3.8 Proceedings Paper

An integrated approach for product remanufacturing assessment and planning

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.procir.2016.01.118

Keywords

Remanufacturing; disassembly; remanufacturing process planning

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The design information of a product can have significant impact on addressing the various issues in product remanufacturing, from upstream design for remanufacturing, to downstream remanufacturing processes, including disassembly, core refurbishment and remanufacturing process planning, etc. This paper presents a comprehensive framework for product remanufacturability assessment, remanufacturing process planning, and a systematic approach to design for disassembly for remanufacturing based on product design information available in CAD models, e.g., bill of materials, mating features, dimensions and tolerances, tools and accessories, etc. Through the consideration of both design for assembly and design for disassembly guidelines, the determination of the optimal disassembly route for cores to be retrieved and remanufactured is evaluated. Various issues associated with remanufacturing process decision-making are investigated, and a conceptual approach for planning product remanufacturing is developed, in which a sequence of suitable operations can be determined. A software tool is developed for the implementation of the proposed approach for product remanufacturing assessment, process planning, and disassembly route evaluation. A case study using a SolidWorks model of an automotive part is used to demonstrate and validate the proposed framework. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of International Scientific Committee of the 13th Global Conference on Sustainable Manufacturing

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available