skip to main content
10.1145/3428690.3429177acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Cyber twins supporting industry 4.0 application development

Published:19 January 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Industry 4.0 involves enhancing industrial processes with high-fidelity and high-value information from machines, workers, and products. Industry 4.0 applications improve production efficiency, product quality, etc., by using Internet of Things (IoT) and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Existing industry 4.0 application development approaches are centered on commercial IoT platforms that provide siloed development and runtime environments (leading to vendor lockdown) and only support individual sensors and actuators instead of entire machines. Therefore, Industry 4.0 applications need to construct representations of complex machines from such basic elements, which is a costly, error-prone, inefficient hindering portability across machines and plants. This paper proposes Cyber Twins, a comprehensive solution for efficient Industry 4.0 application development, testing, and portability. The Cyber Twins solution includes a model for machine representation and services that facilitate Industry 4.0 application development. Finally, a prototype Cyber Twin implementation is presented, with its functionality described using a sample Industry 4.0 application.

References

  1. André Barthelmey, Eunseo Lee, Ramy Hana, and Jochen Deuse. 2019. Dynamic digital twin for predictive maintenance in flexible production systems. In IECON 2019 - 45th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Vol. 1. IEEE, Lisbon, Portugal, Portugal, 4209--4214.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Yi Cai, Binil Starly, Paul Cohen, and Yuan-Shin Lee. 2017. Sensor Data and Information Fusion to Construct Digital-twins Virtual Machine Tools for Cyber-physical Manufacturing. Procedia Manufacturing 10 (2017), 1031--1042.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Jean-Paul Calbimonte, Sofiane Sarni, Julien Eberle, and Karl Aberer. 2014. XGSN: An Open-source Semantic Sensing Middleware for the Web of Things. In TC/SSN@ISWC. CEUR, Garda, Trentino, Italy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Camunda. 2020. Process Automation reinvented for the Digital Enterprise. https://camunda.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Michael Compton, Payam Barnaghi, Luis Bermudez, Raúl García-Castro, Oscar Corcho, Simon Cox, John Graybeal, Manfred Hauswirth, Cory Henson, Arthur Herzog, Vincent Huang, Krzysztof Janowicz, W. David Kelsey, Danh Le Phuoc, Laurent Lefort, Myriam Leggieri, Holger Neuhaus, Andriy Nikolov, Kevin Page, Alexandre Passant, Amit Sheth, and Kerry Taylor. 2012. The SSN ontology of the W3C semantic sensor network incubator group. Journal of Web Semantics 17 (2012), 25 -- 32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Cumulocity. 2020. Introduction to Cumulocity IoT. https://cumulocity.com/guides/concepts/introduction/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Inc Eclipse Foundation. 2020. Eclipse rdf4j. https://rdf4j.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Rossmann Engineering. 2020. THE STANDARD LIBRARY FOR MODBUS COMMUNICATION. http://easymodbustcp.net/en/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Abdur Rahim Mohammad Forkan, Montori Federico, Dimitrios Georgakopoulos, Prem Prakash Jayaraman, Ali Yavari, and Ahsan Morshed. 2019. An Industrial IoT Solution for Evaluating Workers' Performance Via Activity Recognition. In 2019 IEEE 39th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS). IEEE, Dallas, TX, USA, USA, 1393--1403.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. OPC Foundation. 2020. Collaborations: PackML, PRODML, MDIS, AutomationM. https://opcconnect.opcfoundation.org/2016/09/collaborations-packml-prodml-mdis-automationml/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dimitrios Georgakopoulos, Prem Prakash Jayaraman, Maria Fazia, Massimo Villari, and Rajiv Ranjan. 2016. Internet of Things and Edge Cloud Computing Roadmap for Manufacturing. IEEE Cloud Computing 3, 4 (2016), 66--73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. MTConnect Institute. 2020. MTConnect R Standard. https://www.mtconnect.org/standard-download20181Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Krzysztof Janowicz, Armin Haller, Simon J.D. Cox, Danh Le Phuoc, and Maxime Lefrançois. 2019. SOSA: A lightweight ontology for sensors, observations, samples, and actuators. Journal of Web Semantics 56 (2019), 1 -- 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Apache JMeter. 2020. Apache Software Foundation. https://jmeter.apache.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Aleksey Kychkin and Aleksadr Nikolaev. 2020. IoT-based Mine Ventilation Control System Architecture with Digital Twin. In 2020 International Conference on Industrial Engineering, Applications and Manufacturing (ICIEAM). IEEE, Sochi, Russia, Russia, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Stefan-Helmut Leitner and Wolfgang Mahnke. 2006. OPC UA - Service-oriented Architecture for Industrial Applications. Softwaretechnik-Trends 26, 6 (2006), 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Inc Lightbend. 2020. Build powerful reactive, concurrent, and distributed applications more easily. https://akka.io/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Microsoft. 2020. Understand and use device twins in IoT Hub. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/iot-hub/iot-hub-devguide-device-twinsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Thiago Rodrigues Alves, Mario Buratto, Flavio Mauricio de Souza, and Thelma Virginia Rodrigues. 2014. OpenPLC: An open source alternative to automation. In IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC 2014). IEEE, San Jose, CA, USA, 585--589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Ali Salehi, Jose Jimenez-Berni, David Deery, Doug Palmer, Edward Holland, Pablo Rozas-Larraondo, Scott Chapman, Dimitrios Georgakopoulos, and Robert Furbank. 2015. SensorDB: a virtual laboratory for the integration, visualization and analysis of varied biological sensor data. Plant Methods 11 (2015), 108--111. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1779613409/Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Greyce N Schroeder, Charles Steinmetz, Carlos E Pereira, and Danubia B Espindola. 2016. Digital Twin Data Modeling with AutomationML and a Communication Methodology for Data Exchange. IFAC PapersOnLine 49, 30 (2016), 12--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Nicolas Seydoux, Khalil Drira, Nathalie Hernandez, and Thierry Monteil. 2016. IoT-O, a Core-Domain IoT Ontology to Represent Connected Devices Networks. In Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management: 20th International Conference, EKAW 2016, Bologna, Italy, November 19-23, 2016, Proceedings 20, Vol. 10024. Springer, Bologna, Italy, 561--576. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01467853 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Siemens. 2020. MindSphere - the Industrial Internet of Things solution. https://new.siemens.com/au/en/products/software/discover-mindsphere.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. John Soldatos, Nikos Kefalakis, Manfred Hauswirth, Martin Serrano, Jean-Paul Calbimonte, Mehdi Riahi, Karl Aberer, Prem Prakash Jayaraman, Arkady Zaslavsky, Ivana Podnar Žarko, Lea Skorin-Kapov, and Reinhard Herzog. 2015. OpenIoT: Open Source Internet-of-Things in the Cloud. In Interoperability and Open-Source Solutions for the Internet of Things, Ivana Podnar Žarko, Krešimir Pripužić, and Martin Serrano (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 13--25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Matthias Thoma, Torsten Braun, Alexandru-Florian Antonescu, and Carsten Magerkurth. 2014. Managing Things and Services with Semantics: A Survey.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Jan Vachalek, Lukas Bartalsky, Oliver Rovny, Dana Sismisova, Martin Morhac, and Milan Loksik. 2017. The digital twin of an industrial production line within the industry 4.0 concept. In 2017 21st International Conference on Process Control (PC). IEEE, Štrbské Pleso, Slovakia, 258--262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Wikipedia. 2020. Actor Model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor_modelGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Kamil Židek, Ján Pitel', Milan Adámek, Peter Lazorík, and Alexander Hošovský. 2020. Digital Twin of Experimental Smart Manufacturing Assembly System for Industry 4.0 Concept. Sustainability 12, 9 (2020), 3658. http://search.proquest.com/docview/2398421237/Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Cyber twins supporting industry 4.0 application development

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      MoMM '20: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Advances in Mobile Computing & Multimedia
      November 2020
      239 pages
      ISBN:9781450389242
      DOI:10.1145/3428690

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 19 January 2021

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader