| 1. |
- Bouchouireb, Hamza, 1991-
(författare)
-
Advancing the life cycle energy optimisation methodology
- 2019
-
Licentiatavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- 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. This work further develops the LCEO methodology and expands its scope through three main methodological contributions which, for illustrative purposes, were applied to a vehicle sub-system design case study.An End-Of-Life (EOL) model, based on the substitution with a correction factor method, is included to estimate the energy credits and burdens that originate from EOL vehicle processing. Multiple recycling scenarios with different levels of assumed induced recyclate material property degradation were built, and their impact on the LCEO methodology's outcomes was compared to that of scenarios based on landfilling and incineration with energy recovery. The results show that the inclusion of EOL modelling in the LCEO methodology can alter material use patterns and significantly effect the life cycle energy of the optimal designs.Furthermore, the previous model is expanded to enable holistic vehicle product system design with the LCEO methodology. The constrained optimisation of a vehicle sub-system, and the design of a subset of the processes which are applied to it during its life cycle, are simultaneously optimised for a minimal product system life cycle energy. In particular, a subset of the EOL processes' parameters are considered as continuous design variables with associated barrier functions that control their feasibility. The results show that the LCEO methodology can be used to find an optimal design along with its associated ideal synthetic EOL scenario. Moreover, the ability of the method to identify the underlying mechanisms enabling the optimal solution's trade-offs is further demonstrated.Finally, the functional scope of the methodology is expanded through the inclusion of shape-related variables and aerodynamic drag estimations. Here, vehicle curvature is taken into account in the LCEO methodology through its impact on the aerodynamic drag and therewith its related operational energy demand. In turn, aerodynamic drag is considered through the estimation of the drag coefficient of a vehicle body shape using computational fluid dynamics simulations. The aforementioned coefficient is further used to estimate the energy required by the vehicle to overcome aerodynamic drag. The results demonstrate the ability of the LCEO methodology to capitalise on the underlying functional alignment of the structural and aerodynamic requirements, as well as the need for an allocation strategy for the aerodynamic drag energy within the context of vehicle sub-system redesign.Overall, these methodological developments contributed to the exploration of the ability of the LCEO methodology to handle life cycle and functional trade-offs to achieve life cycle energy optimal vehicle designs.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bouchouireb, Hamza, 1991-
(författare)
-
Life Cycle Energy Optimisation: A multidisciplinary engineering design optimisation framework for sustainable vehicle development
- 2023
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This thesis explores how the systemic-level environmental footprint of light-duty vehicles could be reduced through integrative design using the Life Cycle Energy Optimisation (LCEO) methodology. This 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, thereby avoiding any sub-optimal energy demand shifts between the vehicle's different life cycle phases. This thesis further develops the LCEO methodology and expands its scope through four main methodological contributions. This work also contributes in establishing the methodology as a standalone design approach and provides guidelines for its most effective use.Initially, an End-of-Life (EOL) model, based on the substitution with a correction factor method, is included to estimate the energy credits and burdens that originate from EOL vehicle processing. Multiple recycling scenarios with varying levels of induced recyclate material property degradation were built, and their associated resulting optimal vehicle subsystem designs were compared to those associated with landfilling and incineration with energy recovery scenarios. The results show how the structural material use patterns, as well as the very mechanisms enabling the embodiment of the Life Cycle Energy (LCE) optimal designs, are impacted by taking into consideration the effect of a vehicle's EOL phase. In particular, the material intensity-space allocation trade-off was identified as a key factor in the realisation of the LCE optimal designs.This coupling existing between optimal use of material and space allocation was further explored by functionally expanding the LCEO methodology's scope to handle aerodynamic functional requirements. This involved the definition of a novel allocation strategy for the energy necessary to overcome aerodynamic drag, as well as the development of a parametrised vehicle body model that ensures that the LCE knock-on effects of aerodynamically motivated design decisions are fully accounted for at the targeted subsystem level.The expanded methodology was subsequently applied to perform the aero-structural life cycle-driven design optimisation of a vehicle subsystem, with the impact of the constitutive material's circularity potential being included through the previously developed EOL model and scenarios. The results demonstrate the significant extent of the coupling existing between a vehicle's fundamental aerodynamic shape, and a vehicle's structural material composition, including its EOL characteristics, within the LCEO context.Beyond the vehicle level implications, the LCEO methodology's position within the broader vehicle-design methodology context was further characterised by comparing its outcomes to those of the purely lightweight and purely aerodynamic approaches. It was found that the LCE optimal designs were distinctly clustered from their mono-disciplinary counterparts. They offered up to 20% energy savings over the lightweight alternatives by being, on average, larger, heavier and more aerodynamics designs; while also being shorter and lighter than the optimal aerodynamic configurations.Subsequently, a mixed integer nonlinear programming formulation of this expanded LCEO methodology was developed to include the effects of battery energy storage systems on the LCE optimal vehicle designs. In particular, the vehicle's battery size and number of such batteries needed over its life cycle were introduced as variables subject to a range and a cycle life constraint. The former is derived from the battery-capacity-to-structural-mass ratio of recent production vehicles, while the second ensures that the batteries' cycle lives are sufficient for the entirety of the vehicle's use phase. Additionally, three battery chemistries with varying characteristics were included: lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC), lithium iron phosphate (LFP) and lithium cobalt oxide (LCO); along with an EOL recycling scenario. The results of the coupled aero-structural-battery energy storage LCE-driven design optimisations demonstrate that battery chemistry and recycling potential have a significant impact on the system's design in terms of overall LCE footprint, battery size and number, as well as aerodynamic shape. More specifically, a change in battery composition was found to lead to up to 12.5% variation in drag coefficient, while battery recycling can on average reduce a vehicle's associated LCE by 32%.Finally, elements of robust design and uncertainty quantification were included into the LCEO methodology, in order to evaluate the impact of uncertainty on the resulting LCE optimal designs. Specifically, uncertainty was introduced through the assumption that the material properties of a subset of the optimisation's candidate materials are described by statistical distributions, as opposed to a priori fixed values, thereby changing the nature of the optimisation problem from deterministic to stochastic. This change is handled through a multilevel representation hierarchy for the targeted subsystem's model, and using the Multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC) approach in the optimisation process to evaluate the expected compliance of a given design with the transport-related functional requirements. the results demonstrate how the robust design configurations both constitute a significant departure from their deterministic counterparts and depend on the EOL scenario considered, while only incurring a marginal LCE premium. Moreover, this work also further illustrated the performance increase associated with the use of the MLMC estimator in lieu of the classical Monte Carlo one within an optimisation under uncertainty framework.Overall, the work presented in this doctoral thesis has contributed to the development of the state-of-the-art of the LCEO methodology to enable the early-stage conceptual design of more sustainable vehicle configurations, and demonstrated how the methodology is at its most effective when leveraging its cross-scalar and cross-disciplinary nature to enable integrative functional vehicle design.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bouchouireb, Hamza, 1991-, et al.
