1 / 23

Presented by Gareth Coates

End-of-life costing within the automotive sector. Presented by Gareth Coates. Contents. Research background Why is EOL costing becoming important? Stakeholders & Contemporary market drivers Development of the End-of-life cost model Decision support based on the model.

terry
Download Presentation

Presented by Gareth Coates

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. End-of-life costing within the automotive sector Presented by Gareth Coates

  2. Contents Research background Why is EOL costing becoming important? Stakeholders & Contemporary market drivers Development of the End-of-life cost model Decision support based on the model

  3. Research background • 2 year ESPRC funded project • 5 industrial collaborators • Value recovery is focused at the automotive sector (End-of-life Vehicles = ELVs) • Research to form the basis for PhD Research Aim “To create a cost oriented decision support for the recovery of the most amount of end-of-life value while at the same time meeting the legislative requirements.”

  4. 1,500,000 million are natural ELVs • 400,000 crashed/premature write-offs. • 200,000 are abandoned vehicles • Landfill Directive • Waste Electronic and Electrical Directive • Waste Incineration Directive • End-of-life Vehicles Directive… Problem or opportunity ? - On average 2.1 million vehicles are scrapped in the UK every year [SMMT Ltd, 2000], of which :- - EU legislation becoming increasingly prevalent

  5. EU Directive (Summary) U.K. regulations (Summary) • The banning of environmental detrimental substances. Dismantling information made available. • Supply chain software to check vehicle material composition (IMDS). Dismantling info made available (IDIS). • The collection and processing of ELVs at no cost to the last owner. • Manufacturers to create an “own-marquee” collection network. • The establishment of standards for the storage, treatment and de-pollution. • All “scappies” (ATFs) to be regulated by the Environmental Agency. • The recycling and recovery of 85% of a vehicles weight (80% recycling) by 2006. • Recovery rates will be monitored by assumed metallic fraction from shredding trials. (e.g. ≈ 70% metal recovered only the extra 10% needs to be measured) • The recycling and recovery of 95% of a vehicles weight (85% recycling) by 2015.

  6. 995 Registered Authorised Treatment Facilities (ATFs) in the UK • Certificate of Destruction (CoD) issued • Car de-polluted • Some manual disassembly for part reuse • 37 shredder sites run by 8 companies • Vehicle shredded • Magnetic separation • Eddy current separation • Approx 72% recovered through ferrous content • 4 dense media separation plants • 4% of shredded material separated by density • 24% waste, mostly landfilled

  7. Tier 2,3… Other value chains Reconditioning Tier 1 Manufacturer Sales Reuse Materials reprocessors User Mechanic / Hobbyist Plastic recovery ATF Ferrous scrap Shredder Non-ferrous scrap Non-ferrous recoverer Plastic / Aggregate Shredder Residue Incineration sites Landfill sites Contemporary market drivers • Scrap metal value • - Easy separation process • - High export value • - Low logistical cost • Spare parts market • Non-existent for natural ELV’s • Market struggling • De-pollution costs • - High labour cost • - Low resale value • Auto plastics value • - High labour cost • - High purity required • - Lack of processing routes • Landfill tax • - Slowly rising • - Relatively low compared to EU

  8. Cost model development Model requirements • The development of an holistic End-of-life activity map for the automobile • Understand and modelling of the Direct and Indirect vehicle processing costs • The influence of materials, parts and waste management markets • The inclusion of estimate uncertainty within the model • Validation of the model via appropriate case study data • Tailored viewpoints to suit the user • Effective decision-support to improve value recovery

  9. Waste materials costs and markets De-pollution VEHICLE DISMANTLERS (Authorised Treatment Facility) SHREDDERS Last user Collection & documentation processing Storage & movement Crushing & transportation Hulk Fragmenting Ferrous scrap market Air-classification, magnetic separation, Eddie current separation, Manual separation Part-removal & recycling Non-ferrous scrap market Density separation, Eddie current separation, Manual separation, imagine recognition Part sale (Reuse/reconditioning) Materials recycling markets Landfill DENSE-MEDIA SEPARATION

  10. Time studies Parametrics Theoretical separation model Activity Based Costing (ABC)

  11. Waste materials costs and markets De-pollution VEHICLE DISMANTLERS (Authorised Treatment Facility) SHREDDERS Last user Collection & documentation processing Storage & movement Crushing & transportation Hulk Fragmenting Ferrous scrap market Air-classification, magnetic separation, Eddie current separation, Manual separation Part-removal & recycling Non-ferrous scrap market Density separation, Eddie current separation, Manual separation, imagine recognition Part sale (Reuse/reconditioning) Materials recycling markets Landfill DENSE-MEDIA SEPARATION

  12. + - A2 Vehicle storage(2.3.2.0) Vehicle moved(2.3.1.0) Buy-back of vehicle (1.5.0.0) ELV dropped off Last Owner - Documentation processing (2.2.0.0) Vehicle unloading (2.1.0.0) Abandoned vehicles Merchant networks ELV weighted & assessed (1.4.0.0) Vehicle moved for processing (2.3.0.0) ATF processing (2..0.0.0) A1 B1 + Accident damaged ATF collects (1.0.0.0) Address, V5 and identification of last owner collected, de-registered and CoD issued(2.2.2.0) VIM located on vehicle(2.2.1.0) Journey out (1.1.0.0) Vehicle loading (1.2.0.0) Journey in (1.3.0.0) = Cost or revenue (when money exchanges hands to someone outside the boundary of the operation) = Process or materials description = Processing route = Sub-task processing route

  13. B2 B3 B7 B8 B5 B5 B6 + F1 - + - - B4 - + + + + - + - - - Operation identification(2.4.1.1) Vehicle assessment & prep(2.4.1.0) Filler caps opened (2.4.1.2) Battery removed(2.4.2.0) Coolant removed(2.4.3.1) Washer-fluid removed(2.4.3.2) Top accessible fluids removed(2.4.3.0) Brake-fluid removed(2.4.3.3) Steer-fluid removed(2.4.3.4) Wheel de-rimming(2.4.4.1) Tyres removed (2.4.4.0) AC-fluid removed(2.4.3.5) Pb weights removed (2.4.4.2) Place on rig (2.4.5.0) Petrol removed(2.4.6.1) Engine oil removed(2.4.6.2) Bottom accessible fluids removed(2.4.6.0) Gearbox oil removed(2.4.6.3) Dif oil removed(2.4.6.4) Catalytic removed (2.4.7.0) Remove from rig (2.4.8.0) Air-bag deployment(2.4.9.0) Vehicle moved(2.3.1.0) Tipper loaded (2.8.1.0) Journey out (2.8.2.0) Journey in (2.8.3.0) Removal of hazardous substances from the vehicle(2.4.A.0) Vehicle moved for bailing (2.6.0.0) Crushing / Compacting Compacting of the vehicle (2.7.0.0) De-pollution As required under EU directive. (2.4.0.0) Transportation to shredders Tipper used to transport (2.8.0.0) Vehicle moved for processing (2.3.0.0)

  14. De-pollution time study costing

  15. + + + C1 C2 C3 De-pollution As required under EU directive. (2.4.0.0) ATF processing (2..0.0.0) Vehicle unloading (2.1.0.0) Documentation processing (2.2.0.0) Vehicle moved for processing (2.3.0.0) Vehicle moved for bailing (2.6.0.0) Transportation to shredders Tipper used to transport (2.8.0.0) Crushing / Compacting Compacting of the vehicle (2.7.0.0) Parts/Material dismantling Opportunity for parts removal, if non hulk moved straight to bailer. (2.5.0.0) Vehicle loaded (2.7.1.0) Compaction (2.7.2.0) Hulk unloading (2.7.3.0) Address, V5 and identification of last owner collected, de-registered and CoD issued (2.2.2.0) VIM located on vehicle (2.2.1.0) Assessment of dismantling (2.5.1.0) Remove part (2.5.2.1) Remove part (2.5.4.1) Removal of reconditioning parts (2.5.4.0) Removal of resale parts (2.5.2.0) Removal of material (2.5.3.0) Catalogue part (2.5.2.2) Catalogue part (2.5.4.2) Store part (2.5.2.3) Store part (2.5.4.3) Dismantling assessment information gathered (2.5.3.1) Destructive disassembly (2.5.3.2) Sorting of materials (2.5.3.3)

  16. Parametric estimating of material removal costs

  17. + - - - E1 E1 D1 Loading Mill(3.2.1.0) Material processing (3..0.0.0) Hammer Mill 90t/h-180t’h input feed rate (3.2.0.0) Tipper weighted (2.9.0.0) Feed control(3.2.2.0) Waste stream transport (3.2.1.0) Cyclone separation Ferrous and non-ferrous content separated. (3.3.0.0) SR heavy fraction SR light fraction Waste stream transport (3.3.1.0) Waste stream transport (3.3.2.0) Magnetic separation Ferrous and non-ferrous content separated. (3.4.0.0) Eddy current separation ASR-Light further separated (3.5.0.0) Non-ferrous content Ferrous content Waste stream transport (3.4.2.0) Waste stream transport (3.4.1.0) Waste stream transport (3.5.1.0) Waste stream transport (3.5.2.0) Manual separation Picking line removes non-metals (3.6.0.0) Assessment (3.6.1.0) Manual sort(3.6.2.0) Organic. Earth/Dirt Waste stream transport (3.6.3.0) F1 Tipper loaded (3.7.1.0) Journey out (3.7.2.0) Journey in (3.7.3.0)

  18. Post-fragmentation cost modelling Problem • Processing routes vary from facility to facility • Different makes/types of machines have varying separation capabilities • Separation capabilities of a machine is dependent on the waste stream placed through it. • Industrial data on separation processes is difficult to obtain • The value of recovered materials from the SR is highly dependent on its contamination Solution • A typical based model established • Basic material characteristics used to indicate theoretical separation • Process efficiencies (i.e. recovery & grade) can be set E.g. Eddy-current separation

  19. What potential uses are there for this recovery chain cost model?

  20. Mass = Material Removal Rate Time

  21. Labour rate: 15k/annum @ £7:20/h = 0.002 £/s Mass x Value = Value Removal Rate Time

  22. 1.6 Revenues, costs, work throughput and compliancy can be indirectly measured by the ATF if required 1.3 Live local, national and global materials purchasing prices 1.1 Documentation processing via live DVLA web-link 1.4 Make and model checked against parts request database and past sales data 1.2 Automatically updated with information 1.5 Cost analysis of operations and returns (make and model specific)

  23. Summary • Manufacturer “producer responsibility” has dramatically reformed the recovery chain • EU directive implemented at a time when ELVs are viewed as valuable resource • The long term stability of contemporary market drivers can not be guaranteed • Hence… An economic understanding of the current recovery chain is paramount • The model described accounts for indirect and direct costs to all stakeholders • Micro and Macro functional viewpoints possible once a base model is established • Value improvement via decision-support can be most appropriately selected Questions ?

More Related