- Email: [email protected]
A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology jou rnal homep age : ht t p: // ees .e lse vi er . com /ci r p/ def a ult . asp
A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation Pinar Bilge a,*, Fazleena Badurdeen b, Gu¨nther Seliger (1)a, I.S. Jawahir (1)b a b
Department of Machine Tools and Factory Management, Berlin Institute of Technology, Pascalstrasse 8, 10587 Berlin, Germany Institute for Sustainable Manufacturing (ISM), and Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Sustainable development Manufacturing Value creation
Sustainable manufacturing provides technological and management solutions by creating sustainable value in manufacturing. Implementing these solutions, while balancing economic, environmental, and social impacts is a challenge. This paper presents a novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation and its application for products, processes and services. This method combines analyses and syntheses using new attributes for engineering practice by applying the principles of sustainability. These attributes accomplish multiplier effects in transforming engineering programs, implementing and adapting methodologies, and thus increasing awareness about the challenge of implementing sustainable manufacturing principles. The architecture is demonstrated in a case study on power equipment manufacturing. ß 2016 CIRP.
1. Introduction Engineering in general explores opportunities for useful application of scientific principles. Manufacturing, as a specific field in engineering, starts from human thinking and imagination, acquiring new knowledge about natural scientific phenomena through physical utilization of materials and resources toward value creation via products, processes, services using technology and management. A special focus of engineering lies on condensing its activities to sustainable manufacturing, thus in particular addressing value creation for shaping human living [1]. As the world explores the implications of a potential climate agreement at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) in 2015, the industry and research communities are keen to position themselves as enablers of sustainable development, in particular with a lower carbon energy mix [2]. The awareness of sustainability concepts and applying these concepts to products, processes and services in manufacturing holistically require engineering capabilities and information from different sources across the globe. The goal of this paper is to present an architecture for sustainable value creation in manufacturing for research and applications to cope with the challenge of implementing sustainable manufacturing principles. A short review of the state-of-theart of value creation is presented in the next section showing what principles are currently applied in manufacturing for truly implementing sustainable manufacturing. Industrial stakeholders and scientists agree that the need for radical changes is urgent and imminent for sustainable development [3]. A novel manufacturing architecture for promoting sustainable value creation is developed in Section 3, which is based on analysis
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Bilge).
and synthesis: as conditions and requirements of current solutions are analyzed to identify gaps, preferences are synthesized to select opportunities among gaps to increase effectiveness. By applying principles for sustainable development, the selection depends on economic, environmental and social impacts of potential solutions. A case study from the power equipment manufacturing sector is presented in Section 4 to demonstrate these effects in redesigning and assessing handling equipment for remanufacturing of turbine blades. 2. Sustainable value creation 2.1. Value creation framework In manufacturing, value is created by changing the ratio between input and output in terms of raw, auxiliary and operating materials and resources by applying physical and chemical processes [4]. Conditions form boundaries of value creation, and are determined by, for example, natural limitations and governmental regulations, which the engineer cannot directly change. Requirements fulfill goals, for example, meeting customer needs and other stakeholders’ demands. Solutions fulfill the requirements within the frame of conditions. The fulfillment drives competitive advantage. Processes as transformation procedures generate products as tangible objects, services as intangible activities or combinations of the two, representing the output for value creation in manufacturing. Productivity of manufacturing activities increases by maximizing output, and efficiency by minimizing input. Increasing efficiency reduces negative impacts ‘‘to do things right’’ in manufacturing. Increasing positive impacts needs radical changes toward effective utilization of resources, which calls for ‘‘doing the right things’’, and requires more awareness and efforts [5]. Seliger describes five value creation factors—product, process, equipment, organization and people—and their interactions
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114 0007-8506/ß 2016 CIRP.
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 2
P. Bilge et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
constitute and specify a value creation module with a specific scope for a product, service or combination of the two [1]. Value creation covers all stages of life-cycle: pre-manufacturing, manufacturing, use and post-use [6]. Economic, environmental and social impacts of each module are assessed to measure the sustainable value, which is created through implementation and adaptation of methodologies in manufacturing. Cradle-to-grave represents a life-cycle with an open loop. Sustainable manufacturing closes the loop from cradle-to-cradle with provisions for multiple life-cycles. Jawahir et al. [7] introduced the 6R approach—reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, redesign and remanufacture—into manufacturing to enable closed-loop multiple life-cycles. In the 6R methodology, the activity, Reduce mainly focuses on reduced use of energy, materials and other resources during manufacturing and the mitigation of emissions and wastes during the use stage and increases resource-efficiency. The activity, Reuse refers to the reuse of the product or its components, after its first life-cycle, in subsequent life-cycles to reduce the usage of virgin materials to produce such products and components. The wellknown Recycle activity involves the process of converting end-of-life materials that would otherwise be considered wastes normally heading to landfills, into new materials for next generation products. The process of collecting products at the end of the use stage, disassembling, sorting and cleaning for utilization in subsequent life-cycles of the product is referred to as Recover. Recovery is the first major activity in the end-of-life stage of a product, and it provides the basis for generating value streams such as reusing, redesigning, recycling and remanufacturing as shown in Fig. 1. The Redesign activity involves the act of redesigning next generation products, which would use components, residual materials and resources recovered from the previous life-cycle, while Remanufacture involves the re-processing of already used products for restoration to their original state or a like-new form through the reuse of as many components as possible without loss of functionality.
