Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 61 (2017) 40 – 45

The 24th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering

Toolbox for Increasing Resource Efficiency in the European Metal

Mechanic Sector
Stefan Blumea,*, Denis Kurlea, Christoph Herrmanna, Sebastian Thiedea
a
Institute of Machine Tools and Production Technology, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Langer Kamp 19 b, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-531-391-7168; fax: +49-531-391-5842. E-mail address: stefan.blume@tu-braunschweig.de

Abstract

Strategies to improve the economic and environmental performance of companies are usually pursued from a local perspective, hardly considering
interactions between different value chain actors. Thus global improvements are not necessarily reached. Against this background, the authors
present an approach for an integrated improvement strategy covering both perspectives to reveal hidden resource saving potentials. Moreover, a
“decision-making toolbox” has been developed, allowing for an identification of company-internal and cross-company improvements as well as
resulting trade-offs. Applicability and benefits of the approach are underlined by a use case application from the metal mechanic industry.
©©2017
2017TheTheAuthors. Published
Authors. by Elsevier
Published B.V. This
by Elsevier B.V.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 24th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 24th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering
Keywords: Resource Efficiency, Decision-Making Toolbox, Value Chain Analysis, Metal Mechanic Industry

1. Introduction associated environmental impacts. Some of these

acknowledged methods conduct Material and Energy Flow
Energy and resources are an indispensable basis for Analyses (MEFA) often also enabling Life Cycle Assessments
manufacturing. Considering the predicted global increase in (LCA) to provide information associated to environmental
manufacturing over the next twenty years a further increase in impacts of products, processes or combined system levels as
material resources and its associated embodied energy by 40% well as accounting aspects. Another established method rooted
is expected, provided that no considerable policy changes are in the lean manufacturing domain, Value Stream Mapping
accomplished [1,2]. Thus, the environmental significance of (VSM), systematically analyzes process chains to reveal time,
reducing the resource demand per company is an important stock and quality related inefficiencies [5]. Extended versions
step. In addition, economical aspects e.g. resulting from rising also incorporate further aspects such as energy demands of
gas, coal and oil prices entail the cost pressure on processes and supporting services (Energy VSM/EVSM) [6].
manufacturers [3]. To cope with the challenging situation, To capture the dynamics of the interactions of levels and
manufacturers are inclined to analyze their factory more resources simulation has proven to be a promising method [7].
attentively to mitigate risks related to energy and resource However, all of these approaches represent standalone
demands, its fluctuating prices and to comply with more and methods usually executed in an isolated manner for a specific
more strict legislative carbon emission constraints [3,4]. purpose. Thus, each method uses different data and varying
Adequate analyses in that regard require a decomposition of a Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) which hampers the
factory into various levels ranging from process/machine to comparability of the respective results. This situation is further
process chain towards the complete factory level on the one exacerbated when entire value chains with multiple factories
hand and a value chain level comprising multiple factories on and their individual behavior are considered because decisions
the other hand. at one factory level may have repercussions on up- and
To make the subject of energy and resource demands more downstream factories. Figure 1 illustrates these two
tangible several approaches have been established to focus perspectives for a single factory (P1) and an entire value chain
either on different time scales, factory levels, resources and its (P2) as well as potentially resulting trade-offs between

2212-8271 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 24th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.247
 Stefan Blume et al. / Procedia CIRP 61 (2017) 40 – 45 41

different value chain entities if their activities are not higher energy demands. To overcome the shortcomings of the
streamlined. Typical questions decision makers have to take static EVSM character, a combination of EVSM and simulation
into account comprise diverse departments: can be applied [11,12], which helps analyzing the effects of
x Does it make sense to produce smaller batches and reduce multi-product situations in terms of energy and time subject to
the existing inventory? (production planning and control) varying production planning and control information.
x Would an alternative raw material improve our product
quality? (quality control and management) 2.2. Manufacturing system simulation
x Is a redesign of our product favorable with respect to cost
savings? (design and development) Simulation in general is a widely applied method to analyze
x Should we use renewable energies to reduce our a real world system behavior over time which has been used in
environmental impacts? (procurement related issues) many ways in the context of manufacturing [13,14]. Some
x Is the factory layout suitable for increasing the production authors focus on simulating the energy demand on
capacity? (factory planning) process/machine and component level [15,16], whereas others
x Do process changes alter the products properties? How move the energy orientation [7,17,18] or job scheduling of
does this affect our customers? (manufacturing planning) process chains into the spotlight [19]. Another research stream
considers the coupling of different simulation models
developed in diverse software programs and for varying system
levels [20,21]. In that regard not only simulation models but
also a multi-level simulation framework including favorable
coupling recommendations are proposed [22]. In industrial
application, the linkage of manufacturing system simulation
with corporate resource planning systems as demonstrated by
Li et al. [23] is of particular high relevance in order to
continuously optimize the manufacturing system performance.

