SUSTAINABLE

PRODUCTION
AUTOMATION

SUSTAINABLE
PRODUCTION
AUTOMATION
JINGSHAN LI, BENGT LENNARTSON,
YING (GINA) TANG, STEPHAN BILLER,
AND ANDREA MATTA

Sustainable Production Automation

Copyright Momentum Press, LLC, 2017.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic,
mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any otherexcept for brief quotations, not to exceed 400 words, without the prior permission of the
publisher.
First published by Momentum Press, LLC
222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017
www.momentumpress.net
ISBN-13: 978-1-60650-905-0 (print)
ISBN-13: 978-1-60650-906-7 (e-book)
Momentum Press Enterprise Engineering and Sustainability Collection
Cover and interior design by Exeter Premedia Services Private Ltd.,
Chennai, India
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Printed in the United States of America

This book is dedicated to our families

ABSTRACT
Manufacturing accounts for a significant portion of energy expenditure.
Thus, energy efficient and environmentally friendly (EEEF) manufacturing
practices are of significant importance.
Sustainability plays a key role to manufacturing, becoming a major
factor for manufacturers to be competitive in the global market. It would
not only be important to the energy and environmental sectors, but also be
substantially beneficial to society and economy. Sustainable manufacturing
covers a broad spectrum of manufacturing, including both implementation
of advanced manufacturing technology and developing energy-efficient
manufacturing systems, as well as extension of product life cycle.
Automation, as a vital factor to the success of sustainable manufacturing, plays a critical role. In recent years, it has attracted substantial
effort from researchers in both academia and industry to provide efficient scientific and engineering solutions for sustainable manufacturing.
This edited book of Sustainable Production Automation presents the recent
development of innovative algorithms, models, heuristics, and techniques
for production control and operation management in the area of sustainable
manufacturing systems.
In addition to overviews of recent development in sustainable manufacturing technology and practices, optimization and control methodologies for energy efficient manufacturing are the focuses in this volume.
Remanufacturing system modeling and analysis, which are key elements
for product life cycle, are also studied.
We expect this volume can stimulate more original, significant, visionary, and in-depth research in sustainable production automation, to improve
process, efficiency, productivity, quality, and reliability in manufacturing.

KEYWORDS
control, energy-efficient manufacturing, optimization, remanufacturing,
sustainable production automation

CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

xvii

PREFACE

xix

1 THE FUTURE OF WORK: SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Sustainability Performance Measurement
1.3 Selected Examples of Sustainable Manufacturing
1.4 3D Printing for Sustainable Manufacturing
1.5 Sustainable Manufacturing in the Age of Big Data
1.6 Conclusion
References

1
1
5
8
12
14
16
16

ENERGY EFFICIENT MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS: CURRENT

RESEARCH AND FUTURE CHALLENGES
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Energy Assessment of Machine Tools
2.3 Machine Tool Energy Model
2.4 Strategic Measures for Improving Energy Efficiency in
Machining
2.5 Conclusion
References
FROM TWEETS TO ENERGY OPTIMAL ROBOT STATIONS
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Energy Consumption in the Automotive Industry
3.3 Hybrid Robot Operations
3.4 Optimization of Hybrid Robot Operations
3.5 From Tweets to Knowledge
3.6 Conclusions
References

21
21
23
30
40
49
51
59
59
60
63
64
67
72
73

x CONTENTS

ENERGY REDUCTION IN PAINT SHOPS THROUGH ENERGYSENSITIVE ON-OFF CONTROL

4.1 Introduction
4.2 Literature Review
4.3 System Description
4.4 Modeling with Energy Zones
4.5 Energy-sensitive Control
4.6 Test Case
4.7 Conclusions
References

77
77
79
81
83
88
90
92
93

5 TRANSIENT ANALYSIS-BASED PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND

CONTROL FOR ENERGY-EFFICIENT PRODUCTION:
THEORY AND APPLICATION
5.1 Introduction and Research Background
5.2 Literature Review
5.3 System Modeling and Performance Measures
5.4 Transient Performance Evaluation of Bernoulli Serial
Lines Without Active Control
5.5 Analysis of Bernoulli Serial Lines with State-based
Machine Switch-on/off Control
5.6 Analysis of Bernoulli Serial Lines with Machine
Startup/Shutdown Scheduling: A Case Study
5.7 Conclusions and Future Work
References

