Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T10:38:55.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the Benefits of Remanufacture during Product Prototyping: A Cost and Time Based Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

R. M. Real ,
C. Snider  and
B. Hicks
R. M. Real*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
C. Snider
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
B. Hicks
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
*
ric.real@bristol.ac.uk

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.

Whilst remanufacture is identified as a key enabler for sustainable manufacture in future industry, its role within the context of new product development remains unclear. Where prototypes often go through multiple iterations with varying degrees of change, could remanufacture be adopted to reduce the time and cost components of design iteration? This paper presents a computational study to explore the potential savings afforded by remanufacture across stages of a rapid prototyping process. Results suggest significant reductions to development time and cost can be achieved.

Keywords

rapid prototypingremanufacturingchange managementcost managementhybrid prototyping
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 573 - 582
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

Baumers, M., Dickens, P., Tuck, C. and Hague, R. (2015), “The cost of additive manufacturing: machine productivity, economies of scale and technology-push”, available at:10.1016/j.techfore.2015.02.015.Google Scholar
Camburn, B., Viswanathan, V., Linsey, J., Anderson, D., Jensen, D., Crawford, R., Otto, K., et al. (2017), “Design prototyping methods: State of the art in strategies, techniques, and guidelines”, Design Science, Cambridge University Press, Vol. 3, available at:10.1017/dsj.2017.10.Google Scholar
Cooper, R.G. and Kleinschmidt, E.J. (1995), “Benchmarking the firm's critical success factors in new product development”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, No longer published by Elsevier, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 374–391.Google Scholar
Dyson, J. (2001), “Against the odds: an autobiography”, Texere, p. 308.Google Scholar
Gero, J.S. and Kannengiesser, U. (2004), “The situated function-behaviour-structure framework”, Design Studies, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Guimarães, J.C.F., Severo, E.A., Jabbour, C.J.C., de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L. and Rosa, A.F.P. (2021), “The journey towards sustainable product development: why are some manufacturing companies better than others at product innovation?”, Technovation, Elsevier, Vol. 103, p. 102239.Google Scholar
Henrique, Pereira Mello, C., Calandrin Martins, R., Rosa Parra, B., de Oliveira Pamplona, E., Gomes Salgado, E. and Tavares Seguso, R. (n.d.). “Systematic proposal to calculate price of prototypes manufactured through rapid prototyping an FDM 3D printer in a university lab”, available at:10.1108/13552541011083326.Google Scholar
Ijomah, W.L., Bennett, J.P. and Pearce, J. (1999), “Remanufacturing: Evidence of environmentally conscious business practice in the UK”, Proceedings - 1st International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, EcoDesign 1999, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 192–196.Google Scholar
Jensen, J.P., Prendeville, S.M., Bocken, N.M.P. and Peck, D. (2019), “Creating sustainable value through remanufacturing: Three industry cases”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Elsevier, Vol. 218, pp. 304–314.Google Scholar
Najmon, J.C., Raeisi, S. and Tovar, A. (2019), “Review of additive manufacturing technologies and applications in the aerospace industry”, Additive Manufacturing for the Aerospace Industry, Elsevier, pp. 7–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahbazi, S. and Jönbrink, A.K. (2020), “Design Guidelines to Develop Circular Products: Action Research on Nordic Industry”, Sustainability 2020, Vol. 12, Page 3679, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Vol. 12 No. 9, p. 3679.Google Scholar
Smith, R.P. and Tjandra, P. (1998), “Experimental Observation of Iteration in Engineering Design”, Research in Engineering Design - Theory, Applications, and Concurrent Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 107–117.Google Scholar
Xing, K., Belusko, M., Luong, L. and Abhary, K. (2007), “An evaluation model of product upgradeability for remanufacture”, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 35 No. 1–2, pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, F., Wong, Y.S. and Loh, H.T. (2001), “Toward generic models for comparative evaluation and process selection in rapid prototyping and manufacturing”, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Elsevier, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 283–296.Google Scholar