[8]. Therefore, engineering must exceed the limits of economic impacts of single products and processes to open up to integrate all aspects of the economy, environment and society [10]. To identify and conduct research for next generation manufacturing, the US National Science Foundation defines that ‘‘transformative research involves ideas, discoveries, or tools that radically change understanding of an important existing scientific or engineering concept or educational practice or leads to the creation of a new paradigm or field of science, engineering, or education’’ [11]. Following principles remain relevant for implementing transformative research in sustainable manufacturing: environmentally, non-renewable resources should be processed in multiple lifecycles through elements of 6Rs rather than be disposed of after a certain life-cycle. Non-renewables should be substituted by renewables within the natural limitations of renewables regeneration [12]. Economically, instead of tangible objects, functionality and use-based services should be produced and sold, thus achieving more wealth with less resources [1]. Socially, higher living and working standards should be stimulated to increase equal distribution of global wealth. By applying these principles to create sustainable value in manufacturing, instead of looking at the implementation of single elements, engineering must be aware of multiple interactions among value creation factors, life-cycle stages and 6Rs. Fig. 2 illustrates the conceptual framework for mapping and integrating product life-cycle and 6Rs with the five factors. In addition to reducing resource consumption in all life-cycle stages, education and training of the workforce, especially engineers, play a central role to spread the application of end-of-life activities to post-use stages of products and equipment. Performing these activities and repetitive assessment of their impacts requires the development of new technological processes, organizational procedures and services for shaping sustainable solutions in different industrial sectors.
Fig. 1. Closed-loop material flow diagram of 6R elements and the four product lifecycle stages [8].
2.2. Principles for sustainable value creation in manufacturing To create value in manufacturing, engineering applies the following three conventional attributes: (1) Interdisciplinary capabilities support engineers to understand conditions and requirements, develop solutions from different perspectives, while increasing the efficiency of value creation. (2) Digitalization of information, data, and facts, information technologies (IT) support the development and exploration of educational and practical opportunities to create value through integrated and automated solutions. (3) In engineering, problem-solving combines logical thinking with analysis and synthesis by applying methodological knowledge and skills [9]. While these attributes are applied to improve existing manufacturing systems toward resource-efficiency in the circular economy and provide greater economic, sometimes also environmental and social impacts, less attention is paid on understanding the value creation methods for next generation manufacturing
Fig. 2. A conceptual framework for mapping and integrating product life-cycle and 6Rs with sustainable value creation factors.
3. Manufacturing architecture for sustainable solutions Current engineering capabilities can cope with many single challenges in manufacturing. However, they remain restricted when it comes to the application of transformative research in order to operationalize principles for sustainable manufacturing in practice. How can engineers be made capable to apply these principles? Fig. 3 presents a manufacturing architecture developed through research for applications including education and training in order to enhance engineering capabilities, which can create sustainable solutions. In manufacturing, value creation flows from analysis, as shown in orange arrows, to synthesis, as shown in black arrows, iteratively. The existing manufacturing systems are analyzed following Fig. 3 counterclockwise with orange arrows. Analyses support
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 P. Bilge et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
Fig. 3. Manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation.
understanding how and what principles are applied, which methodologies are implemented, and how value is created, i.e., how the value creation module is designed. Conditions and requirements of a certain module are specified to answer the previous questions. The consecutive question, whether the module fulfills the requirements effectively keeping with the conditions, leads to the identification of gaps. If the module fulfills the requirements, the current solution is accepted for further use in value creation. If not, the next question will be how to change the solution so that it contributes to sustainable manufacturing. While life-cycle assessment methodologies measure a set of indicators and calculate the impacts of modules quantitatively to provide evidence of efficient solutions, quality function deployment (QFD) is a use-based assessment methodology to rank solutions. QFD describes in the context of this paper ‘‘quality’’ fulfilling the requirements, ‘‘function’’ focusing on principles to create sustainable value, and ‘‘deployment’’ met by engineering capabilities. QFD demonstrates qualitatively how the effectiveness of modules would change iteratively according to effective utilization of resources and cognition by stakeholders. The manufacturing architecture applies a QFD-based calculation approach to identify the gaps of current solutions and discover potential opportunities. The score S(sk) for an existing kth solution sk is presented by Eq. (1). Each score is the sum of the multiplied combinations of the preference p(rj) of the jth requirement rj and its relation d(rj, sk) to this solution. Sðsk Þ ¼
n X ½dðr j ; sk Þ pðr j Þ
(1)
j¼1
The function f(sk) compares the score for a solution with the minimum tmin and maximum tmax target levels, as presented by Eq. (2), for evaluation. Target levels present a balanced score for economic, environmental and social impacts of each solution. The minimum is determined by 50% fulfillment of requirements and the maximum by 100% fulfillment. If there is a gap, this solution needs to be improved, rejected, or accepted and follow-up action to be taken must be determined. f ðsk Þ : t min ðsk Þ < Sðsk Þ < t max ðsk Þ
(2)
In case of rejection and improvement, the analysis identifies gaps of a product or a service. A potential change indicates an opportunity for balancing impacts to explore. Each opportunity can narrow or close a gap by creating sustainable value. As transformative research often results from a new methodology and an interdisciplinary approach, the authors adopt the following working definition for characterizing transformative engineering: ‘‘transformative engineering challenges engineering wisdom in research, education and practice, and raises awareness for sustainable manufacturing by changing value creation through new engineering capabilities’’. Transformative engineering transforms the value creation in manufacturing to a greater degree, where it will serve sustainable development.
