Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-2jptb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-28T05:17:45.050Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards Holistic Energy-Efficient Vehicle Product System Design: The Case for a Penalized Continuous End-of-Life Model in the Life Cycle Energy Optimisation Methodology

Part of: Mobility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Hamza Bouchouireb ,
Ciarán J. O'Reilly ,
Peter Göransson ,
Josef-Peter Schöggl ,
Rupert J. Baumgartner  and
José Potting
Hamza Bouchouireb*
Affiliation:
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden;
Ciarán J. O'Reilly
Affiliation:
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden;
Peter Göransson
Affiliation:
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden;
Josef-Peter Schöggl
Affiliation:
University of Graz, Austria
Rupert J. Baumgartner
Affiliation:
University of Graz, Austria
José Potting
Affiliation:
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden;
*
Contact: Bouchouireb, Hamza, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, The Centre for ECO2 Vehicle Design, AVE, Sweden, hamzab@kth.se

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.

The Life Cycle Energy Optimisation (LCEO) methodology aims at finding a design solution that uses a minimum amount of cumulative energy demand over the different phases of the vehicle's life cycle, while complying with a set of functional constraints. This effectively balances trade-offs, and therewith avoids sub-optimal shifting between the energy demand for the cradle-to-production of materials, operation of the vehicle, and end-of-life phases. The present work describes the extension of the LCEO methodology to perform holistic product system optimisation. The constrained design of an automotive component and the design of a subset of the processes which are applied to it during its life cycle are simultaneously optimised to achieve a minimal product system life cycle energy. A subset of the processes of the end-of-life phase of a vehicle's roof are modeled through a continuous formulation. The roof is modeled as a sandwich structure with its design variables being the material compositions and the thicknesses of the different layers. The results show the applicability of the LCEO methodology to product system design and the use of penalization to ensure solution feasibility.

Keywords

Design for X (DfX)OptimisationDesign methodologyLife cycle energy optimisationAutomotive product system design
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 2901 - 2910
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) 2019

References

Ashby, M. and Bréchet, Y. (2003), “Designing hybrid materials”, Acta materialia, Vol. 51 No. 19 pp. 5801–5821. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1359-6454(03)00441-5Google Scholar
Biegler, L. (2010), “Nonlinear Programming” Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898719383Google Scholar
Commission, European (2010), EU Transport in figures. Publications Office of the European Union, 2016. European Climate Foundation. Roadmap 2050; a practical guide to a prosperous, low-carbon europe.Google Scholar
Griva, I., Nash, S. G. and Sofer, A. (2009), Linear and nonlinear optimization, volume 108. Siam. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898717730Google Scholar
Grossmann, I. E., “Review of nonlinear mixed-integer and disjunctive programming techniques”, Optimization and Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 227–252, Sep 2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/cite.201400037Google Scholar
Jank, M.-H., O'Reilly, C. J., Göransson, P., Baumgartner, R. J., Schöggl, J.-P. and Potting, J. (2017), “Advancing energy efficient early-stage vehicle design through inclusion of end-of-life phase in the life cycle energy optimisation methodology”, In Ecological Vehicles and Renewable Energies (EVER), 2017 Twelfth International Conference on, pages 1–9. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ever.2017.7935888Google Scholar
Kraemer, K., Kossack, S. and Marquardt, W. (2007), “An efficient solution method for the minlp optimization of chemical processes”, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1570-7946(07)80041-1Google Scholar
Luttropp, C. and Lagerstedt, J. (2006), “Ecodesign and the ten golden rules: generic advice for merging environmental aspects into product development”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14 No. 15, pp. 1396–1408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.11.022Google Scholar
O'Reilly, C. J., Göransson, P., Funazaki, A., Suzuki, T., Edlund, S., Gunnarsson, C., Lundow, J.-O., Cerin, P., Cameron, C. J., Wennhage, P., et al. (2016), “Life cycle energy optimisation: A proposed methodology for integrating environmental considerations early in the vehicle engineering design process”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 135, pp. 750–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.163Google Scholar
Pickering, S. J. (2006), “Recycling technologies for thermoset composite materials current status”, Composites Part A: applied science and manufacturing, Vol. 37, pp. 1206–1215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.05.030Google Scholar
Price, K., Storn, R. M. and Lampinen, J. A. (2006), Differential evolution: a practical approach to global optimization”, Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-31306-0_13Google Scholar
Ribeiro, S. K., Kobayashi, S., Beuthe, M., Gasca, J., Greene, D., Lee, D. S., Muromachi, Y., Newton, P. J., Plotkin, S., Sperling, D., et al. (2007), Transportation and its infrastructure.Google Scholar
Rossi, M., Germani, M. and Zamagni, A. (2016), “Review of ecodesign methods and tools. Barriers and strategies for an effective implementation in industrial companies”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 129, pp. 361–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.051Google Scholar
van der Harst, E., Potting, J. and Kroeze, C. (2016), “Comparison of different methods to include recycling in lcas of aluminium cans and disposable polystyrene cups”, Waste management, Vol. 48, pp. 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.09.027Google Scholar
Wright, S. and Nocedal, J. (1999), “Numerical optimization. Springer Science, Vol. 35 No. 67-68, p. 7, https://doi.org/10.1007/b98874Google Scholar
Zenkert, D. (1995),“An introduction to sandwich structures”, Student edition.Google Scholar