Abstract
The continuously growing social and political pressure to provide sustainable products is forcing also the lightweight industry to rethink current development and manufacturing processes. While established development approaches in lightweight engineering mainly focus on technical and economical product requirements they usually do not consider sustainability criteria. To address these challenges, a new class within the lightweight disciplines is proposed—the Neutral Lightweight Engineering. Its basic goal is to integrate sustainability criteria in all decisions along the development chain of a lightweight component. The decision makers in lightweight engineering thereby have to consider the whole life cycle of a product system from material sourcing to end-of-life part management. To implement this idea, advanced development methods are necessary, using established and emerging materials as well as efficient production and end-of-life strategies. This concept article introduces the idea of Neutral Lightweight Engineering and exemplary highlights some of its aspects before the background of scientific literature.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The current societal dynamics towards climate change response and sustainability lead to a pressure for change not only in conventional industry but also in lightweight engineering. It is crucial to produce less waste and pollutants [1] and the emission-free operation of technical systems must be established [2]. At the same time raw materials are becoming more expensive or only available in reduced quantities [3]. Against this background there is an urgent need for clean and efficient lightweight engineering strategies, supporting the shift towards a circular economy.
The use of lightweight engineering principles to overcome resource scarcity is an established approach, especially in situations of unstable availability of materials. For example a 1988 publication during the cold war era in eastern Germany calls for the “economical use of resources and materials and the rational use of energy”, for “reuse” and “regeneration of the product or component” and in this context addresses the “responsibility of the design engineer” [4]. Towards the mid 1990s the Dresden Model of “Function integrating lightweight engineering in multi-material design” with its motto “the right material at the right place” became a guiding principle throughout the lightweight community in Germany [5]. It summarizes essential aspects of lightweight engineering such as the classical technical criteria like safety, design and manufacturing as well as economical aspects like costs and quality. In addition, a key component of this design concept is the consideration of the environmental impact of lightweight systems (see Fig. 1).
Saving resources is thus a constituent element of lightweight engineering and is firmly anchored in the scientific discipline, both conceptually and methodologically. However, these capabilities have not yet been pushed to the necessary extent by politics, implemented by industry and accepted by society. To support this, the stringent implementation of sustainability criteria in the established Engineering Design Processes is proposed, which leads to a new lightweight class: Neutral Lightweight Engineering. In the context of this concept paper, the term sustainability primarily encompasses environmental aspects. Although social and economic aspects form essential pillars of comprehensive sustainability, they are not the focus of this paper. The fields of action of Neutral Lightweight Engineering are presented and discussed in the context of scientific literature.
2 Neutral lightweight engineering
Typically, three historically evolved classes of lightweight engineering are distinguished—Economical, Efficiency and Functional Lightweight Engineering [6,7,8]. Each class is characterised by its major development goal (see Fig. 2). The Economical Lightweight Engineering aims primarily at the reduction of resources e.g., material and energy during the manufacturing. It is common e.g. in mass production of plastic parts [9] or in civil engineering [10]. The use phase and end-of-life treatment are usually not assessed. Therefore, products that correspond to the Economical Lightweight Engineering class are rarely environmentally optimized. Products that comply with the Efficiency Lightweight Engineering class evaluate the life cycle economically and focus on the use phase. For active products in particular [11] the aim is to achieve positive effects of mass reduction during the use phase—for example, reducing fuel or energy consumption [12, 13] over the life time of mobile systems or the increased payload of utility vehicles [14]. For products with high energy requirements during the use phase this approach can align with environmental interests. Functional Lightweight Engineering is driven by the fulfilment of a challenging technical objective by structures of equal or increased functionality with a required low mass. This class is often relevant for aerospace [15] and aviation structures [16] or special applications like high performance rotors [17, 18].
Environmentally relevant aspects are only indirectly considered by the established lightweight engineering classes. Especially the cross life-cycle thinking and the targeted shaping of the environmental impact including environmental and also social aspects of lightweight structures and systems are not included here. To reach goals like these of the European Green New Deal [19] or international climate arrangements [20, 21], it is crucial to additionally focus on environmentally relevant aspects and consistently take them into account in the research and development processes of future lightweight structures, systems and products.
Considering the historical background and the deficits of established lightweight disciplines regarding environmental product optimization, we propose a fourth lightweight engineering class which is described by the term “Neutral Lightweight Engineering”. Alongside the Economical, Efficiency and Functional Lightweight Engineering, this new class represents a lightweight engineering discipline, which aspires the holistic minimisation of the environmental footprint of a product system (see Fig. 2). In addition to technical and economical criteria, Neutral Lightweight Engineering explicitly includes environmental requirements as development goals in the Engineering Design Process. Although practically not achievable [22] the ideal of Neutral Lightweight Engineering is a resource-neutral circular economy.
This objective of Neutral Lightweight Engineering results in four fields of action for the lightweight community and particularly the research and development engineer (see Fig. 3). First, an Engineering Design Process must be implemented that anticipates the entire life cycle of a product and takes environmental impacts into account already during product development. A specific product design must be elaborated that enables a long product life and a recovery of product-bound resources at the end-of-life while fulfilling the economical boundary conditions at all life stages. To realize this complex task, the 10 R-strategies [23] can be taken into account. Second, the applied engineering materials should rely on recycled materials and renewable bio-based materials. This aspect is directly associated to the third field of action: the technologies which enable high-tech products from sustainable materials at low resource consumption and minimal environmental impact. Finally, a methodical competence needs to be established to forecast the impact of design, material and technology and their interactions on the entire life cycle of the product, e.g. by means of Life Cycle Assessment [24] or other suitable measures. Here, the availability and comparability of according data is a crucial prerequisite for the success of Neutral Lightweight Engineering. Ideally, methods, technologies, materials and data will be standardized, as is being attempted in recent standardization projects [25, 26].
The consideration of the 10 R-strategies (see Fig. 4) can aid in achieving the principles of Neutral Lightweight Engineering in the fields of action. The R-strategies aim to increase the circular nature of a product or material, which can have have a positive impact on the environment since fewer resources are needed to satisfy market demand [23]. Enabling a single product to fulfil multiple tasks (i.e. function integration) can significantly reduce its environmental footprint [27] (R0-2).
The next tier of strategies focuses on prolonging the lifetime of products. Reusing (R3) a functional product requires little to no additional resource input to increase its life. Alternatively, repairing (R4) a defective product allows restoring its function with oftentimes minimal resource input, as is highlighted in the “right to repair”-movement [28]. Is a direct reuse of a functional product not possible due to wearing or corrosion, refurbishing (R5) offers an effective method to extend its life cycle. Finally, remanufacturing (R6) or repurposing (R7) a product or parts of it within a new product to fulfil its original or a different function can save resources. If none of these options are feasible the materials can be recovered by recycling (R8). The last strategy - recovering energy (R9) through incineration - is to be prevented in the concept of Neutral Lightweight Engineering.