117
120
122

ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MULTI-PRODUCT

MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS: EVALUATION AND PROPERTIES
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Literature Review
6.3 System Description and Problem Formulation
6.4 Energy Consumption Evaluation
6.5 General Distributed Processing Time Case
6.6 Monotonic Properties
6.7 Non-monotonic Properties
6.8 Conclusions
References

127
127
129
131
133
138
143
146
151
160

UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT IN REMANUFACTURING

PROCESS ROUTING
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Problem Statement

163
163
165

97
97
100
101
105
111

CONTENTS xi

7.3

Models for Analysis and Control of Remanufacturing

Process Routing
7.4 Comparison Results
7.5 Conclusions
References
INDEX

170
194
195
197
201

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1.

Machine tool physical decomposition in functional

modules and components.

23

Machine tool operational state table: example of

application.

25

Figure 2.3.

Machine power profile of a turning process.

27

Figure 2.4.

Machine power profile of a turning process in

the working and idle states.

28

Power demand for a classical machine tool divided into

fixed and load dependent components.

29

Machine Idle State: a component-based decomposition of fixed power consumption. The data represent
average values acquired on six machine tools (redrawn
using data from Li et al. (2011)).

30

Machine Working State: a component-based decomposition of average working power consumption of a

5-axis machining center (data acquired from a real
machining center). Machine average power 14.6 kW.

31

Figure 2.8.

Energy model classification.

35

Figure 2.9.

Classification of some papers from the literature

according to model type and approach.

37

Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.7.

Figure 2.10. Power breakdown of a machine tool according to machine

functional unit and machine state (redrawn using data
from [Dietmair and Verl 2009]).
38
Figure 2.11. A classification of energy efficient measures applied
in manufacturing at machine level. The figure is
adapted from Zein et al. (2011).

42

Figure 2.12. Qualitative energy over total production time curve in a

general manufacturing process. The process parameter
set changes along the curve.

43

xiv LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.13. Machine state model under a switching off/on control

policy without transitory states.

46

Figure 2.14. Machine state model under a switching off/on control

policy with transitory states.

46

Figure 3.1.

Estimation of the share of primary energy consumers

in an European car production from top-down according to Heil, Paulus, and Schacht (2014); Klger (2013). 62

Figure 3.2.

Example of primary energy demand of a fully automated car body production cell Rdger, Bey, and
Alting (2016).

62

Figure 3.3.

A station including two robots, a conveyor, and a fixture. 63

Figure 3.4.

Gantt chart of robot operations before and after

optimization.

70

Figure 3.5.

Original and optimized joint angles.

71

Figure 4.1.

Schematic layout of an exemplified, typical paint shop.

82

Figure 4.2.

Example of modeling a three-stage iron phosphate

pretreatment unit in two ways with energy zones. Low
resolution on the left side; high resolution on the right.
Arrows represent paths (directional links); boxes
represent energy zones.

84

Figure 4.3.

Automaton of an energy zone.

86

Figure 5.1.

M -machine serial production line.

102

Figure 5.2.

Two-machine Bernoulli serial production line.

105

Figure 5.3.

Analysis of M -machine Bernoulli serial

production line.

108

Analysis of serial lines with machines having

geometric reliability model.

110

Representing an assembly system by a group of virtual

serial lines Jia et al. (2016).

111

Figure 5.6.

Illustration of a two-machine Bernoulli line with

machine switch-on/off control.

114

Figure 5.7.

Virtual three-machine lines.

115

Figure 5.8.

Virtual two-machine line.

115

Figure 5.9.

Virtual lines construction based on the controlled

machines.

116

Figure 5.10. Comparison of simulation- and calculation-based

methods for transient performance evaluation.

116

Figure 5.11. Modeling of the power generator paint shop system.

118

Figure 5.4.
Figure 5.5.

LIST OF FIGURES xv

Figure 5.12. Effects of machine startup/shutdown control in

the power generator paint shop.

121

Figure 6.1.

A multi-product system with M products.

131

Figure 6.2.

ECR of all products with respect to setup time.

145

Figure 6.3.

ECR of all products with respect to the buffer size of

a single product.

146

Figure 6.4.

