Abstract
The development of industry 4.0 (I4.0) systems is increasingly conceptualised as a configuration process during which components are selected and associated to compose a desired system. This paper presents an approach to configuring I4.0 systems in a distributed way involving the various stakeholders. It is termed Tindustry, as it is inspired by concepts from online dating using the app Tinder. In the approach, I4.0 components are “matched” by reciprocal agreement of the respective component owners. The matching of components is embedded in a metaphorical dating process that is aligned with the fundamental activities of configuration design. The Tindustry approach is illustrated using an I4.0 configuration example, demonstrating some of the benefits in a concrete scenario.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Heidel, R., Hoffmeister, M., Hankel, M., Döbrich, U.: Industrie 4.0 - Basiswissen RAMI 4.0 : Referenzarchitekturmodell mit Industrie 4.0-Komponente. DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V., Berlin, Germany (2017)
IEC: IEC PAS 63088:2017 Smart manufacturing - Reference architecture model industry 4.0 (RAMI4.0). International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland (2017)
Moser, C., Kannengiesser, U.: Incremental implementation of automated guided vehicle-based logistics using S-BPM: experience report of a digitalization project at ENGEL Austria. In: S-BPM ONE 2019: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Subject-Oriented Business Process Management, Seville, Spain. Association for Computing Machinery (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3329007.3329015
VDMA: Guideline Industrie 4.0: Guiding principles for the implementation of Industrie 4.0 in small and medium sized businesses. Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau (VDMA), Frankfurt, Germany (2016)
PwC: Global Digital Operations Study 2018. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/industry-4-0.html. Accessed 11 Feb 2020
Kannengiesser, U., Neubauer, M., Heininger, R.: Subject-oriented BPM as the glue for integrating enterprise processes in smart factories. In: Ciuciu, I., et al. (eds.) OTM 2015. LNCS, vol. 9416, pp. 77–86. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26138-6_11
VDI: VDI 2206 - Design Methodology for Mechatronic Systems. Verein Deutscher Ingenieure, Düsseldorf, Germany (2004). https://doi.org/10.1002/mawe.19740050417
VDI: Testing of Networked Systems for Industrie 4.0. Verein Deutscher Ingenieure, Düsseldorf, Germany (2018)
Harrison, R., Vera, D., Ahmad, B.: Engineering methods and tools for cyber-physical automation systems. Proc. IEEE 104, 973–985 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2015.2510665
Aicher, T., Schutz, D., Vogel-Heuser, B.: Consistent engineering information model for mechatronic components in production automation engineering. In: IECON 2014 - 40th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp. 2532–2537. IEEE (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2014.7048862
Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C., Obermeier, S., Börger, E.: Subject-Oriented Business Process Management, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32392-8
Paetzold, K.: Product and systems engineering/CA* tool chains. In: Biffl, S., Lüder, A., Gerhard, D. (eds.) Multi-Disciplinary Engineering for Cyber-Physical Production Systems, pp. 27–62. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56345-9_2
Biffl, S., Gerhard, D., Lüder, A.: Introduction to the multi-disciplinary engineering for cyber-physical production systems. In: Biffl, S., Lüder, A., Gerhard, D. (eds.) Multi-Disciplinary Engineering for Cyber-Physical Production Systems. LNCS, pp. 1–24. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56345-9_1
Kannengiesser, U., Müller, H.: Multi-level, viewpoint-oriented engineering of cyber-physical production systems: an approach based on industry 4.0, system architecture and semantic web standards. In: Proceedings - 44th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, SEAA 2018, Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 331–334. IEEE (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA.2018.00061
Vogel-Heuser, B., Hess, D.: Guest editorial industry 4.0–prerequisites and visions. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 13, 411–413 (2016)
Sharpe, R., van Lopik, K., Neal, A., Goodall, P., Conway, P.P., West, A.A.: An industrial evaluation of an Industry 4.0 reference architecture demonstrating the need for the inclusion of security and human components. Comput. Ind. 108, 37–44 (2019)
Kenett, R.S., Swarz, R.S., Zonnenshain, A. (eds.): Systems Engineering in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Big Data, Novel Technologies, and Modern Systems Engineering. Wiley, Hoboken (2020)
Porrmann, T., Essmann, R., Colombo, A.W.: Development of an event-oriented, cloud-based SCADA system using a microservice architecture under the RAMI4.0 specification: lessons learned. In: IECON 2017 - 43rd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp. 3441–3448 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2017.8216583
Khaitan, S.K., McCalley, J.D.: Design techniques and applications of cyberphysical systems: a survey. IEEE Syst. J. 9, 350–365 (2014)
Thramboulidis, K., Bochalis, P., Bouloumpasis, J.: A framework for MDE of IoT-based manufacturing cyber-physical systems. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Internet of Things - IoT 2017, pp. 1–8. ACM Press, New York (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3131542.3131554
Sabin, D., Weigel, R.: Product configuration frameworks - a survey. IEEE Intell. Syst. Appl. 13, 42–49 (1998)
Brown, D.C.: Defining configuring. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 12, 301–305 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0890060498124034
Fuchs, J., Schmidt, J., Franke, J., Rehman, K., Sauer, M., Karnouskos, S.: I4.0-compliant integration of assets utilizing the Asset Administration Shell. In: 2019 24th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), pp. 1243–1247 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ETFA.2019.8869255
Bauer, D.A., Mäkiö, J.: Hybrid cloud – architecture for administration shells with RAMI4.0 using Actor4j. In: 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), pp. 79–86 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN41052.2019.8972075
Finkel, E.J., Eastwick, P.W., Karney, B.R., Reis, H.T., Sprecher, S.: Online dating: a critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 13, 3–66 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436522
Orosz, G., Tóth-Király, I., Bothe, B., Melher, D.: Too many swipes for today: the development of the problematic tinder use scale (PTUS). J. Behav. Addict. 5, 518–523 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.016
Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin Books, London (2011)
Gero, J.S., Kannengiesser, U.: An ontology of situated design teams. Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 21, 295–308 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060407000297
Förster, R., Förster, A.: Einteilung der Fertigungsverfahren nach DIN 8580. In: Einführung in die Fertigungstechnik, pp. 23–136. Springer Vieweg, Heidelberg (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54702-1_2
Stone, R.B., Wood, K.L.: Development of a functional basis for design. J. Mech. Des. Trans. ASME 122, 359–370 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1289637
Hirtz, J., Stone, R.B., McAdams, D.A., Szykman, S., Wood, K.L.: A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Res. Eng. Des. 13, 65–82 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-001-0008-3
Fleischmann, A., Kannengiesser, U., Schmidt, W., Stary, C.: Subject-oriented modeling and execution of multi-agent business processes. In: Proceedings - 2013 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, IAT 2013, pp. 138–145. IEEE Computer Society (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/WI-IAT.2013.102
Agrawal, R., Imieliński, T., Swami, A.: Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. ACM SIGMOD Rec. 22, 207–216 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1145/170036.170072
Kannengiesser, U., Müller, H.: Industry 4.0 standardisation: where does S-BPM fit? In: S-BPM One 2018: 10th International Conference on Subject-Oriented Business Process Management, Linz, Austria. Association for Computing Machinery (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3178248.3178255
Kannengiesser, U., Krenn, F., Kornexl, M., Stary, C.: Testing of networked systems in industry 4.0: an agile, situated approach. In: AUTOMATION – 21. Leitkongress der Mess- und Automatisierungstechnik. VDI Verlag GmbH (2020)
Gero, J.S., Kannengiesser, U.: Towards agent-based product modelling. In: Borg, J.C., Farrugia, P.J., Camilleri, K.P. (eds.) Knowledge Intensive Design Technology. ITIFIP, vol. 136, pp. 3–17. Springer, Boston (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35708-9_1
Acknowledgment
The research reported in this paper was funded by the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) via project no. 874906 (LINK).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kannengiesser, U., Krenn, F., Stary, C., Höfler, P. (2020). Tindustry: Matchmaking for I4.0 Components. In: Freitag, M., Kinra, A., Kotzab, H., Kreowski, HJ., Thoben, KD. (eds) Subject-Oriented Business Process Management. The Digital Workplace – Nucleus of Transformation. S-BPM ONE 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1278. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64351-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64351-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-64350-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-64351-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)