Recent research showcases the potential of proper application of the R-strategies on lightweight components [29]. Wind turbines are primarily built using glass fiber-reinforced plastics (GFRP) composites. Through remanufacturing and repurposing the components can be used as bridges, within playgrounds and as urban furniture or used for new hybrid material components. Recycling allows for the material to be used as particleboards based on crushed GFRP or improved wall paint for wood protection. Finally, the use of pyrolysis or solvolysis allows to recover some of the material to be used within e.g. concrete. Reusing the blades could further improve their environmental impact and circularity. Enabling this will require lifetime monitoring of mechanical properties [30].
2.1 Design
In Neutral Lightweight Engineering product developers shall anticipate the entire product life cycle during the development phase and systematically take environmental impacts into account. The consistent consideration of the 10 R-strategies can already contribute to this. Though, the assessment of environmental impact during product development poses challenges that are known from cost estimation [31, 32]. The knowledge about a product system is usually lowest at the beginning and increases in the course of the development phase. Therefore, also the predictability of environmental impacts is lowest at the beginning of the development process. At the same time, the possibilities to positively influence the environmental effects are highest at the beginning of the development phase (see Fig. 5) [33,34,35]. Key environmentally relevant decisions are made at early stages of product development, such as the selection of materials or the R-strategies to be addressed [36]. If environmentally relevant information can be considered in the early stages of the development process, the relevant knowledge and thus the leverage for positively influencing the product system both increase [37].
On the one hand, a various number of product development methods, like VDI 2206 [38], VDI 2221 [39, 40] or VDI 2222 [41, 42] are established and address various interactive, iterative, cyclic or agile approaches to consider primarily technical and economical criteria. On the other hand, established environmental assessment methods like Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) are available [24]. Neutral Lightweight Design can be achieved by systematically integrating sustainability-oriented process steps (e.g., from LCA) into the development process [43]. For products with manageable development effort, environmental assessment can be performed at the end of each development phase, enabling an iterative adaption of the technical product features and properties [44]. Following this concept, it may be necessary to repeat previous development phases if the environmental assessment suggests fundamental changes to the product, such as the choice of materials [45]. This can lead to a decreased efficiency of the development process. For technically challenging products, such as lightweight structures in the context of complex technical systems [46, 47] , this procedure rapidly reaches the resources available for product development, such as time, money, experts, software or computer technology.
To successfully develop environmentally friendly and sophisticated lightweight structures in the context of complex technical systems, sustainability aspects need to be considered within the product development process (PDP). Early examples of this are Design for the Environment Decision Support (DEEDS) [48] or the Design for Environment (DFE) [49] methodology. These procedures highlight individual aspects of integrating ecodesign in the PDP such as the evaluation and minimisation of entropy to determine environmentally ideal disassembly sequences. To assess whether a development decision is sustainable, more recent research focuses on how to directly integrate LCA into the PDP [50]. This allows an iterative and interactive adjustment of technical, economical and environmental factors. An example of this is the introduction of the LCA into the PDP of wind turbines [51]. Through the assessment of each life cycle phase in the early phases of development it is possible to identify hotspots with a significant potential for environmental optimization (in this case a feasible reduction in Teflon usage which reduced the overall GWP by 3%). In addition, the LCA results contribute to the identification of energy and waste reduction potentials, the development of environmentally oriented supply chain management, and the prioritization of actions within the PDP and marketing.
Within NLE a similar development process is proposed which specifically aims to incorporate LCA within the framework of the development process as defined by VDI 2221 [39, 40] (see Fig. 6).
In the initial process step during clarification of the problem or task, suitable environmental assessment methods and criteria need to be defined (a). A classic LCA is not applicable here, since it is usually performed on existing product systems, considering all relevant processes in the chosen system boundaries with their actual in- and outputs. During the early phases of development, much environmentally relevant information is not even known, for example the materials, the quality and quantity of energy used for manufacturing or the transportation distances between specific suppliers and customers. Hence it is unavoidable to make numerous assumptions and simplifications, which implies an unavoidable level of uncertainty. Therefore, depending on the project scope and quantity of resources, it may be advantageous to limit the environmental assessment to specific impact categories of interest. Subsequently, environmental requirements for the product need to be specified (b) based on e.g., market demands or legal compliance. For example, today often greenhouse gas emissions are of primary concern for which the CO\(_{2}\)-equivalents are a suitable requirement criteria [52]. The objective and scope of the environmental assessment need then to be determined (c). As the development proceeds, successively more information are available and environmentally sensible decisions can be made on an increasingly solid data basis. It can be beneficial to define a narrow scope, which can then be successively expanded as the process advances and data reliability improves. Based on this, the environmental assessment of the concept (d), preliminary design (e) and overall design (f) can be carried out. Depending on the specific setting it can be advantageous to apply tools which allow for screening LCA’s within the earlier evaluations [53, 54], as these significantly reduce the resources required for a first basic environmental assessment of concepts or preliminary designs. Once a product design has been elaborated, the environmental manufacturing and utilisation optimum can be determined by means of a sensitivity analyses (g). Environmentally ideal settings for parameters such as process temperatures or times need to be compiled [55]. As part of the validation phase, a final Life Cycle Assessment is carried out (h) with all available information to determine whether the requirements defined at the outset can be met by the designed product.
The systematic character of sustainability-oriented product development on the one side, in combination with the increased scope and complexity on the other side, predestines it for implementation as a digitally linked development process. The approach is based on established methodologies, which divide the development process into phases and steps. Feldhusen [56] proposes an approach where each individual step consists of a model, a method and the necessary input data to generate output data and information for subsequent steps. Generally valid data and information are transformed into product information by a continuous sequence. This approach can be transferred to lightweight structures [57, 58]. In such a digitally linked development process, the document-centred way of working of classical engineering processes is transformed into a model-centred approach, whereby a certain analogy can be drawn with Model Based Systems Engineering.
Such a development process is predestined as a basis for integrating models and methods of environmental assessment in the individual development phases, steps, methods and models.
2.2 Material
The second major field of action in Neutral Lightweight Engineering concerns the used materials. It is well known, that the lightweight potential of standard engineering materials is often limited due to its density related mechanical properties [59]. Hence, the classic development goal in lightweight engineering—a low component mass—often cannot be reached by using just one single material. The resulting increased mass of a component can cause higher emissions in the use phase of typical lightweight products [60]. Against this background lightweight design usually combines different materials in a structure, each with its beneficial specific material characteristics [61]. Also on the material level hybridisation is applied, which often offers a significantly expanded range of properties compared to mono materials [62]. For example, due its strong anisotropy, continuous fibre reinforced composites enable a load adapted material design, saving unnecessary mass [63].
It is evident that today multi-material systems as well as plastic-based materials and fiber composites lag far behind other materials like metals in terms of recycling rates [64,65,66]. At the same time, the use of petro-based raw materials is increasingly rejected [67]. Moreover, the technology and energy resources to massively produce e.g., CO\(_{2}\)-based raw materials are limited for the foreseeable future [68]. Therefore, concerning the materials, Neutral Lightweight Engineering currently has to focus on two aspects. First, the retention of materials and structures in the technosphere (Fig. 7 right) must be one central ambition of all development efforts [69]. It represents the main pathway to achieve circularity. The second aspect touches the exchange of technosphere with bio- and geosphere. If additional materials are demanded to fulfill human needs, the extraction rate must not exceed the recovery rate of the natural resource [70].