2.3. MEFA and LCA

MEFA is a method to systematically assess the flows and

stocks of materials and energy within a system as well as the
Fig. 1. Impacts of isolated value chain perspective flows exchanged with the environment [24] such as raw or
auxiliary materials, (pre-) products, waste or emissions. Basing
Against this background, the paper proposes a toolbox to on input-output-models of the system components, various
enhance resource and energy efficiency for single factories and approaches have been developed allowing for both economic
entire value chains alike. It builds upon a common database and environmental system evaluations [25]. However, MEFA
resulting in comparable KPIs for all employed methods is a static approach, basing on average or cumulated values
incorporating EVSM, simulation as well as MEFA and LCA whereas the considered material and energy flows in a real
into one seamless environment. The applicability of the toolbox world system like for instance a manufacturing system are
is exemplified by a case from the metal mechanic sector. usually highly dynamic and interdependent [26]. Additionally,
the MEFA approach is usually not able to provide a complete
2. Background environmental evaluation considering all impacts caused due to
its limited system boundaries, not taking into account any
2.1. EVSM previous or subsequent actions (“gate-to-gate” approach) [24].
In contrast, the methodology of LCA expands the analysis
Value Stream Mapping provides a static method to represent to a life cycle perspective, taking into account all life cycle
the product’s value stream and all its related processes stages from raw material extraction, manufacturing, utilization
emphasizing value and non-value adding activities. This until end-of-life (“cradle-to-grave” approach). Hence, all
method has been extended to assess the impact of different environmental burdens connected with a product or service can
product characteristics on the respective manufacturing be assessed and problem shifting between different life cycle
processes [8] as well as energy associated aspects either on an phases as well as between different environmental impact
average or machine state basis [6] to include the machine’s categories can be made transparent and thus avoided [27,28].
dynamic behavior. Besides the direct energy of the processes Typically, specific software tools and Life Cycle Inventory
further approaches also incorporate indirect energy consumers (LCI) databases are used to estimate the impacts caused by
which account for a significant share of the overall energy previous or subsequent actions, as primary data can usually not
demand [9] by allocating indirect energy demands within the be collected for the whole life cycle of all relevant system
value stream [10]. However, these approaches are only valid flows. Due to the complexity of an LCA analysis and existing
for single but not multiple products potentially blocking each methodological freedom, LCA results are often hardly to
other’s resources and thus leading to longer lead times and compare and may also lead to contrary results between
42 Stefan Blume et al. / Procedia CIRP 61 (2017) 40 – 45

different studies [29]. The method of LCA is standardized time assessments of single factories and whole value chains in
through ISO 14040 and 14044 [30,31], while diverse particular, usually carried out by external consultants. In a first
methodological extensions have been made to include also the step, general requirements have been derived as basis for
economic and social dimensions of sustainability [32,33]. development: A multi-criteria analysis shall make trade-offs
between different KPIs visible, considering technical (lead
2.4. Overview and Research Gap times, throughput etc.), economic (material, energy, labor costs
etc.) and environmental aspects (global warming, harm to
Figure 2 summarizes qualitatively the aforementioned main human health etc.) over the product life cycle. By following a
methods regarding different relevant criteria in the context of multi-level modelling - ranging from process up to value chain
single factory modeling and evaluation. These criteria have level - an impact assessment of local decision-making on other
been chosen to take holistic, timely, quality and user-focused affected areas shall be enabled. Prediction functionalities refer
requirements towards an integrated approach into to the ability to assess both current and possible future states of
consideration. Li et al. [23] as well as Thiede et al. [35] the regarded systems. Decision support functions shall guide
presented an integrated approach combining MEFA, LCA, the user through the tool application and propose suitable
VSM and simulation as a result of the joint project solutions. Building upon these requirements, a concept for the
“Sustainability Cockpit”, which was funded by the Australian toolbox has been derived (see Figure 3), inspired by the system
Research Council (ARC). However, this approach omits to take design of the existing “Sustainability Cockpit” [23,35]:
the value chain perspective into account. Regarding the x A Data Layer, collecting, consolidating and preparing data
modeling and evaluation of value chains Heinemann et al. needed for using the aspired methods.
present a MEFA model chiefly focusing on an existing x A Logic Layer, applying the presented methods to convert
aluminum die casting value chain [33]. Yet, this approach is an the input data into the desired outputs, reached by building
inductively derived approach lacking a simple applicability to up virtual models of the production systems, which can be
other value chains or industries. coupled to constitute a value chain.
Thus, no approach has been found which combines the x A User Interface, presenting the results of the analyses on
benefits of the aforementioned methods into one coherent both local level (Single Factory Module) and global level
environment that is capable of evaluating a single factory as (Value Chain Module) in a comprehensible manner.
well as value chains in a flexible, parametrizable manner. Only
this could alleviate challenges regarding problem shifts
between companies and/or between departments inside one
factory.
Simulation

