0
Research Papers

Simultaneous Selective Disassembly and End-of-Life Decision Making for Multiple Products That Share Disassembly Operations

[+] Author and Article Information
Sara Behdad

Department of Industrial and Enterprise System Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, 104 S. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801behdad1@illinois.edu

Minjung Kwak

Department of Industrial and Enterprise System Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, 104 S. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801kwak14@illinois.edu

Harrison Kim

Department of Industrial and Enterprise System Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, 104 S. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801hmkim@illinois.edu

Deborah Thurston

Department of Industrial and Enterprise System Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, 104 S. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801thurston@illinois.edu

J. Mech. Des 132(4), 041002 (Mar 30, 2010) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4001207 History: Received May 28, 2009; Revised February 01, 2010; Published March 30, 2010; Online March 30, 2010

Environmental protection legislation, consumer interest in “green” products, a trend toward corporate responsibility and recognition of the potential profitability of salvaging operations, has resulted in increased interest in product take back. However, the cost effectiveness of product take-back operations is hampered by many factors, including the high cost of disassembly and a widely varying feedstock of dissimilar products. Two types of decisions must be made, how to carry out the disassembly process in the most efficient manner to “mine” the value-added that is still embedded in the product, and then how to best utilize that value-added once it is recovered. This paper presents a method for making those decisions. The concept of a transition matrix is integrated with mixed integer linear programming to determine the extent to which products should be disassembled and simultaneously determine the optimal end-of-life (EOL) strategy for each resultant component or subassembly. The main contribution of this paper is the simultaneous consideration of selective disassembly, multiple products, and the value added that remains in each component or subassembly. Shared disassembly operations and capacity limits are considered. An example using two cell phone products illustrates application of the model. The obtained results demonstrate the most economical level of disassembly for each cell phone and the best EOL options for each resultant module. In addition, the cell phone example shows that sharing disassembly operations between different products makes disassembly more cost effective compared with the case in which each product is disassembled separately.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Simple assembly (a), its connection diagram (b), and its disassembly graph (c) (23)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Two products with some shared disassembly operations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Product 1 (a) and product 2 (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

EOL Modules and disassembly transitions of Product 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

EOL Modules and disassembly transitions of product 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

EOL Modules and disassembly transitions of product 1 when model was solved just for product 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

EOL Modules and disassembly transitions of product 2 when model was solved just for product 2

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In