Regarding the first aspect, the material usage in the technosphere mandatory has to consider the R-strategies (see Fig. 4). This basically involves slowing the material flow [23] and increasing material efficiency (R2: reduce), which represents the classic lightweight engineering approach [73]. Moreover, it is undisputed today, that recycling (R8) will play the major role in the material life cycle [74]. The strategy of energy recovery by incineration (R9), which is the most widely pursued today [75], must not play a role in Neutral Lightweight Engineering concepts.
In an ideal circular economy, the technosphere is cradle, stock and grave of the material at the same time [22]. In this context, it is of particular importance to examine how previous life cycles and recovering processes affect the material properties [76]. The effects of individual phases in the life cycle need to be understood, the causes of property changes must be determined and correlations must be investigated across life cycles [77]. On this basis, a prediction of the material and component properties in the coming life cycle must be enabled [78]. This also means, that material models are to be developed which consider the cross-life-cycle behaviour.
The cross-life cycle property changes must be taken into account in engineering [77], and materials, technologies and design must be modified in such a way that the expected changes are minimal and the material can be kept in the cycle as long as possible [79]. From this engineering perspective, the occurring volatility of the material flows in terms of availability and quality is especially challenging. Here, fast and efficient strategies to provide material data for process and structural simulation are the key factor to enable high prediction accuracy, high lightweight degrees and low resource impacts. For this, a combination of established characterisation methods [80] and new measurement approaches like soft sensors in recycling and manufacturing [81] can provide valuable information. Tracking techniques like markers [82, 83] can help documenting and merging distributed data sources to enable a continuous understanding [84]. How big data technology [85] and material tracing [86] can support circularity is under research [87].
But even if cross life-cycle behaviour is known, circularity is usually hindered by downcycling [22], contamination [88] and entropy increase [89]. While downcycling is well known for thermoplastic polymers [90] and their composites [91], the effect is also present for metals [88, 92], although often unconsidered in public discussion [93]. Engineering can help slowing degradation and enhancing material efficiency [94]. However, sooner or later a specific amount of energy is necessary to upgrade the material [95] to keep it in the loop. Exemplary, depolymerisation strategies like pyrolysis [96,97,98], solvolysis [98] or chemolysis [97] are under intensive current research. In future, the energy required for recovery could help to decide, which route is the most beneficial for the specific material stream and aspired application [99]. Beside downcycling, contamination of material streams is inevitable due to limited sorting grades [100], adhesion [101] or multi-material systems [29]. The continuously increasing mixing rate is going along with rising process effort and energy demand for recovery [97]. The lightweight design engineer can mitigate this, e.g. by integrating disassembly concepts or design for recycling strategies in his development decisions [102]. Additionally, the amount of different materials or material grades with different additives should be reduced to minimize contamination [103]. For example, hybrid lightweight structures can be designed from different semi-finished products like organosheets, braided tubes and long fibre thermoplastics with the same fiber-matrix combination, enabling a single variety waste stream during recovering [104]. But generally, a distinct material loss is not avoidable [105].
A promising approach to compensate the resulting gap between material loss and industrial demand is the use of renewable sources from the biosphere (e.g. from algae, wood, farming) [106,107,108]. Since biobased materials are well established in lightweight engineering, for example as matrix and fiber [109, 110], there are no general reservations. They even are discussed as option to capture carbon dioxide and store it by feeding it back to the geosphere [108]. The challenge for Neutral Lightweight Engineering is to use this class of materials for high performance technical systems. Promising examples are current approaches for the production of carbon fibers from lignins [111] and cellulose which are being pursued in the high-tech sector [112]. Due to the natural limitations and the potential competition for land and use, the focus must be here on cascade use and the utilisation of co-products or residuals [113].
2.3 Technology
While the structure of a lightweight product is essentially the synthesis of the necessary geometry and the required material, manufacturing technologies [114] determine the opportunities and limitations to place the material in the desired configuration in the structure. For this challenging task both established and innovative technologies are applied, trying to fulfill the technical and economical boundary conditions [115, 116]. From the Neutral Lightweight Engineering point of view, manufacturing technology is decisive for the circularity of materials and the overall life cycle impact of lightweight components in different ways. Firstly the direct environmental effects of the manufacturing process itself have to be considered [117, 118]. Here, energy consumption, consumables and material utilisation rate often play a major role.
Secondly the applied manufacturing technologies have indirect effects on circularity [119] by influencing the material degradation and the composition of material flows during recycling. Third, new technologies like 3D-printing, non-destructive testing and digitalization can help extending the product life time via repair or use material streams more efficiently.
The direct contribution of part manufacturing on the overall impact of a lightweight product is often of minor importance compared to the material production and the use phase [60]. However, production technology needs to be considered to complete the picture and to allow companies to evaluate hot spots in their production [120]. For many classic technologies used to manufacture lightweight components the major environmental impact is caused by the used energy mix during production [121]. Although the environmental footprint of energy (in particular electricity) production is available in regional and temporal resolution [122, 123], data quality is a major challenge for evaluating the actual technological impact [124]. So, even for established polymer technologies such as injection molding, the available data is often limited to general information not considering different (more or less energy efficient) machine types or process routes [122]. For newer lightweight technologies in particular, there are limited or no data sets in the relevant databases [125]. Here, engineers have to resort to empirical values or rough estimations [126].
Beside energy, many typically applied technologies in lightweight engineering cause significant environmental impacts due to consumables [127]. For example, Vacuum Assisted Resin Infusion applied for wind blades [128] or autoclave technology for aviation structures [129] require extensive process auxiliaries to build the vacuum bag, which is usually used once and then disposed [127]. The amount of consumables used is strongly dependent on the specific part, and process setup and therefore mostly estimated [130].
To overcome these uncertainties in technology evaluation, lightweight manufacturing processes must be systematically investigated concerning their environmental impact. Therefore, on the one hand typical production scenarios and new technological developments are to be equipped with energy measurement systems [131]. Relevant process input and output streams including waste and rejects needs to be systematically recorded during production. This data can then be examined e.g. at various operating points [131]. To provide consistent, reproducible and comparable results, this evaluation should follow standardized proceedings, like ISO 14040 for LCA [24] or ISO 14064 for greenhouse gas evaluation [132,133,134]. The LCA relevant data obtained can then help evaluating the environmental impact of the product in different stages of the product development cycle (see Fig. 6). Above that, these results can be used to identify energy efficiency potentials or evaluate approaches like process coupling to reuse thermal energy demand [135].
Another direct impact of technology is the material utilisation rate in production [119] where sprues, runners, cut-offs and production rejects decrease material efficiency [118]. If the material is not recycled—e.g., like most textile cut-offs in classic composite manufacturing – the waste material and its accompanied environmental impact is imposed on the produced part [136, 137]. Since this effect is also economically disadvantageous, optimisation solutions like runner-less injection moulding [138] is established. In composites manufacturing nesting software [139] or novel patching processes that use thermoplastic composite residues and cut-offs increase material efficiency [140].