(författare)
-
The inclusion of End-Of-Life modelling in the Life Cycle Energy Optimisation methodology
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this work, an End-Of-Life (EOL) model is included in the Life Cycle Energy Optimisation (LCEO) methodology to account for the energy burdens and credits stemming from a vehicle’s EOL processing phase and balance them against the vehicle’s functional requirements and production and use phase energies. The substitution with a correction factor allocation method is used to model the contribution of recycling to the EOL phase’s energy. The methodology is illustrated through the optimisation of the design of a simplified vehicle sub-system. For the latter, multiple recycling scenarios with varying levels of assumed recycling induced material property degradation were built, and their impact on the vehicle sub-system’s optimal solutions was compared to that of scenarios based on landfilling and incineration with energy recovery. The results show that the inclusion of EOL modelling in the LCEO methodology can significantly alter material use patterns thereby effecting the life cycle energy of the optimal designs. Indeed, the vehicle sub-system’s optimal designs associated with the recycling scenarios are on average substantially heavier, and less life cycle energy demanding, than their landfilling or incineration with energy recovery-related counterparts.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bouchouireb, Hamza, 1991-, et al.
(författare)
-
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
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design. - : Cambridge University Press. - 2220-4334 .- 2220-4342. ; 1, s. 2901-2910
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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 modelled through a continuous formulation. The roof is modelled 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 penalisation to ensure solution feasibility.
|
|
| 5. |
- Bouchouireb, Hamza, 1991-, et al.
(författare)
-
Vehicle aerodynamic shape significantly impacted by vehicle material composition and material circularity potential in life cycle energy optimal vehicle design
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This paper explores how the systemic-level energy consumption of light-duty vehicles could be reduced through integrative design. To this end, the Life Cycle Energy Optimisation (LCEO) methodology is used to achieve the coupled optimal use of materials (including their circularity potential) and vehicle aerodynamic shape to reduce the overall Life Cycle Energy (LCE) footprint of light-duty vehicles, with the results being compared to the lightweight and aerodynamic alternatives. Initially, the methodology is functionally expanded to handle aerodynamic functional requirements through the definition of a novel allocation strategy for the aerodynamic energy, and a parametrised simple vehicle body model that ensures that the LCE knock-on effects of aerodynamically-motivated design decisions are fully accounted for. Subsequently, the methodology is used to perform the first, to the knowledge of the authors, aero-structural LCE-driven design optimisation of a vehicle subsystem, with the impact of the materials’ circularity potential being taken into account through various end-of-life (EOL) processing scenarios, including recycling. The results show that the environmental footprint of light-duty vehicles could significantly be reduced through integrative early-stage design. Specifically, it shows that a life cycle energy optimal vehicle's aerodynamic shape is significantly impacted by the vehicle's material composition and the latter's EOL characteristics — particularly recycling potential. Furthermore, LCE optimal vehicles have been found to be on average longer, heavier and more aerodynamic than their lightweight counterparts, as well as offering up to 20% energy savings per vehicle; while also being shorter and lighter than optimal aerodynamic configurations.
|
|
| 6. |
- Schöggl, Josef-Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Barriers to sustainable and circular product design : A theoretical and empirical prioritisation in the European automotive industry
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cleaner Production. - 0959-6526 .- 1879-1786. ; 434
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite the increasing availability of tools and methods for sustainable and circular product design (DfS), their uptake in practice is slow. This is also true in the automotive industry, where DfS is an important measure for addressing the industry's negative environmental and social impacts. To facilitate DfS implementation, this paper uses an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and offers, for the first time, a classification and prioritisation of the barriers that need to be overcome when implementing DfS into vehicle development processes. Based on a systematic literature review and on an expert workshop, the top 15 DfS barrier factors were derived and divided equally into five groups, following a multi-level structure. These factors and groups formed the input for a survey-based analytic hierarchy process with 38 European industry experts. The results show that strategic issues are the most important barriers, followed by the group of operational, personal, external, and tool-related barriers. Among the 15 barrier factors identified, the top five were (1) an unclear link to profitability, (2) lack of top management support, (3) difficulties in handling trade-offs, (4) high operational costs, and (5) a lack of integration of DfS into corporate strategy. The results indicate that while external constraints already exert pressure on automotive companies, they still face particular challenges when attempting to integrate sustainability into corporate strategies and in transferring such strategies to DfS activities at the operational level. The study results may be used to inform managerial policy and further research.
|
|
