View in EDS

Design for automated disassembly: a comparative study of different battery component designs.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Design for automated disassembly: a comparative study of different battery component designs.
Authors: Hansen, S.1,2 (AUTHOR), Ohnemüller, G.3,4 (AUTHOR) gregor.ohnemueller@uni-bayreuth.de, Ionescu, Christina5 (AUTHOR), Zorn, Merle6 (AUTHOR), Deeken, Jan-Aut7,8 (AUTHOR), Rüther, Tom4,6 (AUTHOR), Mennenga, Mark1,2 (AUTHOR), Danzer, Michael A.4,6 (AUTHOR), Flamme, Sabine7 (AUTHOR), Vietor, Thomas2,8 (AUTHOR), Herrmann, Christoph1,2 (AUTHOR), Döpper, Frank3,4,5 (AUTHOR)
Source: International Journal of Sustainable Engineering. Dec2025, Vol. 18 Issue 1, p1-16. 16p.
Subjects: Electric vehicle batteries, Energy storage, Technical specifications, Product life cycle assessment
Abstract: The feasibility of automated disassembly at a product's end-of-life stage strongly depends on its design. This relationship is particularly relevant for electric vehicle batteries, for which other design requirements are typically given priority. Consequently, the potential for automated disassembly varies between different battery designs and between the different components. This study investigates the potential for automated disassembly of five EV battery designs currently available on the market. These batteries are subject to disassembly experiments, during which a criteria catalogue is employed to semi-quantitatively compare the individual design characteristics of each individual component. The results of this assessment indicate that the complexity involved in automatically disassembling the components generally increases with the depth of disassembly. Nevertheless, the initial step of the system cover removal appears to be of high importance. It is further identified that the steps involved in the removal of cooling systems, the separation of module housing parts and the cell connector separation are the most critical during disassembly. Based on these findings specific design guidelines are proposed from the best evaluation results of the five disassembly analyses performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of International Journal of Sustainable Engineering is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Description
Abstract:The feasibility of automated disassembly at a product's end-of-life stage strongly depends on its design. This relationship is particularly relevant for electric vehicle batteries, for which other design requirements are typically given priority. Consequently, the potential for automated disassembly varies between different battery designs and between the different components. This study investigates the potential for automated disassembly of five EV battery designs currently available on the market. These batteries are subject to disassembly experiments, during which a criteria catalogue is employed to semi-quantitatively compare the individual design characteristics of each individual component. The results of this assessment indicate that the complexity involved in automatically disassembling the components generally increases with the depth of disassembly. Nevertheless, the initial step of the system cover removal appears to be of high importance. It is further identified that the steps involved in the removal of cooling systems, the separation of module housing parts and the cell connector separation are the most critical during disassembly. Based on these findings specific design guidelines are proposed from the best evaluation results of the five disassembly analyses performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:19397038
DOI:10.1080/19397038.2025.2504388