Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cost modelling to support optimised selection of End-of-Life options for automotive components

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In automotive sector, the End-of-Life components, especially the uni-material components e.g. steel, plastics, etc., traditionally normally go to material recycling. This conventional disposing approach has nowadays moved towards the secondary utilization approach which closes the loop in the material flow process, i.e. reuse via remanufacturing, reconditioning, repairing, etc. However, the economic benefit of different End-of-Life options for automotive components remain unclear; there is a need to quantitatively evaluate the economic benefit of different End-of-Life options. This project aims to develop a cost estimation model to assess the cost-effectiveness between recovery alternatives for End-of-Life automotive components. Firstly, the remanufacturing process for automotive components has been modelled consisting different stages and activities involved. Thereafter, cost breakdown structure has been established, and the cost elements in each stage and the cost drivers for each cost element have been identified. Next, cost estimation relationships between cost elements and cost drivers have been established. Finally, a cost estimation model has been developed, validated and implemented in MS Excel@ platform. Two case studies comparing different End-of-Life options of crankshaft and composite oil pan by using the developed cost model has been performed; it has been shown that the developed cost model can inform which End-of-Life option is more cost-effective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ijomah W, Childe S, McMahon C (2004) Remanufacturing: a key strategy for sustainable development. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Design and Manufacture for Sustainable Development, 1–2 September 2004, Loughborough, UK

  2. Van Nunen J, Zuidwijk RA (2004) E-enabled closed-loop supply chains. Calif Manag Rev 46(2):40–54

    Google Scholar 

  3. King AM, Burggess SC, Ijomah W, McMahon CA (2006) Reducing waste: repair, recondition, remanufacture or recycle? Sustain Dev 14:257–267

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ijomah W, Bennett JP, Pearce J (1999) Remanufacturing: evidence of environmentally conscious business practice in the UK. In: Ecodesign’99 Proceedings of the First international conference on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, 1–3 February 1999, p 192–196

  5. Thierry M, Salomon M, Van Nunen J, Van Wassenhove L (1995) Strategic issues in product recovery management. Calif Manag Rev 37(2):114–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. DIRECTIVE 2000/53/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 18 September 2000 on end-of life vehicles

  7. Gerrard J, Kandlikar M (2007) Is European end-of-life vehicle legislation living up to expectations? Assessing the impact of the ELV Directive on green innovation and vehicle recovery. J Clean Prod 15:17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Seitz MA, Peattie K (2004) Meeting the closed-loop challenge: the case of remanufacturing. Calif Manag Rev 46(2):74–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Toffel MW (2004) Strategic management of product recovery. Calif Manag Rev 46(2):120–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Krikke HR, Blanc HM, van de Velde SL (2004) Product modularity and the design of closed-loop supply chains. Calif Manag Rev 46(2):23–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Amelia L, Wahab DA, Che Haron CH, Muhamad N, Azhari CH (2009) Initiating automotive component reuse in Malaysia. J Clean Prod 17:1572–1579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fei M, Hua Y, Bao-feng S, Meng-na W (2008) Remanufacturing system cost management based on integration of target costing and activity-based costing. International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, p 163–166

  13. Shih LH, Chang YS, Lin YT (2006) Intelligent evaluation approach for electronic product recycling via case-based reasoning. Adv Eng Inform 20(2):137–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dantec D (2005) Analysis of the cost of recycling compliance for the automobile industry (MSc thesis), Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  15. Ferrer G (2000) Theory and methodology: on the widget remanufacturing operation. Eur J Oper Res 135:373–393

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee HB, Cho NW, Hong YS (2010) A hierarchical end-of-life decision model for determining the economic levels of remanufacturing and disassembly under environmental regulations. J Clean Prod 18:1276–1283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bras B, Emblemsvåg J (1995) The use of activity-based costing, uncertainty, and disassembly action charts in demanufacture cost assessments. 1995 ASME Advances in Design Automation Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, Sept. 17–20, p 285–293

  18. Hesselbach J, Herrmann CH (2001) Combine strategies for recycling - product and process oriented benchmarking. In: EcoDesign 2001: 2nd International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo, Japan, December, p 31–36

  19. Coates G, Rahimifard S (2006) Cost models for increased value recovery from End-of-Life vehicles. Proc Life Cycle Eng 2006:347–352

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gregory J, Atlee J, Kirchain R (2006) A process-based model of End-of-Life electronics recycling driving eco-efficiency-informed decisions. In: IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, p 138–143

  21. Lambert AJD (2003) Optimum disassembly sequence with sequence-dependent disassembly costs. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Assembly and Task Planning, p 151–156