In addition to direct effects, technologies affect environmental impact indirectly due to their influence on material quality. For example, polymer degradation in thermoplastic injection moulding is strongly influenced by dwell time or high shear velocities which can occur at disadvantageous process setups [141]. To support circularity, degradation should be as low as possible [142]. The process engineer therefore must know, which parameter settings influence degradation and potential conflicts with economically driven process settings need to be harmonized [143]. New technological developments can help increasing circularity by reducing processing induced degradation of materials. For instance, in injection moulding of lightweight parts, physical foaming strongly reduces melt viscosity leading to improved flowability and enabling less shear induced degradation of the polymers [144].
Manufacturing and especially joining technology also influence the repairability (R4) of a system [145], whereas detachable joints usually allow the simple exchange of a damaged component [146]. If replacement is not economically or environmentally reasonable (according to LCA), repairing can lengthen the component use phase. For high value lightweight products the damage can be identified non-destructively e.g. by computed tomography [147], ultrasonic testing [148] or thermography [149]. According repair structures have to be designed, which compensate the damage without limiting the function. Material-specific repair technologies must be provided to implement the replacement or reinforcement structure like patching [150] or 3D printing [151]. For early damage detection and repair, structural health monitoring is established e.g., at wind turbines [152]. This can potentially lengthen the use phase of a lightweight product [153].
The choice of manufacturing technologies has also influence on the composition of material flows during recycling (R9). Also the joining technologies determine how different components can be separated after the use phase [154]. While mechanical joining usually allows a good separation of different material fractions [155], adhesive bonding is accompanied by agglomerations of different materials, which are difficult to separate [156]. Furthermore, manufacturing processes for hybrid structures strongly affect the contamination of materials during recycling [157]. In addition to the basic components, hybrid lightweight structures often contain additional adhesion promoters [158], which later appear as impurities in the recyclate stream [159]. The amount of these adhesives can be reduced e.g., by plasma coating [160]. With new technologies like laser structuring a bonding can also realised without additives by microscopic form locking [161]. In combination with the end-of-life and recycling technologies the joining methods often determine the quality of the received material streams and the energy required for recovery [162].
The variety of possible manufacturing steps and process technologies and the strong interaction of technology, material and design (cf. Fig. 3) make it challenging to achieve Neutral Lightweight Engineering. To overcome this, digitization can help gaining relevant information along the material and component life [85]. If the measurements are assigned to the specific part, a successively completing data set containing both quality and sustainability relevant information emerges [163]. Above that, in the future this digital twin could help Neutral Lightweight Engineering at the end of the use phase to gain information about the environmental backpack [164]. An example of this would be the automated collection of operational data of wind turbines to assess whether or not a turbine still fulfills the technical requirements of being reused after its initial life cycle [30].
3 Conclusion
In the context of climate change, increasing scarcity of resources and challenging political and societal objectives, the demands on lightweight engineering are becoming increasingly complex. In this context and regarding the introduction of a true circular economy, the concept of Neutral Lightweight Engineering is proposed as a new lightweight engineering class. Neutral Lightweight Engineering aims at the holistic minimisation of the environmental footprint of a product system. Although not practically feasible, its ideal is a resource-neutral circular economy.
The associated shift in focus changes the way engineers think and act in the future by taking the entire life cycle into account. The objective of Neutral Lightweight Engineering results in four fields of action for the lightweight engineering community and in particular the research and development engineer: a sustainability-oriented development process, the technical application of recycled and renewable materials, and manufacturing technologies for high-tech products from these materials with low resource consumption and minimal environmental impact. In parallel, methodical competence must be developed to consider the impact of design, materials, technology and their interactions on the entire life cycle of the product. Life Cycle Assessment methods and the consideration of the 10 R-strategies are proposed to achieve the principles of Neutral Lightweight Engineering in all four fields of action.
The consideration of the proposed lightweight class by companies could enhance awareness in the engineering departments and encourage them to produce demonstrably sustainable lightweight products. In addition to advantages in marketing, efficient use of resources support a more circular economy. This plays an increasingly important role due to the growing political pressure on businesses to offer sustainable solutions. Furthermore, geopolitical conflicts and supply chain issues pose less risk as dependency on imported primary resources is reduced. A comprehensive application of the concept could lead to companies not only making selective environmental progress, but to the introduction of sustainability KPIs into their corporate management in addition to the classic cost and lightweight engineering metrics.
The concept paper refers to a large number of examples in the proposed fields of action and places them in the context of Neutral Lightweight Engineering. It can be seen that single objectives have already been partially implemented or are the subject of current research. A multitude of sub-aspects still need to be investigated, especially with regard to the interactions between the specified fields of action.
Data availability
Not applicable.
Code availability
Not applicable.
References
Wilson DC, Velis CA. Waste management—still a global challenge in the 21st century: an evidence-based call for action. Waste management & research. J Int Solid Wastes Public Clean Assoc. 2015;33(12):1049–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15616055.
Davis SJ, Lewis NS, Shaner M, Aggarwal S, Arent D, Azevedo IL, Benson SM, Bradley T, Brouwer J, Chiang Y-M, Clack CTM, Cohen A, Doig S, Edmonds J, Fennell P, Field CB, Hannegan B, Hodge B-M, Hoffert MI, Ingersoll E, Jaramillo P, Lackner KS, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea M, Ogden J, Peterson PF, Sanchez DL, Sperling D, Stagner J, Trancik JE, Yang C-J, Caldeira K. Net-zero emissions energy systems. Science. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aas9793.
World Bank Group. Commodity Markets Outlook, October 2021. Washington: WorldBank; 2021.
Knauer B, editor. Konstruktionstechnik und Leichtbau: Methodik, Werkstoff, Gestaltung, Bemessung; Mit 243 Tab. Berlin: Akademie-Verl; 1988.
Hufenbach W, Adam F. Dresden model: function-integrative lightweight engineering in multi-material-design. Dresden: Paper presented at the 1st Dresden Lightweight Symposium; 1997.
Schürmann H. Konstruieren Mit Faser-Kunststoff-Verbunden: Mit 39 Tabellen, 2., bearb. und. erw. aufl. edn. Berlin: Springer; 2007.
Wiedemann J. Leichtbau: Elemente und Konstruktion, 3 aufl. 2007 edn. Klassiker der Technik. Berlin: Springer; 2007.
Klein B, Gänsicke T. Leichtbau-Konstruktion: Dimensionierung, Strukturen, Werkstoffe und Gestaltung, 11, überarbeitete und erweiterte. auflage. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2019.
Song MC, Liu Z, Wang MJ, Yu TM, Zhao DY. Research on effects of injection process parameters on the molding process for ultra-thin wall plastic parts. J Mater Process Technol. 2007;187–188:668–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.11.103.
Pheng LS, Hou LS. The economy and the construction industry. In: Sui Pheng L, Shing Hou L, editors. Construction quality and the economy. Management in the built environment. Springer Singapore: Singapore; 2019. p. 21–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5847-0_2.
Alting L. Life cycle engineering and design. CIRP Ann. 1995;44(2):569–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60504-6.
Huang R, Riddle M, Graziano D, Warren J, Das S, Nimbalkar S, Cresko J, Masanet E. Energy and emissions saving potential of additive manufacturing: the case of lightweight aircraft components. J Clean Prod. 2016;135:1559–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.109.
