DISASSEMBLY ANALYSIS, MATERIAL COMPOSITION
ANALYSIS AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENT OF COMPUTER
DISK DRIVES
by
SUNIL MOHITE, B.E.
A THESIS
IN
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for
the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING
Approved
Hong -Chao Zhang
Chairperson of the Committee
Iris Rivero
John Kobza
Accepted
John Borrelli
Dean of the Graduate School
May, 2005
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my profound appreciation to Dr. Hong-Chao Zhang, my
advisor, for all guidance, inspiration and enthusiasm he has provided not only for this
research work but also throughout my term as a graduate student at Texas Tech
University. I am also deeply indebted to my advisory committee members, Dr. John
Kobza and Dr. Iris Rivero, for their helpful advice.
My gratitude goes to my beloved parents, Sadashiv Mohite and Vijaya Mohite,
and my brother Amit, for their love, guidance and motivation. I would like to thank my
friends’ Puneet Shrivastava, Rohit Kulkarni who have been of great help for my research
work. I would also like to thank Abhuday Desai, who has been a great inspiration to me,
for his guidance throughout my graduate degree program.
I also thank for Graduate School for providing summer thesis scholarship to
support this thesis research work.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................ ii
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………......vi
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………….ix
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................... xiv
CHAPTER ......................................................................................................................... 1
I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1
II. LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................................... 4
2.1
Environment Impact Analysis and Disassembly Analysis ................................. 4
2.2
Design for Environment...................................................................................... 7
2.3
Electronic Product Evaluation using Analytical Tool ........................................ 8
2.4
Company Initiative............................................................................................ 11
2.5
Eco Indicator Methods...................................................................................... 15
2.6
Government Policies......................................................................................... 17
2.7
Environmental Protection Agency.................................................................... 22
III. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 25
3.1
Description of the Product ................................................................................ 25
3.2
Disassembly Analysis ....................................................................................... 25
3.2.1
Disassembly Sequence.............................................................................. 26
3.2.2
Disassembly Procedure............................................................................. 26
3.2.3
Disassembly Tree...................................................................................... 27
iii
3.2.4
Comments on Disassembly....................................................................... 27
3.2.5
Component Relationship........................................................................... 27
3.2.6
Disassembly Time and Cost...................................................................... 28
3.3
Material Assessment and Component Weight.................................................. 28
3.4
Environmental Impact Assessment................................................................... 29
3.4.1
Eco-Indicator Calculation ......................................................................... 30
3.4.2
Saving in Eco-Indicator due to Recycling of the Product......................... 31
IV. RESULT AND ANALYSIS....................................................................................... 33
4.1
Hard Disk Drive Analysis................................................................................. 33
4.1.1
Product Description .................................................................................. 33
4.1.2
Disassembly Sequence.............................................................................. 33
4.1.3
Disassembly Procedure............................................................................. 34
4.1.4
Disassembly Tree of Hard Disk Drive...................................................... 36
4.1.5
Comments on Disassembly....................................................................... 37
4.1.6
Component Relationship........................................................................... 37
4.1.7
Disassembly Time and Cost...................................................................... 39
4.1.8
Material Analysis and Weight Distribution .............................................. 40
4.1.9
Environmental Impact Assessment........................................................... 41
4.1.10
Saving in Eco-Indicator due to Recycling ................................................ 45
4.2
Server CD-ROM Drive Analysis:..................................................................... 49
4.2.1
Product description ................................................................................... 49
4.2.2
Disassembly Sequence.............................................................................. 49
iv
4.2.3
Disassembly Procedure............................................................................. 51
4.2.4
Disassembly Tree for CD-ROM Drive:.................................................... 55
4.2.5
Comments on Disassembly....................................................................... 56
4.2.6
Component Relationship........................................................................... 56
4.2.7
Disassembly Time and Cost...................................................................... 58
4.2.8
Material Analysis and weight Distribution:.............................................. 60
4.2.9
Environmental Impact assessment............................................................ 61
4.2.10
Saving in Eco-Indicator due to Recycling ................................................ 65
4.3
Server Floppy Disk ........................................................................................... 70
4.3.1
Product Description .................................................................................. 70
4.3.2
Disassembly Sequence.............................................................................. 70
4.3.3
Disassembly Procedure............................................................................. 72
4.3.4
Disassembly Tree for Floppy Disk Drive: ................................................ 75
4.3.5
Comments on Disassembly....................................................................... 76
4.3.6
Component relationship ............................................................................ 77
4.3.7
Disassembly Time and Cost...................................................................... 78
4.3.8
Material Analysis and weight Distribution:.............................................. 80
4.3.9
Environmental Impact assessment............................................................ 81
4.3.10
Eco-Indicator Saving by Recycling .......................................................... 85
4.4
Laptop Floppy Drive......................................................................................... 90
4.4.1
Product Description: ................................................................................. 90
4.4.2
Disassembly Sequence.............................................................................. 90
v
4.4.3
Disassembly Procedure............................................................................. 92
4.4.4
Disassembly Tree:..................................................................................... 95
4.4.5
Comments on Disassembly....................................................................... 96
4.4.6
Component Relationship........................................................................... 96
4.4.7
Disassembly Time and Cost...................................................................... 98
4.4.8
Material Analysis and Weight Distribution: ............................................. 99
4.4.9
Environmental Impact Assessment......................................................... 100
4.4.10
Eco-Indicator Saving due to Recycling .................................................. 105
V. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE REASERCH.......................................................... 110
5.1
Contribution of this research........................................................................... 110
5.2
Future research................................................................................................ 111
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................... 112
APPENDICES
A. ECOINDIACATOR VALUES OF MATERIAL ................................................... 118
B. STANDARD PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD COMPOSITION............................. 119
C. CONTROL UNIT HARDDISK COMPONENET MATERIAL COMPOSITION 120
vi
ABSTRACT
This main objective of this thesis is to do the disassembly analysis of the
computer drives such as Hard Disk Drive of Desktop, Floppy Disk Drive of Server,
Floppy Disk Drive and CD-ROM drive of Server to identify the components and to
determine the Environmental Impact of these components and product as a whole.
For the disassembly analysis the computer drives were disassembled to the level
where further disassembly is not possible and the time for disassembly was noted down.
The best disassembly sequence was selected so that the disassembly is done in minimum
possible time. Disassembly tree was generated for the easier understanding of the
disassembly and to understand different levels of disassembly. Component relationship
was developed based on the mechanical relationship and electrical connection among the
components. Disassembly cost was calculated by taking into consideration only labor
expenses. Difficulty rate was calculated depending upon the operation performed to
disassemble the specific product.
For determining the environmental impact identification of material is necessary.
It is known that hazardous materials are present in the Printed Circuit Boards of the
computer drives. So the PCB’s from the computer drives were sent to ‘Noranda
Recycling Inc.’ for material analysis. The plastic used in the drives was identified by the
label present on the plastic components and the data for the metal components was taken
from the literature.
Environmental Impact Assessment was done by using Eco-Indicator 99
methodology. Environmental impact caused by components of the drive was calculated
vii
and environmental impact of the computer drive as a whole was also calculated. If these
components are recycled how much eco-indicator will be saved was determined by the
Environmentally
Weighted
Recycling
Quotes
Methodology.
Eco-Indicator
99
methodology is widely used methodology for determining the environmental impact of
the electronic products. Also it is very easy to use.
viii
LIST OF TABLES
1. Disassembly sequence ................................................................................................. 34
2. Component relationship ............................................................................................... 38
3. Disassembly time and cost.......................................................................................... 39
4. Component material and weight hard disk drive ......................................................... 40
5. Environmental impact assessment of hard disk drive.................................................. 42
6. Saving in Eco-Indicator due to recycling..................................................................... 46
7. Disassembly sequence CD-ROM drive ....................................................................... 50
8. Component relationships CD-ROM Drive .................................................................. 57
9. Disassembly time and cost........................................................................................... 58
10. CD-ROM material and weight.................................................................................... 60
11. Environmental impact assessment CD-ROM drive.................................................... 62
12. Eco-indicator saving due to recycling......................................................................... 66
13. Disassembly sequence ................................................................................................ 71
14. Component relationship server floppy disk drive....................................................... 77
15. Disassembly time and cost of floppy disk drive ......................................................... 78
16. Floppy disk drive material and weight....................................................................... 80
17. Environmental impact assessment of FDD................................................................. 82
18. Eco-Indicator saving due to recycling ........................................................................ 86
19. Disassembly sequence ................................................................................................ 91
20. Laptop floppy drive component relationship.............................................................. 97
21. Disassembly time and cost.......................................................................................... 98
ix
22. Laptop FDD material and weight ............................................................................... 99
23. Environmental impact assessment ............................................................................ 101
24. Eco-indicator saving due to recycling....................................................................... 106
x
LIST OF FIGURES
1. PCB ............................................................................................................................... 34
2. Top cover ...................................................................................................................... 34
3. Hard disk....................................................................................................................... 35
4. Pointer assembly ........................................................................................................... 35
5. Circular plate................................................................................................................. 35
6. Plastic assembly ............................................................................................................ 35
7. Disassembly cost of hard disk components ................................................................. 39
8. Component based EI score HDD.................................................................................. 45
9. Saving in eco-indicator due to recycling ...................................................................... 48
10. Bottom cover............................................................................................................... 51
11. PCB ............................................................................................................................. 51
12. CD motor .................................................................................................................... 51
13. CD optical reader ........................................................................................................ 52
14. Bottom cover............................................................................................................... 52
15. CD motor base plate.................................................................................................... 52
16. CD tray........................................................................................................................ 53
17. CD tray frame ............................................................................................................. 53
18. Motor for optical drive................................................................................................ 53
19. Plastic sub frame ......................................................................................................... 54
20. Motor for CD tray ....................................................................................................... 54
xi
21. Disassembly cost CD-ROM drive .............................................................................. 59
22. Component based eco-indicator CD-ROM drive ....................................................... 65
23. Saving in EI due to recycling...................................................................................... 69
24. Side clamp................................................................................................................... 72
25. Main PCB.................................................................................................................... 72
26. PCB ............................................................................................................................. 72
27. Top cover .................................................................................................................... 73
28. Motor........................................................................................................................... 73
29. Floppy reader .............................................................................................................. 73
30. CD insert cover ........................................................................................................... 74
31. Floppy insert flap and eject button.............................................................................. 74
32. PCB ............................................................................................................................. 74
33. Main frame.................................................................................................................. 74
34. Disassembly cost server floppy disk drive................................................................. 79
35. Component based EI score.......................................................................................... 84
36. Saving in EI due to recycling...................................................................................... 89
37. Bottom cover............................................................................................................... 92
38. Top cover .................................................................................................................... 92
39. Circuit board cover ..................................................................................................... 92
40. Main circuit board....................................................................................................... 93
41. Back cover .................................................................................................................. 93
42. Motor........................................................................................................................... 93
xii
43. Floppy insert cover ..................................................................................................... 93
44. Metal frame................................................................................................................. 94
45. Floppy reader assembly .............................................................................................. 94
46. Disassembly cost......................................................................................................... 98
47. Component based EI score........................................................................................ 104
48. Saving in EI due to recycling.................................................................................... 109
xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
FDD
- Floppy Disk Drive
HDD
- Hard Disk Drive
RoHS
- Restriction on Hazardous Substance
WEEE
- Waste from electrical and electronics equipments
EPA
- Environmental Protection Agency
EOL
- End of Life
E-WASTE
- Electronic Waste
xiv
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Due to the technological advances today’s computers have very short product life
cycle. At the end of the useful life of the computer the question arises of its disposal. The
computer contains precious metals, hazardous substances, plastics etc. these days many
countries don’t allow to landfill the electronic waste due to the damage created by them
to the environment and also due to the shortage of landfills. And if the computers are land
filled the material of these computers can not be used again by doing recycling process.
In many countries there are different laws regarding the disposal of the electronic
products.
European Union is almost ready to implement two new laws; the first one is
Directive on Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) and the second one
is Directive on restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and
electronic equipment. According to this law by July 2006 electronic equipment should
not contain certain hazardous material above a specified threshold value. In United
States also certain states such as California does not allow to landfill the electronic
equipments at the end of their useful life. European Union has developed many ‘Eco
Labels’. The Eco-label is given to the electronic product if it meets certain material
criteria such as if the product contains less than the critical amount of hazardous material.
Many European countries, government is giving responsibilities to original equipment
manufacturers (OEM) for taking back their products at the end of their useful life.
1
OEMs usually don’t manufacture the computer peripherals such as CD-ROM,
Floppy Disk Drive or Hard Disk drive. But major portion of the computer is made-up of
these components and when they sell the computer it becomes OEM’s responsibility to
take care of the computer at the end of their useful life. The implementation of WEEE
directive will require manufacturers to provide disassembly information to the recyclers
to facilitate end of life treatment of the product. Further it’s necessary for the
manufacturers to give the information about components and material used in their
product and which components should be removed from the product so as to do separate
recovery or recycling operation.
If a Hard Drive, Floppy Drive or CD-ROM drive acquired from supplier contains
some hazardous material and it’s used as a part of computer manufactured by OEM, then
the OEM might have to take the product off the market due to fact that it won’t meet
specific criteria established by ROHS directive. So OEM should know the material
composition and environmental Impact caused by them. Environmental assessment tools
have been traditionally used to study Environmental Impact caused by these products. On
the basis of environmental analysis it will be possible for OEMs to choose right vendor
for these peripherals. Choosing right material would thus enable OEMs to develop better
recycling programs. The analysis of computer peripherals will be useful for OEMs in
determining the reusability and recycalabality of these components.
This study involves the assessment of Hard Disk Drive, Floppy Disk Drive and
CD-ROM drive from the perspective of disassembly, material analysis and environmental
Impact. In this study first disassembly analysis is done first, the next step followed in this
2
study is to determine the material of the components so as to detect the presence of the
hazardous material and finally environmental impact assessment was done using EcoIndicator 99 methodology.
In the disassembly analysis disassembly of Hard Disk Drive, Floppy Drive and
CD-ROM drive was done. The steps required to disassemble the whole product were
recorded until the further disassembly is not possible. Disassembly tree was generated for
the easier understanding of the disassembly and to establish the component relationship.
The time required for disassembly was recorded. Cost of disassembly was calculated by
taking into consideration time required for disassembly and the labor cost. Material
analysis was done for the components of the computer peripherals and weight of each
component was recorded. Type of plastic used for components was identified according
the description on the component. PCBs of all the Drives were sent to the material testing
lab to identify the composition. Literature information was used to identify the material
which could not be identified due to unavailability of means and resources. Eco-Indicator
99 method was used to analyze the Environmental Impact of the product as a whole and
Environmental Impact was also categorized according to the material and component
basis. Eco-Indicator values were taken from the Eco-Indicator 99 manual for designers.
Calculations were also done for saving in Eco-Indicator score due to recycling. It was
done on material basis and also on component basis. The factors in calculating saving in
Eco-Indicator were the recovery rate of recycling process and material grade of the
recycled product.
3
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
The research done for this thesis is mainly concerned with the disassembly
analysis of the computer drives and finding out the environmental impact of these drives.
So the literature review is done along the line of environmental impact analysis,
disassembly analysis for finding out what products were studied to determine their
environmental impact. Also what kinds of design for environment efforts are being done
so as to reduce the environmental impact of the product. Recycling analysis to get insight
of what is the current scenario regarding the recycling of electronic product. What are the
initiatives taken by the companies to reduce the environmental impact of the products
they produce and government policies, environmental protection agency’s efforts to
reduce the load of the electronic equipment on the environment. Different Eco-Indicator
methodologies were also studied.
2.1 Environment Impact Analysis and Disassembly Analysis
Huisman, J., Gijlswijk, R.V., and Ansems, A. [14] have made an attempt to
determine the flow of the heavy metals used in electronic product at the end of life so that
they can be reused. For this they have considered four end of life scenarios which are
controlled landfill, municipal Incineration, Dismantling/ mechanical separation with
smelting, recycling other material fractions and thermal treatment. Three electronic
products were selected for the presence of ten different heavy metals. The result shows
4
that different metals are emitted to the air for different options. For last three options Zinc
(Zn) and Lead (Pb) are the metals which constitute the most to the air emission.
Life cycle analysis of cassette tapes and mini disk was done by wantanbe, H.,
Satake, K., tomita, H., [22] to find out the environmental impact of these products. Their
research has showed that mini disk consume less energy for manufacturing than the
cassette tapes. They also observed that in cassette tapes the energy is mainly consumed
for the production of the material and in mini disk for the manufacturing process.
Potential recyclability of mini disk is 98% as compared to 71% of cassette tape. Oishi, S.,
Satake. K., of Sony Corporation have done the life cycle analysis of the CD-ROM drive
[42]. The main objective of their research was to find out about the emission of the
Carbon-di-oxide, Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Oxide. The authors have considered four life
cycle stages which were Production, Assembly, Transport and Use. The carbon-di-oxide
emission was used as the main environmental impact criteria because it’s the main cause
of global warming and it increases in relation with the energy consumption [42]. The
result showed that carbon-di-oxide emission was largest during the production stage
followed by the use stage. The carbon-di-oxide emission in assembly and transport stage
was minimal as compared to the production and use stage. Printed wiring boards were the
main constituent responsible for the carbon-di-oxide emission in the production stage at
about 50%. Another observation by the authors was although the metal parts constitute
about 50% of the weight; their share in the carbon-di-oxide emission was only 9% [42].
Pitts, G., Mizuki, C. of Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation
(MCC) [44] have stated the importance of the effective disposition of electronic products
5
in their research paper. They have mentioned the current recycling practices in the United
States. According to them there is dual infrastructure for the management of the solid
waste one deal with commercial waste and the other deals with consumer waste. Reasons
for ineffective disposition of the electronic products are also stated. In the second part of
the paper initiatives taken by different stats in the United States for successful disposition
of the electronic product are quoted and summary of European Recycling models is
given.
Sony had undertaken a disassembly evaluation workshop for the disassembly of
the TV sets [46]. During this workshop every step was clearly clarified and videotaped
for further documentation and interpretation. Cost of the disassembly was also calculated.
From the result of this disassembly evaluation of TV sets, general Disassembly
Evaluation was general disassembly methodology was developed and further specific
methodology was developed for specific products. Kuhn, M., and Hesselbach, J. have
developed assessment tool for recycling oriented design (AsTROid) [48]. The authors
have mentioned about what should be the optimal disassembly of product. The
disassembly time is divided into four categories which are handling time, separation time,
transition time and taking off time. The accumulated time for disassembly each
component can be calculated using the software developed by the authors. The software
also calculates environmental score of the product from design and recycling point of
view.
6
2.2 Design for Environment
Apple computers have done the analysis of their Power Mac G4 computer to
identify the environmental impact of the computer [9]. They have reviewed different
feature of the product so as to understand the environmental impact of that feature. To
reduce the environmental impact they have reduced the energy required for the operation
of the computer by integrating different design features such as platform integration,
silent sleep mode etc. because energy consumption during the use of the computer is the
main contributor to the environmental impact of the computer. Further they have reduced
the number of components required for logic board design, this has resulted in time,
resource and cost saving. They have stopped using flame retardants in their products
because it is environmentally hazardous when recycling or incineration is done. Stevels,
A., and Boks, C., [20] have made and attempt to do assessment of uncertainties which
arise at the end of life of electronic product and to prioritize them from design for
environment point of view. Their approach was to describe the all the factors which have
an effect on the end of life scenario of the product, finding out about the different factors
which change all the time such as changing material prices, changing legislation,
changing technologies etc., to compare the impact of these factor with each other,
weighting the different factor and prioritizing these factors. After this priorities can be
defined. From their research they have concluded that precious metal prices and their
concentration have the major effect on the end of life revenue generated by electronic
product.
7
Stevels, A., has studies the ISO standard 14001, ISO Technical report (draft)
14062, the European Environment Initiative and Eco labels to compare them for
effectiveness in environmental concern. He has reached to the conclusion that none of
them is gives completely satisfactory solution for environmental concerns. But if the best
elements of all are taken it provides a very good basis for further environmental standards
creation [28]. Segerberg, T., Bergendhal, C.G., [32] have mentioned the need for
development of the tool which can be used for environmentally conscious procurement.
And the authors have given the example of joint effort between the Swedish Institute of
Production Engineering Control and sixteen internationally operating manufacturers to
develop such kind of tool.
2.3 Electronic Product Evaluation using Analytical Tool
Biancaniello, J., Headley, L., Kingsbury, T., and Fisher, M. have published paper
regarding the plastics used in the electronics products [11]. The research paper gives the
information about the plastics which is recovered from consumer electronics. The
conclusions of this paper were plastic comprises 17% of end of life electronic products,
there are 12 types of plastics used electronic products, recycling equipment can detect
accurately more than 20 types of plastics, recycled plastics have favorable value to
recovery cost ratio [11], this research has shown the plastics used in electronics can be
recycled at the end of their useful life. American Plastic council (APC) has conducted
study of plastics which are being used in the Information Technology (IT) industry [31].
The main objective of the study were to find out about the Original Equipment
8
Manufacturer’s Recycling strategies, to identify the high volume, high value plastic used
in IT, characterize the recycling capabilities throughout the IT recycling supply chain
and finding out about the potential application of the recycled IT plastic. The study’s
primary focus was on the highly engineered resins. Recycling program was created by
Pitney Bowes Corporation and ‘wTe’ Corporation for recycling of the plastic in
Bridgeport, CT [33]. The research paper describes the steps taken by the company for
recycling the plastic which are procurement of the products, separating them according to
their model, disassembly procedure utilieszed and recycling process.
Wantanabe, H., Noguchi, t., kuromiya, M., Inagaki, Y. [34] of Sony Corporation
have developed a method which uses virgin and waste polystyrene to clean the waste
water. The method involves transformation of polystyrene into water soluble polymers
and then this water soluble polystyrene is used for waste water treatment. Tomita, H.,
Wantanbe, H., Ooki, H., Ichumira, M., Komine, T., of Sony Corporation have developed
method for recycling of the optical disk [41]. By using this method, the different layers of
optical disk (CD/CD-ROM) which are polycarbonate (PC) substrate, aluminum reflection
layer, protecting layer and label can be separated. The recovered polycarbonate substrate
can be used as recycled PC resin for other application. And recovered PC substrate can
again be used in the formation of new CDs. Busselle, L.D., Allred, R.E., of Adherent
Technologies, Inc. have described a recycling process which is being used at their plant
[35]. It is a low temperature catalytic process which can be integrated into continuous
recycling. For the experimental analysis of the system was done by feeding the system
with computers, computer cases, keyboard etc.
9
Langerak, E., [36] has discussed whether shredding of electronic component is
better for recycling or first disassembling it and then shredding it. The author has given
the example of the TV housing and computer keyboard for this purpose. And according
to the author it’s beneficial to shred the TV housing and then separates the materials. In
case of keyboard using automated disassembly machine to separate the components of
keyboards and then shredding it results in higher quality of material but economically it’s
not feasible. Study was done by Raucent, B., Delchambre, A., Lit, P., and Eglise. T., [37],
to propose viable recycling solution for the end of life electronic equipments. They have
considered the three scenarios, current state of Europe, European Commission work and
current situation in Brussels. They have visited the various recycling facilities in the
Europe to determine what kind of infrastructure would be useful for Brussels scenario.
After that simulation was done to determine the total cost and environmental benefits and
facility concept was developed. Biddle, M. B., Arola, D. P., [38] have compared the
business models used in the plastic recycling industry. The difference between two
business models is that first one uses manual plastic sorting and the other uses automated
plastic sorting. The advantages of manual sorting were mentioned as low capital
investment, no skilled workers, simple sorting method etc. and that of automated sorting
were higher volumes, enhanced sorting capacity etc. the authors have also observed that
properties of the plastic is the main issue regardless of whatever method is used.
Pitts. O. D., Kirby, J. R., Ching, S., of IBM Corporation have mentioned the
initiatives taken by IBM to recycle the PVC and PC/ABS material. They have selected
this material because it constitutes a large percentage of the IBM plastic usage [43].
10
Theo, L. [47] of Boliden Ltd. has given information about the recycling operations
performed by Ronnskar smelter, Bergsoe smelter and Norzinc smelter which are the
subsidiaries of the Boliden Ltd. The author has given information about the how much
material is recycled, what kind of material is recycled, what are the emissions to the air.
The author has also mentioned the general composition of printed circuit board.
2.4
Company Initiative
Ricoh Electronic Inc. has the policy of not sending any waste to the landfill [10].
For this they have established the system which creates employee awareness regarding
the environmental consciousness. They have identified the waste generation sources.
Their strategy for sending zero percent waste to landfill was the use of the ‘5Rs’ method
and green purchasing. ‘5Rs’ method consists of refusing to buy anything which would
become waste, return the material to suppliers, reducing the waste at source, reusing
anything which is possible and recycling waste which is left after practicing the first four
‘Rs’.
Brady, T. A., and O’Connell, S. describe the steps taken by the Intel Corporation
to meet with the environmental regulations and laws regarding the material content in
electronic products [13]. They have followed the material declaration guide developed by
‘Electronic Industries Alliance’ (EIA). This guide divides the material used in electronic
products into three categories which are a) controlled material (legally prohibited or
banned) b) restricted (prohibited in certain application) and c) material of interest. For
first and second category Intel has developed ‘Environmental product content
11
specification for suppliers and outsourced manufactures’ to define environmental
requirements for Intel Corporation [13]. For the material of interest category Intel does
the material test by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy per
USEPA method 200.7. [13]. after these tests are done material declaration datasheet are
developed. Deagher, A., of Hewlett- Packard (HP) company has written about the HP’s
take back program of electronic products in her research paper [15]. She has described
how HP’s take back program works, what are the different aspects of it. HP has different
take back programs developed for different products such as Electronic Hardware
program, Laser Jet program and Inkjet program. The author has mentioned the difficulties
in successful operation of HP’s take back program due to different laws in different
countries, even in United States; different states have different laws, controlling cost and
insufficient customer participation. To reduce the environmental impact of their computer
product ‘Digital Equipment Corporation’ has developed a product stewardship group at
each of their facilities. One product integration manager is selected from this group to
raise the awareness of product stewardship with the key function within the business such
as marketing, engineering, manufacturing, logistic etc. [16] the following approach was
taken by ‘Digital Equipment Corporation for successful achievement of product
stewardship, getting support of the management, selecting the product, determining the
product requirement, support activities for the design teams to meet this requirement and
making sure that these product requirements are met.
At International Machines Corporation (IBM) systematic approach has been
adopted to collect and document environmental information about products [17]. For
12
collection of environment information following aspects considered are product design,
regulatory requirements regarding that product, shipping and transportation, marketing
and customer support and product disassembly operation. After this information is
collected it’s documented as ‘Product Environmental Profile’ (PEP). This information is
collected by the IBM product manager and product development team. This PEP consists
of product identification and description, product energy information, product
composition information, product consumable and packaging information, environmental
design, attributes information and standard compliance, emission information. Yehle. L.,
Nobs, C., Keene, R., Grencheus, E. [57] of IBM corporation have described the working
principles of its asset recovery center. Initially the asset recovery center was designed to
dismantle the products and proper environmental disposal of the product. And later parts
recovery operations were incorporated in the asset recovery center. The authors have
also mentioned what changes occurred in the asset recovery center through the years.
Vanderstraeten, J.C., Orolandella, F., Lueckefett, H.J., Korpalaski, T., and
Dirksen, T. [23] have said in their paper that manufacture’s self declaration about the
environmental aspect of the products is better than the currently available eco labels.
They have mentioned the problems and issues with the eco labels such as large number of
eco labels, diversity of criteria to be met for each eco label, unscientific criteria, number
of test procedures to be done etc. Authors say that self declaration concept is better than
eco labels in the following areas such as simple reporting of environmental parameters,
standard test protocols, in house test reduces the delay, standard test and reporting etc.
authors have given example of the Hewlett- Packard’s about what principles they have
13
followed for the self declaration of environmental parameters for their products. At
Panasonic corporation environmental control policy was created in 1991 [25] so as to
make Panasonic products environmentally friendly. Further in 1997 Corporate
Environmental Affairs Division was established. The main objective of this Corporate
Environmental Affairs Division was to do the product assessment, develop energy
conservation technologies so that product will be energy efficient, constrain the variation
of the plastics used in the electronic products so that recycling process is not complicated
and eliminate the presence of toxic substance in the products. Staggs, D., Turk, L.,
Minter, J., Wanielista, M. [30] of Dell Computer Corporation have discussed the Dell’s
Business model and have explained what were the driving factors behind acquisition of
TCO 95 eco label and Blue Angel certification. At IBM corporation Systematic
Environmental Assessment (SEA) methodology is used to develop and report the
environmental evaluation of the product [40]. The SEA is used when decisions regarding
the material, processes and technologies need to be taken. The SEA methodology consists
of defining the goal of assessment , technological parameters needed to be studied are
defined, life cycle analysis of different designs is done by taking into consideration
appropriate environmental aspects, weighting factors are assigned and finally ranking is
determined based on the analysis.
AT & T Company has its own program for the end of life management of the
personal computers [45]. Life management program at AT & T Company deals with the
issues, such as procurement of the computer, installation of the computers, fixing the
computers and end of life disposal/recycling of the computer.
14
2.5 Eco Indicator Methods
In 2001 attempt has been made by Luo, Wirojanagud and Caudill [1] to compare
the four major environmental performance metrics and how those metrics can be applied
to electronic products. The authors have compared Eco-Indicator 95, Eco-indicator 99,
Ecological Footprint and EcoPro methodologies. The methodologies of these four
environmental performance metrics are described. The differences between the weighting
techniques of these methodologies are described. Environmental performance of three
products is calculated using above four mentioned methodologies. The products were two
laptops from different manufacturers having same material content, two telephones from
different manufacturer having different energy usage and economic value and the third
product was a subassembly of a part where one part was made up from aluminum and the
second part was made from plastic.
Stevels, A., Boks, C., and Huisman, J., [2] suggest that, their approach for
calculating
recycling
quotes
which
is
‘Environmentally
Weighted
Recycling
Quotes’(EWRQ) is more accurate than the current weight based material recycling
efficiency. The paper discusses about how to calculate the actual weighted environment
impact. The authors say that the actual weighted environmental impact is the sum of
weighted environmental impact of end of life treatment, weighted environmental impact
of substitution of material, weighted environmental impact of landfill and weighted
environmental impact of incineration. The environmental impact calculated by this way
gives the total environmental impact of end of life stage of a product. Then minimum
environmental impact and maximum environmental impact of the product is calculated.
15
And normalizing these values the EWRQ is calculated. The authors have calculated the
EWRQ of cellular phone for showing how the methodology works. Stevels, A., Huisman,
J., and Middendorf, A. [3] have tried to compare the results of EWRQ methodology by
using different environmental impact assessment tools such as Eco-Indicator 95, Ecoindicator 99 and Toxic Potential Indicator. And further these results are compared with
the traditional weight based recycling quotes. Environmental assessment of nine different
products such as TV, VCR, Walkman, Fax etc was done by using those two
methodologies. They have observed that products which have higher percentage of metal
and Glass have higher material recycle efficiency. The differences between the two
approaches are shown by the example of the electronic product ‘Fax Machine’.
In 2001 Persson, J. [4] has written a paper about the need of the eco-indicators in
the product development stage. The author has explained the concept how eco-indicators
can be developed for different needs and hoe the scales can be selected. The paper also
describes the criteria set by ‘Organization for economic Co-operation and Development’
for generation of eco-indicators. Environmental Impact assessment of a component at
Truck Manufacturing Company is carried out for the development of Eco-Indicators for
the specific part and later these Eco-Indicators will be used for the components which
belong to the same part family.
Analysis of desktop monitor, control unit and keyboard was done by Frey, S. D.,
Harrison, D. J., and Billet, E. H. [5] using Ecological Footprint methodology. The main
factors in the analysis were land space resource consumption by PC system, land space of
resource consumption by life cycle, land space of energy form materials by life cycle and
16
land space of energy consumption from processes by life cycle. They have observed that
the use phase is the main contributor to the energy consumption. Their research has
concluded that the desktop monitor has the highest ecological footprint followed by
control unit in second place and the keyboard is in third place.
2.6 Government Policies
Lueckefett, H. J., Orlandella, F., Holbrook, L. [6] have discussed different
environmental legislations proposed by the European countries in their research paper.
European Union makes the legislation to achieve environmental goals but it depends on
each individual country how to achieve those goals. The regulations are made so that the
environmentally hazardous materials are not used in the electronic products. The authors
have provided the list of the specific materials which are prohibited for use in products in
specific countries. They have also mentioned the example of Hewlett-Packard Company
about how that company makes its product environmentally safe according to various
regulations and laws.
Stevels, A., [7] has discussed the directive on Waste of Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE) for assessing whether it is eco-efficient or not. He has mentioned the
objectives of the take back system for electronic products. He has described how different
categories are defined in the WEEE directive. In WEEE no clear definition of the
required recovery and recycling quotes are given [7]. The author says that recycling
targets should be set according to the environmental impact of the material and not
according the weight of the material, which is the case in the WEEE directive. He has
17
proved this by comparing recycling of gold and palladium which are precious metals with
the recycling of plastics. Dowdell, D.C., Noel, R., Adda, S., Laurent, D., Glazebrrok, B
and Kirkpatrick, N.[8] have compared the current disposal methods in the United
Kingdom, 100% landfill of all the electronic product and end of life results by proposed
WEEE directive. They have compared eight different electronic products such as
refrigerator, TV, personal computer, washing machine, telephone etc. they studied life
cycle analysis of the electronic products after it becomes waste. Cost benefit analysis for
three different methodologies was also done. It’s been concluded that current United
Kingdom processing and disposal routes have more environmental impact than the
proposed WEEE directive. For the some products revenue generated is higher if WEEE
guidelines are followed for disposal and for some products revenue generated is less as
compared to the current United Kingdom processing and disposal routes.
Raymond, M., [12] has described the electronic recycling laws regarding the take
back policy in her research paper. She has observed that every country has different laws.
According to the WEEE directive, the European Union is making laws which will require
all the electronics to be recycled at the end of their useful life and restricts certain
hazardous substances in electronics. The author has given the example of the different
European countries and the practice followed in those countries regarding the take back
policy. For example in Germany and Austria manufacturers are directly responsible for
collection of used packaging. Norway government charges manufacturers to pay the fees
to two collection organizations which collect the electronic product at the end of their
useful life and the fees is collected at the time of the import of electronic product in the
18
country. Hieronymi, K., of Hewlett-Packard Company has described the Waste of
Electronics and Electrical Equipment legislation from its major elements, their
implementation and finance point of view [18].his research paper describes how the
WEEE legislation can be implemented and what steps should be taken for successful
finance management while implementing the WEEE legislation. In 2003 attempt has
been made by Stevels, A., and Huisman, J. [19] to calculate the financial advantages of
take back program and recycling of electronic products. They have compared different
end of life options for products from environmental gain and monetary point of view.
‘REMPRODUSE’ is a project which started in Europe in 1997. The main
objective of this project was closing the recycling loop for copper through redesigning of
the copper rich electronic products such as electric motor. This project was started due to
realization that in motors steel and cooper are attached hard to each other and these two
metals are not compatible with each other and they should be totally separated [24]. The
objective of this project is to make copper rich electric motors and disassembly oriented
recycling system adapt each other. In 1999 Jordan R. C., Korfmacher, H.A., and Suoss,
B. [26] have discussed the laws that exits in Germany regarding the packaging directives
of electronic product. Further they have mentioned the discussed the principles of
directive for waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). They also
mentioned the difficulties in recycling of the plastics prior to 1998 because of the labels
which describe them. These labels are not recycling compatible with the plastics. This
problem was solved when ‘3M’, a major label manufacturer developed labels which are
fully recycling compatible with the plastics. Mausi, K., Nilsson, J., Boks, C. [27] have
19
compared the end of life scenarios of electronic products and legislation regarding
electronic products in Japan, Europe and United states. According to them Europe is
leading in environmentally conscious processing end of life electronic products. Japan is
rapidly following the suit of European countries to develop laws and regulation regarding
the end of life of electronic products. And United States is taking wait and see approach.
Johnson, E.P., of Atlantic Consulting [29] has defined the concept of Eco-labels.
Further he has discussed European Union eco-label stating its need, the criteria which
should be used for its development. According to the author eco label can be developed
in four steps which are feasibility study which includes determining eco label efficiency,
determining the capability of eco-label in making difference in ecology etc. the next step
is to do market research study to determine the product group, product manufacturer,
what is the environmental performance of different products and what difference can ecolabel make in these products. The next step is to do the life cycle analysis of these
products. After this criteria for eco-labels are proposed. The author has given the example
of the personal computer and explained how eco-labels were developed for the personal
computer. Wendschlag, H., Urbach, H.P., Hermann, F. [39] have compared the different
eco labels from ISO point of view. They have categorized different eco labels into type 1,
type 2 and type 3 based on the ISO characterization. The authors have also described the
different issues involved in these three types of eco label. Conclusion of this comparison
was most of the eco labels have the same criteria but there are too many differences also.
IT Industries stand about these eco label is mentioned.
20
Information about the ‘Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment’
(WEEE) and ‘Directive on the Restriction of Use of Certain Hazardous Substances’
(ROHS) is published by ‘Envirowise’ which is a government sponsored program in
United Kingdom [54]. In the publication list of the electronic equipments is given, their
manufacturers will be covered under these regulations. A proposed limit of hazardous
substances in the electronic equipment is mentioned and all the electronic equipment
should comply with this limit after July 2006. How functioning of ‘WEEE’ will
financially sustain is also explained. What are the responsibilities of Electronic
equipment manufacturer are elucidated. Official journal of European Union gives the
information about the ‘directive of waste electrical and electronic equipment’ (WEEE)
[55]. The article gives information about the objective, scope of the WEEE. Definition of
WEEE is elucidated. Different legislation regarding to product design, collection of the
electronic equipment at end of their life, how they should be treated, how much
percentage material should be recovered from equipment in different categories are
explained. Details about the financing aspect of the WEEE are also elaborated. Electronic
equipment manufacturer responsibilities regarding their end of life are described.
Electronic equipment product categories are defined such as large household appliances,
small household appliances, IT and telecommunication equipment, consumer equipment
etc. All the equipments are categorized into ten categories. Information about directive on
restriction of the use of certain hazardous material in electrical and electronic equipment
is published by official journal of European Union [56]. List of materials is provided
which should not be used by the electronic manufacturers in their equipment after 1st July
21
2006. Also concentration values for hazardous material which would be allowed are
published. Steveles, L. N., and Meinders, H.C., [21] of Philips Electronics have described
the different policies of ISO 14001 which are being followed at the company for
successful implementation of eco design in company’s product. The authors have
mentioned the sections of the ISO 14001 and how they are being implemented at the
Philips Electronics.
2.7 Environmental Protection Agency
Useful information about the electronic reuse and recycling can be found in
Environmental Protection agencies technical assistance periodical called as ‘waste wise
update’. The electronic reuse and recycling periodical is published in October 2000 and
the information is given about information required before donating the used electronics,
recommendation for improving future electronic acquisition, methods for managing used
electronics, what are the opportunities for the manufacturers to minimize the electronic
waste and government policies regarding the end of life of electronic products [49].
Information about the regulation regarding the CRT disposal is given such as household
monitors, monitors which are donated for continuous use are not considered as hazardous
waste [49]. End of life management facility does not come under the federal regulation if
the amount electronic waste managed by that facility does not exceed 100 kilogram per
month and if this 100 kilogram per month limit is exceeded, federal laws are applicable to
that facility [49]. Guidelines for purchaser of electronic equipment are also given so that
in the future recycling of this electronic equipment is easy. ‘Aspen Skiing Company’ and
22
‘Public Service Enterprise Group’ have donated their old computers to schools and other
educational facilities; this can be the one way of managing used electronics. Further
information is also given about determining when to donate the old electronic equipment
and what precaution should be taken before donating them. The example of United State
Postal Service’s (USPS) end of life management of electronic products is given. USPS
sends its electronic equipment to the recycler and if the recycler sells it, USPS shares the
revenue with the recycler. How computers are recycled is also explained in the report.
Strategies for manufacturers about how to minimize the electronic waste are also
explained which include standardization of the material used in the electronic product,
using recycled material, using refurbished parts, remanufacturing of the used electronic
product and taking care that material used in the electronic product is recyclable [49].
Actions taken by the government to manage the electronic waste are also elaborated in
the report.
EPA has published periodical which deals with the extended product
responsibility. Design for environment, supply chain and industry partnership, leasing
and take back are the main topics discussed in the periodical. DFE example is illustrated
by Allergen pharmaceutical company which has initiated different strategies in their
company so as products are environmentally friendly. Allergen identified the waste
sources and the options were identified to reduce them or eliminate them [50]. They have
started using environmentally friendly material in their products instead of using
hazardous materials etc. supply chain and industrial partnership is illustrated by the
example of Public Service Electric and Gas Company. They have developed strategy by
23
which they reduced the number of suppliers from 270 to just 9 and further they have
implemented take back policy with the suppliers. Leasing contract is made between the
Dell Computer Corporation and Monsanto. According to this agreement Monsanto leases
high end computer from Dell and returns them after 24-36 months. Dell re-leases this
computer to the companies which don’t need high end computers. Rechargeable Battery
Recycling Corporation (RBRC) is formed by Matsushita Electric Corporation, Sanyo
Energy Corporation, Eveready, SAFT America and Varta batteries Inc. for collecting and
recycling used Nickel-Cadmium batteries. Example of XEROX Corporation is also given
to illustrate the implementation of Take Back policy.
Environmental management system (EMS) is a set of policies and procedure that
defines how an organization evaluates, manages and tracks its environmental impact [51].
EMS is nothing but the Plan-Do-Check-Act model. In the plan phase organization
discovers it’s all environmental aspects. Then critical aspects are recognized and
environmental goals are set for these aspects. Next these goals are achieved through
employee education and operational control. Organizations performance is evaluated in
the next phase to check whether the goals are achieved or not. And if the goals are not
achieved the corrective action is taken. Federal government has given orders to its all
facilities to implement EMS by the end of 2005 [51]. Facts about the recycled products
are explained in closing the loop periodical by EPA [53]. Examples of different
companies and government offices are given who have started buying the recycled
products [52]. Cradle to cradle concept is explained by the EPA in their technical
assistance periodical [53].
24
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
The main aim of this thesis is to carry out disassembly analysis, material
assessment and to find out about the environmental impact caused by the components
used in the computer drives. The products analyzed were for this study were CD-ROM
drive of Server, Floppy Disk Drive of Server, Hard Disk Drive of Desktop and Floppy
Disk Drive of Laptop. The following steps were taken to do the analysis of the product.
For disassembly analysis disassembly sequence was determined, disassembly steps are
elaborated in disassembly procedure, disassembly tree is generated. After disassembling
the computer drives material assessment was done. And based on the weight and material
of the components Eco-Indicator score is calculated. The approach taken for this study is
explained in detail as follows
3.1 Description of the Product
The information regarding the product such as Manufacturer of the product,
Model number, Serial number, Total weight of product and Product specification was
recorded.
3.2 Disassembly Analysis
In this section methodology followed for the disassembly analysis is explained
25
3.2.1
Disassembly Sequence
Disassembly sequence was generated based on the actual disassembly of the
product. Disassembly sequence was generated because for recycling of the product
components disassembly of the product is the first step and of the identification of the
components used in the products to determine their material and weight. Different
disassembly sequences were considered and the best possible disassembly sequence was
generated which would facilitate disassembly of the product in minimum possible time.
Disassembly procedure is tabulated in a table. The table consists of operation number;
description of the part disassembled, disassembly procedure followed, time taken for the
disassembly operation of that part and brief description of procedure such as how many
screws were removed and whether any other action was taken for the disassembly of that
part such as pulling the sub frame from the main frame of the component. The time for
removing the screws or other direct operation such as pulling the cables between the two
components, for e.g. as disconnecting cable between main circuit board and motor, was
considered as the time for disassembly. The time for set up of the experiment or changing
of the tools between two operations was not considered to contribute to the disassembly
sequence. Disassembly of the product was done until no further disassembly is possible
due to unavailability or resources.
3.2.2
Disassembly Procedure
Step by step explanation of the disassembly of the product is described in the
disassembly procedure. This is essentially same as the disassembly sequence; the only
26
difference here is after every step of the disassembly, picture is shown so that it would
facilitate easier understanding for the person reading it.
3.2.3
Disassembly Tree
Disassembly procedure was also explained in terms of disassembly tree so that one
could understand different levels of disassembly. Disassembly tree is generated based on
the disassembly steps followed for this experiment. Disassembly tree would also facilitate
understanding of what steps required to be taken to reach to a specific component of the
product.
3.2.4
Comments on Disassembly
After studying the disassembly sequence remarks on the disassembly are made in
this section. Discussion regarding the structure of the component is made. Why specific
disassembly steps are taken is discussed. What are the difficulties involved is also
discussed.
3.2.5
Component Relationship
Component relationship was established according the mechanical relationship
between the products and electrical connection of the product. Such as whether two
components are connected mechanically by screws, snap fit or by electrical connection
by means of cable. This relationship is tabulated in the table. The table consists of part
27
name, the identified material of that part and to which other part it is connected either
mechanically or electrically.
3.2.6
Disassembly Time and Cost
Disassembly time was recorded. Only the time required for direct disassembly
operation such as removal of screw, removing snap fit or disconnecting cables was
recorded. The time for change of tools or disassembly set up was not considered as the
disassembly time. For calculating the cost of disassembly only cost of labor is
considered. Wage rate of $10/hr is considered in the calculation of the disassembly cost.
Other direct or indirect costs are not considered for the calculation of the disassembly
cost.
Disassembly cost for component in cents = (time for disassembly of that
component * 5/18)
The factor 5/18 = 1000 cents/ 3600 sec. which is equal to $ 10/ hr.
The disassembly time was recorded in seconds so time for disassembly was
multiplied by the factor 5/18 which would give the cost in cent for the disassembly time
considered.
3.3 Material Assessment and Component Weight
Environmental performance of the product is determined by the material used in the
product. Environmental impact of a component is increased if the product contains
hazardous materials. The main component which contains the hazardous material is PCB.
28
So PCBs of Hard Disk Drive, CD-ROM drive and Floppy Drive were sent to the
‘Noranda Recycling Inc.’ for material analysis. The results of that test were used to
determine the material of the PCBs. The plastic material used in the Hard Drive, Floppy
Drive and CD-ROM drive was determined by the label on the plastic components present
in those products. And the data regarding the metals was taken from the literature. The
weight of the every component is recorded
The test result from ‘Noranda Recycling Inc.’ for the material analysis of PCB did
not detect the presence of some materials such as Gold, Aluminum, Epoxy, Glass,
Ceramics etc. but from the information available in literature it is known that these
materials are also present in the PCB. So weight of this material present in the PCB is
approximated by the information available in the literature.
3.4 Environmental Impact Assessment
For Environmental Impact assessment Eco-Indicator 99 (EI-99) methodology is
followed. The Eco-Indicator 99 database provides weighted environmental impact scores
for several common materials and their associated processes. EI-99 involves a procedure
where-in the environmental burden of a material or process is weighted based on three
impact categories viz.
− Human health
− Ecosystem quality
− Resources
29
In the default weighting structure 40% weightage is given to human health, 40%
to ecosystem quality and 20% to resource consumption. These values are provided in
terms millipoint per kilogram for materials.
For purpose of analysis in this research just the production phase of material lifecycle was considered. Later for the end-of life scenario, saving in Eco-Indicator due to
recycling is computed using a different hypothesis. If a certain amount of material is
recycled, the environmental impact of reproducing that exact of amount of material is
avoided. So a certain amount of Eco-Indicator saving is associated with the recycling of
any material. This methodology is explained in detail later.
3.4.1
Eco-Indicator Calculation
Once the material analysis of each product is complete, the eco-indicator value for
each enlisted material is found from the EI-99 score database. The weight based ecoindicator for each material is calculated by simply multiplying the material eco-indicator
with the weight of the material in the product as shown below.
Weight Based EI (mPt) = Material EI (mPt/kg) * Weight of Material
Adding up all the weight based EI of all materials in a particular component the
net eco-indicator for that component is calculated.
Net Component Eco-Indicator = Σ (Weight based material EI)
30
3.4.2
Saving in Eco-Indicator due to Recycling of the Product
If the material is recycled the environmental impact of reproduction of same
amount of that material will be avoided. This is due to the fact that recycled material can
be used in products instead of extracting materials from their ore. Environmentally
Weighted Recycling Quotes (EWRQ) methodology established by Ab Stevels [2], gives a
clear outlook of the end-of-life scenarios of a product. This method evaluates the
recyclability score of a product based on various end-of-life scenarios of different
material fractions of a product. The end-of-life routes considered in this research are:
- Substitution by recycling
- Incineration
- Landfill
Recycling EI is calculated by following formula [2]
EI (actual) = ∑ {(EI (end of life treatment) + EI (substitution) + EI (landfill)
+ EI (incineration)}
But the scope of this thesis is only limited to the recycling (substitution) scenario.
Although the environmental impact is avoided by recycling there are some factors to be
considered for computing the avoided environmental impact. One factor is the recovery
rate of the material in a recycling process. The second factor is the grade of the recycled
material which dictates the application of recycled material. Saving in Eco-Indicator due
to recycling is calculated in terms of eco-indicator values for the materials. The recovery
rate and recycled material grade are represented as percentages or fractions. The
calculations are shown below:
31
EI Saving by Recycling = Weight based EI * Recovery Rate * Material Recycle
Grade
Material Recovery rate and Material Recycle Grade data was obtained from the
‘Noranda Recycling Inc.’ for the metals and for the plastics the data for the recovery rate
and recycle grade was taken from the literature.
32
CHAPTER IV
RESULT AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Hard Disk Drive Analysis
4.1.1
Product Description
Hard-Drive
Model:
Western Digital
Model No.:
WD100BB – 75AUA1
Serial No.:
WMA6Z10216664
Total Weight:
575 grams/ 20.235 oz
Model Specification:
IDE Hard Drive 10 GB
4.1.2
Disassembly Sequence
Following table gives the description of the disassembly steps followed for the
disassembly of the Hard Disk Drive. The total disassembly was done in 4 minutes and
twenty-nine seconds. Disassembly procedure gives the detailed explanation of the
disassembly where pictures are also included for the easier understanding.
33
Table 1 Disassembly sequence
Sr.
No. Part
1 PCB
2 Top cover
Circular plate
3 and Hard Disk
Pointer
assembly and
4 plastic frame
Bottom circular
5 plate
Plastic
6 assembly
4.1.3
1.
Disassembly
Procedure
Unscrew 3 torx
Time
start
Time
end
Disassembly
Time
(seconds)
Operation/Comment
3 torx present
0:56
0:00
0:56
Unscrew 8 torx
0:56
2:16
1:20
Unscrew 5 torx
2:16
3:03
0:47
Remove 3 torx
for pointer
assembly and 2
torx for plastic
assembly
3:03
3:40
0:37
6 torx visible and 2 torx
are covered by sticker,
Attached to the main
frame using adhesives
Pointer assembly and
plastic assembly have
to be taken out
simultaneously
because the cord is
attached between
pointer assembly and
plastic assembly
Remove 3 torx
3:40
4:16
0:36
3 torx present.
Remove 1 torx
4:16
4:29
0:13
1 torx present.
Disassembly Procedure
Remove the PCB from the main frame by removing three torx.
Figure 1 PCB
2.
Remove the top cover by removing the 8 torx.
Figure 2 Top cover
34
3.
Remove the semi-circular plate which holds the hard-disk (which is on the
top) by removing 5 torx. Hard Disk is also removed
Figure 3 Hard disk
4.
Remove the frame, which holds the pointer by removing 3 torx on the
hard-disk side and one on the backside of the hard disk, which is on the main
black frame.
Figure 4 Pointer assembly
5.
Remove the bottom circular plate which hold the hard disk CD by
removing three torx.
Figure 5 Circular plate
6.
Remove the plastic assembly.
Figure 6 Plastic assembly
35
36
4.1.4. Disassembly Tree of Hard Disk Drive
The above figure is the disassembly tree of the Hard Disk Drive. From the
disassembly tree it is observed that there are six level of disassembly in the complete
disassembly of the hard disk drive.
4.1.5
Comments on Disassembly
Disassembly of the hard disk drive is easy as compared to the floppy disk drive
and CD-ROM drive. This is due to the fact that there are not many components involved.
Hard Disk drive does not have complicated structure. All the components can be reached
very easily. The difficulty observed was for removing the top cover operation. To remove
top cover eight torxs are needed to be removed. Among these eight torxs six torxs are
visible. The remaining two torxs are behind the manufacturer’s label. The pointer
assembly is connected to small plastic part; they have to be removed simultaneously
because of the cable connected between them. The cable can not be removed unless both
the parts are taken out of the hard drive. The separation of the pointer assembly from the
its frame is highly difficult due to the fact that pointer assembly is magnetically and
tightly snap fitted in the frame. The torxs used in the Hard Disk Drive were not uniform.
For mechanical assembly two types of torxs were used, which can be avoided by using
single type of torxs.
4.1.6
Component Relationship
The following table shows the component relationship within the Hard Disk
Drive. As Hard Disk Drive does not contain many components almost every component
37
is attached to the main frame. Except the Hard Disk itself and the circular plate which
supports it from the top. Component relationship is developed by taking into
consideration mechanical assembly relationship as well as electrical connections.
Table 2 Component relationship
Sr.
No. Part
1 Top cover
2 PCB
Type of
assembly
Screw
Screw
Screw
Material
Aluminum
PCB
Frame which holds the pointer
3 assembly
Relationship to parts
Main Frame
Main Frame
Bottom Circular Plate
Steel
4 Pointer Assembly
Aluminum
Main Frame
Screw
Pointer assembly
Snap fit
Frame which holds the pointer
assembly
Snap fit
Plastic part
Cable
Screw
Circular plate which holds the
5 hard disk CD
Aluminum
Bottom Circular Plate
Circular plate beneath the plate
6 which holds the hard disk CD
Aluminum
Circular plate which holds the
hard disk CD
Screw
Bottom circular plate which is
7 attached to the main frame
Aluminum
Bottom Circular Plate
Screw
PCB
Screw
Circular plate which holds the
hard disk CD
Screw
Circular plate beneath the
plate which holds the hard
disk CD
Main Frame
8 Plastic part
ABS
9 Main black frame
Aluminum
Pointer Assembly
Main Frame
Top cover
PCB
Frame which holds the pointer
assembly
Screw
Screw
Cable
Screw
Screw
Screw
Screw
Bottom circular plate which is
attached to the main frame
Screw
Plastic part
Screw
10 Hard Disk
Bottom circular plate which is
attached to the main frame
Screw
Aluminum
38
4.1.7
Disassembly Time and Cost
Table 3 Disassembly time and cost
Disassembly
Method
Time (Seconds)
Sr.No. Part
Disassembly
Cost (Cents)
1 PCB
Unscrew (3)
56
15.56
2 Top cover
Circular plate and
3 Hard Disk
Unscrew (8)
80
22.22
Unscrew (5)
47
13.06
Pointer assembly and
4 plastic frame
Unscrew (5)
37
10.28
5 Bottom circular plate Unscrew (3)
36
10
6 Plastic assembly
13
3.61
Unscrew (1)
The above table gives the disassembly time required for the disassembly of the
components of the Hard Disk Drive and the cost associated with the disassembly of the
components.
Disassembly Cost of Components
25
Cent
20
15
10
5
0
PCB
Top cover
Circular plate
Pointer
Bottom
and Hard Disk assembly and circular plate
plastic frame
Component
Figure 7 Disassembly cost of hard disk components
39
Plastic
assembly
From the above graph it is evident that the cost of disassembly of the top cover is
more than any other part due to high number of torxs involved. The total cost of
disassembly of the Hard Disk Drive would be seventy four cents for this disassembly
experiment. The cost is taken as the direct function of time and labor cost. Other direct
and indirect costs are not considered for the calculation of the disassembly cost.
4.1.8
Material Analysis and Weight Distribution
Table 4 Component material and weight hard disk drive
No.
Part description
Quantity
Material
Weight
Grams
Ounce
1 Top Cover
2 PCB
1
1
Aluminum
PCB
120
42
4.2
1.5
3 Frame which holds the
pointer assembly
4 Pointer Assembly
1
Steel
76
2.7
1
Aluminum
8
0.3
5 Circular plate which
holds the hard disk CD
1
Aluminum
2
0.1
6 Circular plate beneath
the plate which holds
the hard disk CD
1
Aluminum
6
0.3
7 Bottom circular plate
which is attached to
the main frame
8 Plastic part
1
Aluminum
52
1.8
1
ABS
1
0.035
9 Main black frame
1
Aluminum
242
8.5
1
25
Aluminum
Steel
22
4
0.8
0.2
10 Hard Disk
11 Torxs
40
From material analysis it is seen that in the hard disk drive aluminum content is
452 grams/ 16 oz. (78.60 %) The major components such as frame and top cover are
made up of aluminum, steel content is 80 grams/ 2.9 oz (13.91 %), ABS content is 1
gram/ 0.035 oz and that of PCB is 42 grams/ 1.5 oz. (7.30 %) the total weight of the
product is 575 grams/ 20.23 oz.
4.1.9
Environmental Impact Assessment
Eco-Indicator calculation
The following table gives the information about the Components of the Hard Disk
Drive, the identified material of these components and the Environmental Impact Score
of these components. The table also contains the EI score of the material. The EI score of
all the components is added to find out the total Environmental Impact of the Hard Disk
Drive. From the table information can be found out about the environmental impact score
of the materials used in the Hard Disk Drive.
41
42
0.18
4.7E-05
1.1E-04
1.4E-03
0.00
670.00
670.00
4266211.00
970.00
5833.00
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
0.24
5200.00
3200.00
Nickel
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
Gold
Precious Metals
Zinc
0.02
42.51
3.51
4.18
11.91
58.00
240.00
7.64
0.02
28.00
400.00
873.00
7000000.00
4600000.00
0.64
640.00
0.03
11.90
1400.00
Copper
Lead
Cobalt
93.60
0.01
1690000.00
Antimony
120.00
0.85
Mercury
1.4E-06
1.38
Wt (g)
780.00
93.60
EI (mPt)
269.10
0.84
0.69
0.12
6.67
107.55
114.72
0.10
1.24
0.41
16.66
0.01
0.00
0.47
0.00
0.12
18.68
0.66
8.4E-05
0.15
EI (mPt)
PCB
61540.00
120.00
Wt (g)
Top cover
Aluminum
110.00
350.00
(mPt/kg)
Non Ferrous Metals
Steel
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material
Material in
Eco-indicator
component ►
76.00
76.00
Wt (g)
26.60
26.60
EI (mPt)
Frame which holds the
pointer assembly
8.00
8.00
Wt (g)
6.24
6.24
EI (mPt)
Pointer assembly
2.00
2.00
Wt (g)
1.56
1.56
EI (mPt)
6.00
6.00
Wt (g)
4.68
4.68
EI (mPt)
52.00
52.00
Wt (g)
40.56
40.56
EI (mPt)
Circular plate
Circular plate which
Bottom circular plate
beneath the plate
holds the hard disk
which is attached to the
which holds the hard
main frame
CD
disk CD
Table 5: Environmental impact assessment of hard disk drive
43
242
17.16
EI (mPt)
4.00
4.00
W t (g)
1.40
1.40
EI (mPt)
1.38
80.00
(g)
0.24
Nickel
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
Gold
Precious Metals
Zinc
6.67
0.84
650.06
3.51
575.51
0.69
4.18
11.91
58.00
240.00
0.12
0.40
7.64
107.55
114.72
1.00
0.02
0.02
0.10
1.24
0.41
16.66
0.01
0.00
0.47
0.00
0.12
18.68
353.22
0.00
28.00
0.15
(mPt)
Weightbased EI for
each
material
28.00
400.00
873.00
17.16
0.64
640.00
5200.00
3200.00
Lead
22.00
11.90
1400.00
Copper
188.76
0.00
0.40
0.00
970.00
5833.00
Chromium
1.00
0.00
4266211.00
Cadmium
7000000.00
4600000.00
0.00
670.00
Beryllium
0.03
0.18
670.00
Cobalt
0.01
1690000.00
Barium
Mercury
Antimony
22.00
W t (g)
Total
0.00
188.76
EI (mPt)
Torxs
452.85
242
W t (g)
Hard Disk
780.00
0.40
EI (mPt)
Main black frame
61540.00
1.00
W t (g)
Plastic part
Aluminum
110.00
350.00
(mPt/kg)
Material
Ecoindicator
Non Ferrous Metals
Steel
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
Table 5 contd.
The total EI score of the Hard Disk drive is fount to be 650.057 mPt for the net
weight of 575 grams. The major contributor to the EI score is PCB of the Hard Disk
drive. The weight of the PCB is 42 grams (7 % of the weight) and its contribution to the
total EI score is 269.097 mPt (41 % of the total EI score). The EI score of the PCB is so
high because of the presence of the precious metals such as gold and silver, hazardous
materials like mercury, cadmium, chromium and lead, and toxic substances such as
antimony, arsenic, barium and beryllium. The frame of the Hard Disk drive and the top
cover is the next major contributor to the EI score. The frame and the bottom cover
constitute for 62 % of weight (362 grams) and their contribution to the EI score is 43%
(282.36 mPt). The frame and the top cover are made up of aluminum which has EI value
than that of steel and Iron.
Material wise the main contributor to the EI score are precious metal which are
gold and silver as well as aluminum. The gold and silver are only 0.0067 % by weight
(0.039 gram) but the EI score due to them is 222.269 mPt. (34%). Aluminum weight in
the Hard Disk drive is 452.85 grams (78%) and its contribution to the total EI score is
353.22 mPt. (54%).
44
100
50
50
0
0
EI Score (mPt)
100
Torxs
150
Hard Disk
150
Main
black
frame
200
Plastic
part
200
Circular
plate
which
Circular
plate
beneath
Bottom
circular
plate
250
Pointer
assembly
250
Pointer
assembly
frame
300
PCB
300
Bottom
cover
Weight (grams)
Component Based EI Score
Component
Weight (grams)
Weight based EI score
Figure 8 Component based EI score HDD
4.1.10 Saving in Eco-Indicator due to Recycling
The following table gives the information about the saving in the Eco Indicator of
the Hard Disk Drive due the recycling of its components. The table provides the
information about the EI score of the components of the Hard Disk Drive, saving in the
EI due to the recycling of the component. Standard Recovery Rate and Material
Recycling Grade are used for the calculation of the saving in EI.
45
46
90
90
90
90
90
90
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Silver
Epoxy Resin
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
80
Glass
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
75
ABS
Plastics
90
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Cadmium
90
90
Antimony
Beryllium
90
Aluminum
Barium
90
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
93.60
84.24
84.24
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
93.60
Saving by
Recycling
Env.
Impact
Score
Top Cover
269.10
0.84
0.69
0.12
6.67
107.55
114.72
0.10
1.24
0.41
16.66
0.01
0.00
0.47
0.00
0.12
18.68
0.66
8.37E-05
0.15
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
239.30
0.51
0.08
4.00
96.80
103.25
0.09
1.11
0.37
15.00
0.01
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.11
16.81
0.60
7.53E-05
0.14
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
PCB
26.60
26.60
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
23.94
23.94
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Frame which holds the
pointer assembly
6.24
6.24
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
5.62
5.62
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Pointer assembly
1.56
1.56
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.40
1.40
(mPt)
4.68
4.68
EI (mPt)
Saving by Env. Impact
Recycling
Score
4.21
4.21
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
40.56
40.56
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
36.50
36.50
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Circular plate which Circular plate beneath the Bottom circular plate
holds the hard disk
plate which holds the
which is attached to the
CD
hard disk CD
main frame
Table 6 Saving in Eco-Indicator due to recycling
47
90
90
90
90
90
90
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Silver
75
Epoxy Resin
100
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
80
Glass
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
ABS
Plastics
90
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
Barium
Cadmium
Antimony
90
90
90
Aluminum
Beryllium
90
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
0.40
0.40
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
0.24
0.24
Recycling
(mPt)
Saving by
Plastic part
188.76
188.76
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
169.88
169.88
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Main black frame
17.16
17.16
EI (mPt)
15.44
15.44
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Hard Disk
Env. Impact
Score
Table 6 contd.
1.40
1.40
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
1.26
1.26
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Torxs
650.06
0.84
0.69
0.12
6.67
0.40
107.55
114.72
0.10
1.24
0.41
16.66
0.01
0.00
0.47
0.00
0.12
18.68
353.22
0.00
28.00
0.15
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
582.04
0.51
0.08
4.00
0.24
96.80
103.25
0.09
1.11
0.37
15.00
0.01
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.11
16.81
317.90
0.00
25.20
0.14
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Total
The EI saving due to recycling is 582.0423 mPt. The major saving in EI score
comes from PCB. This is due to the fact that PCB contains precious metals such as gold
and silver. If PCB is recycled, environmental impact can be minimized by 41%. And if
the Aluminum content of the Hard Disk drive is recycled the environmental impact can
be minimized by 54%.,which would result in EI saving of 317 mPt. If the frame and
bottom cover is recycled the Environmental impact is saved by 43%.
EI score
Saving in EI due to Recycling
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Bottom
cover
PCB
Pointer
assembly
frame
Pointer
assembly
Circular
Circular
Bottom Plastic part Main black Hard Disk
plate which
plate
circular
frame
holds the beneath the plate which
hard disk plate which is attached
CD
holds the to the main
hard disk
frame
CD
Torxs
Component
EI score
Saving in EI score
Figure 9 Saving in eco-indicator due to recycling
The above graph explains saving in Environmental Impact due to recycling of the
components of the Hard Disk Drive.
48
4.2
Server CD-ROM Drive Analysis:
4.2.1
Product description
CD-ROM Drive
Model:
NEC
Model No.
CDR-1910A
Serial No:
8Z064124122
Total Weight (ounce):
938 grams/ 33.8 oz
4.2.2
Disassembly Sequence
The following table gives the description of the disassembly steps followed for
the disassembly of the CD-ROM drive. The disassembly procedure was performed in 6
minutes and 23 seconds. Disassembly sequence is explained with the pictures in
disassembly procedure.
49
Table 7 Disassembly sequence CD-ROM drive
Sr. Part
No.
1 Bottom
Cover
2 PCB
Disassembly Procedure
Unscrew 8 screw,4 on the top and 4 on
the side
Remove 1 screw and detach 4 cables
3 CD motor Unscrew 3 screw which connect the CD
motor to the CD tray
4 CD
Remove 4 screws which connect the CD
Optical
optical reader to the main frame of the
reader
CD-ROM
5 Top
Remove the top cover by pushing the
Cover
black push button on the side and
remove the snapfit which connects the
Bottom cover to the CD tray
6 CD Motor Remove 2 screws which connect the CD
base
Motor base plate to CD tray and
plate
Remove 4 snapfit which connect it to the
main black frame
7 CD tray Remove CD tray by pushing it forward
and by pushing two black push buttons
on the main black frame
8 CD tray Unscrew 4 screws to remove the CD tray
frame from the main black frame
frame
9 CD Motor
for
Optical
Reader
10 Plastic
Subframe
and
Plastic
gears
Remove 2 screws which connect the
motor for optical reder to the CD tray
metal frame
Remove plastic subframe from main
frame by pulling it up in 90 degrees and
then pulling it vertically
upwards.Remove Plastic Gears for CD
tray motion by unscrewing 3 screws .
Remove the metal clamp from the main
frame by removing one screw
11 Motor for Unscrew 2 screws which connect the
CD tray motor to the black frame
50
Time Time Disassembly Operation/
start end Time
Comment
(seconds)
0:00 1:01
61 Unscrew (8)
1:01
1:11
1:11
1:39
10 Unscrew (1)
and
Handpull (4)
28 Unscrew(3)
1:39
2:17
38 Unscrew (4)
2:17
3:10
53 Handpull
(High
Difficulty)
3:10
3:29
19 Unscrew (2)
and
Handpull (4)
3:29
3:41
12 Handpull (3)
3:41
4:07
4:07
4:21
26 Unscrew (4)
and
Handpull
14 Unscrew (2)
4:21
6:07
106 Unscrew (4)
and
Handpull
6:07
6:23
16 Unscrew (2)
and
Handpull (4)
4.2.3
1)
Disassembly Procedure
Remove Bottom Cover by unscrewing 8 screws, 4 on the side and 4 on the top
Figure 10 Bottom cover
2)
Remove PCB by Unscrewing 1 screw on the top of the PCB and disconnect 4
cables.
Figure 11 PCB
3)
Unscrew 3 screws motor which connect the CD Motor to the CD tray to remove
CD
Figure 12 CD motor
51
4)
Unscrew 4 screws to which connect CD optical reader to the main frame of the
CD-ROM to remove CD Optical Reader.
Figure 13 CD optical reader
5)
Remove the Top Cover by pushing the black push buttons on the side and remove
snap fit which connect the Bottom cover to the CD Tray.
Figure 14 Bottom cover
6)
Unscrew 2 screws which connect the CD Motor Base Plate to the CD Tray and
remove 4 snap fit which connect the CD Motor Base Plate to the main frame to remove
the CD Motor Base Plate
Figure 15 CD motor base plate
52
7)
Remove CD tray by pushing it forward and by pushing 2 black push buttons on
the main frame.
Figure 16 CD tray
8)
Unscrew 4 screws to remove the CD Tray Frame from main frame
Figure 17 CD tray frame
9)
Unscrew 2 screws which connect the Motor for Optical Drive to the CD Tray
Metal Frame to remove the Motor for Optical Drive.
Figure 18 Motor for optical drive
53
10)
Plastic sub-frame is removed from the main plastic frame by pulling it up in 90
degrees and then pulling it up vertically. Plastic gears which are used for the motion of
the CD tray are removed by unscrewing 3 screws. Metal clamp is removed by
unscrewing 1 screw.
Figure 19 Plastic sub frame
11)
Unscrewing 2 screws, Motor for CD Tray is removed.
Figure 20 Motor for CD tray
54
55
4.2.4 Disassembly Tree for CD-ROM Drive:
The above figure is the disassembly tree of the Server CD-ROM. From the figure it is
observed that there are nine disassembly levels for total disassembly of the CD-ROM
Drive.
4.2.5
Comments on Disassembly
Disassembly of CD-ROM takes comparatively longer time than the other products
studied in this study. This is due to the fact that it has complex structure as compared to
the other products. For removing main PCB from the frame four cables are required to be
removed. Unless we remove the PCB it’s not possible to see to what other components
these cables are connected. Optical reader for CD has to be removed by removing sliding
rods for the optical drive. Unless sliding rods are removed from the main frame, optical
reader can not be removed due to the fact that it’s not connected to any other part
mechanically. For removing CD motor base plate it is necessary to remove the CD motor
first. CD insert cover can be removed only after CD tray is taken out. CD tray has to be
pulled out first from the plastic frame and then only CD insert cover becomes separated
from the CD tray. For the removal of plastic sub- frame from the main plastic frame, subframe has to be lifted upwards by 90 degrees and then only it can be pulled out.
4.2.6
Component Relationship
The following table describes the component relationship among the components
of the CD-ROM drive. From the table it is evident that the main plastic frame is the part
to which almost all the parts are connected either by mechanical assembly which involves
56
assembly of two parts by screws or by snap fit or by electrical connection. The main PCB
has electrical connection with every motor present in the CD-ROM drive.
Table 8: Component relationships CD-ROM Drive
Sr.
No.
Part
1 Bottom Cover
Material
Relationship to parts
Type of
assembly
Steel
Main Plastic Frame
Top Cover
Screw
Screw
2 Main PCB
PCB
3 Main Plastic frame
PPE + PE
4 Plastic Subframe
PPE + PE
5 Metal frame
Steel
6 Optical Drive Motor with PCB
Main Plastic Frame
Screw
Optical Reader Assembly
Cable
Optical Drive Motor with PCB
Cable
Motor for CD Tray
Cable
CD Rotator Motor with PCB
Cable
Bottom Cover
Main PCB
Plastic Subframe
Motor for CD Tray
CD Insert Cover
CD Motor Base Plate
Top Cover
Plastic gears
CD tray
Miscelleneous Plastic Parts
Main Plastic frame
Metal frame
Screw
Screw
Snap fit
Screw
Snap fit
Screw
Screw
Screw
Snap fit
Screw
Snap fit
Screw
Plastic Subframe
Optical Drive Motor with PCB
Gears for Optical Reader Assembly
Optical reader Motion Rod
Screw
Screw
Screw
Screw
Main PCB
Metal frame
Cable
Screw
Gears for Optical Reader Assembly
Top Cover
CD tray
Screw
Snap fit
Snap fit
Screw
Snap fit
7 CD Insert Cover
ABS
8 CD Tray
PC/ABS
CD tray gears
Main Plastic Frame
Steel
Main Plastic Frame
Screw
Steel
Main Plastic frame
Bottom Cover
Screw
Screw
11 Motor for CD Tray
Main PCB
Main Plastic Frame
CD tray gears
Cable
Screw
Gear
12 CD Rotator Motor with PCB
Main PCB
Metal frame
CD Motor Base Plate
Cable
Screw
Screw
13 Optical Reader assembly
Optical reader Motion Rod
Optical reader assembly gears
Sliding
Gear
Optical Reader assembly
Sliding
Metal frame
Screw
9 CD Motor Base Plate
10 Top Cover
14 Optical reader Motion Rod
Steel
57
4.2.7
Disassembly Time and Cost
Table 9 Disassembly time and cost
Sr.No.
Part
Bottom
1 Cover
PCB
2
3 CD motor
CD Optical
4 reader
Top Cover
5
CD Motor
6 base plate
7 CD tray
CD tray
8 frame
CD Motor
for Optical
9 Reader
Plastic
Subframe
and Plastic
10 gears
Motor for
11 CD tray
Disassembly Method
Unscrew (8)
Unscrew (1) and
Handpull (4)
Unscrew(3)
Unscrew (4)
Handpull (High
Difficulty)
Unscrew (2) and
Handpull (4)
Handpull (3)
Unscrew (4) and
Handpull
Unscrew (2) and
Handpull (4)
Unscrew (4) and
Handpull
Unscrew (2)
Time
(Seconds)
Disassembly
Cost (Cents)
61
16.94
10
28
2.78
7.78
38
10.56
53
14.72
19
12
5.28
3.33
26
7.22
14
3.89
106
29.44
16
4.44
From the table it can be seen that the maximum time required for the removal of
the plastic sub-frame from the main plastic frame and removal of gears which are
assembled to the main plastic frame. This operation was the last disassembly step while
performing the disassembly analysis. Removal of the top cover takes 61 seconds this is
due to that fact that eight screws have to be removed to disassemble the top cover from
the main frame. Removal of the bottom cover takes 53 seconds to remove because it is
tightly snap fitted to the main plastic frame.
58
Disassembly Cost of the Components
35
Cost (Cents)
30
25
20
15
10
Motor for CD tray
Plastic Subframe and
Plastic gears
CD Motor for Optical
Reader
CD tray frame
CD tray
CD Motor base plate
Bottom Cover
CD Optical reader
CD motor
PCB
0
Top cover
5
Components
Figure 21 Disassembly cost CD-ROM drive
The above graph explains the disassembly cost of the different components of the
CD-ROM drive. From the graph it is evident that maximum cost is associated with the
removal of the top cover, and separating the plastic sub frame from the main plastic
frame and removal of gears from the main plastic frame.
59
4.2.8
Material Analysis and weight Distribution:
Table 10: CD-ROM material and weight
Sr. No.
Part
Material
Weight
Grams
Quantity
Ounce
1 Bottom Cover
Steel
1
188
6.7
2 Main PCB
PCB
1
82
3
3 Main Plastic frame
PPE + PE
1
86
3.1
4 Plastic Subframe
5 Metal frame
PPE + PE - GF30
Steel
1
1
38
96
1.3
3.4
6 Optical Drive Motor with PCB
Iron
1
20
0.7
7 CD Insert Cover
ABS
1
24
1
8 CD Tray
9 CD Motor Base Plate
PC/ABS
Steel
1
1
34
40
1.2
1.5
10 Optical Reader assembly
11 Top Cover
ABS
Steel
1
1
18
220
0.6
7.8
12 Motor for CD Tray
Iron
1
18
0.6
13 CD Rotator Motor with PCB
Iron
1
40
1.5
14 Plastic gears
ABS
5
10
0.4
15 Optical reader Motion Rod
Steel
2
6
0.3
16 Screws
Steel
31
8
0.3
18 Miscelleneous Plastic Parts
ABS
5
10
0.4
The above table describes the material composition and weight of the CD-ROM.
The top cover, bottom cover, metal frame and CD motor base plate constitute almost 97%
of the total steel (544 grams) content of the CD-ROM drive. The plastic content of the
product is 220 grams which is due to the presence of component made up of
polycarbonate (PC), acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS), polyethylene (PE) and
polyphenylene ether (PPE). The weight of the PCB is 82 grams, which contains precious
metals, hazardous material and toxic substances. Here the material composition of the
motor is taken as Iron because motor composition could not be determined due to
unavailability of the resources.
60
4.2.9
Environmental Impact assessment
Eco-Indicator Calculation:
The following table gives the information about the Components of the CD-ROM
Drive, the identified material of these components and the Environmental Impact Score
of these components. The table also contains the EI score of the material. The EI score of
all the components is added to find out the total Environmental Impact of the CD-ROM
Drive. Also the environmental impact score of the materials used in the CD-ROM Drive
can be found out from the table.
61
62
Epoxy Resin
Polythene
Other
Ceramics
Glass
TBBPA
TOTAL
0.03
0.02
1.81
0.12
0.0008
0.26
0.0001
0.0000
0.0041
0.0332
16.07
2.18
0.0000
0.35
0.26
8.89
25.34
7.46
82.00
58
240
0.32
0.25
1.47
1.79
612.24
14.18
243.99
112.70
1.41
207.80
1.39
0.17
0.0001
0.05
0.0040
0.1936
22.49
1.40
0.0001
1.81
0.82
86
86
28.38
28.38
EI (mPt)
Main Plastic
frame
EI (mPt) Wt (g)
8.0E-07 4.9E-05
2.93
28
65.8
65.8
16.24
188
188
Wt (g)
Main PCB
873
330
400
7000000
4600000
Precious Metals
Gold
Silver
Plastics
ABS
780
1690000
1690000
670
670
4266211
970
5833
1400
640
2711
5200
3200
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
61540
110
350
Wt (g)
(mPt/kg)
EI (mPt)
Bottom Cover
Material
Ecoindicator
Ferrous Metals
Iron
Steel
Non Ferrous Metals
Mercury
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
38
38
12.54
12.54
96
96
33.6
33.6
EI (mPt)
Metal frame
Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g)
Plastic
Subframe
20
20
Wt (g)
2.2
2.2
EI (mPt)
Optical Drive
Motor with PCB
Table 1 Environmental impact assessment CD-ROM drive
24
24
Wt (g)
9.6
9.6
EI (mPt)
CD Insert Cover
34
34
Wt (g)
13.6
13.6
EI (mPt)
CD Tray
63
Epoxy Resin
Polythene
Other
Ceramics
Glass
TBBPA
TOTAL
Plastics
ABS
Precious Metals
Gold
Silver
Motor for CD
Tray
CD Rotator
Motor with
PCB
Plastic gears
Optical reader
Motion Rod
Screws
Miscelleneou
s Plastic
Parts
58
240
28
873
330
400
7000000
4600000
40
40
14
14
18
18
7.2
7.2
220
220
77
77
18
18
1.98
1.98
40
40
4.4
4.4
10
10
4
4
6
6
2.1
2.1
8
8
2.8
2.8
10
10
4
4
Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt) Wt (g) EI (mPt)
Top Cover
(mPt/kg)
Optical
Reader
assembly
CD Motor Base
Plate
Material
Ecoindicator
Ferrous Metals
110
Iron
350
Steel
Non Ferrous Metals
61540
Mercury
780
Aluminum
1690000
Antimony
1690000
Arsenic
670
Barium
670
Beryllium
4266211
Cadmium
970
Chromium
5833
Cobalt
1400
Copper
640
Lead
2711
Molybdenum
5200
Nickel
3200
Zinc
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
Table 11 Contd.
1.41
207.80
1.39
0.17
5.E-05
5.E-02
4.E-03
2.E-01
22.49
1.40
1.E-04
1.81
0.82
1.81
0.12
8.E-04
0.26
7.9E-05
1.1E-05
4.E-03
3.E-02
16.07
2.18
4.1E-05
0.35
0.26
38.4
8.89
25.34
7.46
938
0.25
1.47
1.79
895.44
16.24 14.18000031
124
40.92
96
243.99
112.70
5.E-05
8E-07
0.03
0.02
8.90
195.3
(mPt)
Weightbased EI for
each material
80.93
558
(g)
Total
The total Eco-indicator of the CD-ROM drive is found to be 895.44 mPt for the
net weight of 938 grams. Out of all the components the highest eco-indicator value is
contributed by main PCB (612.24 mPt-68 % of total EI score) although the weight of the
PCB is not substantially very high. PCB constitutes for only 8.6 % of the total weight.
This is due to the presence of precious metals like gold, silver and palladium, hazardous
materials like mercury, cadmium, chromium and lead, and toxic substances like
antimony, arsenic, barium and beryllium. The casing of the CD-ROM drive formed by
the top and bottom covers is the other major contributor for the eco-indicator score. It
contributes for 43% of weight and 15 % of EI score. Casing is primarily made of steel
which is the highest material weight fraction. Although its material EI score is less, due
to its sheer weight it contributes substantially to the product EI. The plastics (236.34
grams- 25%) used in the CD-ROM drive contribute for 10 % (93.50 mPt) of EI score.
Materials wise the main contributor to the EI score are precious metals which are
Gold, Silver as well as Steel. The gold and silver content contribute for only 0.006 % by
weight to the whole product but their contribution to the EI score is 39% i.e. 356.69 mPt.
Steel contributes for 59 % of the total weight i.e. 558 grams and its contribution to the EI
score is 21% i.e. 195 mPt. The following graph explains component and EI score
relationship.
64
Component Based EI score
700
500
150
400
300
100
200
50
Screws
Miscelleneous
Plastic Parts
Plastic gears
Optical reader
Motion Rod
Top Cover
Motor for CD
Tray
CD Rotator
Motor with
CD Tray
CD Motor
Base Plate
Optical
Reader
Metal frame
Optical Drive
Motor with
CD Insert
Cover
Main Plastic
frame
Plastic
Subframe
100
Main PCB
0
EI score
600
200
Bottom Cover
Weight (grams)
250
0
Component
Weight (grams)
Weight based EI score
Figure 22 Component based eco-indicator CD-ROM drive
4.2.10
Saving in Eco-Indicator due to Recycling
The following table gives the information about the saving in the Eco Indicator of
the CD-ROM Drive due the recycling of its components. The table contents the
information about the EI score of the components of the CD-ROM Drive, saving in the EI
due to the recycling of the component. Standard Recovery Rate and Material Recycling
Grade are used for the calculation of the saving in EI.
65
66
100
90
90
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
Silver
75
75
Epoxy Resin
Polythene
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
80
Glass
80
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
ABS
Plastics
90
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Lead
90
90
Copper
90
Chromium
Cobalt
90
Cadmium
100
90
90
Barium
Beryllium
100
90
90
Antimony
Arsenic
100
90
90
Mercury
100
100
Aluminum
Non Ferrous Metals
90
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
65.8
59.22
59.22
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
65.8
Saving by
Recy
Env.
Impact
Score
Bottom Cover
4.79E-05
0.04405
5.32E-05
0.048944
7.2
1.790198
1.469733
0.248871
14.18
112.7024
243.9912
0.821241
1.808523
0.000112
1.396617
22.4936
0.193575
4.32
1.08963
0.177765
8.508
101.4321
219.5921
0.739117
1.627671
0.000101
1.256955
20.24424
0.174217
0.003563
0.153788
0.170876
0.003959
187.0168
1.248871
207.7964
1.387634
4.45E-05
1.272379
4.95E-05
0.289862
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
1.413755
0.322068
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
Main PCB
28.38
28.38
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
17.028
17.028
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Main Plastic frame
12.54
12.54
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
7.524
7.524
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Plastic Subframe
33.6
33.6
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
Optical Drive Motor
with PCB
30.24
30.24
(mPt)
2.2
2.2
EI (mPt)
1.98
1.98
(mPt)
Saving Env. Impact Saving
by Recy
Score
by Recy
Metal frame
Table 12 Eco-indicator saving due to recycling
9.6
9.6
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
5.76
5.76
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
CD Insert Cover
67
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
90
Silver
75
75
Epoxy Resin
Polythene
80
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
Glass
80
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
ABS
Plastics
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Cadmium
90
90
Arsenic
90
90
Antimony
Beryllium
90
Aluminum
Barium
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
13.6
8.16
8.16
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
13.6
Saving by
Recycling
Env.
Impact
Score
CD Tray
14
14
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
12.6
12.6
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
CD Motor Base Plate
7.2
7.2
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
4.32
4.32
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Optical Reader
assembly
Table 12 Contd.
77
77
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
69.3
69.3
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Top Cover
1.98
1.98
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.782
1.782
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Motor for CD Tray
4.4
4.4
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
3.96
3.96
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
CD Rotator Motor
with PCB
68
Materials ▼
Barium
90
90
90
90
90
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
90
Silver
75
Epoxy Resin
Polythene
100
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
80
Glass
80
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
75
ABS
Plastics
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Chromium
90
90
Arsenic
90
90
Antimony
Cadmium
90
Aluminum
Beryllium
90
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
4
2.4
2.4
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
4
Saving by
Recycling
Env.
Impact
Score
Plastic gears
2.1
2.1
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.89
1.89
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Optical reader Motion
Rod
2.8
2.8
EI (mPt)
2.52
2.52
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Screws
Env.
Impact
Score
Table 12 Contd.
4
4
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
2.4
2.4
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Miscelleneous
Plastic Parts
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
4.45E-05
175.77
1.2488705
23.04
0.177765
24.552
895.4398 775.955295
1.790198
1.469733 1.08962974
0.248871
40.92
14.18 8.50800018
38.4
112.7024 101.432138
243.9912 219.592058
0.821241 0.73911699
1.808523 1.62767096
0.000112 0.00010122
1.396617 1.25695543
22.4936 20.2442359
0.193575 0.17421732
0.003959 0.00356304
0.048944 0.04405004
5.32E-05 4.7922E-05
0.170876 0.15378845
1.387634
207.7964 187.016801
1.413755 1.27237913
4.95E-05
195.3
8.902068 8.01186152
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
Total
The EI saving due recycling is 775.95 mPt. Almost 64 % (496.79 mPt) saving
comes from precious metals (gold and silver) and steel. This means that if gold, silver
and steel content in the CD-ROM drive is recycled Environmental Impact can be reduced
by 64%. PCB is the only part in the CD-ROM drive which contains gold and silver. So if
we want to reduce the environmental impact PCB must be recycled.
Miscelleneous Plastic Parts
Screws
Optical reader Motion Rod
Plastic gears
CD Rotator Motor with PCB
Motor for CD Tray
Top Cover
Optical Reader assembly
CD Motor Base Plate
CD Tray
CD Insert Cover
Optical Drive Motor with PCB
Metal frame
Plastic Subframe
Main Plastic frame
Main PCB
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Bottom Cover
EI score (mPt)
Saving in EI due to recycling
Component
EI score
Saving in EI
Figure 23: Saving in EI due to recycling
The above graph explains the saving in Environmental Impact due to recycling of
the components.
69
4.3 Server Floppy Disk
4.3.1
Product Description
Floppy Drive for Server
Model:
NEC
Model No.
FD1231T
Serial No:
D9HM06RH2771
Total Weight:
345 grams/ 12.535
4.3.2
Disassembly Sequence
Disassembly steps required for the total disassembly of the floppy disk drive are
explained in the following table. Every single disassembly step is taken into account for
the generation of the disassembly sequence. Disassembly sequence is elaborated with the
help of the pictures in disassembly procedure. Disassembly tree is also generated for
understanding of different levels of the disassembly.
70
Table 13 Disassembly sequence
Sr. Part
No.
Disassembly Procedure Time
start
Unscrew 2 screws from
1 Side Clamps the top of the PCB
0:19
0:19 Unscrew (2)
0:36
Unscrew
(3)and Hand
0:17 pull
0:55
Unscrew (3)
and Hand
0:19 pull
0:55
1:08
Unscrew (1)
and Hand
0:19 pull (4)
1:08
1:19
0:11 Unscrew (2)
1:19
1:36
0:17 Unscrew (3)
1:36
1:43
0:17 Hand pull (4)
Floppy Insert Remove the Floppy Insert
Flap and
Flap and Eject Button by
8 Eject Button pushing push lock buttons
1:43
1:53
0:10 Hand Pull
PCB for
9 Motor
Remove PCB for Motor by
unscrewing 1 screw
1:53
2:01
0:08 Unscrew (1)
Seprate 3 subframes from
eachother by removing 3
springs and 1 screw
2:01
2:22
Hand pull (3)
0:21 and unscrew
Floppy Drive
Motor with
the PCB
2 Base Plate
3 Main PCB
Unscrew 3 screws on the
top of the PCB Base Plate
and remove one wire from
the Main PCB
Unscrew 3 screws which
connect the Main PCB to
the Main frame and cut
the wire which connect the
PCB to the Motor and
Disconnect one cable
4 Top Cover
Unscrew 1 screw which is
located at the side of the
Motor and pulling it
forward, lifting it vertically
up to unlock 4 latch locks
Floppy
Reader
6 assembly
Unscrew 2 screws to
remove the motor from
the main frame
Unscrew 2 screws which
connect the floopy reader
to the main frame and
unscrew 1 screw which
locks the sliding rod with
the locking plate
CD Insert
7 Cover
Remove the CD Insert
Cover by pushing 4
pushlocks and pulling it
out
5 Motor
10 Metal frame
71
0:00
Time Disassembly Operation/
end
Time
Comment
(seconds)
0:19
0:36
4.3.3 Disassembly Procedure
1)
Unscrew 2 screws which are on the top of metal frame to remove left and
right side clamps.
Figure 24 Side clamp
2)
Unscrew 3 screws on the top of the PCB Base Plate and remove one wire
connected to the Main PCB to remove the Floppy Drive motor with the PCB Base
Plate.
Figure 25 Main PCB
3)
Main PCB is removed by unscrewing 3 screws which connect the PCB to
the Main Frame, Cutting the wire and disconnecting 1 cable from PCB.
Figure 26 PCB
72
4)
Remove the Top Cover by removing 1 screw which is located at the side
of the motor and by unlocking 4 latch locks.
Figure 27 Top cover
5)
Motor is removed from the main frame by unscrewing 2 screws which
connect the Motor to the Main Frame.
Figure 28 Motor
6)
Unscrew 2 screws which connect the Floppy Reader to the Main Frame
and Unscrew 1 screw which hold the metal plate which act as a lock for the
Sliding Rod and take out the Floppy Reader.
Figure 29 Floppy reader
73
7)
Remove the CD Insert Cover by pushing 4 push locks and pulling it out.
Figure 30 CD insert cover
8)
Remove Front Floppy Insert Flap and Floppy Eject button by pushing the
push lock buttons
Figure 31 Floppy insert flap and eject button
9)
Remove the PCB for the motor by unscrewing 1 screw.
Figure 32 PCB
10)
Separate all Metal frames from each other by removing the springs and 1
screw
Figure 33 Main frame
74
75
4.3.4 Disassembly Tree for Floppy Disk Drive
The above figure is the disassembly tree of the Server Floppy Disk Drive. The
disassembly of the FDD has nine disassembly levels for the total disassembly.
4.3.5
Comments on Disassembly
In general the disassembly operation of the floppy drive is simple. There are not
many screws involved for removal of any component. Every component can be accessed
easily except few exceptions. The disassembly procedure is straight forward. Deciding
the disassembly steps is easy and intuitive. The difficulty in the disassembly operation
was observed for the removal of floppy reader assembly. For removal the floppy reader
assembly removal of metal clamp is necessary which is not easily accessible. Similarly
separation of the metal frame from each other is difficult for the reason that spring which
holds them together is not easily reachable.
76
4.3.6
Component relationship
Table 14 Component relationship server floppy disk drive
Material Relationship to parts
Type of
assembly
1 Metal Clamps
Steel
Main Frame
Screw
2 Motor with PCB
Iron
Main PCB
Main Metal Frame
Motor Cover
Cable
Screw
3 Main PCB
PCB
4 Top Cover
Motor for floppy reader
5 assembly
Steel
Main Metal Frame
Motor with PCB
Motor for floppy Drive
Main Metal Frame
Screw
Cable
Cable
Screw
Iron
PCB
Main Frame
Floppy Reader Assembly
Cable
Screw
Cable
6 Floppy Reader Assembly
ABS
Motor for floppy reader assembly Cable
Sr. No. Part
Sliding Rod for Floppy Reader
Main Metal Frame
Sliding
Screw
7 Metal Clamp for Sliding Rod
Steel
Main Metal Frame
Screw
8 Sliding Rod for Floppy Drive
Steel
Main Metal Frame
Screw
9 CD Insert Cover
10 Floppy Insert Flap
11 Floppy Eject Button
ABS
ABS
ABS
Main Metal Frame
Main Metal Frame
Main Metal Frame
Snap fit
Snap fit
Snap fit
12 Main Frame
Steel
Metal Clamps
Motor with PCB
Screw
Screw
Main PCB
Top Cover
Screw
Screw
Motor for floppy reader assembly Screw
77
Floppy Reader Assembly
Screw
Metal Clamp for Sliding Rod
Screw
Sliding Rod for Floppy Drive
Screw
CD Insert Cover
Floppy Insert Flap
Floppy Eject Button
Snap fit
Snap fit
Snap fit
The above table describes the component relationship of the components of the
Floppy Disk Drive. Main frame is the part to which most of the other components are
attached either mechanically assembly or by electrical connection. Every relationship is
taken into consideration for creating the component relationship.
4.3.7
Disassembly Time and Cost
Table 15 Disassembly time and cost of floppy disk drive
Sr. No.
Part
comment
1 Side Clamps Unscrew (2)
2 Floppy Drive Unscrew (3)and Hand pull
Motor with
the PCB
Base Plate
Time ( Sec) Cost
(Cents)
5.28
19
17
3 Main PCB
4 Top Cover
Unscrew (3) and Hand pull
Unscrew (1) and Hand pull (4)
19
19
5 Motor
6 Floppy
Reader
assembly
7 CD Insert
Cover
8 Floppy Insert
Flap and
Eject Button
Unscrew (2)
Unscrew (3)
11
17
Hand pull (4)
17
Hand Pull
10
4.72
5.28
5.28
3.06
4.72
4.72
2.78
9 PCB for
Unscrew (1)
Motor
10 Metal frame Hand pull (3) and unscrew
8
21
2.22
5.83
From the above table it is apparent that almost every disassembly operation
requires same amount of the time. The total time for disassembly of the floppy drive is 2
minutes 38 seconds. The total disassembly cost of the floppy disk drive is 43 cents.
78
Metal frame
PCB for Motor
Floppy Insert Flap and
Eject Button
CD Insert Cover
Floppy Reader assembly
Motor
Top Cover
Main PCB
Floppy Drive Motor with
the PCB Base Plate
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Side Clamps
Cost (Cents)
Disassembly Cost
Component
Figure 34 Disassembly cost server floppy disk drive
The above graph explains the cost associated with the disassembly of the
components of the Server FDD.
79
4.3.8
Material Analysis and weight Distribution:
Table 16 Floppy disk drive material and weight
Weight
Sr. no. Part
1 Main Frame
Quantity Material
1 Steel
Grams
Ounce
170
6
Front Plastic Frame assembly (
Eject Button,CD Insert Cover
2 and the Insert Flap)
1 ABS
6
0.3
3 Floppy Reader assembly
1 ABS
6
0.3
Motor for Floppy reader
4 assembly
1 Iron
8
0.3
5 Sliding Rod for Floppy Reader
1 Steel
2
0.1
6 Main PCB
22
0.8
7 Motor with PCB
1 PCB
Steel,
1 PCB,Copper
42
1.5
8 Motor Cover
1 Iron
18
0.7
9 Metal Clamps
10 Top Cover
11 Springs
2 Steel
1 Steel
3 Steel
18
50
1
0.7
1.8
0.035
12 Screws
13 Plastic mechanism
Steel
1 ABS
2
1
0.1
0.035
14 Metal Clamp for Sliding rod
1 Steel
2
0.1
The floppy drive’s major components such as main frame, top cover are made
from steel. The total steel content in the floppy drive is 274 grams which constitute for
79.19% of the total weight of the product. The plastic content of the floppy drive is 13
grams. The material of the motor is considered as iron due to the unavailability of
resources.
80
4.3.9
Environmental Impact assessment
Eco-Indicator calculation
The following table gives the information about the Components of the Floppy
Disk Drive of the Server, the identified material of these components and the
Environmental Impact Score of these components. The table also contains the EI score of
the material. The EI score of all the components is added to find out the total
Environmental Impact of the Server Floppy Disk Drive. From the table information can
be found out about the environmental impact score of the materials used in the Server
Floppy Disk Drive.
81
82
350
0.88
2
0.06843
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
Gold
2.4
6
2.4
0.7 22.2057
2.00124
6.7986
6
2.38465
58
240
4.35784
28
400
873
247.3255
0.480297
0.394319
0.06677
3.80439
112.7024
0.821241
65.46105
0.25664
3200
Zinc
Precious Metals
0.485214
0.0245
0.09331
5200
Nickel
3.02E-05
0.374702
6.034867
0.051935
0.001062
0.013131
1.43E-05
0.045845
0.372292
55.75027
0.3793
1.33E-05
0.086409
EI (mPt)
0.00935
1.1E-05
7000000
4600000
0.58547
Lead
640
4.31062
1400
Copper
2711
0.0089
Molybdenum
0.0011
970
Chromium
5833
3.1E-06
Cadmium
Cobalt
2.1E-05
670
4266211
Beryllium
Mercury
670
0.78553
Barium
0.7
W t (g)
0.00022
8
2
EI (mPt)
0.03299
2.4
0.88
W t (g)
1690000
6
8
EI (mPt)
1690000
W t (g)
Arsenic
2.4
EI (mPt)
M ain PCB
Antimony
W t (g)
Sliding Rod for
Floppy Reader
2.2E-07
6
EI (mPt)
M otor for Floppy
reader assembly
0.48628
W t (g)
Floppy Reader
assembly
780
59.5
59.5
EI (mPt)
Eject Button,CD
Insert Cover and
the Insert Flap
61540
170
170
W t (g)
Main Frame
Aluminum
Non Ferrous Metals
110
Steel
(mPt/kg)
Material
Ecoindicator
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ?
Weight of
Material in
component ?
Table 17 Environmental impact assessment of FDD
42
0.72772
2.47222
0.86715
1.58467
0.00239
0.0034
0.02504
0.03393
4E-06
0.2129
5.56749
0.00324
0.0004
1.1E-06
7.8E-06
0.02488
8E-05
0.012
0.17683
7.8E-08
30
0.28564
W t (g)
75.8307
0.174653
0.143389
0.02428
1.383415
10.99535
23.80402
0.080121
0.176441
1.1E-05
0.136255
7.794486
0.018885
0.000386
0.004775
5.19E-06
0.016671
0.135379
20.27282
0.137927
4.82E-06
10.5
0.03142
EI (mPt)
Motor with PCB
83
6.3
6.3
Wt (g)
50
50
17.5
17.5
EI (mPt)
Wt (g)
2
2
0.7
0.7
EI (mPt)
Wt (g)
2
2
0.7
EI (mPt)
Metal Clamp for Sliding
rod
(mPt)
Weightbased EI for
each
material
274
95.9
27.07117257 2.977828982
(g)
Total
0.12724132 0.661654862
0.281675683 0.901362185
3200
Zinc
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
Gold
Precious Metals
12
4.8
9.270814537 0.537707243
0.7 346.2056761 416.2162202
2.728960538 0.654950529
3.251798771 0.091050366
58
240
5.942502853 5.187804991
28
400
873
0.026890811 123.6977287
0.012752152 89.26506431
1.51777E-05 4.11467E-05
5200
Nickel
7000000
4600000
0.798371084 0.510957494
Lead
640
0.012141273 0.070820048
9.878109333 13.82935307
5833
1400
Cobalt
Copper
2711
4.19729E-06 0.017906519
0.001493186 0.001448391
970
Chromium
Molybdenum
2.90751E-05 1.94803E-05
4266211
Beryllium
Cadmium
0.093306912 0.062515631
670
Barium
670
0.044984077 76.02308987
0.000300397 0.507670935
1690000
1690000
Antimony
Arsenic
Mercury
2.93989E-07 1.80921E-05
18
18
EI (mPt)
Screws
0.663111906 0.517227287
1.98
1.98
Wt (g)
Top Cover
780
18
18
EI (mPt)
Metal Clamps
61540
Wt (g)
Motor Cover
Aluminum
Non Ferrous Metals
110
350
Iron
(mPt/kg)
Material
Ecoindicator
Steel
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
Table 17 Contd.
The total Eco-indicator of the Floppy Disk drive is found to be 416.2166 mPt for
the net weight of 346.2057 grams. The EI score of the PCB is 247.3255 mPt. (60% of
total EI score). The weight of the PCB is 22 grams (6.35 % of total weight of the
product). The EI score of the PCB is so high because PCB contains precious metals such
as gold and silver, hazardous material such as lead, mercury, cadmium and chromium,
and toxic substances such as antimony, arsenic, barium and beryllium. EI score of 59.5
mPt (14%) is added by the main frame of the Floppy Disk Drive which has the weight
170 grams (49%).
EI score of 212.96 mPt. (51%) is added by precious metals (gold and silver)
which contribute only 0.0396 grams (0.0086%) of the whole product. The next major
contributor to the EI score is steel which constitutes for 274 grams (79.19%) of the total
product. The EI score due to steel is 95.9 mPt. (22.83%). The following is the graph of
the component and its contribution to the EI score due to its weight and material.
Component
Weight (grams)
EI score (mPt)
Figure 35 Component based EI score
84
Metal
Clamp for
Sliding rod
Screws
Top Cover
Metal
Clamps
Motor
Cover
Motor with
PCB
Main PCB
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
EI Score (mPt)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Main
Frame
Eject
Button,CD
Insert
Floppy
Reader
assembly
Motor for
Floppy
reader
Sliding
Rod for
Floppy
Weight (grams)
Component Based EI Score
4.3.10
Eco-Indicator Saving by Recycling
The following table gives the information about the saving in the Eco Indicator of
the Server Floppy Disk Drive due the recycling of its components. The table contents the
information about the EI score of the components of the Floppy Disk Drive, saving in the
EI due to the recycling of the component. Standard Recovery Rate and Material
Recycling Grade are used for the calculation of the saving in EI.
85
86
90
90
90
Barium
Beryllium
90
90
90
90
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
90
Silver
Epoxy Resin
80
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Glass
%
Ceramics
Other
75
75
ABS
Plastics
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Cobalt
90
90
Arsenic
90
90
Antimony
Chromium
90
Aluminum
Cadmium
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
Steel
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Standard Material
Recovery Recycling
Rate
Grade
59.5
53.55
53.55
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
59.5
Saving
by Recy
Env.
Impact
Score
Main Frame
2.4
2.4
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.44
1.44
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Eject Button,CD Insert
Cover and the Insert
Flap
2.4
2.4
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.44
1.44
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Floppy Reader
assembly
0.88
0.88
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.792
0.792
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Motor for Floppy
reader assembly
Table 18 Eco-Indicator saving due to recycling
0.7
0.7
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.63
0.63
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Sliding Rod for
Floppy Reader
87
90
Silver
Epoxy Resin
80
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
Glass
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
75
ABS
Plastics
90
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Zinc
90
Copper
Nickel
90
Cobalt
90
90
Chromium
90
90
Cadmium
Molybdenum
90
Beryllium
Lead
90
90
90
Antimony
Barium
90
Aluminum
Arsenic
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
247.32552
0.48
0.39
0.07
3.80
112.70
65.46
0.82
0.49
3.017E-05
0.37
6.03
0.05
0.0010622
0.01
0.05
1.429E-05
0.37
55.75
0.38
1.327E-05
10.5
0.03
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.14
20.27
0.14
0.17
0.14
0.02
1.38
11.00
23.80
0.08
0.18
1.0972E-05
0.14
7.79
0.02
220.9444 75.8307004
0.29
0.05
2.28
101.43
58.91
0.74
0.44
2.72E-05
0.34
5.43
0.05
0.000956 0.00038624
0.02
1.29E-05 5.1948E-06
0.01 0.00477507
0.04
0.34
50.18
0.34
67.648164
0.11
0.02
0.83
9.90
21.42
0.07
0.16
9.875E-06
0.12
7.02
0.02
0.0003476
0.0042976
4.675E-06
0.02
0.12
18.25
0.12
4.342E-06
9.45
0.03
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Motor with PCB
1.19E-05 4.8246E-06
0.08
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
0.09
Saving
by Recy
Env.
Impact
Score
Main PCB
Table 18 Contd.
1.98
1.98
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.782
1.782
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Motor Cover
6.3
6.3
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
5.67
5.67
(mPt)
Saving
by Recy
Metal Clamps
88
90
90
90
Cobalt
Copper
Silver
Epoxy Resin
80
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
Glass
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
75
ABS
Plastics
90
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Chromium
Zinc
90
Cadmium
90
90
Beryllium
Nickel
90
Barium
90
90
Arsenic
90
90
Antimony
Molybdenum
90
Aluminum
Lead
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
17.5
15.75
15.75
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
17.5
Saving by
Recy
Env.
Impact
Score
Top Cover
0.7
0.7
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.63
0.63
(mPt)
Saving by
Recy
Screws
Table 18 contd.
0.7
0.7
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
(mPt)
Saving by
Recy
8.11E-01
5.95E-01
3.70E-05
4.60E-01
1.24E+01
6.37E-02
1.30E-03
1.61E-02
1.75E-05
5.63E-02
4.57E-01
6.84E+01
4.66E-01
1.63E-05
86.31
2.88
0.654950529
0.537707243 0.398645025
0.091050366 0.065035975
5.187804991 3.112682994
4.8
123.6977287 111.3279559
89.26506431 80.33855788
9.01E-01
6.62E-01
4.11E-05
5.11E-01
1.38E+01
7.08E-02
1.45E-03
1.79E-02
1.95E-05
6.25E-02
5.08E-01
7.60E+01
5.17E-01
1.81E-05
95.9
2.977828982 2.680046084
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
Total
0.63 416.2162202 370.9066003
0.63
(mPt)
Saving by
Recy
Metal Clamp for Sliding
rod
The EI saving due recycling is 364.42 mPt. The major saving is due to the
recycling of gold and silver 191.66 mPt (52%). If the steel is recycled the EI score saved
would be 76.86 mPt. (21%). The main frame constitutes for 69% of the total weight of
the steel in the Floppy Disk Drive. So if the main frame is recycled environmental impact
would be reduced by 53.55 mPt. (14%).
Saving in EI due to Recycling
300
200
150
100
Component
EI Score
Saving in EI Score
Figure 36 Saving in EI due to recycling
89
Metal Clamp for Sliding rod
Screws
Top Cover
Metal Clamps
Motor Cover
Motor with PCB
Main PCB
Sliding Rod for Floppy
Reader
Motor for Floppy reader
assembly
Floppy Reader assembly
0
Eject Button,CD Insert
Cover and the Insert Flap
50
Main Frame
EI Score
250
4.4
Laptop Floppy Drive
4.4.1
Product Description:
Floppy Drive:
Model:
DELL
Model No.
4702P A01
Serial No:
PH009YXE4457205E009N
Total Weight (ounce):
245 grams/ 9.2 oz
Model Specification
3.5 inch, 1.44 MB
4.4.2
Disassembly Sequence
Disassembly steps taken for the disassembly of the laptop floppy drive are
summarized in the disassembly sequence table. The disassembly sequence table gives the
information about what kind of operation performed such as whether screw is removed,
and if screws are removed how many are removed, the component has to be pulled to
remove snap fit and how electrical connection are removed.
90
Table 19 Disassembly sequence
Sr.
No.
Part
Bottom
1 Cover
Main
Frame
2 body
circuit
board
3 cover
Main
circuit
4 board
back
cover of
the main
5 frame
6 motor
floppy
insert
7 cover
Main
Frame
8 body
floppy
reader
circuit and
sliding
9 rod.
Disassembly Procedure
Time
start
Open the bottom cover by
unscrewing 2 screws and pull up
to separate bottom cover
Twist open the PCB mounted on
the plastic base and drag out the
main frame. Pull put the PCB by
unplugging cable from the main
body. Pull out the push button
Time Disassembly Operation/C
end Time
omment
(seconds)
0:00
0:17
17 unscrew (2)
0:17
0:28
11 hand pull (3)
0:28
1:16
48 Unscrew (8)
1:16
1:28
Unscrew (2)
& Handpull
12 (1)
Unscrew 1 screw to open the
back cover of the main frame
1:28
1:34
Remove motor by unscrewing 2
screws and pull out
1:34
1:49
Remove the floppy insert cover
by pulling out.
1:49
1:52
3 Hand pull (1)
1:52 1:57
Remove the snap fit to separate frames.
5 Hand pull (1)
Unscrew 8 screws to open the
circuit board cover
Unscrew 2 screws on the small
PCB and lift out the main circuit
board connected to the main
frame
Unscrew 2 screws which hold
the sliding rod for floppy
reader, take out the floppy
reader circuit and sliding rod.
91
1:57
2:15
6 Unscrew (1)
Unscrew (2)
& Handpull
15 (1)
Unscrew (2)
& Handpull
18 (1)
4.4.3
Disassembly Procedure
1) Open the bottom cover by unscrewing 2 screws and pull up to separate bottom cover.
Figure 37 Bottom cover
2) Twist open the PCB mounted on the plastic base and drag out the main frame. Pull put
the PCB by unplugging cable from the main body. Pull out the push button. Top cover
becomes separated.
Figure 38 Top cover
3) Unscrew 8 screws to open the circuit board cover.
Figure 39 Circuit board cover
92
4) Unscrew 2 screws on the small PCB and lift out the main circuit board connected to
the main frame.
Figure 40 Main circuit board
5) Unscrew 1 screw to open the back cover of the main frame.
Figure 41 Back cover
6) Remove motor by unscrewing 2 screws and pull out.
Figure 42 Motor
7) Remove the floppy insert cover by pulling out.
Figure 43 Floppy insert cover
93
8) Remove the snap fit to separate frames.
Figure 44 Metal frame
9) Unscrew 2 screws which hold the sliding rod for floppy reader, take out the floppy
reader circuit and sliding rod.
Figure 45 Floppy reader assembly
94
95
4.4.4
Disassembly Tree:
The above figure is the disassembly tree of the Laptop FDD. From the disassembly tree it
is apparent that Laptop FDD disassembly has eight disassembly levels.
4.4.5
Comments on Disassembly
The floppy drive components can be accessed after removal of the back cover and
circuit board cover which are enclosed in additional top cover made up of plastic and
bottom cover made up of aluminum. The floppy drive has to be removed from these
additional cover by pulling it outside. The main circuit board can be removed after
removal of the main circuit board which is sandwiched between main circuit board cover
and the main frame. The main circuit board and its cover are assembled to the main frame
using same screws. The metal frame consists of three frames. For removal of the floppy
reader assembly, removal of the first frame is necessary. With out the removal of this
frame the screws which connect floppy reader assembly to the main frame are not
accessible.
4.4.6
Component Relationship
The following table describes the component relationship of floppy drive of
laptop. Most of the components are assembled to the main frame. The component
relationship is developed by taking into consideration mechanical assembly relationship
and electrical connections.
96
Table 20: Laptop floppy drive component relationship
Sr. No.
Part
1 Bottom Cover
Material
steel
Relationship to parts
Top Cover
Type of assembly
Screw
2 PCB 1
PCB
PCB 1 Plastic Frame
Main circuit board
Screw
cable
Bottom Cover
Top Cover
Screw
Screw
PCB 1
Top Cover
Screw
Screw
Bottom Cover
Screw
3 PCB 1 Plastic Frame
ABS
4 Top Cover
ABS
Bottom Cover
Back cover main frame
PCB 1
PCB 1 Plastic Frame
Screw
Screw
Screw
Screw
5 Circuit Board Cover
Aluminum
Main circuit board
Metal Frame
Screw
Screw
6 main circuit board
Steel,
Copper,PCB
Circuit Board Cover
Metal Frame
PCB 2
Screw
Screw
Cable
7 PCB 2
PCB
Metal Frame
Main circuit board
Screw
cable
8 Back cover main Frame
Aluminum
Metal Frame
Screw
9 Motor
Iron
Floppy Reader Assembly
Metal Frame
cable
Screw
10 Floppy insert cover
ABS
11 Metal Frame
Main circuit board winding
12 cover
Steel
13 Floppy reader assembly
ABS
Sliding rod for floppy reader
14 assembly
Steel
97
Metal Frame
Snap fit
Circuit Board Cover
Screw
main circuit board
Screw
PCB 2
Screw
Back cover main Frame
Screw
Motor
Screw
Floppy reader assembly
Screw
Sliding rod for floppy reader assembly
Screw
Main circuit board
Press fit
Motor
Cable
Metal Frame
Screw
Sliding rod for floppy reader assembly
Screw
Metal Frame
Screw
Floppy reader assembly
Sliding
4.4.7
Disassembly Time and Cost
Table 21: Disassembly time and cost
Sr.No.
Part
Disassembly Method
Disassembly Cost
(Cents)
Time (Seconds)
1 Bottom Cover
unscrew (2)
17
4.72
2 Main Frame body
hand pull (3)
11
3.06
3 circuit board cover
Unscrew (8)
48
4 Main circuit board
Unscrew (2) & Handpull (1)
12
back cover of the main
5 frame
Unscrew (1)
13.33
3.33
1.67
6
6 motor
Unscrew (2) & Handpull (1)
7 floppy insert cover
Hand pull (1)
3
8 Main Frame body
Hand pull (1)
5
floppy reader circuit
9 and sliding rod.
Unscrew (2) & Handpull (1)
4.17
15
0.83
1.39
5
18
From the above table it is clear that removal of the main circuit board requires
maximum time. This is due to the fact that it involves the removal of 8 screws. The total
disassembly time is 2 minutes 15 seconds and the total cost of disassembly is 37.5 cents.
Cost (Cent)
Disassembly Cost
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Bottom
Cover
Main
Frame
body
circuit
board
cover
Main
back
motor
circuit cover of
board the main
frame
Com ponent
Figure 46 Disassembly cost
98
floppy
insert
cover
Main
Frame
body
floppy
reader
circuit
and
sliding
rod.
The above graph explains the relationship between the component and its
disassembly cost.
4.4.8
Material Analysis and Weight Distribution:
Table 22 Laptop FDD material and weight
Weight
Sr. No.
Part
1 Bottom cover
2 PCB 1
Ounce
Quantity Grams
1
34
1.2
Material
Steel
PCB
1
4
0.2
3 PCB 1 plastic frame ABS
1
2
0.1
4 Top cover
ABS
1
38
1.4
5 circuit board cover
Aluminum
Steel,
Copper,PCB
1
6
0.2
1
22
0.8
1
4
0.2
Aluminum
1
10
0.4
9 Motor
10 Floppy insert cover
11 Metal Frame 1
Iron
ABS
Steel
1
1
4
1
18
0.2
0.035
0.6
12 Metal Frame 2
13 Metal Frame 3
Main circuit board
14 winding cover
Floppy reader
15 assembly
Sliding rod for floppy
16 reader assembly
17 Screws
Steel
Aluminum
1
46
38
1.7
1.4
Steel
1
12
0.5
ABS
1
4
0.2
Steel
Steel
1
17
1
1
0.035
0.035
6 main circuit board
7 PCB 2
Back cover main
8 Frame
The above table explains the identified components of the Laptop FDD, its
quantity and material. The laptop floppy drive contains 128 grams of steel, 54 grams of
aluminum, 45 grams of ABS. Main circuit board has complex material. The material of
the motor is taken as iron because unavailability of resources.
99
4.4.9
Environmental Impact Assessment
Eco-Indicator calculation
The following table gives the information about the Components of the Floppy
Disk Drive of the laptop, the identified material of these components and the
Environmental Impact Score of these components. The table also contains the EI score of
the material. The EI score of all the components is added to find out the total
Environmental Impact of the Laptop Floppy Disk Drive. From the table information can
be found out about the environmental impact score of the materials used in the Server
Floppy Disk Drive.
100
101
3200
Zinc
Gold
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
3.999997
0.363861
1.236108
0.792334
0.001195
0.0017
0.012519
0.016966
2.02E-06
0.106449
0.783749
0.001619
0.000199
5.6E-07
3.88E-06
0.012441
4.01E-05
0.005998
0.088415
3.92E-08
0.142824
0.433573
11.9
11.9
58
240
34
34
W t (g)
PCB 1 plastic
frame
Top cover
circuit board
cover
29.865
0.0873
0.0717
0.0121
0.6917
5.4977
11.902
0.0401
0.0882
5E-06
0.0681
1.0972
0.0094
0.0002
0.0024
3E-06
0.0083
0.0677
10.136
0.069
2E-06
0.0157
2
2
0.8
0.8
38
38
15.2
15.2
6
6
4.68
4.68
21.8572
0.36386
1.23611
0.43357
0.79233
0.0012
0.0017
0.01252
0.01697
2E-06
0.10645
2.78375
0.00162
0.0002
5.6E-07
3.9E-06
0.01244
4E-05
0.006
0.08841
3.9E-08
16
0.14282
38.2496
0.08733
0.07169
0.01214
0.69171
5.49768
11.902
0.04006
0.08822
5.5E-06
0.06813
3.89725
0.00944
0.00019
0.00239
2.6E-06
0.00834
0.06769
10.1364
0.06896
2.4E-06
5.6
0.01571
EI (mPt)
main circuit board
EI (mPt) W t (g) EI (mPt) W t (g) EI (mPt) W t (g) EI (mPt) W t (g)
PCB 1
28
400
873
7000000
4600000
5200
Nickel
Precious Metals
2711
Molybdenum
640
1400
Lead
Copper
970
5833
Chromium
Cobalt
670
670
Barium
4266211
1690000
Arsenic
Cadmium
1690000
Antimony
Beryllium
780
61540
Aluminum
Mercury
110
350
W t (g)
(mPt/kg)
EI (mPt)
Bottom cover
Material
Ecoindicator
Non Ferrous Metals
Steel
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
Table 23 Environmental impact assessment
102
3200
Zinc
Gold
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
3.92E-08
0.012519
0.016966
2.02E-06
0.106449
0.783749
0.001619
0.000199
5.6E-07
3.88E-06
0.012441
4.01E-05
0.005998
0.088415
3.999997
28 0.433573
58 1.236108
240 0.363861
400
873 0.792334
7000000
0.0017
4600000 0.001195
5200
Nickel
Precious Metals
2711
Molybdenum
640
1400
Lead
Copper
970
5833
Chromium
Cobalt
670
670
Barium
4266211
1690000
Arsenic
Cadmium
1690000
Antimony
Beryllium
780
61540
Aluminum
Mercury
W t (g)
29.865
0.0873
0.0717
0.0121
0.6917
5.4977
11.902
0.0401
0.0882
5E-06
0.0681
1.0972
0.0094
0.0002
0.0024
3E-06
0.0083
0.0677
10.136
0.069
2E-06
0.0157
EI (mPt)
PCB 2
110 0.142824
350
(mPt/kg)
Material
Ecoindicator
Non Ferrous Metals
Steel
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
10
10
W t (g)
7.8
7.8
EI (mPt)
Back cover main
Frame
W t (g)
4
4
1.4
1.4
EI (mPt)
Motor
W t (g)
1
1
0.4
0.4
EI (mPt)
Floppy insert
cover
Table 23 Contd.
18
18
W t (g)
6.3
6.3
EI (mPt)
Metal Frame 1
46
46
W t (g)
16.1
16.1
EI (mPt)
Metal Frame 2
38
38
W t (g)
29.64
29.64
EI (mPt)
Metal Frame 3
103
670
4266211
970
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
3200
Zinc
TOTAL
TBBPA
Glass
Ceramics
Other
Epoxy Resin
ABS
Plastics
Silver
Gold
4
4
1.6
1.6
EI (mPt)
W t (g)
1
1
0.35
0.35
EI (mPt)
W t (g)
1
1
0.35
0.35
EI (mPt)
Screws
2.377
245
1.09158
195.8360684
0.261980191
0.215082881
0.036420143
2.075121837
18
0
45
16.4930305
0
35.70602573
0.120181625
0.264661945
1.64587E-05
0.204382997
6.091745715
0.028328019
0.000579356
0.007162607
7.79213E-06
0.025006252
0.203068374
30.40923595
42.3268909
7.23683E-06
42
1.367131939
(mPt)
Weight-based
EI for each
material
0.00359
0.0051
0.03756
0.0509
6.1E-06
0.31935
4.35125
0.00486
0.0006
1.7E-06
1.2E-05
0.03732
0.00012
0.01799
54.2652
1.2E-07
120
12.4285
(g)
Total
1.30072
W t (g)
Sliding rod for
floppy reader
assembly
3.70833
1.32
1.32
EI (mPt)
Floppy reader
assembly
28
12
12
W t (g)
Main circuit board
winding cover
58
240
400
873
7000000
4600000
5200
Nickel
Precious Metals
2711
640
Molybdenum
Lead
1400
670
Barium
Copper
1690000
Arsenic
5833
1690000
Antimony
Cobalt
780
61540
Aluminum
Mercury
110
350
(mPt/kg)
Material
Ecoindicator
Non Ferrous Metals
Steel
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Weight of
Material in
component ►
Table 23 Contd.
The total EI score of the Hard Disk drive is found to be 179.49 mPt for the net
weight of 244.99 grams. 97.98 mPt of EI score is added to the total score of 187.67 by
components main circuit board and two PCBs. The weight of the PCBs in floppy disk
drive is 12 grams (4.91% of the total weight of the product). Two PCBs are separate and
the third PCB is integrated with the main circuit board. The two PCBs EI score is 59.72
mPt (33%). The main circuit board adds the EI score of 38.24 mPt (21.36%) to the total
EI score. Metal frames and bottom cover of the laptop floppy disk drive contribute for EI
score of 47.6 mPt. (26% of total EI score).
Precious metals such as gold and silver add 52.19 mPt. to the total EI score
although their weight in the overall product is just 0.0086 grams. This is due to the fact
that EI value of the precious metal is very high. EI score of 55.3 mPt is added due to the
presence of 158 grams of the steel. The following graph shows the relationship between
the component and their EI score due to their material content and weight.
EI Score (mPt)
50
40
30
20
Component
Weight (grams)
EI Score( mPt)
Figure 47 Component based EI score
104
Screws
Motor
Floppy
insert
Metal
Frame 1
Metal
Frame 2
Metal
Frame 3
Main
circuit
Floppy
reader
Sliding
rod for
Back
cover
PCB 2
circuit
board
main
circuit
Top cover
PCB 1
plastic
0
PCB 1
10
Bottom
cover
Weight (grams)
Component Based EI Score
4.4.10
Eco-Indicator Saving due to Recycling
The following table gives the information about the saving in the Eco Indicator of
the Laptop Floppy Disk Drive due the recycling of its components. The table provides the
information about the EI score of the components of the Floppy Disk Drive, saving in the
EI due to the recycling of the components. Standard Recovery Rate and Material
Recycling Grade are used for the calculation of the saving in EI.
105
106
Materials ▼
90
90
90
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
90
Silver
75
Epoxy Resin
100
80
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
Glass
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
ABS
Plastics
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
Lead
90
Cadmium
90
90
Beryllium
Copper
90
Barium
90
90
Arsenic
90
90
Antimony
Cobalt
90
Aluminum
Chromium
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
11.9
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
2.171E-06
0.0613149
0.9875237
0.0873267
0.0716943 0.05315266
0.01214 0.00867146
0.6917073 0.41502435
5.4976768 4.94790915
11.902009 10.7118077
0.0400605 0.03605449
0.0882206 0.07939858
5.486E-06 4.9376E-06
0.0681277
1.0972486
0.0094427 0.00849841
0.0001931 0.00017381
0.0023875 0.00214878
2.597E-06 2.3376E-06
0.0083354 0.00750188
0.0676895 0.06092051
10.136412 9.12277078
0.0689636 0.06206727
2.41E-06
0.0157106 0.01413958
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
PCB 1
10.71 29.865356 26.5790875
10.71
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
11.9
Saving by
Recycling
Env.
Impact
Score
Bottom cover
0.8
0.8
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.48
0.48
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
PCB 1 plastic frame
15.2
15.2
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
9.12
9.12
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Top cover
Table 24 Eco-indicator saving due to recycling
4.68
4.68
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.0075019
2.338E-06
0.0021488
2.597E-06
0.0023875
4.212 38.265356
0.0873267
0.0716943
0.01214
0.6917073
5.4976768
11.902009
0.0400605
0.0882206
5.486E-06
0.0681277
3.8972486
0.0094427
34.139088
0.0531527
0.0086715
0.4150244
4.9479091
10.711808
0.0360545
0.0793986
4.938E-06
0.0613149
3.5075237
0.0084984
0.0001738
0.0609205
0.0083354
0.0001931
9.1227708
0.0620673
2.171E-06
5.04
0.0141396
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
0.0676895
2.412E-06
5.6
0.0157106
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
main circuit board
4.212 0.0689636
10.136412
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
circuit board cover
107
90
90
90
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
90
Silver
75
Epoxy Resin
100
2.171E-06
80
80
80
TBBPA
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
2.3376E-06
0.00214878
100 0.002388
0.9875237
0.0613149
29.86536 26.5790875
0.087327
0.071694 0.05315266
0.01214 0.00867146
0.691707 0.41502435
5.497677 4.94790915
11.90201 10.7118077
0.040061 0.03605449
0.088221 0.07939858
5.49E-06 4.9376E-06
0.068128
1.097249
0.009443 0.00849841
0.000193 0.00017381
0.00750188
0.06092051
9.12277078
0.06206727
100 0.067689
100 0.008335
100 2.6E-06
Glass
TOTAL
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
0.015711 0.01413958
Saving by
Recycling
Env.
Impact
Score
PCB 2
100 2.41E-06
100 0.068964
100 10.13641
100
Ceramics
Other
75
ABS
Plastics
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Copper
90
90
90
Cadmium
Cobalt
90
Beryllium
Chromium
90
90
Arsenic
90
Antimony
Barium
90
90
Mercury
Aluminum
Non Ferrous Metals
90
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Materials ▼
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
7.8
7.8
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
7.02
7.02
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Back cover main
Frame
1.4
1.4
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
1.26
1.26
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Motor
Table 24 Contd.
0.4
0.4
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
0.24
0.24
(mPt)
6.3
6.3
EI (mPt)
5.67
5.67
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Metal Frame 1
Env.
Saving by
Impact
Recycling
Score
Floppy insert cover
16.1
16.1
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
14.49
14.49
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Metal Frame 2
29.64
29.64
EI (mPt)
Env.
Impact
Score
26.676
26.676
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Metal Frame 3
108
Materials ▼
90
90
90
90
90
90
Copper
Lead
Molybdenum
Nickel
Zinc
Silver
75
Epoxy Resin
80
80
TBBPA
TOTAL
80
Glass
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Ceramics
Other
75
ABS
Plastics
90
90
Gold
Precious Metals
90
90
Cobalt
90
Cadmium
Chromium
90
Arsenic
Beryllium
90
Antimony
90
90
Aluminum
Barium
90
90
Mercury
Non Ferrous Metals
90
Steel
%
%
Iron
Ferrous Metals
Material
Recycling
Grade
Standard
Recovery
Rate
1.32
1.188
1.188
(mPt)
EI (mPt)
1.32
Saving by
Recycling
Env. Impact
Score
Main circuit board
winding cover
1.6
1.6
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
0.96
0.96
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Floppy reader assembly
Table 24 Contd.
0.35
0.35
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
0.315
0.315
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Sliding rod for floppy
reader assembly
0.35
0.35
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
38.09
6.51E-06
37.8
0.23819575
10.8
0.261980191
0.215082881 0.159457998
0.036420143 0.026014388
2.075121837 1.245073102
18
16.4930305 14.84372745
35.70602573 32.13542315
0.120181625 0.108163462
0.264661945
1.64587E-05 1.48128E-05
0.204382997 0.183944698
6.091745715 5.482571143
0.028328019 0.025495217
0.000579356 0.000521421
0.007162607 0.006446347
7.79213E-06 7.01292E-06
0.025006252 0.022505627
0.203068374 0.182761537
30.40923595 27.36831235
42.33
7.24E-06
42
1.367131939 1.230418745
EI (mPt)
Env. Impact
Score
Total
0.315 195.8360684 169.9532625
0.315
(mPt)
Saving by
Recycling
Screws
The EI saving due to recycling is 169.9533 mPt. The major saving in the EI
comes from the recycling of the PCB and the main circuit board. PCB contains gold and
silver so the EI score is high of the PCB due to the fact that gold and silver have high EI
value. 37.8 mPt of EI score is saved if components made up of steel are recycled. The
following graph shows the saving in EI score if the whole product is recycled.
Component
EI Score
Saving in EI Score
Figure 48 Saving in EI due to recycling
109
Screws
Sliding rod for floppy reader
assembly
Floppy reader assembly
Main circuit board winding cover
Metal Frame 3
Metal Frame 2
Metal Frame 1
Floppy insert cover
Motor
Back cover main Frame
PCB 2
main circuit board
circuit board cover
Top cover
PCB 1 plastic frame
PCB 1
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Bottom cover
EI Score
Saving in EI due to recycling
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE REASERCH
The literature review has shown that there are not many articles available which
talk about the components of the computer disk drives, their material and environmental
impact of the component of the computer drives. Previous research has been done on
laptops and desktops for determining their environmental impact but almost no
information is available about the computer disk drives. This thesis aims to conduct a
comprehensive analysis of computer disk drives to highlight some of the environmental
issues and presents results of the assessment.
In this research the complete disassembly of the computer disk drive is done,
components of the drives are identified, the time required for the disassembly is
calculated, and disassembly tree is developed. Material analysis is done to identify the
material of the component and environmental impact assessment is done based on the EI
99 methodology. A model is also proposed to calculate the saving in environmental
impact by recycling.
5.1
Contribution of this research
This research would be beneficial to the manufacturers and recyclers and
academic institution. Manufacturers often source disk drives from different vendors
which makes it difficult for them to understand material composition of these drives.
With the upcoming laws manufacturers will be required to educate recyclers about
110
disassembly methods and material composition. This thesis will therefore help
manufacturers in understanding the drives from environmental perspective. Recyclers
will benefit from thesis as they will get to know the amount of precious metal to be
recovered from these drives. Recyclers will also be able to use suitable recycling
methodology for different materials based on the components recovered after
disassembly. Academic researchers will be able to use this thesis as a case study for
environmental impact assessment of computer disk drives.
5.2
Future research
Similar analysis should be done on different drives to get better comparison of
disassembly time, hazardous and precious material content and environmental impact of
these drives, this comparison will also help manufacturers in selecting vendors whose
drives are easier to disassemble, provide value on material recovery and are
environmentally safer and also carry labeling for different plastics for identification
purpose.
Design changes are required for various components which are not easily
separable such as Hard Disk reader assembly, floppy reader assembly which contains
metal as well as plastic. Current research analyzed printed circuit boards from these
drives for material analysis. Further research should be conducted to estimate material of
different other components like motor, main circuit board of laptop etc. which have
complex material composition and can not be determined using visual inspection. More
in-depth environmental impact assessment is required for entire life cycle of these drives.
111
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1) Luo, Y., Wirojanagud, P., Caudill, R., (2000) ‘Comparison of major environmental
performance metrics and their application to typical electronic products’. Proceedings
International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p 94-99.
2) Huisman, J., Boks, C., Stevels, A., (2000) ‘Environmentally Weighted Recycling
Quotes – Better Justifiable and More Correct’. Proceedings International Symposium
on Electronics & Environment, p. 105-111
3) Stevels, A., Huisman, J., Middendorf, A., (2001) ‘Calculating environmentally
weighted recyclability of consumer electronic products using different environmental
assessment models’. Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 88-92.
4) Persson, J. (2001) ‘Eco-Indicators in product development’. Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers – Part B. p. 627-635
5) Frey, S. D., Harrison, D. J., and Billet, E. H. (2000) ‘Integrated product policy and
ecological footprint of electronic products’. Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 130-135
6) Lueckefett, H. J., Orlandella, F., Holbrook, L (1997) ‘A global perspective on
environmentally related product legislation and regulations’, Proceedings
International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 88-92
7) Stevels, A., (2003) ‘Is the WEEE directive eco-efficient’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 7-13
8) Dowdell, D.C., Noel, R., Adda, S., Laurent, D., Glazebrrok, B and Kirkpatrick, N.,
(2000) ‘An integrated life cycle assessment and cost analysis of the implications of
implementing the proposed waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)’
Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 1-10
9) Cox, D. Sweatman, A., (2000) ‘A case study of Power Mac G4 desktop computer’,
Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p.191-196
10) Pierre, F., Gjetley, L. (2003) ‘Becoming a zero waste to landfill facility’, Proceedings
International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 220-223
112
11) Biancaniello, J., Headley, L., Kingsbury, T., and Fisher, M. (2003) ‘Ten facts to know
about plastics from consumer electronics’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 260-264
12) Raymond, M., (2002) ‘Getting your product back: Coping the challenge of global
electronics recycling mandates’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment ,p. 89-92
13) Brady, T. A., and O’Connell, S. (2002) ‘Product material declaration at Intel’,
Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 113-117
14) Huisman, J., Gijlswijk, R.V., and Ansems, A. (2002) ‘End of life control and
management of heavy metals out of electronics’, Proceedings International Symposium
on Electronics & Environment, p. 169-173
15) Deghher, A. (2002) ‘HP’s worldwide take back and recycling programs: Lessons on
improving program implementation’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 224-227
16) Elsbree, J.F., Nielsen, L.J., (1997) ‘Integration of product stewardship into personal
computer product family’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 57-62
17) Mann, T., Brinkley, A., (1997) ‘Documenting product environment attributes’,
Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 52-56
18) Hieronymi, K., (2001) ‘Implementing WEEE directive’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 217-222
19) Stevels, A., and Huisman, J., (2003) ‘Eco-efficiency of take back and recycling, a
comprehensive approach’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 265-270
20) Stevels, A., and Boks, C., (2001) ‘Ranking eco design priorities from quantitative
uncertainness assessment of end of life scenarios’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 76-81
21) Steveles, L. N., and Meinders, H.C., (1997) ‘ISO 14001, an opportunity for eco
design’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p.
141-146
22) H., Satake, K., tomita, H., (1997) ‘Environmental load of magnetic recording media:
LCA case study’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, 137-140
113
23) Vanderstraeten, J.C., Orolandella, F., Lueckefett, H.J., Korpalaski, T., and Dirksen, T.
(1997) ‘Product eco labels and manufacturers self declaration: A proposal for a
rational and practical approach for the global marketplace’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 79-83
24) Nilsson, J., Leagarth, J.B., (1997) ‘Redesign of electromechanical products for reuse
and recycling: A European initiative’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 1-6
25) Thompson, D. A., Nitta, T. (1999) ‘Global environment protection technologies in the
Matsushita electric group (Panasonic)’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 173-180
26) Jordan R. C., Korfmacher, H.A., and Suoss, B. (1999) ‘Durable goods labeling and
plastic recycling strategy for the plastic electronics industry (design aspect for
recycling compatible plastic label)’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 157-159
27) Mausi, K., Nilsson, J., Boks, C. (1998), ‘An international comparison of products end
of life scenarios and legislation for consumer electronics’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 19-24
28) Stevels, A., (2001) ‘Product environment care, a praxis – Based system uniting ISO
14001, ISO 14062, IPP, EEE and Eco label element’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 52-58
29) Johnson, E.P., (1998) ‘Developing European Eco-labels of PC’s’, Proceedings
International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 9-13
30) Staggs, D., Turk, L., Minter, J., Wanielista, M., (1998) ‘Market demands for eco
label’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 4-8
31) Olsavasky, M.J., Jung, L., Dillon, P., corbet, K.S., (1997) ‘Plastic recycling in the
electronics industry’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 297-302
32) Segerberg, T., Bergendhal, C.G.,(1997) ‘Procurement of components for
environmentally compatible electronic products’, Proceedings International
Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p.172-175
33) Corbett, M. S., Ryan, C., ‘Good for the environment - Smart for business; Recycling
plastics from end of life mailing equipment’, Proceedings International Symposium
on Electronics & Environment, p. 161-166
114
34) Wantanabe, H., Noguchi, t., kuromiya, M., Inagaki, Y., (1997) ‘Modification of
plastic waste from electrical product’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 121-124
35) Busselle, L.D., Allred, R.E.,(1997) ‘Economical tertiary recycling process for mixture
of electronic scrap’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 115-120
36) Langerak, E., ‘To shred or to disassemble? Recycling of plastics in mass consumer
goods’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 6368
37) Raucent, B., Delchambre, A., Lit, P., and Eglise. T, ‘Recycling of electric and
electronic end of life devices: Economical assessment study in Brussels, Belgium’,
Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 149-154
38) Biddle, M. B., Arola, D. P., ‘Making plastic recycling from electronic equipment a
commercial reality’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 75-80
39) Wendschlag, H., Urbach, H.P., Hermann, F., (2001) ‘Eco-labeling and the
information technology industry’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 1-3
40) Pitts, D., Kirby, J.R., Karlsson, J., Brinkley, A., ‘Systematic environmental
assessment: A decision methodology for strategic environmental issues’, Proceedings
International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 178-183
41) Tomita, H., Wantanbe, H., Ooki, H., Ichumira, M., Komine, T., (1998) ‘A new
approach for recycling optical disk’, Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p.147-150
42) Oishi, S., Satake. K., (1998) ‘LCA for electronic product – A case study for CDROM Drive’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment,
p. 176-179
43) Pitts. O. D., Kirby, J. R., Ching, S., (1996) ‘Plastic recycling issues for the computer
industry’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment,
p.118-123
44) Pitts, G., Mizuki, C., (1996) ‘A view of electronic product disposition’, Proceedings
International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p. 66-72
115
45) DeBartolo, M., Carlson, J., Blazek, M., (1998) ‘Life cycle management of personal
computers in a service company’ Proceedings International Symposium on
Electronics & Environment, p. 275- 279
46) Ridder, C., Scheidt, L. G., (1998) ‘Practical experiences in the Sony disassembly
evaluation workshop’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p. 94-98
47) Theo, L., (1998) ‘Integrated recycling of non ferrous metals at Boliden Ltd. Ronnskar
Smelter’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics & Environment, p.
42-47
48) Kuhn, M., and Hesselbach, J, (1998) ‘Disassembly evaluation of electronic and
electrical product’, Proceedings International Symposium on Electronics &
Environment, p.79-81
49) EPA, (2000) ‘Electronic reuse and recycling’, Waste Wise Update, Technical
Assistance periodical, p.1-15
50) EPA, (1998) ‘Extended product responsibility’, Waste Wise Update, Technical
Assistance periodical, p.1-16
51) EPA, (2003) ‘Environmental management system’, Waste Wise Update, Technical
Assistance periodical, p.1-16
52) EPA, (1997) ‘Closing the loop’, Waste Wise Update, Technical Assistance periodical,
p.1-12
53) EPA, (2000) ‘Moving towards sustainability’, Waste Wise Update, Technical
Assistance periodical, p.1-12
54) Envirowise, (2003) ‘A guide to the marketing, product development and
manufacturing action you need to take’ AEA technology plc, and Technology Transfer
and Innovation Ltd. www.envirowise.gov.uk
55) ‘Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Union Parliament and of the Council of 27
January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment’, (2003), Official Journal
of European Union. p. 24-38
56) ‘Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Union Parliament and of the Council of 27
January 2003 on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical
and electronic equipment’, (2003), Official Journal of European Union. p.19-23
116
57) Yehle, L., Nobs, C., Keene, R., Grenchus, E. (2001) ‘The quest for environmental and
productivity improvements at the IBM demanufacturing and asset recovery center’
IEEE, p. 25-29
117
APPENDIX A
ECO INDICATOR VALUES OF MATERIAL
Material
EI-99 Indicator
Ferrous Metals
Iron
Steel
Non Ferrous Metals
Mercury
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Material
61540 Palladium
780 Silver
1690000 Plastics
4600000
4600000
1690000 ABS
670 Epoxy Resin
400
873
670 Polythene
4266211 Polystyrene
970 Poly Vinyl Chloride
5833 Other
1400 Ceramics
640 Glass
2711 TBBPA
3200
7000000
Gold
Cobalt
Lead
5200
110 Zinc
350 Precious Metals
Copper
Molybdenum
EI-99 Indicator
Nickel
330
360
280
28
58
240
118
APPENDIX B
STANDARD PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD COMPOSITION – EU STUDY
Material
Glass
Epoxy Resin
TBBPA
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Aluminum
Silver
Gold
Cadmium
Chromium
Beryllium
Palladium
Epoxy with TBBPA
Silicon oxide,Glass & Ceramics
Wt. (Grams)
236
163
107
176.6
42
9.5
10
3.7
26
0.59
0.5
0.004
0.3
0.08
0.1
70
255
Source: LCA study (version 1.2), EU Ecolabels for personal computers, March 1998.
Atlantic Consulting and IPU
119
APPENDIX C
CONTROL UNIT HARD DISK COMPONENT MATERIAL COMPOSITION
Component
Cover
Casing
Hard Disk Plate
PWB with components
Material
Wt. (Grams)
Aluminium
60
Aluminium
205
Aluminium
85
60
Source: LCA study (version 1.2), EU Ecolabels for personal computers, March 1998.
Atlantic Consulting and IPU
120
PERMISSION TO COPY
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master’s
degree at Texas Tech University or Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, I
agree that the Library and my major department shall make it freely available for research
purposes. Permission to copy this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the
Director of the Library or my major professor. It is understood that any copying or
publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my further
written permission and that any user may be liable for copyright infringement.
Agree (Permission is granted.)
____Sunil Sadashiv Mohite ______________________
Student Signature
05-05-2005______
Date
Disagree (Permission is not granted.)
_______________________________________________
Student Signature
_________________
Date