3
In addition to the three conventional attributes in engineering described above, three transformative attributes are proposed to ease the transition from conventional to sustainable manufacturing: (1) The focus on sustainable solutions, which balance impacts, is likely to improve the current products and services by designing, operating and assessing the value creation in manufacturing. (2) Focus on projects incorporates problem-solving, interdisciplinary teamwork, and project management, while emphasizing that there is not just one optimal solution to any problem to increase effectiveness [13]. (3) The rapid rise of IT has simplified the access to information within projects and allowed for focus on interactions among stakeholders, disciplines, and regions, when engineers search for innovative and creative solutions. Following clockwise the black arrows in Fig. 3 shows that the stakeholders in manufacturing need to raise awareness by embracing transformative engineering principles in sustainable manufacturing, thus specially addressing changes to balance economic, environmental and social impacts. Transforming thinking habits and enhancing engineering capabilities drives transformation of educational programs close to application in industry. Application of all six attributes in higher and professional education and training would enhance engineering capabilities to discover opportunities among specific gaps for sustainable manufacturing. The proposed manufacturing architecture in Fig. 3 illustrates how the enhanced capabilities are operationalized in iterative closed-loop cycles. Thus, engineers get motivated to justify continuously why a technological or organizational opportunity provides a potential solution for creating sustainable value in practice. To transform existing value creation modules to sustainable solutions, opportunities are explored by synthesizing the principles of sustainable development according to stakeholder preferences. Exploiting opportunities by implementing methodologies of technology and management leads to similar solutions for modules. Scores of potential solutions are compared to select the most effective one. 4. Implementation The manufacturing architecture is exemplified in a case study, which addresses remanufacturing of components in the power equipment manufacturing sector. The goal here is to examine the internal logistics with the proposed manufacturing architecture in order to identify, design and test potential solutions, which can increase the effectiveness of remanufacturing by providing a sustainable solution for equipment. A brief introduction into the value creation factors (VCF) follows: turbine blades are internal combustion engine components (VCF1 = product). A life-cycle of a component is completed after about 25,000 working hours of the engine. After each life-cycle (VCF2 = organization), components are disassembled for remanufacturing, which involves coating and repairing (VCF3 = process). Coating with a mix of ceramics and metallic materials is used to preserve the components against corrosion, oxidation and high temperatures during the working period of the engines. For each component, relevant processes for coating and repair are selected by the engineers and workers (VCF4 = people), depending on the function, engine and component type. Remanufacturing accounts for 30% of the cost of a new component. Remanufactured components have a 100% guarantee for the next 25,000 h. After coating and repair, the components are re-assembled in the engines for the next life-cycle. After three life-cycles, only 10% of the raw material can be reused. The handling equipment (VCF5 = equipment), while serving as a tangible object, provides use-based services such as transportation, storage and protection during the internal supply of the components by remanufacturing. A motion-time-system based on methods-time-measurement is used to analyze the internal logistics for different component types based on the time in which a worker completes a process. Some requirements for the equipment to ensure effective remanufacturing of components are: easy upload and download of components
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 4
P. Bilge et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
increase the time efficiency of repair and coating. Handling equipment must be resistant against acid and heat as well as compatible with existing automated equipment and warehouse, while avoiding fragmentation of coating, contamination and damages during transports. To be able to respond to changing requirements such as state of the used components after a life-cycle or capacity utilization of the machinery for coating and repair adequately, repeated interactions among engineers and workers are needed. The analysis highlights some gaps of the equipment: lack of universality, lack of protection, lack of ergonomic handling, waste of time and resources. The weights of component vary between 50 and 800 kg and sizes between 10 and 150 cm. The gaps impose application of the following principles to internal logistics: flexibility and adaptability of equipment made by the use of renewables; less resources and avoiding waste for transportation, storage and protection; and improving ergonomics and working standards. Redesign is selected as methodology to implement for creating a sustainable solution for the handling equipment. From an engineering perspective, a common understanding of the principles and changing requirements is needed to adapt current value creation by integrating a redesigned equipment into the current remanufacturing. The workforce has the capabilities to apply interdisciplinary problem-solving. However, the awareness and motivation for searching sustainable solutions remain limited. The principles for sustainable manufacturing are mediated to the workforce within a training program increasing their awareness for sustainability and integration of environmental and social impacts into decision-making and actions. The training program is transformed as a professional educational program to encourage the workforce and interrogate the current value creation through the equipment in a project and investigate opportunities to change it sustainably. The workforce is trained within this project on how to synthesize sustainable solutions among opportunities. The workforce with enhanced capabilities discovers new opportunities for redesigning the equipment among the identified gaps. For example, to carry diverse components and to standardize solutions for equipment, a modular design is selected providing a flexible and compatible equipment. Euro-pallets are elevated on wheels in different ways (see opportunities in Table 1) to justify their impacts. A laminated paperboard is tested for use instead of plastics to assemble modular shelves for diverse components. Detachable safety guards are built for outdoor protection. Assembly costs for a unit of the handling equipment including shelves are kept below 1500 EUR. Opportunities are synthesized to shape solutions in iterative cycles, and examined. The scores and targets of four opportunities, which are calculated following Eqs. (1) and (2) for the three principles, are shown in Table 1. These four opportunities are drawn and tested as potential solutions with 3D-modeling and blueprints. Their scores are ranked. The first ranked solution with a score of 100 points is selected to transport, store and protect
Technological solutions
Preference
Table 1 Analysis of gaps and opportunities via technological solutions for component handling equipment.