Koffler C, Rohde-Brandenburger K. On the calculation of fuel savings through lightweight design in automotive life cycle assessments. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2010;15(1):128–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0127-z.
Galos J, Sutcliffe M, Cebon D, Piecyk M, Greening P. Reducing the energy consumption of heavy goods vehicles through the application of lightweight trailers: fleet case studies. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2015;41:40–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.09.010.
Adam T, Liao G, Petersen J, Geier S, Finke B, Wierach P, Kwade A, Wiedemann M. Multifunctional composites for future energy storage in aerospace structures. Energies. 2018;11(2):335. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11020335.
Terao Y, Seta A, Ohsaki H, Oyori H, Morioka N. Lightweight design of fully superconducting motors for electrical aircraft propulsion systems. IEEE Trans Appl Supercond. 2019;29(5):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASC.2019.2902323.
Spitzer S, Pohl M, Grothe R, Langkamp A, Hermerath P, Gude M. Endless fibre-reinforced composite-metal-impeller: material related design and dimensioning process for hybrid radial-fans. Darmstadt: Paper presented at the International Conference on Fan Noise, Aerodynamics, Applications and Systems; 2018.
Bhamla MS, Benson B, Chai C, Katsikis G, Johri A, Prakash M. Hand-powered ultralow-cost paper centrifuge. Nat Biomed Eng. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-016-0009.
European Commission: a European green deal. 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal. Accessed 26 Jan 2022.
UNFCCC: the Paris agreement. 2016. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement. Accessed 26 Jan 2022.
Stavins R, Zou J, Brewer T, ConteGrand M, den Elzen M, Finus M, Gupta J, Höhne N, Lee M-K, Michaelowa A, Paterson M, Ramakrishna K, Wen G, Wiener J, Winkler H. International cooperation: agreements and instruments. In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC, editors. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014. p. 1001–83.
Cullen JM. Circular economy: theoretical benchmark or perpetual motion machine? J Ind Ecol. 2017;21(3):483–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12599.
Potting J, Hekkert MP, Worrell E. Circular economy: measuring innovation in the product chain. The Hague: PBL Publishers; 2017.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14040:2006—Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. Geneva: ISO; 2006.
Deutsches Institut für Normung: circular economy I standards making way for the circular economy. 2021. https://www.din.de/en/innovation-and-research/circular-economy/standardization-roadmap-circular-economy. Accessed 26 Jan 2022.
Deutsches Institut fur Normung. DIN SPEC 91446: classification of recycled plastics by data quality levels for use and (digital) trading. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH; 2021.
Rabbitt N, Ghosh B. A study of feasibility and potential benefits of organised car sharing in Ireland. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2013;25:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.004.
Hernandez RJ, Miranda C, Goñi J. Empowering sustainable consumption by giving back to consumers the ‘Right to Repair’. Sustainability. 2020;12(3):850. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030850.
Jensen JP, Skelton K. Wind turbine blade recycling: experiences, challenges and possibilities in a circular economy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2018;97:165–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.041.
MEGAVIND: strategy for extending the useful lifetime of a wind turbine. 2016. https://megavind.winddenmark.dk/publications/strategy-extending-the-useful-lifetime-of-a-wind-turbine. Accessed 14 Apr 2022.
Mandolini M, Campi F, Favi C, Germani M, Raffaeli R. A framework for analytical cost estimation of mechanical components based on manufacturing knowledge representation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2020;107(3–4):1131–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05068-5.
Calado EA, Leite M, Silva A. Integrating life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) in the early phases of aircraft structural design: an elevator case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2019;24(12):2091–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01632-8.
Collingridge D. The social control of technology. London: Pinter; 1982.
Arvidsson R, Tillman A-M, Sandén BA, Janssen M, Nordelöf A, Kushnir D, Molander S. Environmental assessment of emerging technologies: recommendations for prospective LCA. J Ind Ecol. 2018;22(6):1286–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12690.
Atik A. Entscheidungsunterstützende Methoden Für die Entwicklung Umweltgerechter Produkte: Zugl.: Darmstadt, Techn. Univ., Diss., 2000. Darmstädter Forschungsberichte für Konstruktion und Fertigung. Aachen: Shaker; 2001.
Simões CL, Costa Pinto LM, Simoes R, Bernardo CA. Integrating environmental and economic life cycle analysis in product development: a material selection case study. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2013;18(9):1734–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0561-9.
Buyle M, Audenaert A, Billen P, Boonen K, Van Passel S. The future of ex-ante LCA? Lessons Learn Pract Recomm Sustain. 2019;11(19):5456. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195456.
Gausemeier J, Moehringer S. VDI 2206–a new guideline for the design of mechatronic systems. IFAC Proc Vol. 2002;35(2):785–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-6670(17)34035-1.
Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. VDI 2221 Part 1: design of technical products and systems—model of product design. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH; 2019.
Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. VDI 2221 Part 2: design of technical products and systems—configuration of individual product design processes. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH; 2019.
Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. VDI 2222 Part 1: methodic development of solution principles. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH; 1997.
Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. VDI 2222 Part 2: design engineering methodics; setting up and use of design catalogues. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH; 1982.
Seitz A. Entwicklungsbegleitende Ökobilanzierung. Neukirchen: Paper presented at the 14th Design for X Symposium; 2003.
Wynn DC, Eckert CM. Perspectives on iteration in design and development. Res Eng Design. 2017;28(2):153–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-016-0226-3.
Pollini B, Rognoli V. Early-stage material selection based on life cycle approach: tools, obstacles and opportunities for design. Sustain Prod Consum. 2021;28:1130–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.07.014.
Zhu L, Li N, Childs PRN. Light-weighting in aerospace component and system design. Propuls Power Res. 2018;7(2):103–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jppr.2018.04.001.
Mallick PK. Materials, design and manufacturing for lightweight vehicles. 2nd ed. Duxford: Woodhead Publishing; 2020.
Bhamra TA, Evans S, McAloone TC, Simon M, Poole S, Sweatman A. Integrating environmental decisions into the product development process. i. The early stages. Tokyo: Proceedings First International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing; 1999. p. 329–33. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECODIM.1999.747633.
Mascle C, Zhao HP. Integrating environmental consciousness in product/process development based on life-cycle thinking. Int J Prod Econ. 2008;112(1):5–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.08.016.
da Luz LM, de Francisco AC, Piekarski CM, Salvador R. Integrating life cycle assessment in the product development process: a methodological approach. J Clean Prod. 2018;193:28–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.022.
Bonou A, Olsen SI, Hauschild MZ. Introducing life cycle thinking in product development—a case from siemens wind power. CIRP Ann. 2015;64(1):45–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2015.04.053.
Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, et al. Technical summary. In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC, editors., et al., Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014. p. 33–108.
Autodesk developer network: EcoDesigner. 2022. https://www.autodesk.com/developer-network/certified-apps/ecodesigner. Accessed 26 Jan 2022.
SOLIDWORKS: sustainability. 2022. https://www.solidworks.com/solutions/sustainability. Accessed 26 Jan 2022.
Joshi SC, Bhudolia SK. Microwave-thermal technique for energy and time efficient curing of carbon fiber reinforced polymer prepreg composites. J Compos Mater. 2014;48(24):3035–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998313504606.
Gericke K, Bender B, Pahl G, Beitz W, Feldhusen J, Grote K-H. Der Produktentwicklungsprozess. In: Pahl G, Beitz W, editors. Konstruktionslehre. Berlin: Springer Vieweg; 2021. p. 57–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-57303-7_4.
Haider DR, Gerritzen J, Folprecht F, Krahl M, Spitzer S, Gude MEA. Robust development, validation and manufacturing processes for hybrid metal-composite lightweight structures. Amsterdam: Paper presented at the SAMPE Europe Conference and Exhibition 2020; 2020.
Haider DR, Folprecht F, Gerritzen J, Krahl M, Spitzer S, Hornig A, Langkamp A, Gude M. Contribution to digital linked development, manufacturing and quality assurance processes for metal-composite lightweight structures. In: Dröder K, Vietor T, editors. Technologies for economic and functional lightweight design. Zukunftstechnologien für den multifunktionalen Leichtbau. Berlin: Springer; 2021. p. 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62924-6_5.
Campbell FC. Lightweight materials. ASM Int. 2012. https://doi.org/10.31399/asm.tb.lmub.9781627083072.
Hufenbach W, Krahl M, Kupfer R, Rothenberg S, Weber T, Lucas P. Enhancing sustainability through the targeted use of synergy effects between material configuration, process development and lightweight design at the example of a composite seat shell. In: Hung S, Subic A, Wellnitz J, editors. Sustainable automotive technologies 2011. International conference on sustainable automotive technologies. Berlin: Springer; 2011. p. 103–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19053-7_13.
Clyne TW, Hull D. An introduction to composite materials. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139050586.
Hamdan MHM, Siregar JP, Cionita T, Jaafar J, Efriyohadi A, Junid R, Kholil A. Water absorption behaviour on the mechanical properties of woven hybrid reinforced polyester composites. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2019;104(1–4):1075–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-03976-9.
Hufenbach W, Gude M, Ebert C. Tailored 3D-textile reinforced composites with load-adapted property profiles for crash and impact applications. Kompozyty. 2006;3(6):8–13.
Henckens MLCM, Worrell E. Reviewing the availability of copper and nickel for future generations. The balance between production growth, sustainability and recycling rates. J Clean Prod. 2020;264: 121460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121460.
Horodytska O, Cabanes A, Fullana A. Plastic waste management: current status and weaknesses. In: Stock F, Reifferscheid G, Brennholt N, Kostianaia E, editors. Plastics in the aquatic environment—part I Springer eBook Collection, vol. 111. Cham: Springer International Publishing and Imprint Springer; 2022. p. 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2019_408.
d’Ambrières W. Plastics recycling worldwide: current overview and desirable changes. Field actions science reports. J Field Actions. 2019;19:12–21.
European Parliament: the COP26 climate change conference. 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/695459/IPOL_STU(2021)695459_EN.pdf. Accessed 27 Jan 2022.
Zhang Z, Pan S-Y, Li H, Cai J, Olabi AG, Anthony EJ, Manovic V. Recent advances in carbon dioxide utilization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2020;125: 109799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109799.
McDonough W, Braungart M. Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make things. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2002.
Korhonen J, Honkasalo A, Seppälä J. Circular economy: the concept and its limitations. Ecol Econ. 2018;143:37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.06.041.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circular economy diagram. Cowes: Ellen MacArthur Foundation; 2019.
Friedrich B, Latacz D, Birich A, Greiff K. Circular economy strategy at RWTH Aachen—a raw materials perspective. Aachen: Paper presented at the Aachener Stahlkolloquium 2021; 2021.
Herrmann C, Dewulf W, Hauschild M, Kaluza A, Kara S, Skerlos S. Life cycle engineering of lightweight structures. CIRP Ann. 2018;67(2):651–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2018.05.008.
Smol M, Marcinek P, Duda J, Szołdrowska D. Importance of sustainable mineral resource management in implementing the circular economy (CE) model and the European green deal strategy. Resources. 2020;9(5):55. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9050055.
Morseletto P. Targets for a circular economy. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2020;153:104553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104553.
Eriksen MK, Christiansen JD, Daugaard AE, Astrup TF. Closing the loop for PET, PE and PP waste from households: Influence of material properties and product design for plastic recycling. Waste Manag. 2019;96:75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.07.005.
Lundquist L, Leterrier Y, Sunderland P, Månson JAE. Life cycle engineering of plastics: technology, economy and the environment. 1st ed. Oxford: Elsevier; 2000.
TU Dresden. GePart—Entwicklung effizienter Verfahrenstechnologien innerhalb des geschlossenen Partikelschaum Werkstoffkreislaufs. Dresden: TU Dresden; 2021.
Hart J, Pomponi F. A circular economy: where will it take us? Circ Econ Sustain. 2021;1(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-021-00013-4.
Faraca G, Astrup T. Plastic waste from recycling centres: characterisation and evaluation of plastic recyclability. Waste Manag. 2019;95:388–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.06.038.
Mulrennan K, Donovan J, Creedon L, Rogers I, Lyons JG, McAfee M. A soft sensor for prediction of mechanical properties of extruded PLA sheet using an instrumented slit die and machine learning algorithms. Polym Test. 2018;69:462–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.06.002.
Gulak SV, Cherkashin AI, Balashov I, Zarytskyi VI, Kurskoy YS, Zhdanova YV. Laser marking system for plastic products. Bulgaria: 2019 IEEE 8th International Conference on Advanced Optoelectronics and Laser (CAOL); 2019. p. 361–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/CAOL46282.2019.9019422.
Dragičević D, Tegeltija S, Ostojić G, Stankovski S, Lazarević M. Reliability of dot peen marking in product traceability. Int J Ind Eng Manag. 2017;8(2):71–6.
Nobre GC, Tavares E. Scientific literature analysis on big data and internet of things applications on circular economy: a bibliometric study. Scientometrics. 2017;111(1):463–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2281-6.
Yan J, Meng Y, Lu L, Li L. Industrial big data in an industry 4.0 environment: challenges, schemes, and applications for predictive maintenance. IEEE Access. 2017;5:23484–91. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2017.2765544.
TU Dresden: LiKE: Leichtbautechnolo-gien in lebensphasenüber-greifenden Kreislaufprodukten der Energiewende. 2021. https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilk/das-institut/news/like-leichtbautechnologien-in-lebensphasenuebergreifenden-kreislaufprodukten-der-energiewende. Accessed 26 Jan 2022.
Bressanelli G, Adrodegari F, Perona M, Saccani N. The role of digital technologies to overcome circular economy challenges in PSS business models: an exploratory case study. Procedia CIRP. 2018;73:216–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.322.
Koffler C, Florin J. Tackling the downcycling issue—a revised approach to value-corrected substitution in life cycle assessment of aluminum (VCS 2.0). Sustainability. 2013;5(11):4546–60. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5114546.
Reuter MA. Limits of design for recycling and “sustainability”: a review. Waste Biomass Valorization. 2011;2(2):183–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-010-9061-3.
Grigore M. Methods of recycling, properties and applications of recycled thermoplastic polymers. Recycling. 2017;2(4):24. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling2040024.
Zhang J, Chevali VS, Wang H, Wang C-H. Current status of carbon fibre and carbon fibre composites recycling. Compos B Eng. 2020;193:108053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108053.
Paraskevas D, Kellens K, Renaldi R, Dewulf W, Duflou J. Closed and open loop recycling of aluminium: a life cycle assessment perspective. In: Seliger G, editor. Proceedings/11th Global Conference on Sustainable Manufacturing. Berlin: TU Berlin; 2013. p. 305–10.
Bowyer J, Bratkovich S, Fernholz K, Frank M, Groot H, Howe J, Pepke E. Understanding steel recovery and recycling rates and limitations to recycling. Minneapolis: Dovetail Partners; 2015.
Blume S, Herrmann C, Thiede S. Increasing resource efficiency of manufacturing systems using a knowledge-based system. Procedia CIRP. 2018;69:236–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.126.
Korley LTJ, Epps TH, Helms BA, Ryan AJ. Toward polymer upcycling-adding value and tackling circularity. Science. 2021;373(6550):66–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg4503.
Armenise S, SyieLuing W, Ramírez-Velásquez JM, Launay F, Wuebben D, Ngadi N, Rams J, Muñoz M. Plastic waste recycling via pyrolysis: a bibliometric survey and literature review. J Anal Appl Pyrol. 2021;158:105265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2021.105265.
Ragaert K, Delva L, van Geem K. Mechanical and chemical recycling of solid plastic waste. Waste Manag. 2017;69:24–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.07.044.
Vollmer I, Jenks MJF, Roelands MCP, White RJ, van Harmelen T, de Wild P, van der Laan GP, Meirer F, Keurentjes JTF, Weckhuysen BM. Beyond mechanical recycling: giving new life to plastic waste. Angewandte Chemie. 2020;59(36):15402–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201915651.
Nimmegeers P, Parchomenko A, de Meulenaere P, van Steenberge PHM, Rechberger H, Billen P, D’hooge DR. Extending multilevel statistical entropy analysis towards plastic recyclability prediction. Sustainability. 2021;13(6):3553. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063553.
Daehn KE, Cabrera Serrenho A, Allwood JM. How will copper contamination constrain future global steel recycling? Environ Sci Technol. 2017;51(11):6599–606. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00997.
Branco LTP, Saron C. Separation and recycling of polymeric post-industrial waste from adhesive bandages. Int J Environ Sci Technol. 2020;17(4):1877–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-019-02570-6.
Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. VDI 2243: Recycling-oriented product development. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH; 2002.
Pivnenko K, Jakobsen LG, Eriksen MK, Damgaard A, Astrup TF. Challenges in plastics recycling. Cagliari: Paper presented at the 15th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium; 2015.
Platform Forel: FuPro. https://plattform-forel.de/fupro/ Accessed 22 Apr 2022.
Solis M, Silveira S. Technologies for chemical recycling of household plastics—a technical review and TRL assessment. Waste Manag. 2020;105:128–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.038.
Kabir E, Kaur R, Lee J, Kim K-H, Kwon EE. Prospects of biopolymer technology as an alternative option for non-degradable plastics and sustainable management of plastic wastes. J Clean Prod. 2020;258:120536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120536.
Devadas VV, Khoo KS, Chia WY, Chew KW, Munawaroh HSH, Lam M-K, Lim J-W, Ho Y-C, Lee KT, Show PL. Algae biopolymer towards sustainable circular economy. Bioresour Technol. 2021;325:124702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.124702.
Arnold U, Brück T, de Palmenaer A, Kuse K. Carbon capture and sustainable utilization by algal polyacrylonitrile fiber production: process design, techno-economic analysis, and climate related aspects. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2018;57(23):7922–33. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b04828.
Di Landro L, Janszen G. Composites with hemp reinforcement and bio-based epoxy matrix. Compos B Eng. 2014;67:220–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.021.
Tech S, Läßig C, Kupfer R, Wiemer H, Gohrbandt A, Siegel C, Horbens M, Jornitz F, Wagenführ A, Neinhuis C, Fischer S, Hufenbach W, Großmann K. Material and technological development of natural fiber reinforced cellulose acetate butyrate. Adv Eng Mater. 2014;16(10):1202–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.201400251.
Ralph J, Brunow G, Boerjan W. Lignins. Encycl Life Sci. 2007;20:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0020104.
Beaucamp A, Wang Y, Culebras M, Collins MN. Carbon fibres from renewable resources: the role of the lignin molecular structure in its blendability with biobased poly(ethylene terephthalate). Green Chem. 2019;21(18):5063–72. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9GC02041A.
Brizga J, Hubacek K, Feng K. The unintended side effects of bioplastics: carbon, land, and water footprints. One Earth. 2020;3(1):45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.06.016.
Groover MP. Fundamentals of modern manufacturing: materials, processes, and systems. 7th ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2019.
Campbell FC Jr. Manufacturing processes for advanced composites. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2003.
Viscusi A, Antonucci V, Carrino L, Della Gatta R, Lopresto V, Papa I, Perna AS, Ricciardi MR, Astarita A. Manufacturing of an innovative composite structure: Design, manufacturing and impact behaviour. Compos Struct. 2020;250:112637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.112637.
Ciambrone DF. Environmental life cycle analysis. 1st ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1997.
Al-Lami A, Hilmer P, Sinapius M. Eco-efficiency assessment of manufacturing carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP) in aerospace industry. Aerosp Sci Technol. 2018;79:669–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2018.06.020.
Fleischer J, Teti R, Lanza G, Mativenga P, Möhring H-C, Caggiano A. Composite materials parts manufacturing. CIRP Ann. 2018;67(2):603–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2018.05.005.
Owsianiak M, Bjørn A, Laurent A, Molin C, Ryberg MW. LCA applications. In: Hauschild MZ, Rosenbaum RK, Olsen SI, editors. Life cycle assessment. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_4.
Cheung WM, Leong JT, Vichare P. Incorporating lean thinking and life cycle assessment to reduce environmental impacts of plastic injection moulded products. J Clean Prod. 2017;167:759–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.208.
Sphera. LCA Datasets. Bengaluru: Sphera; 2021.
Ecoinvent: LCA Datasets. 2021. https://ecoinvent.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Database-Overview-for-ecoinvent-v3.8.xlsx. Accessed 27 Jan 2022.
Garwood TL, Hughes BR, Oates MR, O’Connor D, Hughes R. A review of energy simulation tools for the manufacturing sector. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2018;81:895–911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.063.
Liebsch A, Müller-Pabel M, Kupfer R, Gude M. Life cycle assessment of thermoplastic hybrid structures with hollow profiles. Wolfsburg: Paper presented at the Conference on Future Production of Hybrid Structures; 2020.
Hauschild MZ. Introduction to LCA methodology. In: Hauschild MZ, Rosenbaum RK, Olsen SI, editors. Life cycle assessment. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_6.
Vita A, Castorani V, Germani M, Marconi M. Comparative life cycle assessment and cost analysis of autoclave and pressure bag molding for producing CFRP components. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2019;105(5–6):1967–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04384-9.
