The document evaluates hard materials using eco-attributes to determine their environmental impact. It develops a computing system to evaluate materials based on their ranges of eco-attributes like CO2 footprint, water usage, NOx emissions, and SOx emissions. The system then calculates a range compliance value to determine if a material is good or not good for the environment. It provides examples evaluating the eco-attributes of materials like alumina, zirconia, silicon carbide, and boron nitride to demonstrate the system.

1. 1
Evaluation of Hard Materials Using
Eco-Attributes
Md. Mamunur Rashid, A.M.M. Sharif Ullah, Jun’ichi
Tamaki and Akihiko Kubo
Kitami Institute of Technology, Hokkaido, Japan
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

2. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
2
Contents:
2.Green Manufacturing
3.Eco-Attributes
4.Current Research
5.Objective
6.Evaluation Method
7.Results
8.Concluding Remarks
9.References
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

3. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
3
Green Manufacturing
Remanufacture Sustainable Manufacturing
(Innovative, 6R based)
Redesign Green Manufacturing
(Environmentally-benign, 3R based)
Recover
Lean Manufacturing
Recycle
(Waste Reduction based)
Reuse
Traditional Manufacturing
(Substitution based)
Reduce
Year
1950 1975 2000 2025 2050
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

4. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
4
Eco-Attributes
Products Manufacturing Environmental Burden
CO2 Footprint (kg/kg)
Water Usage ( l/kg)
Eco-Attributes NOX emission (g/kg)
SOX emission (g/kg)
…
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

5. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
5
Current Research
100
Ogawa et al., Advance
Robotic Machine Materials Research,
126-128, p.415, 2010.
Vol.
Tools are Good for 10
Environment, while
performing precision 1
material removal
processes.
0.1
Compact Machining
robot Centre
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

6. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
6
Current Research
Good
Green Tools
Carbide
Tools
-A
u
b
e
r
t
i
HSS
R
o
d
P
e
a
E
c
s
r
t
l
Not-so-good Good
Ullah et al., ASME MSEC2011
Proceedings, MSEC2011-50071.
Material Related Eco-Attributes
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

7. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
7
Objective Grinding
wheel
Work -piece Abrasive
grain
The objective is to evaluate
abrasive grain materials (AN, ZN, Bond
Chip
SC, BN, and BC) by using the eco-
attributes: Typical grain materials:
Figure 1: Structure of the grinding wheel
CO2 Footprint (kg/kg) Alumina (Al2O3)
Water Usage ( l/kg) Zirconia (ZrO2)
NOX emission (g/kg) Silicon Carbide (SiC)
SOX emission (g/kg) Boron Nitride (BN)
Boron Carbide (BC)
…
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

8. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
8
Evaluation: Imprecision in Eco-attributes
300
250
We need to process
Water Usage (l/kg)
200
170 types of the ranges of eco-
150 technical
ceramics attributes for the
100
evaluation.
50
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
CO2 Footprint (kg/kg)
Data Sources: CES Selector (V.5.1.0), Granta Design Ltd. UK.
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

9. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
9
Evaluation: Imprecision in Eco-Attributes
300 120
Alum ina
Silicon Carbide
Zirconia
250 Boron Nitride BC
Boron Carbide BC
90
Water Usage (l/kg)
200
BN
SOX (g/kg)
ZrO2
150 60
BN
ZrO2 SC
100
Alum ina
30 Silicon Carbide
SC Al2O3 Zirconia
50 Boron Nitride
Boron Carbide
Al2O3
0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15 0 20 40 60 80
CO2 Footprint (kg/kg) NOX (g/kg)
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

10. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
10
Evaluation:
Computing System
Developed
Step 1: Step 1
Define the Universe of
Step 3
Discourse BN
[a,b]=[0,15]
Step 2:
Define the Linguistic a c d b
Classes
(VL, L, M, H, VH)
Step 3: Step 4
Input the Range for a Step 2
material
L=[c,d]=[6,7.9] Range Compliance of
Step 4: CO2 of Boron Nitride
Determine the Range
Compliance (R(.))
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

11. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
11
Case 1
Case 1
VL L M H VH VL – Very Low
VL L M H VH VL – Very Low
L – Low
L – Low Moderate
M–
m(.) M – H – High
Moderate
m(.)
H – VH – Very High
High
VH – Very High
x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x
Values of an Eco-attribute
Values of an Eco-attribute
Eco-attribute Multiplying Factor (X)
Eco-attribute Multiplying Factor (X)
CO2 (kg/kg) 15
CO2 (kg/kg) 15
Water Usage (l/kg) 300
Water Usage (l/kg) 300
NOX (g/kg) 120
NOX (g/kg) 120
SOX (g/kg) 80
SOX (g/kg) 80
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

12. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
12
Case 2
VL L M H VH
VL – Very Low
L – Low
m(.) M – Moderate
H – High
VH – Very High
x x x x x x x x x x x
Values of an Eco-attribute
Eco-attribute Multiplying Factor (X)
CO2 (kg/kg) 12
Water Usage (l/kg) 280
NOX (g/kg) 110
SOX (g/kg) 70
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

13. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
13
Evaluation: Range Compliance
mF (x)
1.2
1
0.8
d
mF 0.6
∫ m F ( x ) dx
0.4
0.2
c d R( F ) = c
0
X
L′
0
e
10 20
f
x
30 40 50
L = [c,d]: a numerical range
L’= [e,f]: segment of L that belongs to the support of mF
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

14. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
14
Evaluation: Range Compliance 1.2
mF ( x )
1.2
mF ( x )
1
1
0.8 0.8
m F
F
0.6 0.6
m
0.4 0.4
c e
0.2 0.2
0
d c d
0 10 20 30 40 x 0
50
0 10 20 30
x
40
x
1.2 L = [e,d]
’
1.2 L’ =[c,d]
x
mF ( x ) mF ( x )
1 1
0.8 0.8
mF
mF
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
f d c e f d
0.2 0.2
0
c x 0
x
0 10 20 30 40 0
50 10 20 30 40
x x
L = [c,f]
’ L = [e,f]
’
14 ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011
TH
06/14/12

15. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
15
Evaluation: An example of arbitrary material for good for environment
1.5
1 VL L M H VH 1.5
mF
0.5
[0,5]
0 1.0
0 5 10 15
U
CO2 footprint (kg/kg)
I
0.5
F R(F) (good)
F R(F)
VL 0.5000 Desirable Impact (DI) 0.0
VL 0.5000 (good)
L 0.6667 (good for environment) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
L
M 0.6667
0.0833 DI
M
H 0.0833
0.0000 Undesirable Impact (UI)
H
VH 0.0000
(not good for environment)
VH 0.0000
Rounded to four digits
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

16. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
16
Evaluation: An example of arbitrary material for not good for environment
1.5 1.5
1
VL L M H VH
mF
0.5 [5,10]
1.0
0
0 5 10 15
U
I
CO2 footprint (kg/kg)
0.5
F R(F) (good)
VL
F 0.0000
R(F) Desirable Impact (DI) 0.0 (good)
L
VL 0.4167
0.0000 (good for environment) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
L 0.4167 DI
M 0.5833
M
H
0.5833
0.4167 Undesirable Impact (UI)
H 0.4167
VH 0.0000
(not good for environment)
VH 0.0000
Rounded to four digits
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

17. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
17
Results: Evaluation of Alumina (Al2O3)
Alumina
1.5
1.2 CO2 Footprint
0.9 Water Usage Al2O3 is a
relatively good
U
I
0.6 NOX
material for the
0.3
(good)
SOX
environment.
0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9
(good)
1.2 1.5
DI
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

18. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
18
Results: Evaluation of Zirconia (ZrO2)
1.5 Zirconia
1.2 CO2 Footprint
ZrO2 is a
0.9 Water Usage some cases
good
U
NOX
I
0.6
material for
0.3 SOX the
(good)
environment.
0 (good)
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5
DI
14 ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011
TH
06/14/12

19. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
19
Results: Evaluation Silicon Carbide (SiC)
1.5 Silicon Carbide
CO2 Footprint
1.2 SiC is also a
0.9 Water Usage some cases
good
U
NOX
I
0.6
material for
SOX
0.3
(good)
the
0 environment.
(good)
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5
DI
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

20. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
20
Results: Evaluation of Boron Nitride (BN)
1.5 Boron Nitride
1.2 CO2 Footprint
BN is
0.9 Water Usage
relatively far
from good
U
NOX
I
0.6
SOX
material for
0.3
(good) the
0 (good) environment.
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1.5
DI
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

21. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
21
Results: Evaluation Boron Carbide (BC)
1.5 Boron Carbide
1.2 CO2 Footprint
BC is mostly
0.9 Water Usage
far from
good
U
NOX
I
0.6
SOX material for
0.3
(good) the
0
(good) environment
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5
.
DI
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

22. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
22
Results: Sensitivity Analysis (change in the scaling)
Universe of Discouse
Eco-Attributes Case-1 Case-2
CO2 foot print (kg/kg) 15 12
Water Usage (l/kg) 300 280
NOx emission (g/Kg) 80 70
SOx emission (g/Kg) 120 110
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

23. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
23
Results: Sensitivity Analysis in Alumina (Al2O3)
Case-1 Case- 2
1.5 Alumina Alumina
1.5
1.2 CO2 Footprint 1.2 CO2 Footprint
0.9 Water Usage 0.9 Water Usage
U
U
NOX
I
NOX
I
0.6 0.6
0.3 SOX SOX
0.3
0 0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5
DI DI
Similar Scenario after change value
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

24. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
24
Results: Sensitivity Analysis in Zirconia (ZrO2)
Case-1 Case -2
1.5 Zirconia Zirconia
1.5
1.2 CO2 Footprint CO2 Footprint
1.2
0.9 Water Usage Water Usage
0.9
U
U
NOX
I
NOX
I
0.6 0.6
0.3 SOX SOX
0.3
0 0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5
DI DI
Similar Scenario after change value
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

25. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
25
Results: Sensitivity Analysis in Silicon Carbide(SiC)
Case-1 Case- 2
Silicon Carbide 1.5 Silicon Carbide
1.5
CO2 Footprint 1.2 CO2 Footprint
1.2
Water Usage 0.9 Water Usage
0.9
U
NOX
I
U
NOX 0.6
I
0.6
SOX 0.3 SOX
0.3
0 0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5
DI DI
Similar Scenario after change value except Water Usage Attribute
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

26. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
26
Results: Sensitivity Analysis in Boron Nitride (BN)
Case-1 Case- 2
Boron Nitride 1.5 Boron Nitride
1.5
1.2 CO2 Footprint 1.2 CO2 Footprint
0.9 Water Usage 0.9 Water Usage
U
U
NOX
I
NOX
I
0.6 0.6
0.3 SOX 0.3 SOX
0 0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5
DI DI
Similar Scenario after change value
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

27. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
27
Results: Sensitivity Analysis in Boron Carbide (BC)
Case-1 Case- 2
Boron Carbide 1.5 Boron Carbide
1.5
CO2 Footprint 1.2 CO2 Footprint
1.2
Water Usage 0.9 Water Usage
0.9
U
NOX
U
I
NOX
I
0.6 0.6
SOX 0.3 SOX
0.3
0 0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1 .2 1 .5
DI DI
Similar Scenario after change value
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

28. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
28
Results: Categories of Materials Less
Environmentally- Environmentally-
friendly (A) B C friendly (D)
Al2O3 ZrO2 SiC BN BC
Categories Reasons Hard Materials
A Close to idea materials Al2O3 based materials
Some cases close to ideal
B ZrO2 or SiC based materials
materials some cases not
Relatively far from ideal
C BN based materials
materials
Mostly far from the ideal
D BC based materials
materials
Range Compliance is an effective computing method for the evaluation.
The results can be used to improve the present practices in abrasive
technology.
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

29. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
29
References
1. S. Ogawa, S. Okumura, T. Hirogaki, E. Aoyama and Y. Onchi: Investigation of Eco-friendly Fixed-Abrasive Polishing with Compact Robot,
Advanced Materials Research Vol. 126-128 (2010), p. 415
2. Z. Sun, S. Biller, F. Gu and L. Li: Energy Consumption Reduction for Sustainable Manufacturing Systems Considering Machines with
Multiple-Power States, Proceedings of the ASME 2011 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, June 13-17,
2011, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
3. A.M.M. Sharif Ullah, K. Kitajima, T. Akamatsu, M. Furuno, J. Tamaki and A. Kubo: On Some Eco-indicators of Cutting Tools, Proceedings
of the ASME 2011 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, June 13-17, 2011, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
4. —.CES Selector™ Version 5.1.0, 2009, Granta Design Limited, UK, http://www.grantadesign.com
5. D. Dubois, L. Foulloy, G. Mauris and H. Prade: Probability-Possibility Transformations, Triangular Fuzzy Sets, and Probabilistic
Inequalities, Reliable Computing, Vol. 10 (2004), p. 273
6. G. Mauris, V. Lasserre and L. Foulloy: A fuzzy approach for the expression of uncertainty in measurement, Measurement, Vol. 29(3)
(2001), p. 165
7. R.Y. Tan, A. B. Culaba and R.I. Purvis: Application of possibility theory in the life-cycle inventory assessment of biofuels, International
Journal of Energy Research, Vol. 26 (2002), p. 737-745
8. A.M.M. Sharif Ullah: A Fuzzy Decision Model for Conceptual Design, Systems Engineering, Vol. 8(4) (2005), p. 296
9
9. A.M.M. Sharif Ullah: Handling Design Perceptions: An Axiomatic Design Perspective, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 16(3) (2005),
p. 109
10. A.M.M. Sharif Ullah, K.H. Harib and A. Al-Awar: Minimizing Information Content of a Design using Compliance Analysis, SAE Technical
Paper 2007-01-1209, (2007).
11. A.M.M. Sharif Ullah and K.H. Harib: An Intelligent Method for Selecting Optimal Materials and its Application, Advanced Engineering
Informatics Vol. 22(4) (2008), p. 473
12. A.M.M. Sharif Ullah: Logical interaction between domain knowledge and human cognition in design, International Journal of
Manufacturing Technology and Management, Vol. 14(1-2) (2008), p. 215
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12

30. Evaluation of Hard Materials Using Eco-Attributes
30
Thank you for the attention!
14TH ISAAT, Stuttgart, Germany , 18-23 September, 2011 06/14/12