Requirements Flexi- and adaptability Resourceefficiency Ergonomics Standardization Scores Min. and max. targets Rank
Gaps
Opportunities
9
1
1
3
3
9
9
3
9
9
9
9
3
3
1 1
3 1 40
3 3 42
1 1 3 9 58 64 14 and 126
1 3 94
1 9 100
6
5
2
1
4
3
the components, and then integrated into the internal logistics for remanufacturing. This case demonstrates how enhanced capabilities of the workforce by professional education contribute to finding a sustainable solution by redesigning and assessing handling equipment. Such a solution is likely to advance similar manufacturing systems. 5. Conclusions This paper reviews the value creation architecture in manufacturing with a focus on increasing effectiveness. The 6R approach provides methodologies to change value creation factors toward sustainability. Engineers apply IT-based methodologies and their combinations in products, processes and services in interdisciplinary teams to design, operate and evaluate manufacturing systems. In order to promote economic profit, while increasing social benefits and decreasing environmental burden, engineers must be aware of principles for sustainable development and capable of analysis and synthesis. A novel manufacturing architecture is proposed to guide engineers on how to achieve sustainable solutions in manufacturing. Based on sustainability, projects, global and local responsibilities, new attributes are developed to educate and train engineers for discovering opportunities to bridge gaps between conventional and sustainable manufacturing. For generating engineering capabilities toward sustainability in industrial applications, programs in higher and professional education must be transformed. The enhanced capabilities lead to multiplier effects through the implementation of the new manufacturing architecture in industry. The architecture of transformative engineering is exemplarily applied for the redesign of handling equipment. Potential solutions are assessed in balancing economic, environmental and social impacts, and thus increasing effectiveness of turbine blade remanufacturing in power equipment manufacturing. The usefulness of the architecture for sustainable value creation is verified. Future research will address how engineering capabilities can contribute to sustainable value creation by applying principles of sustainable manufacturing. References [1] Seliger G (2011) Sustainability Engineering by Product-Service Systems. Proceedings of the 18th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Braunschweig, Germany, May 2–4, 22–28. [2] WEC – World Energy Council (2015) 2015 Energy Trilemma Index: Benchmarking the Sustainability of National Energy Systemshttps://www.worldenergy.org/ wp-content/uploads/2015/11/20151030-Index-report-PDF.pdf. (accessed 12.01.16). [3] PWC – Price Waterhouse Coopers (2015) 14th PwC Global Power & Utilities Survey 2015: A Different Energy Futurehttp://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/ energy-utilities-mining/power-utilities/global-power-and-utilities-survey. html. (accessed 13.01.16). [4] Segreto T, Teti R (2014) Manufacturing. in Laperrie`re L, Reinhart G, (Eds.) CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering, 828–830. [5] Lanza G, Stoll J, Stricker N, Peters S, Lorenz C (2013) Measuring Global Production Effectiveness. Procedia CIRP 7:31–36. [6] Jayal AD, Badurdeen F, Dillon OW, Jawahir IS (2010) Sustainable Manufacturing: Modeling and Optimization Challenges at the Product, Process and System Levels. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology 2(3):144–152. [7] Jawahir IS, Dillon OW, Rouch KE, Joshi KJ, Venkatachalam A, Jaafar IH (2006) Total Life-Cycle Considerations in Product Design for Manufacture: A Framework for Comprehensive Evaluation. Proceedings of the 10th International Research/Expert Conference, Barcelona, Spain, September 11–15, 1–10. [8] Jawahir IS, Bradley R (2016) Technological Elements of Circular Economy and the Principles of 6R-Based Closed-loop Material Flow in Sustainable Manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 40:103–108. [9] Bilge P, Seliger G, Badurdeen F, Jawahir IS (2016) A Novel Framework for Achieving Sustainable Value Creation through Industrial Engineering Principles. Procedia CIRP 40:516–523. [10] Peters J (1994) Engineering, A Dialogue Between Science and Society. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 43(1):401–404. [11] NSF – National Science Foundation (2015) Definition of Transformative Research, NSF – National Science Foundation http://www.nsf.gov/about/ transformative_research/. (accessed 13.01.16). [12] Emec S, Bilge P, Seliger G (2015) Design of Production Systems with Hybrid Energy and Water Generation for Sustainable Value Creation. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 17(7):1807–1829. [13] Dankers W (2014) Decision Making. in Laperrie`re L, Reinhart G, (Eds.) CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering, 363–367.