Mishnaevsky L, Branner K, Petersen HN, Beauson J, McGugan M, Sørensen BF. Materials for wind turbine blades: an overview. Materials. 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10111285.
Hassan MH, Othman AR, Kamaruddin S. A review on the manufacturing defects of complex-shaped laminate in aircraft composite structures. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2017;91(9–12):4081–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0096-5.
Bortolotti P, Berry DS, Murray R, Gaertner E, Jenne DS, Damiani RR, Barter GE, Dykes KL. A detailed wind turbine blade cost model. Natl Renew Energy Lab. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2172/1529217.
Müller M, Liebsch A, Kupfer R, Stegelmann M, Gude M. Process chain based data capture for a flexible and reliable life cycle inventory of a glass fiber-reinforced thermoplastic lightweight structure. Procedia CIRP. 2019;85:32–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.09.001.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14064–1:2018—Greenhouse gases—part 1: specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Geneva: ISO; 2018.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14064–2:2019—Greenhouse gases—part 2: specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements. Geneva: ISO; 2019.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14064–3:2019—greenhouse gases—part 3: specification with guidance for the verification and validation of greenhouse gas statements. Geneva: ISO; 2019.
Gude M, Bräuer R, Mrotzek T, Zichner M, Behnisch T. Project METEOR—optimising the resource efficiency of manufacturing hybrid lightweight structures. Dresden: Paper presented at the 24th Dresden International Lightweight Engineering Symposium; 2021.
Bjørn A, Moltesen A, Laurent A, Owsianiak M, Corona A, Birkved M, Hauschild MZ. Life cycle inventory analysis. In: Hauschild MZ, Rosenbaum RK, Olsen SI, editors. Life cycle assessment. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 117–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3_9.
Hohmann A, Albrecht S, Lindner JP, Voringer B, Wehner D, Drechsler K, Leistner P. Resource efficiency and environmental impact of fiber reinforced plastic processing technologies. Prod Eng Res Devel. 2018;12(3–4):405–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-018-0802-7.
Gooch JW. Encyclopedic dictionary of polymers. 2nd ed. New York: Springer New York; 2011. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6247-8.
Sherif SU, Jawahar N, Balamurali M. Sequential optimization approach for nesting and cutting sequence in laser cutting. J Manuf Syst. 2014;33(4):624–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2014.05.011.
Schwanemann P, Modler N, Witschel B, Grüber B, Lenz F. Process development for generative manufacturing of fiber thermoplastic composites structures—thermoplastic patch placement (TPP). Munich: Paper presented at the 17th European Conference on Composite Materials; 2016.
Gramann PJ, Turng L, Osswald TA. Injection molding handbook. 2nd ed. Munich: Carl Hanser Publishers; 2008.
Schyns ZOG, Shaver MP. Mechanical recycling of packaging plastics: a review. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2021;42(3):2000415. https://doi.org/10.1002/marc.202000415.
Singh B, Sharma N. Mechanistic implications of plastic degradation. Polym Degrad Stab. 2008;93(3):561–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2007.11.008.
Hamidinejad M, Zhao B, Zandieh A, Moghimian N, Filleter T, Park CB. Enhanced electrical and electromagnetic interference shielding properties of polymer-graphene nanoplatelet composites fabricated via supercritical-fluid treatment and physical foaming. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(36):30752–61. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.8b10745.
Hart-Smith LJ. The design of repairable advanced composite structures. In: SAE technical paper series. Warrendale: SAE International; 1985. https://doi.org/10.4271/851830.
Feldhusen J, Krishnamoorthy SK. Fast joining and repairing of sandwich materials with detachable mechanical connection technology. Aachen: Universitätsbibliothek der RWTH Aachen; 2008.
Garcea SC, Wang Y, Withers PJ. X-ray computed tomography of polymer composites. Compos Sci Technol. 2018;156:305–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.10.023.
Krautkrämer J, Krautkrämer H. Ultrasonic testing of materials. 4th ed. Berlin: Springer; 1990.
Ciampa F, Mahmoodi P, Pinto F, Meo M. Recent advances in active infrared thermography for non-destructive testing of aerospace components. Sensors. 2018. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18020609.
Duong CN, Wang CH. Composite repair: theory and design. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2007.
Park M. Print to repair: 3D printing and product repair. In: Chapman J, editor. Routledge handbook of sustainable product design. New York: Taylor & Francis Group; 2017. p. 236–49.
Gómez Muñoz CQ, García Marquez FP, Hernandez Crespo B, Makaya K. Structural health monitoring for delamination detection and location in wind turbine blades employing guided waves. Wind Energy. 2019;22(5):698–711. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2316.
Noel AB, Abdaoui A, Elfouly T, Ahmed MH, Badawy A, Shehata MS. Structural health monitoring using wireless sensor networks: a comprehensive survey. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2017;19(3):1403–23. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2017.2691551.
Soo VK, Compston P, Doolan M. The impact of joining choices on vehicle recycling systems. Procedia CIRP. 2018;69:843–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.009.
Amancio-Filho ST, dos Santos JF. Joining of polymers and polymer-metal hybrid structures: Recent developments and trends. Polym Engi Sci. 2009;49(8):1461–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.21424.
Lu Y, Broughton J, Winfield P. A review of innovations in disbonding techniques for repair and recycling of automotive vehicles. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2014;50:119–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.01.021.
Utekar S, More N, Rao A. Comprehensive study of recycling of thermosetting polymer composites - Driving force, challenges and methods. Compos Part B Eng. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108596.
Yulinova A, Göring M, Nickel D, Spange S, Lampke T. Novel adhesion promoter for metal-plastic composites. Adv Eng Mater. 2015;17(6):802–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.201400366.
Shen L, Worrell E. Plastic recycling. In: Handbook of recycling. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2014. p. 179–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-396459-5.00013-1.
Samal S. Thermal plasma technology: the prospective future in material processing. J Clean Prod. 2017;142:3131–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.154.
Stoian R, Colombier J-P. Advances in ultrafast laser structuring of materials at the nanoscale. Nanophotonics. 2020;9(16):4665–88. https://doi.org/10.1515/nanoph-2020-0310.
Gagliardi F, Palaia D, Ambrogio G. Energy consumption and CO2 emissions of joining processes for manufacturing hybrid structures. J Clean Prod. 2019;228:425–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.339.
Niemann J, Pisla A. Digital product tracking. In: Niemann J, editor. Life-cycle management of machines and mechanisms. Mechanisms and machine science ser, vol. 90. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG; 2021. p. 283–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56449-0_15.
Chen Z, Huang L. Digital twin in circular economy: remanufacturing in construction. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2020;588(3):032014. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/588/3/032014.
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization, RK, LS, SS, MZ and MG; writing—original draft preparation, RK and LS; writing—review and editing, LS, RK, SS, MZ and MG; visualization, LS and RK. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
All authors have approved and agreed to submit this manuscript to this journal.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kupfer, R., Schilling, L., Spitzer, S. et al. Neutral lightweight engineering: a holistic approach towards sustainability driven engineering. Discov Sustain 3, 17 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-022-00084-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-022-00084-9