Table 4 |
|||||
|
Use of experimental design study results to determine the average value of sensors |
|||||
|
(1) Experiment |
(2) Profit (SEPs) |
(3) Profit (CPs) |
(4) Difference in Profit ((2)-(3)) |
(5) Total Number of EOL Products Collected |
(6) Value of Sensors in an EOL Product ((4)/(5)) |
|
|
|||||
|
1 |
892765.57 |
689984.74 |
202780.84 |
16161.60 |
12.55 |
|
2 |
1478995.73 |
1048313.37 |
430682.35 |
16173.60 |
26.63 |
|
3 |
1476935.85 |
1055570.37 |
421365.48 |
16185.60 |
26.03 |
|
4 |
2050911.70 |
1350521.63 |
700390.07 |
32327.60 |
21.67 |
|
5 |
3063884.18 |
2798715.87 |
265168.31 |
32339.60 |
8.20 |
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
80 |
1801372.32 |
1370260.27 |
431112.05 |
24271.20 |
17.76 |
|
81 |
1748333.24 |
1315398.01 |
432935.24 |
24247.20 |
17.86 |
|
|
|||||
|
Average |
2259563.26 |
1366333.99 |
893229.27 |
32320.83 |
28.64 |
|
|
|||||
|
Ilgin et al. Journal of Remanufacturing 2011 1:7 doi:10.1186/2210-4690-1-7 |
|||||