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology jou rnal homep age : ht t p: // ees .e lse vi er . com /ci r p/ def a ult . asp
A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation Pinar Bilge a,*, Fazleena Badurdeen b, Gu¨nther Seliger (1)a, I.S. Jawahir (1)b a b
Department of Machine Tools and Factory Management, Berlin Institute of Technology, Pascalstrasse 8, 10587 Berlin, Germany Institute for Sustainable Manufacturing (ISM), and Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Sustainable development Manufacturing Value creation
Sustainable manufacturing provides technological and management solutions by creating sustainable value in manufacturing. Implementing these solutions, while balancing economic, environmental, and social impacts is a challenge. This paper presents a novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation and its application for products, processes and services. This method combines analyses and syntheses using new attributes for engineering practice by applying the principles of sustainability. These attributes accomplish multiplier effects in transforming engineering programs, implementing and adapting methodologies, and thus increasing awareness about the challenge of implementing sustainable manufacturing principles. The architecture is demonstrated in a case study on power equipment manufacturing. ß 2016 CIRP.
1. Introduction Engineering in general explores opportunities for useful application of scientific principles. Manufacturing, as a specific field in engineering, starts from human thinking and imagination, acquiring new knowledge about natural scientific phenomena through physical utilization of materials and resources toward value creation via products, processes, services using technology and management. A special focus of engineering lies on condensing its activities to sustainable manufacturing, thus in particular addressing value creation for shaping human living [1]. As the world explores the implications of a potential climate agreement at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) in 2015, the industry and research communities are keen to position themselves as enablers of sustainable development, in particular with a lower carbon energy mix [2]. The awareness of sustainability concepts and applying these concepts to products, processes and services in manufacturing holistically require engineering capabilities and information from different sources across the globe. The goal of this paper is to present an architecture for sustainable value creation in manufacturing for research and applications to cope with the challenge of implementing sustainable manufacturing principles. A short review of the state-of-theart of value creation is presented in the next section showing what principles are currently applied in manufacturing for truly implementing sustainable manufacturing. Industrial stakeholders and scientists agree that the need for radical changes is urgent and imminent for sustainable development [3]. A novel manufacturing architecture for promoting sustainable value creation is developed in Section 3, which is based on analysis
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Bilge).
and synthesis: as conditions and requirements of current solutions are analyzed to identify gaps, preferences are synthesized to select opportunities among gaps to increase effectiveness. By applying principles for sustainable development, the selection depends on economic, environmental and social impacts of potential solutions. A case study from the power equipment manufacturing sector is presented in Section 4 to demonstrate these effects in redesigning and assessing handling equipment for remanufacturing of turbine blades. 2. Sustainable value creation 2.1. Value creation framework In manufacturing, value is created by changing the ratio between input and output in terms of raw, auxiliary and operating materials and resources by applying physical and chemical processes [4]. Conditions form boundaries of value creation, and are determined by, for example, natural limitations and governmental regulations, which the engineer cannot directly change. Requirements fulfill goals, for example, meeting customer needs and other stakeholders’ demands. Solutions fulfill the requirements within the frame of conditions. The fulfillment drives competitive advantage. Processes as transformation procedures generate products as tangible objects, services as intangible activities or combinations of the two, representing the output for value creation in manufacturing. Productivity of manufacturing activities increases by maximizing output, and efficiency by minimizing input. Increasing efficiency reduces negative impacts ‘‘to do things right’’ in manufacturing. Increasing positive impacts needs radical changes toward effective utilization of resources, which calls for ‘‘doing the right things’’, and requires more awareness and efforts [5]. Seliger describes five value creation factors—product, process, equipment, organization and people—and their interactions
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114 0007-8506/ß 2016 CIRP.
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 2
P. Bilge et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
constitute and specify a value creation module with a specific scope for a product, service or combination of the two [1]. Value creation covers all stages of life-cycle: pre-manufacturing, manufacturing, use and post-use [6]. Economic, environmental and social impacts of each module are assessed to measure the sustainable value, which is created through implementation and adaptation of methodologies in manufacturing. Cradle-to-grave represents a life-cycle with an open loop. Sustainable manufacturing closes the loop from cradle-to-cradle with provisions for multiple life-cycles. Jawahir et al. [7] introduced the 6R approach—reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, redesign and remanufacture—into manufacturing to enable closed-loop multiple life-cycles. In the 6R methodology, the activity, Reduce mainly focuses on reduced use of energy, materials and other resources during manufacturing and the mitigation of emissions and wastes during the use stage and increases resource-efficiency. The activity, Reuse refers to the reuse of the product or its components, after its first life-cycle, in subsequent life-cycles to reduce the usage of virgin materials to produce such products and components. The wellknown Recycle activity involves the process of converting end-of-life materials that would otherwise be considered wastes normally heading to landfills, into new materials for next generation products. The process of collecting products at the end of the use stage, disassembling, sorting and cleaning for utilization in subsequent life-cycles of the product is referred to as Recover. Recovery is the first major activity in the end-of-life stage of a product, and it provides the basis for generating value streams such as reusing, redesigning, recycling and remanufacturing as shown in Fig. 1. The Redesign activity involves the act of redesigning next generation products, which would use components, residual materials and resources recovered from the previous life-cycle, while Remanufacture involves the re-processing of already used products for restoration to their original state or a like-new form through the reuse of as many components as possible without loss of functionality.