ECR of all products with respect to the processing rate. 148

Figure 6.5.

The bound of s for the non-monotonicity to occur, in

a two-product scenario.

149

The bound of s for the non-monotonicity to occur, in

a three-product scenario.

149

Figure 7.1.

Reverse logistic model (Tang and Li [2012]).

166

Figure 7.2.

Remanufacturing process flow (Li, Tang, Li, and Li

[2013]).

166

Different RPRs for used lathe spindles (Li, Tang, Li,

and Li [2013]).

168

The two types GERT output nodes: (a) Deterministic

output; (b) Probabilistic output.

172

Figure 7.5.

The parameters of a GERT network.

172

Figure 7.6.

Linear routing flow.

173

Figure 7.7.

Skipping routing flow.

173

Figure 7.8.

Feedback routing flow.

174

Figure 7.9.

Branching routing flow.

174

Figure 6.6.

Figure 7.3.
Figure 7.4.

Figure 7.10. The simplified RPRs of used lathe spindles (Li, Tang,
Li, and Li [2013]).

175

Figure 7.11. GERT-based RPR model for a lathe spindle

remanufacturing system (Li et al. 2013).

176

Figure 7.12. Arena simulation model and simulation process

(Li, Tang, Li, and Li [2013]).

180

Figure 7.13. The FCPN for the lather spindle remanufacturing in

Figure 7.10.

184

Figure 7.14. Basic architecture of the fuzzy learning system for

uncertain remanufacturing process time.

185

Figure 7.15. Fuzzy learning module.

186

Figure 7.16. The example membership function of a used machine

spindle.

186

xvi LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 7.17. (a) Fuzzy membership function for buffer waiting queue
length; (b) Fuzzy membership function for the machine
workload.
193
Figure 7.18. The learning of the membership function of (t1r ).
194
Figure 7.19. The evolution of the approximated mean of the output
membership function (t1r ) in remanufacturing time
is long set.
194
Figure 7.20. The evolution of mF value of a fuzzy rule.
195

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1.
Table 3.1.
Table 3.2.

Detailed references on process control for energy

saving
Low level events used by the transformation services

45
69

Hybrid robot operations identified from the example

system in Figure 3.3
Energy consumption and peak power reduction after
optimization. Robots used are KUKA KC30

72

Table 5.1.
Table 5.2.
Table 7.1.

The relative energy reduction potential revealed in the

test case
System parameters
Model validation
The logical nodes in a GERT network

91
118
120
171

Table 7.2.

The probability and time distribution

178

Table 7.3.

The comparison of calculation results and simulation

results
An evaluation method of inspection scores for the used
machine spindles under different kinds of failure
conditions
Initial inference rules used in the simulation system
Comparison of the average makespan

Table 3.3.
Table 4.1.

Table 7.4.

Table 7.5.
Table 7.6.

70

181

188
193
196

PREFACE
Going sustainable is noticeably becoming a major component of the
missions for manufacturers to stay globally competitive. The focus of sustainable production automation is on design, analysis, and management of
the processes involved in the product life cycle to have the minimal negative
impacts on society (environmental, economic, and social). Automation, as
a central part of production systems, plays a crucial role for manufacturers
to attain solutions to achieve sustainable development.
In recent years, significant advancements in technology, the fast growing economy, and rapidly changing market have generated numerous opportunities and challenges, leading to a paradigm change in manufacturing.
Sustainable production automation, as an effective way to seize the opportunities, responds to the challenges and enhances resource utilizations,
attracts substantial efforts from researchers in both academy and industry. The successful transition to sustainability depends on new designs,
techniques, and tools available for manufacturing that satisfies sustainable development requirement. Therefore, there is a need to systematically
address the methodology and theoretical foundation in the area.
This book volume is exclusively devoted to sustainable production
automation. It highlights the cutting edge research advances of innovative
algorithms, models, and optimization and control strategies in the area of
sustainable production systems.
Chapter 1 by Biller and Biller presents an overview of the selected
examples from the sustainable manufacturing practices and discusses new
technologies on the future of work for sustainable manufacturing.
Chapter 2 by Frigerio and Matta provides a structural review of the
current state of the research and future challenges in energy efficient manufacturing systems.
Chapter 3 by Bengtsson, Rdger, Riazi, Wigstrm, Bey, and Lennartson
describes an optimization service with a smart event-driven information
architecture to reduce energy consumption in running robot station.

xx PREFACE

Chapter 4 by Cronrath, Lennartson and Lemessi introduces a modeling approach for energy consumptions and energy-sensitive on-off control
strategies in paint shops.
Chapter 5 by Zhang, Chen, Jia, Wang, and Naebulharam presents the
theory and application of transient analysis-based performance evaluation
and control for energy-efficient production.
Chapter 6 by Feng, Kang, Zhao, Li, and Zheng introduces a Markov
chain model for performance evaluation of energy consumptions in multiproduct manufacturing systems.
Chapter 7 by Tang, Li, and Li discusses two formal models tackling
uncertainty management in modeling and analysis of remanufacturing process and planning.
The editors are grateful to Dr. Ningxuan Kang of Tsinghua University
and University of Wisconsin-Madison for his substantial efforts on preparing and editing the LaTex template, and the anonymous reviewers for their
helpful comments to improve the paper quality. In addition, we express our
deep gratitude to Professor Frank Chen, the Series Editor, and Joel Stein
of Momentum Press, who have provided incredible support to this book
volume.

CHAPTER 1

THE FUTURE OF WORK:

SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING
Bahar Biller and Stephan R. Biller
General Electric Global Research Center, Niskayuna, NY 12309, USA

1.1 INTRODUCTION
Each year, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory releases energy
flow charts that illustrate the national use of energy. For 2014, the U.S.
energy use is reported as approximately 98.3 quadrillion thermal units and
25 percent of this consumption is estimated to be incurred by the industrial
sector with a 20 percent energy loss. This energy flowchart also indicates
an increase of 3.2 quadrillion thermal units in energy use, in comparison to
year 2012, with 25 percent of this increase originating from the industrial
sector. Hence, the efficient use of energy for sustainability is an important
business challenge faced by the industrial sector. The sustainable generation, use, and transmission of energy is also critical to the global economy.
The goal of this chapter is to discuss the importance of establishing a sustainable production operations practice for long-term manufacturing business models. Our discussion is accompanied by the reported examples of
successful sustainability practices from the industrial sector. Furthermore,
we discuss the potential impact of disruptive technologies, in particular,
Additive Manufacturing and Industrial Internet, on the future of sustainable manufacturing.
The U.S. Department of Commerce defines sustainable manufacturing
as the creation of manufactured products that use processes that minimize
negative environmental impacts, conserve energy and natural resources,
are safe for employees, communities, and consumers and are economically

2 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

sound. Haapala et al. (2013) note the importance of including the concept
of closing resource loops (Guide and Van Wassenhove 2009) in this definition. As we still make progress toward a broadly accepted definition of
sustainable manufacturing, a close look at the existing literature reveals the
recognition of sustainability as gaining increasing importance in academic,
industrial, and government research agendas. In fact, sustainability is one
of the categories identified by the U.S. National Academy of Engineering
as a grand challenge. This trend for sustainability is also evident in industry
in various company initiatives.
Confino (2014) highlights the U.S. corporations with the best practices
in sustainability and makes a note of the growing number of companies
with initiatives to overcome sustainability challenges. For example, General
Electric (GE) defines sustainability as the alignment of business strategy
to meet societal needs, even while the environmental impact is minimized
and social development is advanced. The commitment to sustainability is
embedded at every level of the company from high-visibility initiatives
such as Ecomagination and healthymagination to day-to-day safety and
compliance management around the world (General Electric 2016). In a
similar manner, we see many companies publish their annual sustainability
reports where they give information about their economic, environmental, social, and governance performance. The common goal is to optimize
energy use subject to maintaining services and the quality of the resources
and environment over time.
Efficient energy use is important for the success of any industrial company as it benefits not only the customers but also the society. Weisman
(2015) identifies the top benefits of manufacturing sustainability initiatives as capital optimization, scalability, predictability of production outcomes and prevention of waste and downtimes, and improved employee
output. Also, reduced energy consumption leads to decreased emissions of
greenhouse gases and other air pollutants into the environment. Furthermore, efficient energy use helps reduction in the operational costs of the
facilities.
A study of the global energy flows shows that more than one fourth
of the worlds energy is used in industrial facilities (Evans and Annunziata
2012). Bohringer et al. (2012) provide empirical evidence for the positive relation between production growth and energy and environmental
improvement investments. As discussed in Brundage et al. (2015), it is,
therefore, critical to investigate how to reduce the energy consumption of
production facilities to attain sustainability in the manufacturing industry. Toward achieving this objective, Kanoglu and Karabay (2008) break
down the use of energy in industrial facilities into the following three areas
considering the main objectives of consuming energy:

THE FUTURE OF WORK 3

To operate equipment such as furnaces, machine tools, and heating

and cooling systems as outlined by the process flow and to enable
the functioning of the supporting operational systems
To operate process services such as compressed air, steam, and water
use for production
To perform building services such as space heating, ventilation, and
lighting
Focusing on a packaging film manufacturing facility, Kanoglu and
Karabay (2008) investigate the effectiveness of a series of efficient energy
use ideas such as installing high motion sensors and eliminating unnecessary lighting (see Section 2 for more details). It is reported that a reduction of 16 percent is achieved in the total energy consumption by the
implementation of their energy saving ideas. We encounter similar examples of energy saving studies across various companies. Despeisse et al.
(2011) present examples of manufacturing use from steel to automotive
glass and aluminum to metal forging industries: Compressed air system
improvements increase production at a tin mill; mill-water pumping system optimization leads to higher efficiency and lower demand for water
for process cooling and reduces the amount of chemicals needed for water
treatment; compressed air system optimization improves production at a
metal forging plant, resulting in lower energy use, lower maintenance costs,
and enhanced product quality; and aluminum recycling in the automotive
after-market reduces aluminum waste from 8 percent to 1.5 percent. Similar energy savings achievements have also been reported at GE as part
of the initiative, Ecomagination. This initiative is a commitment to invest
in research and development, launch new solutions that save money and
reduce environmental impact for the customers, while minimizing the environmental footprint. Since its launch, Ecomagination has been reported
to have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent and improved
water reuse and the energy intensity of operations by 50 percent (Hower
2013).
Swisher (2006) discusses four different ways that companies can move
toward long-run sustainability with focus on their production processes.
First, increasing the recycling rate can decrease pressure on the energy
sources due to increased availability and reduction in waste flows. It is,
therefore, suggested that companies design more durable and recyclable
products and encourage recycling through education, awareness campaigns,
and consumer recycling incentives. Second, waste flows can be reduced
through more efficient production processes together with end-of-pipe solutions. This would have the additional benefit of slowing down the depreciation of the natural capital stock. Third, effort can be made to preserve the

4 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

indirect amenity service and life support functions of the environment with
the goal of ensuring the continued operation of vital natural capital services.
Fourth, Swisher discusses the importance of using more efficient production processes that operate with renewable energy sources. In a similar
manner, Despeisse et al. (2011) discuss the role of the four R strategies,
namely, reduction, remanufacturing, recycling, and reuse, on establishing
sustainable manufacturing practices. Hence, companies that demonstrate
the potential for the most success at sustainability are those that adopt
a holistic approach by considering all operations from product design to
manufacturing operations to distribution, even extending to the way offices
and plants are built and operated (Dreher et al. 2009). It is, therefore, no
surprise that all successful companies have implemented a combination of
technological measures and employee awareness, training, and action on
their path to sustainable operations management.
With regard to the availability of options to companies to decrease the
retrieval rate of resources from the energy base, it is important to recognize
the increasing body of work on sustainable energy portfolio management.
The decision-support tools resulting from this research stream is expected
to enable the industrial sector to make better sustainable production system investments with optimized economical and environmental benefits.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory notes the clear change in the
energy flow diagrams published over time as new technologies are developed. For instance, alternative energy sources such as wind and solar had
not even figured in the 1982 energy flow chart. In 2015, however, 13 percent
of the electricity in the United States was generated from renewable energy
resources. Furthermore, the Energy Information Administration expects
the total amount of renewable used in the electric power sector to increase
by 11.3 percent in 2016 and by 4.4 percent in 2017 (http://www.eia.gov).
This changing landscape in the energy industry together with the increasing demand for energy use have been generating great opportunities for
selected companies to internally launch energy startups (Brulte 2016).
These startups are expected to benefit from the balance sheets and brand
recognition of the parent companies. GE and Lockheed Martin are the
two examples of such companies. Both of them have been leveraging their
brand to get into the space with energy startups inside of their corporate
structures. While the topic of energy portfolio management is beyond the
scope of the discussion in this chapter, it is important to note the expanding body of work on performing energy systems analysis with the potential
to complement the sustainable manufacturing decisions with a strategic
perspective. We refer the interested reader to Despres et al. (2015) for a
comprehensive review of the state-of-the-art in the energy system modeling
literature.

THE FUTURE OF WORK 5

The remainder of the chapter is organized as follows. In Section 2, we

present a brief review of the literature on developing performance indicators of sustainability, which have proven useful to quantify the success
of companies moving toward long-run sustainability. We provide selected
examples from sustainable manufacturing applications in Section 3. We
discuss 3D printing as the disruptive technology with expected positive
impact on cleaner and greener manufacturing in Section 4. We discuss
potential implications of living in the world of big data for performing
effective sustainability studies in Section 5. We conclude with a discussion of further challenges faced by the manufacturing sector striving for
sustainability in Section 6.

1.2 SUSTAINABILITY PERFORMANCE

MEASUREMENT
The ability to measure the sustainability performance of an industrial facility is critical for assessment and improvement of the sustainable operations. The development of a decision-support tool to enhance sustainable
operations management would be guided by the chosen set of sustainable
performance indicators. Hence, the selection of both qualitative and quantitative sustainability measures of performance is an important problem to
address.

1.2.1 DEVELOPING SUSTAINABILITY METRICS

There exists a significant body of work on the development of sustainability
metrics. The National Institute of Standards and Technology conducted its
workshop on sustainable manufacturing with the focus on metrics, standards, and infrastructure in 2009. Singh et al. (2011) provide a summary
of the sustainability assessment techniques together with a list of 41 sustainability indices proposed on a global scale. The authors also present an
overview of several high-level frameworks which may be beneficial in the
beginning of a large sustainability project intended to forge a link between
strategic and operational issues over the projects planning horizon. For
example, the pressure-state-response framework illustrates the impact of
human activities that put pressure on the environment and lead to changes
in the quality and quantity of environmental conditions (OECD 1998). An
extension of this framework results in the Driving Pressure State Impact
Response model, which has been adopted by the European Environmental
Agency and the European Statistical Office. The indicator framework of
the Lowell Center for sustainable production, on the other hand, illustrates

6 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

a five-step approach toward the identification of sustainable system indicators (Spohn 2004):

Step 1: Facility compliance/conformance indicators

Step 2: Facility material use and performance indicators
Step 3: Facility effect indicators
Step 4: Supply chain and product life-cycle indicators
Step 5: Sustainable system indicators

The other examples include the hierarchical structure of the Global

Reporting Initiative framework (GRI 2002), the United Nations Commission for sustainable development theme indicator framework, the Institute
of Chemical Engineers sustainability metrics, the Wuppertal sustainable
development indicator framework (Labuschagnea et al. 2005), and the
framework of sustainability assessment tools developed by Ness et al.
(2007). Detailed descriptions of these sustainability performance metric
development efforts can be found in Haapala et al. (2013).
1.2.2 WORKING WITH PRODUCTION SUSTAINABILITY
METRICS
A close look at the production literature reveals the widespread use of
the following performance indicators to measure the sustainability of a
production system:
The total energy consumption
The carbon footprint
The total waste
Specifically, the total energy consumption can be measured by the
peak period energy use. It may also be measured with respect to the energy
consumed from different (renewable and non-renewable) energy sources.
The carbon footprint is often considered to be affected by machine selection
as well as process plan selection. The total waste is, on the other hand,
primarily driven by the number of products and the energy consumed by
the waste products. We refer the reader to Dreher et al. (2009) for a more
granular itemization of the sustainable manufacturing metrics.
There exists a significant body of work on predicting consumption in
manufacturing based on the physics-based models of the manufacturing
processes of organizations that adopt Smart Manufacturing. Specifically,
Smart Manufacturing results from the heavy use of advanced intelligent
systems to enable rapid manufacturing, dynamic response, and real-time

THE FUTURE OF WORK 7

optimization of production (Smart Manufacturing Leadership Coalition

2011). As will be discussed in detail in Section 1.5, data analytics is a
key enabler for implementing smart manufacturing. A by-product of the
enhanced predictive analytics capability of smart manufacturing is the
development of the ability to perform sustainable manufacturing.
With the focus on a metal cutting process, Shin, Woo, and Rachuri
(2014) discuss the development of an analytics model to predict power
consumption by building on a big data infrastructure. More specifically,
the authors retrieve a training data set from the accumulated raw data
according to the cause-effect relations and use time-series modeling to
obtain descriptive statistics in the first phase. The second phase performs
analytic modeling on the training data set with a machine learning tool.
While it is beyond the scope of Shin, Woo, and Rachuri (2014), the next
step would be the identification of the optimal machining process parameters to improve the eco-efficiency of the corresponding manufacturing
process. As an example of this second step, we refer the reader to Winter
et al. (2014). Specifically, the authors focus on a grinding process, develop
an empirical model to represent the grinding process, and determine the
process parameters that lead to Pareto-optimal solutions for improving the
eco-efficiency of the grinding operations.
However, Brundage et al. (2015) note that this form of sustainable performance measurementfocusing on the total energy consumption, the
carbon footprint, and the wastedoes not address the economic impact
of these sustainability decisions on the production system management.
Instead, the authors approach the production sustainability problem from an
energy economics perspective. As a product, the plant manager is provided
with a quantitative tool utilizing readily available sensor data to predict the
energy cost savings in performing maintenance on specific machines in
the manufacturing line. Accordingly, the decision is made between replacing a part and replacing an entire machine on the production line. The
authors further introduce a control methodology that uses real sensor data
to selectively turn off certain machines to reduce the overall energy cost
with minimal impact on production.
In Johnson et al. (2016), we provide a detailed presentation of a business analytics approach for production design and operations optimization.
More specifically, we discuss a set of analytical methods with the capability of raising the economic return while reducing the financial and operational risks in the design and operations of a manufacturing ecosystem. We
also discuss how to utilize activity-based costing to guide the plant manager in an effort to reduce the unit cost of production, represented as the
sum of the costs incurred in each step of each production area associated
with each product manufactured in the factoryto meet the cost target.

8 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

These analytical methodologies covered in Johnson et al. (2016) would

be of great use in the search for an efficient energy use with favorable
economic and environmental impact. For example, this set of analytical
methodologies may be utilized to determine modifications to the existing
equipment portfolio to meet the increasing demand. The choice may be
between the investment option with newer technology and lower carbon
print but at a higher investment cost and the alternative investment option
with older technology and higher carbon print at a lower investment cost.
The ambiguity about which option is optimal is often due to the uncertainty
of the future energy landscape. Combining real options thinking with our
business analytics approach to operations optimization reveals the optimal
investment policy even under extreme uncertainty, allowing management
to successfully hedge against the energy system risk.

1.3 SELECTED EXAMPLES OF SUSTAINABLE

MANUFACTURING
Organizations use materials, labor, and equipment as the resources while
demanding utilities such as electricity, natural gas, compressed air, steam,
chilled water, and water to operate their manufacturing facilities. It is often
the case that the use of these resources and utilities is not optimized and
operating costs are not controlled. The first step to manufacturing sustainability is the management of resources and utilities with the objectives of
maximizing economic return and minimizing unfavorable environmental
impact.
Kanoglu and Karabay (2008) elaborate on the simple and economical
ways of saving energy in facilities. Examples include

the use of efficient illumination, high efficiency motors, and boiler

systems;
the installation of high motion sensors and programmable thermostats;
the repair of air leaks in compressed air lines;
the insulation of hot and cold surfaces; and
the practice of pre-heating combustion air.

