Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T07:09:30.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Approach to Sustainability-Based Assessment of Solution Alternatives in Early Stages of Product Engineering

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

I. Gräßler  and
P. Hesse
I. Gräßler
Affiliation:
Paderborn University, Germany
P. Hesse*
Affiliation:
Paderborn University, Germany
*
philipp.hesse@hni.upb.de

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Sustainable product engineering is becoming increasingly important. This includes the development of environmentally friendly products and the design for recycling. In this paper a holistic method for the assessment of solution alternatives is presented, in which the stakeholder perspectives along the generic product lifecycle are taken into account. Finally, a new visualization is presented. By visualizing the results in the integrated sustainability triangle, decision-makers in product development can holistically assess the sustainability of the solution alternatives.

Keywords

sustainabilitydecision makinggeneric product lifecycledesign analysisecodesign
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 1001 - 1010
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

Amrina, E. and Yusof, S.M. (2011), “Key Performance Indicators for Sustainable Manufacturing Evaluation in Automotive Companies”, in IEEE, pp. 1093–1097.Google Scholar
Bender, B. and Gericke, K. (2021), Pahl/Beitz Konstruktionslehre: Methoden und Anwendung erfolgreicher Produktentwicklung, 9.th ed., Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertoni, A., Dasari, S.K., Hallstedt, S.I. and Andersson, P. (2018), “Model-Based Decision Support For Value and Systainability Assessment:. Applying Machine Learning in Aerospace Product Development”, in International Design Conference, pp. 2585–2596.Google Scholar
Bocken, Nancy, Morgan, D., Evans, S. and Bocken, N. (2013), “Understanding environmentalperformance variation in manufacturing companies variation in manufacturing companies”, in International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 62, pp. 856–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briner, R.B. and Denyer, D. (2012), “Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis as a Practice and Scholarship Tool”, in The Oxford Handbook of Evidence-Based Management, pp. 112–129.Google Scholar
Deutsches Institut für Normung (2021), Umweltmanagement – Ökobilanz, No. 14040., Beuth Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Ehrlenspiel, K. and Meerkamm, H. (2013), Integrierte Produktentwicklung: Denkabläufe, Methodeneinsatz, Zusammenarbeit, 6.th ed., Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH Co KG, München, Wien.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2013), Towards The Circular EconomyGoogle Scholar
Commission, Enquiry (Ed.) (1998), Protection of people and Environment: Goals and framework conditions for sustainable development.Google Scholar
Fiksel, J. (1996), “Achieving eco-efficiency through design for environment”, in Total Quality Enviromental Management, Vol. 5, pp. 47–54.Google Scholar
(2022), Gabi Solutions, sphera.Google Scholar
Göhlich, D., Syré, A.M., van der Schoor, Michel Joop, Jefferies, D., Grahle, A. and Heide, L. (2022), “Design Methodologies for Sustainable Mobility Systems”, in Krause, D. and Heyden, E. (Eds.), Design Methodology for Future Products, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 123–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gräßler, I. and Pottebaum, J. (2021), “Generic Product Lifecycle Model: A Holistic and Adaptable Approach for Multi-Disciplinary Product–Service Systems”, in Applied Sciences, Vol. 11, pp. 4–24.Google Scholar
Gräßler, I., Wiechel, D., Roesmann, D. and Thiele, H. (2021), “V-model based development of cyber-physical systems and cyber-physical production systems”, in 31st CIRP Design Conference, Vol. 100, pp. 253–258.Google Scholar
Hassan, F.M., Mahmood, S., Zameri, Mat Saman, M., Sharif, S. and Sapuan, S.Z. (2017), “Application of Product Sustainability Evaluation Tool (ProSET) on Car Seat Design Configurations”, in International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering, pp. 88–97.Google Scholar
Hauff, M. (2014), Nachhaltige Entwicklung, Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH, München.Google Scholar
Hede, S., Ferreira, P.V., Lopes, M.N. and Rocha, L.A. (2015), “TRIZ and the Paradigms of Social Sustainability in Product Development Endeavors”, in Procedia Engineering, Vol. 131, pp. 522–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heng, T.B., Lee, C.L., Foong, Y.P. and San, O.T. (2012), “A Framework of a Sustainable Performance Measurements (SPMs)”, in World Applied Sciences Journal, pp. 107–119.Google Scholar
Isaksson, O. and Eckert, C. (2020), Product Development 2040: Technologies are just as good as the Designer's ability to integrate them.Google Scholar
Kwok, S.Y., Schulte, J., Hallstedt, S.I. and Hallstedt, S.I. (2020), “Approach for sustainability Criteria and Product Life-Cycle Data Simulation in Concept Selection”, in International Design Conference, pp. 1979–1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindemann, U. (2005), Methodische Entwicklung technischer Produkte, Shaker Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S. and Olsson, L. (2007), “Categorising tools for sustainability assessment”, in Ecological Economics, Vol. 60, pp. 498–508.Google Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J. and Grote, K.-H. (2007), Engineering Design, 3.th ed., Springer, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponn, J. and Lindemann, U. (2011), Konzeptentwicklung und Gestaltung technischer Produkte, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, V.P., Pigosso, D.C.A. and McAloone, T.C. (2017), “Measuring the implementation of ecodesign management practices”, in Journal of cleaner Production, Vol. 156, pp. 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R.K., Murty, H.R., Gupta, S.K. and Dikshit, A.K. (2009), “An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies”, in Ecological Indicators, Vol. 9, pp. 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soo, V.K., Compston, P. and Doolan, M. (2018), “The Impact of Joining Choices on Vehicle Recycling Systems”, in Procedia CIRP, Vol. 69, pp. 843–848.Google Scholar
VDIc 2206 (2021), Development of mechatronic and cyber-physical systems, Beuth Verlag, Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
VDI 2221 (2019), Design of technical products and systems, Beuth Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
VDI 2243 (2002), Recyclingorientierte Produktentwicklung, Beuth-Verlag GmbH, Berlin.Google Scholar
Walden, D.D., Roedler, G.J., Forsberg, K.J., Douglas Hamelin, R. and Shortell, T.M. (2015), Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activites, 4.th ed., Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken.Google Scholar