[8]. Therefore, engineering must exceed the limits of economic impacts of single products and processes to open up to integrate all aspects of the economy, environment and society [10]. To identify and conduct research for next generation manufacturing, the US National Science Foundation defines that ‘‘transformative research involves ideas, discoveries, or tools that radically change understanding of an important existing scientific or engineering concept or educational practice or leads to the creation of a new paradigm or field of science, engineering, or education’’ [11]. Following principles remain relevant for implementing transformative research in sustainable manufacturing: environmentally, non-renewable resources should be processed in multiple lifecycles through elements of 6Rs rather than be disposed of after a certain life-cycle. Non-renewables should be substituted by renewables within the natural limitations of renewables regeneration [12]. Economically, instead of tangible objects, functionality and use-based services should be produced and sold, thus achieving more wealth with less resources [1]. Socially, higher living and working standards should be stimulated to increase equal distribution of global wealth. By applying these principles to create sustainable value in manufacturing, instead of looking at the implementation of single elements, engineering must be aware of multiple interactions among value creation factors, life-cycle stages and 6Rs. Fig. 2 illustrates the conceptual framework for mapping and integrating product life-cycle and 6Rs with the five factors. In addition to reducing resource consumption in all life-cycle stages, education and training of the workforce, especially engineers, play a central role to spread the application of end-of-life activities to post-use stages of products and equipment. Performing these activities and repetitive assessment of their impacts requires the development of new technological processes, organizational procedures and services for shaping sustainable solutions in different industrial sectors.
Fig. 1. Closed-loop material flow diagram of 6R elements and the four product lifecycle stages [8].
2.2. Principles for sustainable value creation in manufacturing To create value in manufacturing, engineering applies the following three conventional attributes: (1) Interdisciplinary capabilities support engineers to understand conditions and requirements, develop solutions from different perspectives, while increasing the efficiency of value creation. (2) Digitalization of information, data, and facts, information technologies (IT) support the development and exploration of educational and practical opportunities to create value through integrated and automated solutions. (3) In engineering, problem-solving combines logical thinking with analysis and synthesis by applying methodological knowledge and skills [9]. While these attributes are applied to improve existing manufacturing systems toward resource-efficiency in the circular economy and provide greater economic, sometimes also environmental and social impacts, less attention is paid on understanding the value creation methods for next generation manufacturing
Fig. 2. A conceptual framework for mapping and integrating product life-cycle and 6Rs with sustainable value creation factors.
3. Manufacturing architecture for sustainable solutions Current engineering capabilities can cope with many single challenges in manufacturing. However, they remain restricted when it comes to the application of transformative research in order to operationalize principles for sustainable manufacturing in practice. How can engineers be made capable to apply these principles? Fig. 3 presents a manufacturing architecture developed through research for applications including education and training in order to enhance engineering capabilities, which can create sustainable solutions. In manufacturing, value creation flows from analysis, as shown in orange arrows, to synthesis, as shown in black arrows, iteratively. The existing manufacturing systems are analyzed following Fig. 3 counterclockwise with orange arrows. Analyses support
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 P. Bilge et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
Fig. 3. Manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation.
understanding how and what principles are applied, which methodologies are implemented, and how value is created, i.e., how the value creation module is designed. Conditions and requirements of a certain module are specified to answer the previous questions. The consecutive question, whether the module fulfills the requirements effectively keeping with the conditions, leads to the identification of gaps. If the module fulfills the requirements, the current solution is accepted for further use in value creation. If not, the next question will be how to change the solution so that it contributes to sustainable manufacturing. While life-cycle assessment methodologies measure a set of indicators and calculate the impacts of modules quantitatively to provide evidence of efficient solutions, quality function deployment (QFD) is a use-based assessment methodology to rank solutions. QFD describes in the context of this paper ‘‘quality’’ fulfilling the requirements, ‘‘function’’ focusing on principles to create sustainable value, and ‘‘deployment’’ met by engineering capabilities. QFD demonstrates qualitatively how the effectiveness of modules would change iteratively according to effective utilization of resources and cognition by stakeholders. The manufacturing architecture applies a QFD-based calculation approach to identify the gaps of current solutions and discover potential opportunities. The score S(sk) for an existing kth solution sk is presented by Eq. (1). Each score is the sum of the multiplied combinations of the preference p(rj) of the jth requirement rj and its relation d(rj, sk) to this solution. Sðsk Þ ¼
n X ½dðr j ; sk Þ pðr j Þ
(1)
j¼1
The function f(sk) compares the score for a solution with the minimum tmin and maximum tmax target levels, as presented by Eq. (2), for evaluation. Target levels present a balanced score for economic, environmental and social impacts of each solution. The minimum is determined by 50% fulfillment of requirements and the maximum by 100% fulfillment. If there is a gap, this solution needs to be improved, rejected, or accepted and follow-up action to be taken must be determined. f ðsk Þ : t min ðsk Þ < Sðsk Þ < t max ðsk Þ
(2)
In case of rejection and improvement, the analysis identifies gaps of a product or a service. A potential change indicates an opportunity for balancing impacts to explore. Each opportunity can narrow or close a gap by creating sustainable value. As transformative research often results from a new methodology and an interdisciplinary approach, the authors adopt the following working definition for characterizing transformative engineering: ‘‘transformative engineering challenges engineering wisdom in research, education and practice, and raises awareness for sustainable manufacturing by changing value creation through new engineering capabilities’’. Transformative engineering transforms the value creation in manufacturing to a greater degree, where it will serve sustainable development.
3
In addition to the three conventional attributes in engineering described above, three transformative attributes are proposed to ease the transition from conventional to sustainable manufacturing: (1) The focus on sustainable solutions, which balance impacts, is likely to improve the current products and services by designing, operating and assessing the value creation in manufacturing. (2) Focus on projects incorporates problem-solving, interdisciplinary teamwork, and project management, while emphasizing that there is not just one optimal solution to any problem to increase effectiveness [13]. (3) The rapid rise of IT has simplified the access to information within projects and allowed for focus on interactions among stakeholders, disciplines, and regions, when engineers search for innovative and creative solutions. Following clockwise the black arrows in Fig. 3 shows that the stakeholders in manufacturing need to raise awareness by embracing transformative engineering principles in sustainable manufacturing, thus specially addressing changes to balance economic, environmental and social impacts. Transforming thinking habits and enhancing engineering capabilities drives transformation of educational programs close to application in industry. Application of all six attributes in higher and professional education and training would enhance engineering capabilities to discover opportunities among specific gaps for sustainable manufacturing. The proposed manufacturing architecture in Fig. 3 illustrates how the enhanced capabilities are operationalized in iterative closed-loop cycles. Thus, engineers get motivated to justify continuously why a technological or organizational opportunity provides a potential solution for creating sustainable value in practice. To transform existing value creation modules to sustainable solutions, opportunities are explored by synthesizing the principles of sustainable development according to stakeholder preferences. Exploiting opportunities by implementing methodologies of technology and management leads to similar solutions for modules. Scores of potential solutions are compared to select the most effective one. 4. Implementation The manufacturing architecture is exemplified in a case study, which addresses remanufacturing of components in the power equipment manufacturing sector. The goal here is to examine the internal logistics with the proposed manufacturing architecture in order to identify, design and test potential solutions, which can increase the effectiveness of remanufacturing by providing a sustainable solution for equipment. A brief introduction into the value creation factors (VCF) follows: turbine blades are internal combustion engine components (VCF1 = product). A life-cycle of a component is completed after about 25,000 working hours of the engine. After each life-cycle (VCF2 = organization), components are disassembled for remanufacturing, which involves coating and repairing (VCF3 = process). Coating with a mix of ceramics and metallic materials is used to preserve the components against corrosion, oxidation and high temperatures during the working period of the engines. For each component, relevant processes for coating and repair are selected by the engineers and workers (VCF4 = people), depending on the function, engine and component type. Remanufacturing accounts for 30% of the cost of a new component. Remanufactured components have a 100% guarantee for the next 25,000 h. After coating and repair, the components are re-assembled in the engines for the next life-cycle. After three life-cycles, only 10% of the raw material can be reused. The handling equipment (VCF5 = equipment), while serving as a tangible object, provides use-based services such as transportation, storage and protection during the internal supply of the components by remanufacturing. A motion-time-system based on methods-time-measurement is used to analyze the internal logistics for different component types based on the time in which a worker completes a process. Some requirements for the equipment to ensure effective remanufacturing of components are: easy upload and download of components
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114
G Model
CIRP-1523; No. of Pages 4 4
P. Bilge et al. / CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
increase the time efficiency of repair and coating. Handling equipment must be resistant against acid and heat as well as compatible with existing automated equipment and warehouse, while avoiding fragmentation of coating, contamination and damages during transports. To be able to respond to changing requirements such as state of the used components after a life-cycle or capacity utilization of the machinery for coating and repair adequately, repeated interactions among engineers and workers are needed. The analysis highlights some gaps of the equipment: lack of universality, lack of protection, lack of ergonomic handling, waste of time and resources. The weights of component vary between 50 and 800 kg and sizes between 10 and 150 cm. The gaps impose application of the following principles to internal logistics: flexibility and adaptability of equipment made by the use of renewables; less resources and avoiding waste for transportation, storage and protection; and improving ergonomics and working standards. Redesign is selected as methodology to implement for creating a sustainable solution for the handling equipment. From an engineering perspective, a common understanding of the principles and changing requirements is needed to adapt current value creation by integrating a redesigned equipment into the current remanufacturing. The workforce has the capabilities to apply interdisciplinary problem-solving. However, the awareness and motivation for searching sustainable solutions remain limited. The principles for sustainable manufacturing are mediated to the workforce within a training program increasing their awareness for sustainability and integration of environmental and social impacts into decision-making and actions. The training program is transformed as a professional educational program to encourage the workforce and interrogate the current value creation through the equipment in a project and investigate opportunities to change it sustainably. The workforce is trained within this project on how to synthesize sustainable solutions among opportunities. The workforce with enhanced capabilities discovers new opportunities for redesigning the equipment among the identified gaps. For example, to carry diverse components and to standardize solutions for equipment, a modular design is selected providing a flexible and compatible equipment. Euro-pallets are elevated on wheels in different ways (see opportunities in Table 1) to justify their impacts. A laminated paperboard is tested for use instead of plastics to assemble modular shelves for diverse components. Detachable safety guards are built for outdoor protection. Assembly costs for a unit of the handling equipment including shelves are kept below 1500 EUR. Opportunities are synthesized to shape solutions in iterative cycles, and examined. The scores and targets of four opportunities, which are calculated following Eqs. (1) and (2) for the three principles, are shown in Table 1. These four opportunities are drawn and tested as potential solutions with 3D-modeling and blueprints. Their scores are ranked. The first ranked solution with a score of 100 points is selected to transport, store and protect
Technological solutions
Preference
Table 1 Analysis of gaps and opportunities via technological solutions for component handling equipment.
