0
Research Papers

An Integrated Approach to Information Modeling for the Sustainable Design of Products

[+] Author and Article Information
Douglas Eddy

Department of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering,
University of Massachusetts Amherst,
Amherst, MA 01003
e-mail: dceddy@engin.umass.edu

Sundar Krishnamurty

Department of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering,
University of Massachusetts Amherst,
Amherst, MA 01003
e-mail: skrishna@ecs.umass.edu

Ian Grosse

Department of Mechanical
and Industrial Engineering,
University of Massachusetts Amherst,
Amherst, MA 01003
e-mail: grosse@ecs.umass.edu

Paul Witherell

National Institute of Standards and Technology,
Engineering Laboratory,
Gaithersburg, MA 20899
e-mail: paul.witherell@nist.gov

Jack Wileden

Department of Computer Science,
University of Massachusetts Amherst,
Amherst, MA 01003
e-mail: jack@cs.umass.edu

Kemper Lewis

Department of Mechanical
and Aerospace Engineering,
University at Buffalo—SUNY,
Buffalo, NY 14150
e-mail: kelewis@buffalo.edu

1Corresponding author.

This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Manuscript received June 5, 2013; final manuscript received June 26, 2013; published online April 23, 2014. Editor: Bahram Ravani.

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 14(2), 021011 (Apr 23, 2014) (13 pages) Paper No: JCISE-13-1106; doi: 10.1115/1.4027375 History: Received June 05, 2013; Revised June 26, 2013

The design of more sustainable products can be best accomplished in a tradeoff-based design process that methodically handles conflicting objectives. Such conflicts are often seen between, environmental impact, cost, and product performance. To support such a process, this paper proposes the development of an environment where sustainability considerations are explicitly introduced early into the design process. This explicitness is provided by integrating the requirements information of sustainability standards and regulations directly into the design process. The emergence of the semantic web provides an interoperable environment in which the context and meaning of knowledge about the relationships among various domains can be shared. This work presents an ontological framework designed to represent both the objectives that pertain to sustainable design and the applicable sustainability standards and regulations. This integrated approach not only can ease the adoption of the standards and regulations during a design process but can also influence a design toward sustainability considerations. The usefulness of this model integration is demonstrated by an illustrative brake disk rotor and pads case study. The results show that both the standards and criteria may be considered at early design stages by using this methodology. Furthermore, it can be used to capture, reveal, and propagate the design intent transparently to all design participants.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Ramani, K., Ramanujan, D., Bernstein, W. Z., Zhao, F., Sutherland, J., Handwerker, C., Choi, J. K., Kim, H., and Thurston, D., 2010, “Integrated Sustainable Life Cycle Design: A Review,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(9), p. 091004. [CrossRef]
Brown, A. S., 2009, “Conflict on the Green,” Mech. Eng., 131(3), pp. 42–45.
Eddy, D. C., Krishnamurty, S., Grosse, I. R., Wileden, J. C., and Lewis, K. E., 2012, “A Normative Decision Analysis Method for the Sustainability-Based Design of Products,” J. Eng. Des., 8, pp. 1–21. [CrossRef]
Schwarz, J., Beloff, B., and Beaver, E., 2002, “Environmental Protection—Use Sustainability Metrics to Guide Decision-Making—Sustainability Provides a Framework for Integrating Environmental, Social and Economic Interests Into Effective Business Strategies,” Chem. Eng. Prog., 98(7), pp. 58–63.
Hermann, B. G., Kroeze, C., and Jawjit, W., 2007, “Assessing Environmental Performance by Combining Life Cycle Assessment, Multi-Criteria Analysis and Environmental Performance Indicators,” J. Cleaner Prod., 15(18), pp. 1787–1796. [CrossRef]
Tanzil, D., and Beloff, B. R., 2006, “Assessing Impacts: Overview on Sustainability Indicators and Metrics,” Environ. Qual. Manage., 15(4), pp. 41–56. [CrossRef]
Sustainable Standards Guide, 2011, website, http://spi.ncms.org/standards/
Yang, Q. Z., and Song, B., 2009, “Semantic Knowledge Management to Support Sustainable Product Design,” International Association of Computer Science and Information Technology-Spring Conference, IACSITSC'09, IEEE, pp. 419–423.
Rachuri, S., Sriram, R., Narayanan, A., Sarkar, P., Lee, J., Lyons, K., and Kemmerer, S., 2010, “Sustainable Manufacturing: Metrics, Standards, and Infrastructure—NIST Workshop Report,” National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD, NIST Interagency/Internal report (NISTIR) 7683.
Narayanan, A., Lee, J., Witherell, P., Sarkar, P., and Rachuri, S., 2011, “An Information Modeling Methodology for Sustainability Standards,” ASME 2011 IDETC/CIE.
D’Alessio, A. E., Witherell, P., and Rachuri, S., 2012, “Modeling Gaps and Overlaps of Sustainability Standards,” Leveraging Technol. Sustainable World, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, pp. 443–448. [CrossRef]
Chandrasegaran, S. K., Ramani, K., Sriram, R. D., Horvath, I., Bernard, A., Harik, R. F., and Gao, W., 2013, “The Evolution, Challenges, and Future of Knowledge Representation in Product Design Systems,” Comput.-Aided Des., 45(2), pp. 204–228. [CrossRef]
Ahmed, S., Kim, S., and Wallace, K. M., 2007, “A Methodology for Creating Ontologies for Engineering Design,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 7(2), pp. 132–140. [CrossRef]
Grosse, I. R., Milton-Benoit, J. M., and Wileden, J. C., 2005, “Ontologies for Supporting Engineering Analysis Models,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des., Analysis Manuf., 19(1), pp. 1–18. [CrossRef]
Witherell, P., Krishnamurty, S., and Grosse, I. R., 2007, “Ontologies for Supporting Engineering Design Optimization,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 7(2), pp. 141–150. [CrossRef]
Li, Z., Raskin, V., and Ramani, K., 2008, “Developing Engineering Ontology for Information Retrieval,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 8(1), p. 0110031. [CrossRef]
Witherell, P., Krishnamurty, S., Grosse, I. R., and Wileden, J., 2008, “FIDOE: A Framework for Intelligent Distributed Ontologies in Engineering,” ASME 2008 IDETC/CIE.
Rockwell, J. A., Witherell, P., Fernandes, R., Grosse, I., Krishnamurty, S., and Wileden, J., 2008, “A Web-Based Environment for Documentation and Sharing of Engineering Design Knowledge,” ASME 2008 IDETC/CIE.
Fernandes, R., Grosse, I. R., Krishnamurty, S., and Wileden, J. C., 2007, “Design and Innovative Methodologies in a Semantic Framework,” ASME 2007 IDETC/CIE.
Protégé Ontology Editor, 2012, http://protege.stanford.edu/
Auer, S., Dietzold, S., and Riechert, T., 2006, “OntoWiki—A Tool for Social, Semantic Collaboration,” Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., 4273, pp. 736–749. [CrossRef]
Rockwell, J. A., Grosse, I. R., Krishnamurty, S., and Wileden, J. C., 2010, “A Semantic Information Model for Capturing and Communicating Design Decisions,” ASME J. Comput. Inform. Sci. Eng., 10(3), p. 031008. [CrossRef]
Rockwell, J. A., 2009, “A Semantic Framework for Reusing Decision Making Knowledge in Engineering Design,” ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst, http://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/329
Hazelrigg, G. A., 1998, “A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 120(4), pp. 653–658. [CrossRef]
Thurston, D. L., 2001, “Real and Misconceived Limitations to Decision Based Design With Utility Analysis,” J. Mech. Des., 123(2), pp. 176–182. [CrossRef]
Thurston, D. L., 2006, “Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis of Conflicting Preferences,” Decision Making in Engineering Design, K.Lewis, W.Chen, and L.Schmidt, eds., ASME Press, New York, pp. 125–133.
Gurnani, A., and Lewis, K., 2005, “Robust Multiattribute Decision Making Under Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Design,” Eng. Optim., 37(8), pp. 813–830. [CrossRef]
Krishnamurty, S., 2006, “Normative Decision Analysis in Engineering Design,” Decision Making in Engineering Design, K.Lewis, W.Chen, and L.Schmidt, eds., ASME Press, New York, pp. 21–33.
Kulok, M., and Lewis, K., 2007, “A Method to Ensure Preference Consistency in Multi-Attribute Selection Decisions,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(10) pp. 1002–1011. [CrossRef]
Thurston, D. L., and Srinivasan, S., 2003, “Constrained Optimization for Green Engineering Decision-Making,” Environ. Sci. Technol., 37(23) pp. 5389–5397. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Semantic Web for Earth and Environmental Terminology (SWEET), 2012, http://sweet.jpl.nasa.gov/ontology/
Shigley, J. E., and Mischke, C. R., 1996, Standard Handbook of Machine Design, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Maleque, M. A., Dyuti, S., and Rahman, M. M., 2010, “Material Selection Method in Design of Automotive Brake Disc,” Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2010, Vol. III, WCE 2010, June 30–July 2, 2010, London.
PTC MathCAD, 2012, website, http://www.ptc.com/product/mathcad/
Pre SimaPro LCA software, 2012, website, http://www.pre-sustainability.com/simapro-lca-software
OSHA, US Department of Labor, Standards—29 CFR, Standard Number: 1910.1001 App F, 2012, http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=10001

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Desired state of information models for a design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Modular building blocks of the information model for sustainable product design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Relationships in the sustainability categories ontology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Relationships of the Zachman framework deployed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Relationships to constraints in a design process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Criteria including LCA and LCC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

LCA module construction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Specific contributions of IASDOP to a successful design process for sustainability

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Modeling of a constraint imposed by sustainability standards

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Use of information from LCA to compare impact results among alternatives

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Results of the most preferred design alternative—baseline for comparison

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Results of an alternative with some copper content in the caliper pads

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Results of an alternative with increased content of both copper and silicon in the rotor

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In