approach
MEFA

EVSM
LCA

criterion

dynamic system behavior

economic performance

environmental performance

technical performance

changes in product/material flow

simplicity (time & knowledge)

life cycle phases

decision support

degree of application

Fig. 2. Classification of described methods (adapted from [35])

Fig. 3. Toolbox concept
3. Concept
From the user perspective, three different application paths
Motivated by the shortcomings of existent approaches, the can be distinguished: An EVSM, a simulation and a MEFA &
objective to develop a tool for holistic evaluations of single LCA path providing different results depending on their type
factories and value chains basing on a common data basis has of calculations (static or dynamic), evaluation perspective
been derived, combining the complementing methods (economic, environmental, technical) and focus (production
presented beforehand. In contrast to the tool developed by stage or whole life cycle). Based on the user’s objective, either
Thiede et al. and Li et al. [23,35], who rather focused on one path can be followed independently or several paths can be
continuous application within companies using live data from used in a complementary way, whereby the results are then
resource planning systems, the presented approach aims at one- combined. In a first step, analysis results are displayed for each
 Stefan Blume et al. / Procedia CIRP 61 (2017) 40 – 45 43

factory in the respective Single Factory Module. In the case that Petri net based models are used to describe the factories. To
an evaluation from the value chain perspective is required, the allow for an easy build-up and adaption of models, pre-defined
user can automatically aggregate and transfer the results to the standard modules for various kinds of processes and Technical
Value Chain Module. Decision Support functions are Building Services (TBS) have been developed, which can be
implemented into both modules to support the user in terms of inserted into a model per drag & drop.
result interpretation and selection of suitable improvements by
providing suitable information from a Knowledge Database. 3.4. Value Chain Module
The Single Factory Module with its three application paths as
well as the Value Chain Module and the Decision Support One critical issue regarding the global improvement of a
functions are further described in the following. value chain’s performance is the asymmetric information
distribution between the partners, which can be explained using
3.1. Single Factory Module: EVSM the principal agent theory. Pursuant to that the Value Chain
Module extends the scope of analysis from an intra-company to
The approach within this path is based on the EVSM an inter-company perspective in order to facilitate an improved
methodology, which has been extended by several additional information exchange and a higher degree of transparency
KPIs. Each process is represented by a separate box, containing between value chain partners. Accordingly, this module
specific KPIs regarding capacity, flexibility, quality, resource receives aggregated data from all Single Factory Modules
consumption and costs. Furthermore, total values are visualized which are part of the value chain, calculating global KPIs and
under the process boxes, allowing to quickly estimate the showing the respective shares of the actors regarding
processes relevance. This approach provides relevant key production costs, environmental impacts or lead time. By
figures at a glance and helps to reach a better understanding of assessing the consequences of local decision making or
the system and its interdependencies, allowing for a first stochastic events from the global perspective, benefits and
identification of hot spots and possible fields of action. drawbacks of these decisions can be allocated to all involved
partners and trade-offs become visible.
3.2. Single Factory Module: Simulation
3.5. Decision Support
The simulation path allows for analyzing dynamic aspects
that are either related to the dynamic behavior of machines To improve usability and acceptance of the toolbox, the user
regarding states and media demands or interactions between is supported by the system through the following decision-
the respective system elements (products, jobs, machines). making functionalities:
These system elements have been realized following a discrete- x A Knowledge Database with rule-based and case-based
event simulation (DES) and agent-based (AB) approach also knowledge such as improvement approaches as well as
using dynamic systems (DS). The DES ensures to include all average values for different factory elements to overcome
relevant changes between machine states e.g. ramp up, idle, gaps in the data basis and allow for plausibility checks.
processing while the DS calculations continuously imitate x A configurable KPI Monitor, comprehensibly visualizing
conditions over time to compute e.g. the energy demand of KPIs and sustainability indicators to enable a multi criteria
machines. The AB approach allows for an individual machine assessment of the company or value chain.
placing and product flow definition also incorporating aspects x A Regulatory Module, providing information about
such as diverging and converging product flows, batch and regulatory constraints for the considered processes, e.g. by
single process types. As a result, this path provides information describing the general framework of the regulation and by
regarding time and energy related planning and scheduling indicating legal thresholds for emissions into soil, water and
aspects subject to the dynamic interactions between the air. The database covers France, Germany and Spain and is
involved system elements. To assess the performance of the designed to be regularly updated.
system key figures such as value and non-value adding times, x A Product Quality Check, revealing interdependencies
energy demands per product and job, system or machine load between different processes concerning product related
profiles and failure/maintenance statistics are employed. aspects, e.g. the influence of a changed raw material quality.
x A Scenario Analysis, allowing for an easy comparison of
3.3. Single Factory Module: MEFA & LCA alternative options and evaluation of suitable business
models on value chain level.
The MEFA and LCA modeling is carried out in the software
Umberto, which provides an automated calculation of 4. Application
connected energy and material flows along a modelled system
of transformation processes. By varying input/output balances In the following the application of the toolbox is
of system elements, scenario oriented experiments are possible demonstrated by means of a case study from the European
to calculate and compare the resulting energy and material metal mechanic industry. The general setup of the value chain,
flows [26] as well as related environmental impacts such as comprising three factories, is depicted in Table 1.
global warming potential, eutrophication or resource depletion.
44 Stefan Blume et al. / Procedia CIRP 61 (2017) 40 – 45

Table 1. Setup of the assessed value chain

Factory number: #1 #2 #3
Main processes: - Grinding - Activating - Cutting
- Hardening - Chr. Plating - Polishing
- Hot Rolling - Degreasing
- Leveling - Etching
- Peeling - Grinding

The case product is a medium sized hard chrome plated

piston rod made from steel billets (42CrMo4), which is widely Fig. 6. Cross company KPI visualization in Value Chain Module
used in hydraulic components such as caterpillars or cranes.
Starting with the steel billets, supplied by a local company, The results from the three single factories have been
factory #1 mainly performs reshaping and separating processes transferred to the Value Chain Module to receive a global
as well as thermal treatment to increase the mechanical assessment of the current situation. Figure 6 presents the
properties. Factory #2 focuses on surface treatment processes distribution of selected KPIs across the factories, showing that
by applying a chromium layer, whereby the surface roughness factory #1 is dominant regarding production costs and
is the most important quality requirement. Factory #3 then environmental impacts (here: CO2 emissions). However,
performs the final preparations before distribution of the piston factory #2 is responsible for 66 % of quality related losses
rod to the customers. Extensive primary data has been collected through rejects. Therefore, it also has a significant influence on
in the factories to assess the current factory and value chain the total costs and eco-impacts, as the previous factory #1 is
performance. Figure 4 (a) shows an excerpt from the EVSM forced to produce excess parts to compensate later defects in
visualization of factory #1, giving a first overview about the subsequent steps. The relevance of factory #3 is rather low for
process chain. Figure 4 (b) depicts the cost distribution basing all displayed KPI. Basing on these finding, possible
on the MEFA analysis, taking into account material, energy and improvement measures have been evaluated with the toolbox.
labor costs. Costs for raw steel are excluded here due to One approach to overcome the inefficiencies in factory #2 due
readability, but it can be stated that they account for ~75 to quality related losses is to improve the quality of raw steel
percent of the total production costs and are therefore the main used in factory #1. Such a higher steel quality would increase
cost driver. Beyond that, three processes are highly cost raw steel costs by ~10 %, hence there has been no incentive for
relevant and can be regarded as economic hotspots. factory #1 to change the material so far. The toolbox is now
able to make local and global benefits and drawbacks of this
measure transparent. Figure 7 gives an impression of the
scenario analysis as part of the Value Chain Module for this
specific measure. Here, the base scenario and an improved
scenario are compared using spider web diagrams, covering six
different criteria. It can be stated that the choice of a “better”
material causes higher costs for factory #1, but significantly
Fig. 4. Production cost calculation for factory #1, steel inputs excluded
improves the quality rate and therefore also costs,
By applying the simulation path, knowledge about the environmental impacts and energy intensity in factory #2.
dynamic behavior of the factories has been gained. Figure 5 (a) Factory #3 is not affected by the changes and is therefore not
displays the cumulated electrical load profile of the involved depicted. From value chain perspective, a total cost reduction
machines in factory #1. Two specific processes are responsible of ~1.4 percent can be achieved and energy intensity and
for significant load peaks and could therefore be of interest environmental impacts are reduced due to lower quality related
regarding load management strategies. Figure 5 (b) shows the losses. However, a suitable business model should be found to
waiting time of one specific product in front of all machines first encourage factory #1 for an implementation and second to
passed, indicating that the product had to queue in front of compensate the additional local costs caused by this change,
several machines, increasing its lead time. which account for ~7.6 percent per part for factory #1.

Fig. 5. Selected simulation results of factory #1: (a) Electr. load profile of the Fig. 7. Comparison of base scenario and improved scenario from single
process chain; (b) Waiting times in front of machines for a specific product factory and value chain perspective
 Stefan Blume et al. / Procedia CIRP 61 (2017) 40 – 45 45

5. Conclusion [13] Jahangirian M, Eldabi T, Naseer A, Stergioulas LK, Young T. Simulation

in manufacturing and business: A review. Eur. J. Oper. Res.
2010;203(1):1-13.
The presented toolbox allows for a holistic value chain [14] Negahban A, Smith JS. Simulation for manufacturing system design and
analysis, assessing both the local perspective of each factory operation: Literature review and analysis. J Man. Sys. 2014;33(2):241-61.
involved but also the global value chain perspective. Suitable [15] Eisele C. Simulationsgestützte Optimierung des elektrischen
complementary methodologies have been combined in one Energiebedarfs spanender Werkzeugmaschinen. Aachen: Shaker; 2014.
environment, using a common data basis and facilitating the [16] Gontarz A, Züst S, Weiss L, Wegener K. Energetic machine tool modeling
approach for energy consumption prediction. 10th Global Conf. on Sust.
comparability of key figures among the assessed systems. The Man. 2012, Istanbul. Zürich, Switzerland: Institute of Machine Tools and
tool has been designed to be applicable also for non-experts in Manufacturing, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.
modeling and simulation of production systems. It is expected, [17] Weinert N, Chiotellis S, Seliger G. Methodology for planning and
that significant saving potentials can be identified and assessed operating energy-efficient production systems. CIRP Ann. - Manuf.
using the toolbox in the European metal mechanic sector. Technol. 2011;60(1):41-44.
[18] Seow Y, Rahimifard S. A framework for modelling energy consumption
Further, a transferability of the presented approach to other within manufacturing systems. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2011;
industry sectors is generally given and might be followed as 4(3):258-64.
soon as the benefits have been proved in industrial application. [19] Agha MH, Thery R, Hetreux G, Hait A, Le Lann JM. Integrated
production and utility system approach for optimizing industrial unit
Acknowledgements operations. Energy 2010;35(2):611-627.
[20] Bleicher F, Duer F, Leobner I, Kovacic I, Heinzl B, Kastner W. Co-
simulation environment for optimizing energy efficiency in production
The research leading to the presented results has received systems. CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol. 2014;63(1):441-44.
funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Programme [21] Heinzl B, Rossler M, Popper N, Leobner I, Ponweiser K, Kastner W, Dur
under grant agreement no. 636926 with the title “MEMAN - NF, Bleicher F, Breitenecker F. Interdisciplinary Strategies for
Integral Material and Energy flow MANagement in Simulation-Based Optimization of Energy Efficiency in Production
Facilities. In: UKSim 15th Int. Conf. Comput. Model. Simul.; 2013. p.
MANufacturing metal mechanic sector” (www.meman.eu). 304-309.
The authors also want to acknowledge TECHNOFI as partner [22] Thiede S, Schönemann M, Kurle D, Herrmann C. Multi-level simulation
responsible for the development of the “Regulatory Module”. in manufacturing companies: The water-energy nexus case. Journal of
Cleaner Production 2016;139:1118-27.
References [23] Li W, Alvandi S, Kara S, Thiede S, Herrmann C. Sustainability Cockpit:
An integrated tool for continuous assessment and improvement of
sustainability in manufacturing. CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol. 2016;
[1] European Commission. Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe. COM
65(1):5-8.
(2011), 571. [24] Torres MT, Barros MC, Bello PM, Casares JJ, Rodríguez-Blas JM.
[2] World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Vision 2050: The Energy and material flow analysis: application to the storage stage of clay
new agenda for business. Geneva; 2010.
in the roof-tile manufacture. Energy 2008;33(6):963-73.
[3] Duflou JR, Sutherland JW, Dornfeld D, Herrmann C, Jeswiet J, Kara S, [25] Suh S. Theory of materials and energy flow analysis in ecology and
Hauschild M, Kellens K. Towards energy and resource efficient economics. Ecological Modelling 2005;189(3):251-69.
manufacturing: A processes and systems approach. CIRP Ann. - Manuf.
[26] Ghadimi P, Li W, Kara S, Herrmann C. Integrated Material and Energy
Technol. 2012; 61(2):587-609. Flow Analysis towards Energy Efficient Manufacturing. Procedia CIRP
[4] Henriques I, Sadorsky P. Can environmental sustainability be used to 2014;15:117-22.
manage energy price risk? Energy Econ. 2010;32(5):1131-8.
[27] Klöpffer W. Life cycle assessment. Environ. Sci. & Pollut. Res.
[5] Rother M, Shook J. Learning to See: Value Stream Mapping to Add Value 1997;4(4):223-8.
and Eliminate Muda. Cambridge: The Lean Enterprise Institute; 1999. [28] Finnveden G, Hauschild MZ, Ekvall T, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S,
[6] Bogdanski G, Schönemann M, Thiede S, Andrew S, Herrmann C. An
Koehler A, Pennington D, Suh S. Recent developments in Life Cycle
Extended Energy Value Stream Approach Applied on the Electronics Assessment. Journal of Environmental Management 2009;91(1):1-21.
Industry. In: IFIP Int. Conf. Adv. Prod. Man. Sys. Berlin, Heidelberg: [29] Laurent A, Clavreul J, Bernstad A, Bakas I, Niero M, Gentil E,
Springer; 2012. p. 65-72.
Christensen TH, Hauschild MZ. Review of LCA studies of solid waste
[7] Herrmann C, Thiede S, Kara S, Hesselbach J. Energy oriented simulation management systems - Part II: Methodological guidance for a better
of manufacturing systems - Concept and application. CIRP Ann. - Manuf. practice. Waste Management 2014;34(3):589-606.
Technol. 2011; 60(1):45–8.
[30] International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14040:2006:
[8] Schönemann M, Thiede S, Herrmann C. Integrating Product Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and
Characteristics into Extended Value Stream Modeling. Procedia CIRP framework. Geneva; 2006.
2014;17:368-73.
[31] International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14044:2006:
[9] Devoldere T, Dewulf W, Deprez W, Willems B, Duflou JR. Improvement Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and
Potential for Energy Consumption in Discrete Part Production Machines. guidelines. Geneva; 2006.
In: Takata S, Umeda Y, editors. Proceedings of the 14th CIRP Conference
[32] Grießhammer R, Benoît C, Dreyer LC, Flysjö A, Manhart A, Mazijn B,
on Life Cycle Engineering. London: Springer London; 2007. p. 311-316. Méthot AL, Weidema B. Feasibility Study: Integration of Social Aspects
[10] Posselt G, Fischer J, Heinemann T, Thiede S, Alvandi S, Weinert N, Kara into LCA. Paris; 2006.
S, Herrmann C. Extending Energy Value Stream Models by the TBS
[33] Hunkeler D, Lichtenvort K, Rebotzer G (Eds.). Environmental Life Cycle
Dimension – Applied on a Multi Product Process Chain in the Railway Costing. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2008.
Industry. Procedia CIRP 2014;15:80-5. [34] Heinemann T. Energy and Resource Efficiency in Aluminium Die
[11] Schönemann M, Kurle D, Herrmann C, Thiede S. Multi-product EVSM
Casting. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2016.
Simulation. Procedia CIRP 2016;41:334-339. [35] Thiede S, Li W, Kara S, Herrmann C. Integrated Analysis of Energy,
[12] Alvandi S, Li W, Schönemann M, Kara S, Herrmann C. Economic and Material and Time Flows in Manufacturing Systems. Procedia CIRP
environmental value stream map (E2VSM) simulation for multi-product
2016;48:200
manufacturing systems. Int. J. Sust. Eng. 2016:1-