  22. Tang O, Grubbstrom RW, Zanon S (2004) Economic evaluation of disassembly processes in remanufacturing systems. Int J Prod Res 42:3603–3617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Johnson MR, Wang MH (1989) Economical evaluation of disassembly operations for recycling, remanufacturing and reuse. Int J Prod Res 36:3227–3252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ewers HJ, Schatz M, Fleischer G, Dose J (2001) Disassembly factories: economic and environmental options. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Assembly and Task Planning, p 447–452

  25. Shu LH, Flowers WC (1999) Application of a design-for-remanufacture framework to the selection of product life-cycle fastening and joining methods, Robot Comput Integr Manuf 15:179–190

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lee SG, Lye SW, Khoo MK (2001) A multi-objective methodology for evaluating product End-of-Life options and disassembly. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 18:148–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hula A, Jalali K, Hamza K, Skerlos SJ, Saitou K (2003) Multi-criteria decision-making for optimization of product disassembly under multiple situations. Environ Sci Technol 37(23):5303–5313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tan A, Kumar A (2008) A decision making model to maximise the value of reverse logistics in the computer industry. Int J Logist Syst Manag 4:297–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Das S, Yedlarajiah D (2002) An integer programming model for prescribing material recovery strategies. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, San Francisco, CA, p 118–122

  30. Fujimoto H, Ahmed A (2001) Planning for product take-back and component life under uncertainty in technical evolution. In: EcoDesign 2001: 2nd International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo, Japan, p 37–43

  31. Bufardi A, Gheorghe R, Kiritsis D, Xirouchakis P (2004) Multicriteria decision-aid approach for product end-of-life alternative selection. Int J Prod Res 42(16):3139–3157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chan JWK, Tong TKL (2007) Multi-criteria material selections and end-of-life product strategy: grey relational analysis approach. Mater Des 28:1539–1546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ghazalli Z, Murata A (2011) Development of an AHP-CBR evaluation system for remanufacturing: End-of-life selection strategy. Int J Sustain Eng 4(1):2–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Remery M, Mascle C, Agard B (2012) A new method for evaluating the best product end-of-life strategy during the early design phase. J Eng Des 23(6):419–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mergias I, Moustakas K, Papadopoulos A, Loizidou M (2007) Multi-criteria decision aid approach for the selection of the best compromise management scheme for ELVs: the case of Cyprus. J Hazard Mater 147:706–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jun HB, Cusin M, Kiritsis D, Xirouchakis P (2007) A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for EOL product recovery optimization: turbocharger case study. Int J Prod Res 45(18–19):4573–4594

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Mangun D, Thurston DL (2000) Product Portfolio design for component reuse. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, 8–10 May, p 86–92

  38. Steinhilper R (1998) Remanufacturing: the ultimate form of recycling. Fraunhofer IRB Verlag, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  39. García-Cascales MS, Lamata MT (2009) Selection of a cleaning system for engine maintenance based on the analytic hierarchy process. Comput Ind Eng 56:1442–1451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. NC3R, National Center for Remanufacturing & Resource Recovery (2001) Cleaning with Aqueous Spray Washing. Fact sheet, July 2001

  41. Lam A, Sherwood M, Shu LH (2001) FMEA-based design for remanufacture using automotive-remanufacturer data. In: SAE 2011 World Congress, March 2001, Detroit, MI, USA

  42. Mouti Z, Westwood K, Kayvantash K, Njuguna J (2010) Low velocity impact behavior of glass filled fiber-reinforced thermoplastic engine components. MDPI Mater 3:2463–2473

    Google Scholar 

  43. Shettigar KB (2010) Feature based model for RUAM cost modelling and comparative, MSc thesis, Cranfield University, Cranfield

  44. Yousefpour A, Hojjati M, Immarigeon JP (2004) Fusion bonding/welding of thermoplastic composites. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 17:303–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) (2002) NASA Cost Estimating Handbook. Cost Analysis Division, NASA Headquarters, Washington DC

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Applied Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire, MK43 0AL, UK

    Yuchun Xu, Jorge Fernandez Sanchez & James Njuguna

  2. School of Engineering Robert Gordon University Riverside East, Garthdee Campus, Aberdeen, AB10 7GJ, UK

    James Njuguna

Authors
  1. Yuchun Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jorge Fernandez Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James Njuguna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuchun Xu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xu, Y., Fernandez Sanchez, J. & Njuguna, J. Cost modelling to support optimised selection of End-of-Life options for automotive components. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 73, 399–407 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-5804-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-5804-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation