Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676

https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING | RESEARCH ARTICLE

Digital factory technologies for robotic automation
and enhanced manufacturing cell design
Alessandra Caggiano1,2* and Roberto Teti1,3

Received: 02 January 2018 Abstract: The fourth industrial revolution is characterised by the increased use of
Accepted: 08 January 2018
digital tools, allowing for the virtual representation of a real production environment
First Published: 12 January 2018
at different levels, from the entire production plant to a single machine or a specific
*Corresponding author: Alessandra
process or operation. In this framework, Digital Factory technologies, based on the
Caggiano, Fraunhofer Joint Laboratory employment of digital modelling and simulation tools, can be used for short-term
of Excellence on Advanced Production
Technology (Fh-J_LEAPT UniNaples), analysis and validation of production control strategies or for medium term pro-
Naples, Italy; Department of Industrial duction planning or production system design/redesign. In this research work, a
Engineering, University of Naples
Federico II, P.le Tecchio 80, 80125 Digital Factory methodology is proposed to support the enhancement of an existing
Naples, Italy
E-mail: [email protected]
manufacturing cell for the fabrication of aircraft engine turbine vanes via robotic
automation of its deburring station. To configure and verify the correct layout of the
Reviewing editor:
Duc Pham, University of Birmingham, upgraded manufacturing cell with the aim to increase its performance in terms of
UK
resource utilization and throughput time, 3D Motion Simulation and Discrete Event
Additional information is available at Simulation are jointly employed for the modeling and simulation of different cell
the end of the article
settings for proper layout configuration, safe motion planning and resource utiliza-
tion improvement. Validation of the simulation model is carried out by collecting
actual data from the physical reconfigured manufacturing cell and comparing these
data to the model forecast with the aim to adapt the digital model accordingly to
closely represent the physical manufacturing system.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Alessandra Caggiano is Assistant Professor of The fourth industrial revolution is characterised
Manufacturing Technology and Systems at the by the increased use of digital tools, allowing for
Department of Industrial Engineering, University the virtual representation of a real production
of Naples Federico II, Italy. Since 2010 she is environment at different levels, from the entire
Research Fellow of the Fraunhofer Joint Laboratory production plant to a single machine or a specific
of Excellence on Advanced Production Technology, process or operation. In this research work,
Fh-J_LEAPT UniNaples, Italy, directed by Prof a Digital Factory methodology based on the
Roberto Teti. Her research activities are focused employment of digital modelling and simulation
on advanced manufacturing technology and tools is proposed. The methodology is applied
systems, with particular reference to Industry 4.0, to support the enhancement of an existing
cloud manufacturing, digital factory technologies, manufacturing cell for the fabrication of aircraft
intelligent sensor monitoring of manufacturing engine components via robotic automation. To
processes, 3D metrology and reverse engineering. configure and verify the correct layout of the
She is the principal investigator of the project manufacturing cell with the aim to increase its
CLOUD MODE, “CLOUD Manufacturing for performance in terms of resource utilization
On-Demand manufacturing sErvices” funded and throughput time, 3D Motion Simulation and
by the University of Naples Federico II, aimed Discrete Event Simulation are jointly employed.
at developing methodologies to virtualize Different cell settings are modelled and simulated
manufacturing resources through digital models for proper layout configuration, safe motion
and incorporate them into services in a cloud planning and resource utilization improvement.
manufacturing architecture.

© 2018 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution
(CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Page 1 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

Subjects: Mechanical Engineering; Manufacturing Engineering; Manufacturing Technology;

Production Systems & Automation; Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM)

Keywords: Manufacturing cell; industry 4.0; digital factory; discrete event simulation; 3D
motion simulation; industrial robot

1. Introduction
The fourth industrial revolution, also known as Industry 4.0, is strongly based on the industrial de-
ployment of Key Enabling Technologies (KETs), such as ICT-based engineering technologies, to cre-
ate Smart Factories with increased competitiveness, with particular reference to industrial
productivity and innovation capacity (Monostori et al., 2016; Smith, Kreutzer, Moeller, & Carlberg,
2016). This is particularly relevant nowadays, as the international manufacturing sector is facing an
intense and growing competitive pressure in global markets, and recent worldwide advances in
manufacturing technologies have caused a transformation in industry. Fast-changing technologies
on the product side have created a need for a similarly fast response from manufacturing industries,
that are required to improve their innovation activities to quickly and effectively transform new ideas
into new products and processes (Westkämper, 2007a).

In this framework, Industry 4.0 is focused on the adoption of new computing and Internet-based
technologies, including internet of things, cyber-physical systems, cloud manufacturing, digital/vir-
tual reality, etc., as KETs to meet new challenges (Horizon, 2020; Monostori, 2014; Monostori et al.,
2016). The main features of Industry 4.0 include interoperability, decentralisation, real-time capabil-
ity, service orientation and virtualisation, i.e. linking real factory data with virtual plant models and
simulation models to create a virtual copy of the Smart Factory (Smith et al., 2016). This will lead to:
increased flexibility in production, e.g. via the use of configurable robots and machineries that may
produce a variety of different products; mass customisation, e.g. allowing the production even of
small lots adapted to customer specifications due the ability to rapidly configure machines; process
speed up, since digital design and virtual modelling of manufacturing processes and systems can
reduce time between design and start of production, allowing to substantially decrease the time
needed to deliver orders and the time to get products to market (Smith et al., 2016).

Accordingly, the fourth industrial revolution is not only represented by Internet-enabled interac-
tion between machines, robot, computer, and data, but also by the increased use of digital manu-
facturing and software tools, allowing for the digital representation of the real production
environment, including all levels from the entire production plant, a single machine, a specific pro-
cess or operation or just the design and the development of new products (Shariatzadeh, Lundholm,
Lindberg, & Sivard, 2016).

In this framework, Digital Factory technologies, based on the employment of digital methods and
tools, such as numerical simulation, 3D modelling and Virtual Reality to examine a complex manu-
facturing system and evaluate different configurations for optimal decision-making with a relatively
low cost and fast analysis instrument, are an essential part of the continuous effort towards the
reduction in a product’s development time and cost, as well as towards the increase in customiza-
tion options (Bracht & Masurat, 2005; Gregor, Medvecký, Matuszek, & Štefánik, 2009; Kühn, 2006;
Maropoulos, 2003; Monostori et al., 2016; Papakostas, Mavrikios, Makris, & Alexopoukos, 2015;
Westkämper, 2007b).

Simulation-based technologies are central in the Digital Factory approach, since they allow for the
experimentation and validation of different product, process and manufacturing system configura-
tions (Hosseinpour & Hajihosseini, 2009; Papakostas et al., 2015; Smith, 2003).

The shared digital data and models within the Smart Factory should be adaptive, in the sense that
they should always represent the current status of the physical manufacturing system (Kádár et al.,
2010; Monostori et al., 2016). For this reason, they should be regularly updated with information

Page 2 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

coming from the physical manufacturing system as well as based on user input. As the models are
updated and valid, they can be effectively used to carry out decision-making through the employ-
ment of valid optimization methods. A fundamental issue is therefore represented by the adaptation
of shared data and models realizing a tight coupling between the physical and the digital world
(Kádár et al., 2010; Monostori et al., 2016).

The updated digital models can be used for short-term analysis and validation of different produc-
tion control settings or for medium term production planning or production system design/redesign
(Monostori et al., 2016). Following the latter objective, different categories of digital simulation tools
can be suitably employed: system capacity, resource utilization, throughput, and other relevant per-
formance metrics can be evaluated through Discrete Event Simulation (DES), which is particularly
useful to investigate the manufacturing system behaviour under different logics and conditions
(Caggiano, Caiazzo, & Teti, 2015; Caggiano & Teti, 2013). 3D Motion Simulation, on the other hand, is
oriented to the analysis of facility layout, material handling system selection and configuration or
robot activities planning (Caggiano & Teti, 2012, 2013).

In this research work, both DES and 3D Motion Simulation are jointly employed in a Digital Factory
based methodology to study the reconfiguration of an existing manufacturing cell for the produc-
tion of turbine vanes to be automated through the introduction of a new robotic deburring station.
The simulation tools are employed to configure the layout of the new automated cell as well as to
improve its performance in terms of throughput time for the production of a specific part number
and enhance the resource efficiency by increasing the utilization of resources through appropriate
part routing strategies. Finally, predictive validation is performed on the DES simulation model by
comparing the physical system behaviour and the model forecast and to update the digital model
accordingly so as to closely represent the current status of the physical manufacturing system.

2. Digital factory methodology for manufacturing cell enhancement

Nowadays manufacturing systems are subject to a permanent adaptation, involving frequent recon-
figuration during their life, characterized by several stages start from the initial system design, and
proceed through its implementation, operation, and subsequent re-design or reconfiguration
(ElMaraghy, 2006; Westkämper, Constantinescu, & Hummel, 2006).

The integration of advanced technologies into existing manufacturing systems should be de-
signed following an efficient as well as comprehensive approach, since any change carried out on a
sub-system or component affects the behaviour of the overall system. Therefore, every enhance-
ment involves the analysis and evaluation of the system performance and the examination of sev-
eral alternative solutions to support optimal design decision-making. On the other hand, a very short
time for design improvement is imposed in order to stand global competition.

In the literature, several analytical methods have been proposed and employed (Gershwin, 1994;
Matta, Semeraro, & Tolio, 2005). However, as advanced manufacturing systems are often very com-
plex, these methods may require considerable efforts in terms of computational time and
resources.

The Digital Factory ICT-based tools are very supportive in the process of reconfiguring a manufac-
turing cell: they allow to deal with a number of aspects as diverse as facility layout, material han-
dling system design, system capacity and throughput analysis. Instead of considering each aspect
as a different problem, the Digital Factory promotes the combination of different digital tools and
the sharing of common data in order to deal with the reconfiguration problem in a comprehensive
way (Mourtzis, Papakostas, Mavrikios, Makris, & Alexopoulos, 2011).

In the Digital Factory approach proposed in this paper, two different digital simulation tools, able
to simulate the behavior of the system in diverse hypotheses/scenarios without need of physical

Page 3 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

Figure 1. Flow chart of the

proposed digital factory
methodology for manufacturing
cell enhancement.

experimentation, are jointly employed for manufacturing cell analysis and reconfiguration: 3D
Motion Simulation and Discrete Event Simulation (Caggiano et al., 2015; Caggiano & Teti, 2013).

The flow chart of the proposed Digital Factory methodology for manufacturing cell enhancement
is shown in Figure 1.

At the physical level, data are acquired from the physical manufacturing cell and communicated
via ICT to the digital level, where they are used as input to setup the digital simulation models. The
ICT connection, such as the internet-based communication, allows for regular data input/output
between the physical and the digital world.

At the digital level, 3D Motion Simulation is mainly applied for layout and material handling sys-
tem design, by using kinematics modelling and collision detection. The input data for setting up the
model are represented by the initial manufacturing cell layout, 3D models of the manufacturing cell
equipment, 3D robot models with kinematics and digital human models to simulate the human op-
erators. Based on these data, 3D Motion Simulation allows to determine the optimal manufacturing
cell layout and dimensions as well as to identify collision-free robot paths.

The simulation results are then shared in the digital environment via Internet-based ICT such as
cloud technologies and used to adapt the DES model, which is later employed to analyze different
manufacturing cell production strategies and improve the cell performance with reference to two
main objectives: the first is the optimization of the batch throughput time for the part number fabri-
cated in the manufacturing cell, and the second is the resource utilization improvement of the auto-
mated deburring station. The results of this simulation are then employed to define the best strategy
for the physical manufacturing system. Then, the behaviour of the physical system is compared to
the model forecast to validate the model: in the case where the validation is unsatisfactory, model
improvement is carried out by modifying the model input data; otherwise, the model is validated
and can be used as a basis to further verify different manufacturing cell strategies or
configurations.

Page 4 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

The proposed Digital Factory methodology was applied to support the upgrade of the manufactur-
ing cell under study with the introduction of a robotic deburring station.

3. Case study: Manufacturing cell automation improvement

The existing manufacturing cell to be automated is dedicated to the machining of an aircraft engine
component, namely one turbine vane part number. Each turbine vane serial number goes through a
production cycle consisting of two consecutive grinding operations, called Stage 1 and Stage 2,
which are carried out on opposing sides of the vane. After each single-stage grinding process, the
vane is transferred to a Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) to perform metrological inspection
and then to a table where deburring operations are performed manually by a skilled operator.

Three main fundamental components make up the legacy manufacturing cell:

• A grinding machine tool equipped with a loading/unloading robot

• A coordinate measuring machine
• A manual deburring table

To date, the deburring process requires considerable human operator experience, manual ability
and attention as it is performed manually with the help of small mills and grinding discs. A wrong
procedure or an incorrect movement due to lack of concentration or tiredness may produce dam-
ages to the vane which cannot be amended. Indeed, repair machining is not applicable when too
much material has been removed via from the machined part and tolerances are very tight.
Therefore, the result of such damages is the full rejection of the machined part, with very high rejec-
tion costs related to both the expensive raw material and the manufacturing processes previously
executed on the part.

Moreover, ergonomics analysis proves that manual material removal processes, such as deburring
or polishing, can often cause physical impairments to the worker that could be avoided by introduc-
ing a higher level of automation based on devices such as robots.

To reduce injury risks and upgrade the manufacturing cell, an automated deburring station
equipped with an industrial robot has been designed to improve the overall automation of the man-
ufacturing cell.

3.1. The automated manufacturing cell

Following the integration of the robotic deburring station, the automated manufacturing cell is com-
posed of three main constituent elements:

• A grinding machine tool provided with a loading/unloading robot

• A coordinate measuring machine
• An automated robotic deburring station

The automated deburring station employs a robot to perform the required tasks on the parts, includ-
ing metrological assessment, actual deburring and transfer. To achieve these tasks, the station con-
sists of a rotary table which is used for components input/output, a metrological inspection device
equipped with a touch probe for metrological assessment aimed at verifying the position of given
component data points and surfaces with respect to the robot (which allows an accurate positioning
of the component geometry within the 3D coordinate reference system of the robot), a deburring
machine tool with one mill and two abrasive discs to deburr different component features, and an
automated robotic tool changer to replace the robot gripper when needed, e.g. when a different part
number is processed.

Page 5 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

Table 1. Manufacturing cell components

No. Manufacturing cell components
1. Input part storage
2. Component and fixture assembly place
3. Handling robot
4. Grinding machine
5. Rotary table
6. Deburring robot
7. Metrological inspection device
8. Deburring machine tool
9. Tool changer
10. CMM—Coordinate measuring machine
11. Output part storage

Figure 2. Robotic manufacturing

cell layout.

Out of the robotic deburring station, a human worker is responsible for manual tasks such as the
assembly and disassembly of the parts and the complex fixtures required for accurate and stable
part positioning within the grinding machine. These assembly operations are carried out on the in-
put/output buffers of the grinding machine, without impacting on the machine processing time.
Furthermore, manual part transfer among the grinding machine, the CMM and the automated de-
burring station is performed by the worker.

The components of the enhanced robotic manufacturing cell are reported in Table 1 and the gen-
eral layout is shown in Figure 2.

4. Manufacturing cell upgrading through digital simulation

Following the proposed Digital Factory approach presented in Section 2, two different digital simula-
tion tools were jointly employed for the upgrade of the manufacturing cell under study: 3D Motion
Simulation and Discrete Event Simulation.

4.1. Manufacturing cell layout and robot activity verification through 3D motion
simulation
The first step of the decision-making procedure is the configuration of an appropriate layout for the
enhanced manufacturing cell. The integration of the robotic deburring station necessitates the ac-
curate examination of the manufacturing cell components layout in view of an efficient and safe
robot motion. This type of analysis is accomplished via the employment of 3D Motion Simulation,

Page 6 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

Figure 3. 3D motion simulation

of the robot tasks: component
grabbing, surface inspection
and deburring.

which represents an effective tool to simulate a manufacturing cell in a digital environment without
performing physical experimentation on the manufacturing shop floor. This simulation is basically
kinematic and employs 3D models of the machines and devices as well as 3D models of the indus-
trial robots integrating kinematics modelling features.

The robot chosen for the deburring station is a 6 axis ABB IRB 2400-16 robot having a payload of
20 kg, a maximum reach of 1.55 m, a weight of 380 kg and a repeatability equal to 0.03–0.07 mm.

A 3D model of the robot with the matching kinematics was retrieved from a large robot data base.
As regards the robot end effector, a robot gripper was newly designed so as to handle the compo-
nents by inserting two prongs in the available part slots. In the 3D modelling and simulation soft-
ware, the robot gripper was modelled as a device and its kinematics was formally described and
included in the 3D model of the gripper. The kinematics modules of the 3D Motion Simulation soft-
ware allowed to simulate the robot and gripper kinematics, and collision detection was employed to
plan safe robot paths within the deburring station. Tasks were created to simulate all the steps of the
deburring station production cycle, from the rotary motion of the table for introducing the new parts
to robot part grabbing, metrological inspection for 3D part positioning control, and finally compo-
nent deburring (Figure 3).

This simulation allows to determine the distance required between the cell elements and the ro-
bot, and thus the overall dimension of the deburring station: the bounded area requires a maximum
of 4,000 mm in one direction and 4,100 mm in the other direction. The layout of the overall manu-
facturing cell employed for the 3D Motion Simulation, including the grinding machine, the CMM and
the automated deburring station, is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. 3D Motion Simulation

model of the manufacturing
cell.

Page 7 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

4.2. DES for manufacturing cell performance analysis and optimization

The upgrade and reconfiguration of the new manufacturing cell involves the analysis of several as-
pects related to system performance: as already mentioned in the introduction, any change carried
out on a sub-system or component affects the behaviour of the overall system. Therefore, in order
to achieve the desired outcome, the analysis and evaluation of the system performance and the
examination of several alternative solutions should be carried out to support optimal
decision-making.

Several mathematical models of different complexity have been developed for this (Gershwin,
1994; Matta et al., 2005). On the other hand, the employment of DES tools can considerably reduce
the time and cost required for decision-making on cell reconfiguration. DES represents a valuable
tool through which it is possible to study and analyze different what-if scenarios in a digital frame-
work with limited computational effort. It can be employed to optimize the performance of a manu-
facturing cell without experimenting on a physical system, which is particularly useful in case of a
new system that is not already available as well as in the case of existing systems that are busy with
actual production and cannot be stopped. Moreover, the efforts in terms of time and cost of physical
experimentation, when it is feasible, are very high if compared to those of digital experimentation.

In this case study, DES was employed to examine different settings of the manufacturing cell un-
der study with the aim of improving specified performance measures. The layout of the digital model
employed for DES is shown in Figures 5 and 6.

Figure 5. Top view of the

manufacturing cell DES model.

Figure 6. 3D view of the

manufacturing cell DES model.

Page 8 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

4.2.1. DES for throughput time optimization

In the proposed simulation framework, the first aim of DES is to evaluate different scenarios to im-
prove the throughput time for a batch of the part number fabricated in the manufacturing cell. As
the grinding operation process is the longest one carried out in the manufacturing cell, it has a
strong impact on the overall throughput time: thus, two different hypotheses, both focused on the
grinding machine processing sequence, are identified.

In the first simulation case (Case A), the grinding machine starts carrying out a Stage 1 operation
on a new component. When Stage 1 is completed, another component is assembled on the Stage 1
fixture and then processed. After this, the grinding machine performs alternatively Stage 1 and
Stage 2.

In this way, only one fixture per grinding stage is required in Case A: while the Stage 1 fixture-
component assembly is inside the grinding machine, the next component ready for Stage 2 is as-
sembled on the Stage 2 fixture at the assembly station located at the entrance of the grinding
machine (element N. 2 in Figures 2 and 4).

In the second simulation case (Case B), the grinding machine performs all the Stage 1 operations
for the whole batch, and only when all the components have undergone Stage 1, it starts carrying
out Stage 2 on the entire batch. In Case B, in order to carry out assembly/disassembly of compo-
nents and fixtures while the grinding machine is working, two fixtures for each grinding stage are
required, for a total of 4 fixtures.

In both simulation cases, 3 shifts of 8 hours each, with breaks distributed during the day, are con-
sidered for the human labor, and the maximum availability of the grinding machine is set to 85% to
take into account stops and maintenance.

The results of the simulation runs for Case A and Case B show a very similar throughput time for
an entire batch of components: 64.3 h against 64.1 h. As a consequence, Case A seems to be the
optimal solution for several reasons; even if two fixtures per each grinding stage are available in
Case B, there is no significant advantage in terms of throughput time. This is because no setup is
required on the grinding machine to switch between Stage 1 and Stage 2, so that there is no signifi-
cant benefit in processing subsequent components with the same stage operation rather than alter-
nating Stage 1 and Stage 2. Moreover, the Work in Progress (WIP) of the manufacturing cell is much
higher in Case B: the maximum number of components in the system is equal to the batch, and the
first fully finished component is obtained only after completing all the Stage 1 operations on the
whole batch. Therefore, Case B requires a higher investment in terms of fixtures cost, a larger buffer
to collect the components waiting for Stage 2 operations and a longer time to have available a fully
finished component.

Table 2 shows the comparison between the two simulation cases in terms of utilization of ele-
ments (machines, robots and labors): it can be noticed that the utilization values are very close for
the two cases. In particular, the grinding machine is in both cases the bottleneck of the cell with a
utilization around 84%.

The utilization of the handling/deburring robot is quite low for both cases, as it is around 13%.

Table 2. Manufacturing cell elements utilization: Case A and Case B

Element Case A utilization (%) Case B utilization (%)
Grinding machine 84.0 84.3
CMM 9.3 9.4
Handling/deburring robot 13.2 13.3

Page 9 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

4.2.2. DES for elements utilization improvement

To justify the investment required by the automated robotic deburring station, a higher utilization of
the handling/deburring robot should be achieved.

To further exploit the capacity of the handling/deburring robot, additional part numbers, coming
from other manufacturing cells in the same production department, could be introduced in the au-
tomated deburring station for simulation. As long as the additional part numbers are geometrically
comparable with the ones fabricated in the upgraded manufacturing cell, the robot is able to per-
form deburring with only slight variations of the cycle time (as the latter is related to component
dimensions).

To verify this hypothesis, starting from the cell configuration for Case A, new elements and logics
are introduced in the DES model of the manufacturing cell. Novel logics for component routing are
set up, in particular for the entrance of an external part number, as this should not interfere with the
production cycle of the original part number.

As an example, the remaining time to the end of the grinding process is taken into consideration
as a decisional parameter for component routing. The grinding machine is the bottleneck of the
system and it should never be kept waiting because of the introduction of an additional part number,
as this would increase the entire batch throughput time.

Two different hypotheses are simulated through DES, respectively called Case C and Case D. In
Case C, the external part number components are introduced into the cell as a unique final batch
requiring Stage 1 and Stage 2 deburring operations to be performed on the same component one
immediately after the other. In Case D, the external part number components are introduced into
the cell as two subsequent batches: first a Stage 1 batch and then a Stage 2 batch, to be deburred
separately.

The simulation runs carried out for Case C and Case D provided new results about the utilization of
the cell elements, as shown in Table 3. The handling/deburring robot utilization was significantly
increased from 13 to 61% of batch throughput time for Case D. As regards the number of deburred
external part number components, this is much higher for Case D than for Case C: 115 against 36.

These results are explained by the fact that when the additional part number components are
deburred using two separate batches, one for Stage 1 deburring and the other for Stage 2 deburring,
their impact on the production cycle time of the original part number fabricated in the manufactur-
ing cell is much lower because their deburring cycle times are easier to manage.

Table 3. Manufacturing cell elements utilization: Case C and Case D

Element Case C utilization (%) Case D utilization (%)
Grinding machine 84.0 84.0
CMM 9.3 9.3
Handling/deburring robot 28.6 61.4

Page 10 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

Figure 7. Real robot tasks:

component grabbing, surface
inspection and deburring.

5. Simulation model validation

Model verification and validation represent a key issue in every simulation activity (Law, 2003). As
simulation models are used to support decision-making, it is important to determine whether a
model and its results are correct.

Different reasons can lead to a model’s failure: among these, inadequate model structure, incor-
rect input values, observation errors, system noise, misinterpretation of simulation results, inappro-
priate simulation software (Sargent, 2007).

Different levels of validation can be distinguished. Conceptual model validation assures that the
assumptions underlying the conceptual model are correct and that the model representation of the
problem is reasonable. Computerized model verification consists in assuring that the computer pro-
gramming and implementation of the conceptual model is correct. Operational validation aims at
determining that the model’s output behaviour has sufficient accuracy for the model’s intended
purpose (Sargent, 2007). Data validity is defined as ensuring that the data employed for model build-
ing, and experimentation are adequate and correct (Love & Back, 2000).

In this case study, the so-called predictive validation was performed on the DES simulation model
(Sargent, 2007). Comparisons were made between the system’s behavior and the model’s forecast
to determine if they are the same: the system data came from the physical manufacturing cell and
consist of time and throughput data of the real manufacturing operations.

As the physical system initially operates under the logics of Case A, the first comparison was carried
out by evaluating the results of the simulation carried out for the Case A model. Figure 7 shows the real
robot performing the sequence of tasks: component grabbing, surface inspection and deburring.

The batch, 1 kit of 34 components, throughput time of the real manufacturing cell is compared to
the results of the simulation run performed on the DES model for Case A: 65.3 h in the real system,
64.3 h in the DES model, with a difference of about 1.5%.

The main discrepancies between the simulation model and the real system are concerned with
the manual operations, in particular the assembly of parts and fixtures, as shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8. Comparison between
real system and simulation
model data.

Page 11 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

6. Conclusions
The fourth industrial revolution is not only represented by Internet-enabled interaction between
machines, robot, and computers but also by the increased use of digital tools, allowing for the virtual
representation of the real production environment at all levels, from the entire production plant to a
single machine or a specific process.

In this paper, a Digital Factory approach for manufacturing cell enhancement based on the em-
ployment of digital simulation tools and innovative ICT in the Industry 4.0 framework was present-
ed. In the proposed framework, at the physical level, data are acquired from the physical
manufacturing cell and communicated via ICT to the digital level, where they are used as input to
setup the digital simulation models. The use of internet-based communication may allow for regular
data input/output between the physical and the digital world. At the digital level, two different digi-
tal simulation tools are jointly employed, and their data are shared in order to support decision-
making on the optimal cell reconfiguration in terms of layout and performance. 3D Motion Simulation
is applied to determine the optimal manufacturing cell layout and dimensions as well as to identify
collision-free robot paths. The simulation results are then shared in the digital environment via
Internet-based ICT such as cloud technologies and used to feed the DES model, which is later em-
ployed to analyze different manufacturing cell production strategies and improve the cell perfor-
mance with reference to two main objectives: the first is the optimization of the throughput time,
and the second is the resource utilization improvement of the manufacturing cell. The simulation
results are employed to define the best strategy for the physical manufacturing system and then,
the behaviour of the physical system is compared to the model forecast to validate the model. As
the models are updated and valid, realizing a tight coupling between physical and digital world, they
can be effectively used to carry out decision-making.

The presented approach was illustrated with reference to an industrial case study represented by
the upgrade of an existing manufacturing cell for the fabrication of aircraft engine components. The
automation improvement involved the integration of an automated robotic deburring station into
the legacy manufacturing cell. The improvement of the automated deburring station utilization was
achieved by processing an amount of additional external part number components into the auto-
mated deburring station, without interfering with the original part number batch throughput time.
The optimal solution was identified as follows: the logic should alternate Stage 1 and Stage 2 on the
grinding machine and the additional external part number components should be deburred sepa-
rately for Stage 1 and Stage 2 deburring using the new automated deburring station. Digital model
validation was carried out by comparing the actual system behavior and the model forecast to de-
termine how well they coincide. The main discrepancies between the simulation model and the real
system concerned the manual operations, in particular the assembly of parts and fixtures. The fu-
ture continuation of the work will involve further comparisons between simulation model and sys-
tem behavior for several experimental conditions.

Acknowledgements Author details

The Fraunhofer Joint Laboratory of Excellence on Alessandra Caggiano1,2
Advanced Production Technology (Fh-J_LEAPT UniNaples) E-mail: [email protected]
at the Department of Chemical, Materials and Industrial ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3930-7344
Production Engineering, University of Naples Federico II,
Roberto Teti1,3
is gratefully acknowledged for its support to this research
E-mail: [email protected]
activity. 1
Fraunhofer Joint Laboratory of Excellence on Advanced
Production Technology (Fh-J_LEAPT UniNaples), Naples, Italy.
Funding
The research activities were carried out in the framework
2
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Naples
Federico II, P.le Tecchio 80, Naples 80125, Italy.
of the project CLOUD MODE, “CLOUD Manufacturing for
On-Demand manufacturing services” (000011–ALTRI_DR_
3
Department of Chemical, Materials and Industrial Production
3450_2016 _ RICERCA_ATENEO-CAGGIANO) funded by the Engineering, University of Naples Federico II, P.le Tecchio 80,
Naples 80125, Italy.
University of Naples Federico II within the “Programma per
il finanziamento della ricerca di Ateneo” [2016-2018].

Page 12 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

Citation information Maropoulos, P. G. (2003). Digital enterprise technology -

Cite this article as: Digital factory technologies for defining perspectives and research priorities. International
robotic automation and enhanced manufacturing cell Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 16(7–8),
design, Alessandra Caggiano & Roberto Teti, Cogent 467–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192031000115787
Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676. Matta, A., Semeraro, Q., & Tolio, T. (2005). Configuration of
AMSs. In A. Matta & Q. Semeraro (Eds.), Design of
References advanced manufacturing systems (pp. 125–189). Springer.
Bracht, U., & Masurat, T. (2005). The Digital Factory between ISBN 1-4020-2930-6.
vision and reality. Computers in Industry, 56(4), 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2931-4
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2005.01.008 Monostori, L. (2014). Cyber-physical production systems: Roots,
Caggiano, A., Caiazzo, F., & Teti, R. (2015). Digital factory expectations and R&D challenges. In Proceedings of the
approach for flexible and efficient manufacturing systems 47th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems, Procedia
in the aerospace industry. Procedia CIRP, 37, 122–127. CIRP 17 (pp. 9–13).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.08.015 Monostori, L., Kádár, B., Bauernhansl, T., Kondoh, S., Kumara, S.,
Caggiano, A., & Teti, R. (2012, June 12–13). Digital Reinhart, G., … Ueda, K. (2016). Cyber-physical systems in
manufacturing cell design for performance increase. In manufacturing. CIRP Annals, 65(2), 621–641.
1st CIRP Global Web Conference on Interdisciplinary https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2016.06.005
Research in Production Engineering, CIRPE, Procedia CIRP Mourtzis, D., Papakostas, N., Mavrikios, D., Makris, S., &
(Vol. 2, pp. 64–69). ISSN 2212-8271. Alexopoulos, K. (2011, September 28-30). The role of
Caggiano, A., & Teti, R. (2013). Modelling, analysis and simulation in digital manufacturing – Applications and
improvement of mass and small batch production outlook, keynote paper. In 7th international conference on
through advanced simulation tools. Procedia CIRP, 12, digital enterprise technology (DET 2011) (pp. 189–203).
426–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.09.073 Athens, Greece.
ElMaraghy, H. A. (2006). Flexible and reconfigurable Papakostas, N., Mavrikios, D., Makris, S., & Alexopoukos, K.
manufacturing systems paradigms. International Journal (2015). The role of simulation in digital manufacturing:
of Flexible Manufacturing Systems (IJFMS), 17(4), 261–276. Applications and outlook. International Journal of
Gershwin, S. B. (1994). Manufacturing systems engineering. Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 28, 3-24.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PTR Prentice Hall. Sargent, R. G. (2007, December 9–12). Verification and
Gregor, M., Medvecký, Š., Matuszek, J., & Štefánik, A. (2009). validation of simulation models. In Proceedings of the
Digital factory. 3. No. 3. Journal of Automation, Mobile 2007 winter simulation conference (pp.124–137).
Robotics & Intelligent Systems (JAMRIS), 3(3), 123–132. Washington, DC.
ISSN 1897-8649. Shariatzadeh, N., Lundholm, T., Lindberg, L., & Sivard, G. (2016).
Horizon. (2020). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/ Integration of digital factory with smart factory based on
horizon2020/en/h2020-section/industrial-leadership internet of things. Procedia CIRP, 50, 512–517.
Hosseinpour, F., & Hajihosseini, H. (2009, March). Importance https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.05.050
of simulation in manufacturing. 51. World Academy of Smith, J. S. (2003). Survey on the use of simulation for
Science, Engineering and Technology, 51, 285–288. ISSN manufacturing system design and operation. Journal of
2070–3724. Manufacturing Systems, 22(2), 157–171.
Kádár, B., Lengyel, A., Monostori, L., Suginishi, Y., Pfeiffer, A., & https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-6125(03)90013-6
Nonaka, Y. (2010). Enhanced control of complex Smith, J., Kreutzer, S., Moeller, C., & Carlberg, M. (2016).
production structures by tight coupling of the digital and Industry 4.0. Study for the ITRE committee (pp. 1–81).
the physical worlds. CIRP Annals, 59, 437–440. Westkämper, E. (2007b). Digital manufacturing in the global
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2010.03.123 era. In P. F. Cunha & P. G. Maropoulos (Eds.), Digital
Kühn, W. (2006). Digital factory - Integration of simulation enterprise technology: Perspectives and future challenges
enhancing the product and production process towards (pp. 3–14). New York, NY: Springer. ISBN 978-0-387-
operative control and optimisation. International Journal 49863-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-49864-5
of Simulation, 7(7), 27–39. ISSN 1473–8031 Westkämper, E. (2007a). Strategic development of factories
Law, A. M. (2003, December 7–10). Model verification and under the influence of emergent technologies. CIRP
validation. In S. Chick, P. J. Sanchez, D. Ferrin, & D. J. Annals, 56(1), 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Morrice (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 winter simulation cirp.2007.05.100
conference (pp. 66–70). New Orleans, LA. Westkämper, E., Constantinescu, C., & Hummel, V. (2006). New
Love, G., & Back, G. (2000, August 6–10). Model verification paradigms in manufacturing engineering: Factory life
and validation for rapidly developed simulation models: cycle. Annals of the Academic Society for Production
Balancing cost and theory. In Proceedings of the 18th Engineering, Research and Development, XIII(1), 143–147.
international conference of the system dynamics society. .
Bergen, Norway.

Page 13 of 14
Caggiano & Teti, Cogent Engineering (2018), 5: 1426676
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2018.1426676

© 2018 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Cogent Engineering (ISSN: 2331-1916) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com

Page 14 of 14