IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9533-d620973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of Multi-Disciplinary Green-BOM to Maintain Sustainability in Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Kezia Amanda Kurniadi

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan 46241, Korea)

  • Kwangyeol Ryu

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan 46241, Korea)

Abstract

The reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) appears to be eco-friendly while coping with rapidly changing market demands. However, there remains a lack of discussion or research regarding sustainability or environment-friendly functions within RMS. In this study, the reconfiguration planning problem is introduced to represent the core issues within the RMS. Reconfiguration occurs depending on new demands or conditions in the company by reconfiguring machines, such as removing, adding, or changing parts, giving considerable consideration to arrangement of machines, known as configurations in RMS. Therefore, reconfiguration process is always strongly connected to cost, energy consumption, and, more importantly, data management. The complexity of reconfiguration, product variation, and development processes requires tools that are capable of managing multi-disciplinary bill-of-material(BOM) or product data and providing a better collaboration support for data/information tracking while maintaining sustainability. This paper proposes a multi-disciplinary green bill-of-material (MDG-BOM)—an improved Green-BOM concept—with an additional multi-disciplinary feature to minimize emissions and hazardous materials during product development, as well as manage product information across multiple disciplines during the reconfiguration process. A smart spreadsheet for managing MDG-BOM was developed to allow multiple departments to integrate multiple sources of CAD design data and monitor/track changes throughout each step of the process.

Suggested Citation

  • Kezia Amanda Kurniadi & Kwangyeol Ryu, 2021. "Development of Multi-Disciplinary Green-BOM to Maintain Sustainability in Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9533-:d:620973
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9533/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9533/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tian, Guangdong & Zhang, Honghao & Feng, Yixiong & Wang, Danqi & Peng, Yong & Jia, Hongfei, 2018. "Green decoration materials selection under interior environment characteristics: A grey-correlation based hybrid MCDM method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 682-692.
    2. Stefan Hajkowicz & Geoff McDonald & Phil Smith, 2000. "An Evaluation of Multiple Objective Decision Support Weighting Techniques in Natural Resource Management," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 505-518.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sini Gao & Joanna Daaboul & Julien Le Duigou, 2021. "Process Planning, Scheduling, and Layout Optimization for Multi-Unit Mass-Customized Products in Sustainable Reconfigurable Manufacturing System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.
    2. Seyit Ali Erdogan & Jonas Šaparauskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model to Choose the Best Option for Sustainable Construction Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Bingtao Hu & Yixiong Feng & Hao Zheng & Jianrong Tan, 2018. "Sequence Planning for Selective Disassembly Aiming at Reducing Energy Consumption Using a Constraints Relation Graph and Improved Ant Colony Optimization Algorithm," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Sarook Sarky & Jim Wright & Mary Edwards, 2017. "Evaluating consistency of stakeholder input into participatory GIS-based multiple criteria evaluation: a case study of ecotourism development in Kurdistan," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(9), pages 1529-1553, September.
    5. Feng, Jianghong & Xu, Su Xiu & Xu, Gangyan & Cheng, Huibing, 2022. "An integrated decision-making method for locating parking centers of recyclable waste transportation vehicles," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    6. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    7. Hajkowicz, Stefan, 2006. "Multi-attributed environmental index construction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 122-139, April.
    8. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    9. Snežana Tadić & Mladen Krstić & Violeta Roso & Nikolina Brnjac, 2020. "Dry Port Terminal Location Selection by Applying the Hybrid Grey MCDM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    10. Li, Tao & Li, Ang & Guo, Xiaopeng, 2020. "The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry——A comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    11. R. Bhalla & Neil Pelkey & K. Devi Prasad, 2011. "Application of GIS for Evaluation and Design of Watershed Guidelines," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(1), pages 113-140, January.
    12. Crossman, Neville D. & Bryan, Brett A., 2009. "Identifying cost-effective hotspots for restoring natural capital and enhancing landscape multifunctionality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 654-668, January.
    13. Xiong Xiaoqin & Cheng Aiguo, 2020. "Evaluation of Heavy Commercial Vehicles Brand Considering Multi-Attribute Indexes in China," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 8(4), pages 291-308, August.
    14. Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
    15. Calabrese, Armando & Costa, Roberta & Levialdi, Nathan & Menichini, Tamara, 2019. "Integrating sustainability into strategic decision-making: A fuzzy AHP method for the selection of relevant sustainability issues," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 155-168.
    16. Hou, Xiaochen & Zhang, Hongguang & Xu, Yonghong & Yu, Fei & Zhao, Tenglong & Tian, Yaming & Yang, Yuxin & Zhao, Rui, 2018. "External load resistance effect on the free piston expander-linear generator for organic Rankine cycle waste heat recovery system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1252-1261.
    17. Hajkowicz, Stefan, 2007. "Allocating scarce financial resources across regions for environmental management in Queensland, Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 208-216, March.
    18. Kuosmanen, Timo & Nillesen, Eleonora & Wesseler, Justus, 2004. "Does ignoring multidestination trips in the travel cost method cause a systematic bias?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(4), pages 1-23.
    19. Favretto, N. & Stringer, L.C. & Dougill, A.J. & Dallimer, M. & Perkins, J.S. & Reed, M.S. & Atlhopheng, J.R. & Mulale, K., 2016. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to identify dryland ecosystem service trade-offs under different rangeland land uses," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 142-151.
    20. Garmendia, Eneko & Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 110-120.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9533-:d:620973. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.