Dynamic Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Calculation of Injection Moulding Machines

  • Sebastian Thiede
  • Tim Spiering
  • Stephan Kohlitz
  • Christoph Herrmann
  • Sami Kara
Conference paper

Abstract

As an extension to the investment oriented business perspectives, the evaluation and the active usage of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) concepts are significantly gaining importance in manufacturing companies. TCO subsumes all cost portions that occur for the operator of a machine. While essential shares of the TCO (energy and maintenance) cannot be determined by static calculations, a method for a dynamic calculation of the TCO of production machines is presented. It allows a realistic calculation of the TCO by taking into account individual machine characteristics and behaviour as well as uncertainties over the entire period of ownership.

Keywords

Injection Moulding Life Cycle Costing Total Cost of Ownership Energy Efficiency 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Herrmann, C.: Ganzheitliches Life-Cycle-Management - Nachhaltigkeit und Lebenszyklusorientierung in Unternehmen. Springer, Berlin (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    VDI: Guideline 2884 – Purchase, operating and maintenance of production equipment using Life Cycle Costing (LCC). Beuth Verlag, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Komarek, J.: Life cycle cost simulation in defence planning. In: RTO SAS symposium on ‘Cost Structure and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) for Military Systems’, Paris, France (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Herrmann, C., Kara, S., Thiede, S.: Dynamic life cycle costing based on lifetime prediction. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 1–12 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herrmann, C., Thiede, S., Heinemann, T.: Ganzheitliche Ansätze zur Erhöhung der Energie- und Ressourceneffizienz in der Produktion. 10. Karlsruher Arbeitsgespräche Produktionsforschung (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neugebauer, R.: Energieeffizienz in der Produktion: Untersuchung zum Handlungs- und Forschungsbedarf. Fraunhofer Publica., Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Plasticseurope: Plastics – the facts,– An analysis of European plastics production demand and recovery for 2010, Brussels, Belgium (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lange, O.: Generation Golf. Plastverarbeiter 2009(06), 1–3 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stauber, R.-C.: The automobile of the future: opportunities and challenges for plastics and plastics technologies. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Plastics in Automotive Engineering, Düsseldorf, Germany, pp. 1–13 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bonnet, M.: Kunststoffe in der Ingenieuranwendung. Vieweg+Teubner, Wiesbaden (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bünting, F.: Lebenszykluskostenbetrachtungen bei Investitionsgüternin. In: Schweiger, S. (ed.) Lebenszykluskosten optimieren - Paradigmenwechsel für Anbieter und Nutzer von Investitionsgütern, pp. 35–50. Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kawauchi, Y., Rausand, M.: Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis in oil and chemical process industries. Department of Production and Quality Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schüle, H.: Verarbeitung von Kunststoffen zu Bauteilen - Urformen. In: Eyerer, P., Hirth, T., Elsner, P. (eds.) Polymer Engineering, pp. 211–218. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rees, H., Catoen, B.: Selecting Injection Molds – Weighing Cost vs. Productivity. Hanser Verlag, München (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krahn, H., Eh, D., Vogel, H.: 1000 Konstruktionsbeispiele für den Werkzeug- und Formenbau beim Spritzgießen. Hanser Verlag, München (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stewart, J.: Das Beste aus beiden Welten. Kunststoffe 2006(6), 72–75 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thierez, A., Gutowski, T.: An Environmental Analysis of Injection Moulding. In: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, pp. 195–200 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Helbig, A.: Energieeffizientes elektrisch- hydrostatisches Antriebssystem am Beispiel der Kunststoffspritzgussmaschine. Shaker Verlag, Aachen (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bürkle, E., Hammerschmid, J., Würtele, M.: Energetische Systemoptimierung spart Kosten. K-zeitung, 2008(19) (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dörner, J., Heinzler, F., Wortberg, J.: Kennzahlen zum objektiven Effizienzvergleich? Kunststoffe 2011(7), 31–34 (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eckhardt, H.: Wirkungsfeld Spritzgießmaschine. In: Reduzierung des Energieverbrauchs beim Spritzgießen, VDI Verlag, Düsseldorf (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bertsche, B., Lechner, G.: Zuverlässigkeit im Fahrzeug- und Maschinenbau. Springer, Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Takata, S., Kimura, F., van Houten, F.J.A.M., Westkämper, E., Shpitalni, M., Ceglarek, D., Lee, J.: Maintenance: Changing Role in Life Cycle Management. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 53(2), 643–655 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feldman, K., Jazouli, T., Sandborn, P.: A Methodology for Determining the Return on Investment Associated with Prognostics and Health Management. IEEE Trans. on Reliability 58(2), 305–316 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Herrmann, C., Bergmann, L., Thiede, S., Torney, M., Zein, A.: Framework for The Dynamic And Life Cycle Oriented Evaluation Of Maintenance Strategies. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International VIDA Conference, Poland, pp. 277–284 (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fleischer, J., Wawerla, M., Niggeschmidt, S.: Machine Life Cycle Cost Estimation via Monte-Carlo Simulation. In: Proceedings of the 14th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering 2007 (LCE 2007), Tokyo, Japan, pp. 449–453 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kleyner, A., Sandborn, P.: Minimizing Life Cycle Cost by Managing Product Reliability via Validation Plan and Warranty Return Cost. International Journal of Production Economics 112(2), 796–807 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Folgado, R., Peças, P., Henriques, E.: Life cycle cost technology selection: A case study in the manufacturing of injection molds. International Journal of Production Engineering 128(1), 368–378 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weissmann, A., Ananthanarayanan, A., Gupta, S.K., Sriram, R.D.: A systematic methodology for accurate design-stage estimation of energy consumption for injection molded parts. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information Engineering Conference, Montreal, Canada, pp. 1–13 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian Thiede
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tim Spiering
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
  • Stephan Kohlitz
    • 4
  • Christoph Herrmann
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sami Kara
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Joint German–Australian Research Group ‘Sustainable Manufacturing and Life Cycle ManagementTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Machine Tools and Production Technology (IWF), Product- and Life-Cycle-Management Research GroupTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany
  3. 3.Life Cycle Engineering and Management Research Group, School of Mechanical and Manufacturing EngineeringThe University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  4. 4.Volkswagen AG, Komponenten-WerkzeugbauKunststofftechnologie-FormenbauBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations