EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Life cycle cost for technology selection: A Case study in the manufacturing of injection moulds

R. Folgado, P. Peças and E. Henriques

International Journal of Production Economics, 2010, vol. 128, issue 1, 368-378

Abstract: During mould design phase different approaches are envisaged to materialize part production and they must be evaluated not only in technological criteria, but also in an economical perspective. However, the comparison of such alternative approaches is not always evident for the mould designer. The solution proposed in this paper, based on the development of a life cycle cost model, fosters its application as a methodology to compare two mould manufacturing alternatives: a spray metal shell mould backfilled with a resin and aluminium powder resin and a conventional machined aluminium mould. A better mould or a better alternative is the one that incurs in fewer life cycle costs, assuming that the injected part is produced within a conformed quality.

Keywords: Life; cycle; cost; Plastic; injection; moulds; Low; production; moulds; Spray; metal; moulds; Technology; selection (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925-5273(10)00279-3
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:proeco:v:128:y:2010:i:1:p:368-378

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Production Economics is currently edited by Stefan Minner

More articles in International Journal of Production Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:eee:proeco:v:128:y:2010:i:1:p:368-378