Requirements Flexi- and adaptability Resourceefficiency Ergonomics Standardization Scores Min. and max. targets Rank
Gaps
Opportunities
9
1
1
3
3
9
9
3
9
9
9
9
3
3
1 1
3 1 40
3 3 42
1 1 3 9 58 64 14 and 126
1 3 94
1 9 100
6
5
2
1
4
3
the components, and then integrated into the internal logistics for remanufacturing. This case demonstrates how enhanced capabilities of the workforce by professional education contribute to finding a sustainable solution by redesigning and assessing handling equipment. Such a solution is likely to advance similar manufacturing systems. 5. Conclusions This paper reviews the value creation architecture in manufacturing with a focus on increasing effectiveness. The 6R approach provides methodologies to change value creation factors toward sustainability. Engineers apply IT-based methodologies and their combinations in products, processes and services in interdisciplinary teams to design, operate and evaluate manufacturing systems. In order to promote economic profit, while increasing social benefits and decreasing environmental burden, engineers must be aware of principles for sustainable development and capable of analysis and synthesis. A novel manufacturing architecture is proposed to guide engineers on how to achieve sustainable solutions in manufacturing. Based on sustainability, projects, global and local responsibilities, new attributes are developed to educate and train engineers for discovering opportunities to bridge gaps between conventional and sustainable manufacturing. For generating engineering capabilities toward sustainability in industrial applications, programs in higher and professional education must be transformed. The enhanced capabilities lead to multiplier effects through the implementation of the new manufacturing architecture in industry. The architecture of transformative engineering is exemplarily applied for the redesign of handling equipment. Potential solutions are assessed in balancing economic, environmental and social impacts, and thus increasing effectiveness of turbine blade remanufacturing in power equipment manufacturing. The usefulness of the architecture for sustainable value creation is verified. Future research will address how engineering capabilities can contribute to sustainable value creation by applying principles of sustainable manufacturing. References [1] Seliger G (2011) Sustainability Engineering by Product-Service Systems. Proceedings of the 18th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Braunschweig, Germany, May 2–4, 22–28. [2] WEC – World Energy Council (2015) 2015 Energy Trilemma Index: Benchmarking the Sustainability of National Energy Systemshttps://www.worldenergy.org/ wp-content/uploads/2015/11/20151030-Index-report-PDF.pdf. (accessed 12.01.16). [3] PWC – Price Waterhouse Coopers (2015) 14th PwC Global Power & Utilities Survey 2015: A Different Energy Futurehttp://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/ energy-utilities-mining/power-utilities/global-power-and-utilities-survey. html. (accessed 13.01.16). [4] Segreto T, Teti R (2014) Manufacturing. in Laperrie`re L, Reinhart G, (Eds.) CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering, 828–830. [5] Lanza G, Stoll J, Stricker N, Peters S, Lorenz C (2013) Measuring Global Production Effectiveness. Procedia CIRP 7:31–36. [6] Jayal AD, Badurdeen F, Dillon OW, Jawahir IS (2010) Sustainable Manufacturing: Modeling and Optimization Challenges at the Product, Process and System Levels. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology 2(3):144–152. [7] Jawahir IS, Dillon OW, Rouch KE, Joshi KJ, Venkatachalam A, Jaafar IH (2006) Total Life-Cycle Considerations in Product Design for Manufacture: A Framework for Comprehensive Evaluation. Proceedings of the 10th International Research/Expert Conference, Barcelona, Spain, September 11–15, 1–10. [8] Jawahir IS, Bradley R (2016) Technological Elements of Circular Economy and the Principles of 6R-Based Closed-loop Material Flow in Sustainable Manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 40:103–108. [9] Bilge P, Seliger G, Badurdeen F, Jawahir IS (2016) A Novel Framework for Achieving Sustainable Value Creation through Industrial Engineering Principles. Procedia CIRP 40:516–523. [10] Peters J (1994) Engineering, A Dialogue Between Science and Society. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 43(1):401–404. [11] NSF – National Science Foundation (2015) Definition of Transformative Research, NSF – National Science Foundation http://www.nsf.gov/about/ transformative_research/. (accessed 13.01.16). [12] Emec S, Bilge P, Seliger G (2015) Design of Production Systems with Hybrid Energy and Water Generation for Sustainable Value Creation. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 17(7):1807–1829. [13] Dankers W (2014) Decision Making. in Laperrie`re L, Reinhart G, (Eds.) CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering, 363–367.
Please cite this article in press as: Bilge P, et al. A novel manufacturing architecture for sustainable value creation. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.04.114