Another example comes from a summary workout visual in Energy

Star (2014) describing a situation of 117 manual fans being left running in
unoccupied areas over the weekend. The cost of implementing a standardized work to shut fans off at the end of a shift is reported to cost $70 in
return for a savings of $6,600 with a pay-back period of 0.01 years.
In particular, Kanoglu and Karabay (2008) considered a packaging film
manufacturing facility and investigated the effectiveness of decreasing the

THE FUTURE OF WORK 9

compressor power by evaporative cooling, minimizing air leaks on compressed air lines, installing high motion sensors, high-efficiency illumination, and eliminating unnecessary lighting. In fact, the Environmental
Protection Agency reports that the amount of energy that is wasted due to
lighting and cooling of empty rooms exceeds 30 percent of the total energy
use (Narayan 2016). The authors further considered the replacement of
standard fluorescent lamps with high-efficiency ones and mercury vapor
lamps with sodium ones as well as the use of the high-efficiency electric motors and boilers as energy conservation measures. Subsequently,
a reduction of 16 percent in the total energy consumption was achieved,
resulting in a significant amount of savings.
A natural question to ask is how to identify the energy savings opportunities that are discussed in detailed in Kanoglu and Karabay (2008). At GE,
a process used to identify such opportunities for energy use optimization is
the Energy Treasure Hunt process. This process was originally developed
by Toyota Motor Corporation as a lean manufacturing process and has
been refined to determine the projects that drive efficiency into the operations. Specifically, the Energy Treasure Hunt is a two-to-three day event
that engages employees in identifying low-cost energy savings opportunities from behavioral, operational, and maintenance actions. Opportunities
for energy efficiency improvement and energy savings can be divided into
four overlapping categories (Energy Star 2014):

Operational savings
Small capital project savings
Large capital project savings
Procurement savings

Specifically, an operational saving can be achieved by eliminating

unnecessary use of existing equipment. A small capital project saving may
come from lighting upgrades while a large capital project saving may be
the result of a building renovation. Finally, a procurement saving may arise
from the renegotiation of the utility supply contracts.
Energy Star (2014) provides a tabulation of 31 examples of energy
saving opportunities, which are reported to have been identified by Energy
Treasure Hunts conducted across different companies. In the case of a
need to prioritize the savings actions to achieve higher levels of ecoefficiency, tools built on environmental costing methods can be utilized
(Cagno, Micheli, and Trucco 2012). Since 2000, the Energy Treasure Hunts
have identified the majority of the energy-reduction opportunities available
to Toyota Motor Corporation. The companys Environmental Action Plans

10 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

incorporate these opportunities to achieve plant and corporate energy and

greenhouse gas reduction goals.
At GE, Treasure Hunts are run by people from various functions in
businesses. In addition to Treasure Hunts, businesses routinely engage in
identifying projects that may reduce energy and greenhouse emissions for
the purpose of making business-efficiency improvements. Since the adoption of the EnergyTreasure Hunt approach in 2006, more than 2,400 energyefficiency and energy-and-greenhouse emissions-reduction projects have
been implemented. These projects are reported to have saved more than a
cumulatively estimated $350 million and to have reduced energy and greenhouse emissions by more than 3.7 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents.
During 2014, 99 projects that optimize energy use were tracked as either
completed or proposed for implementing across GEs global operations.
Approximately, $700,000 was saved from projects completed in 2014. In
the same year, GE lowered its absolute energy use by 19 percent from the
adjusted 2004 baseline. GEs energy intensity also improved by 32 percent
from the 2004 baseline year, measured as energy per dollar revenue. This
performance was due to both an increase in revenue and a further reduction
in energy usage in 2014 from 2004 (General Electric 2016). These are the
examples of the benefits of the energy saving efforts made only in a single
company. Today, Treasure Hunts are used across many different industry
sectors to find energy savings opportunities. One can easily imagine how
significant the combined benefit can be to the global economy and the
environment.
Another example of a company that has successfully followed the
Energy Treasure Hunt process is the apparel manufacturer Hanesbrands.
The company is reported to have reduced energy costs by more than $4 million dollars in one year, primarily attributed to shifting employees thinking
about energy use. In the case of Merck & Company, the Treasure Hunts
have achieved more than $12-million savings from five plants, equivalent
to 20 percent of the companys greenhouse gas reduction goal. The Treasure
Hunt participants at Intertape Polymer Groupa manufacturer of packaging materialsalso identified savings opportunities, which are reported to
have exceeded $200,000 and achieved a reduction of 1,200 metric tons of
greenhouse gases.
Another energy savings opportunity for a manufacturing facility is
through the prevention of the waste products. As discussed in Guide et al.
(2000), a manufacturing system focusing on the recovery of the materials
that are used to manufacture and deliver products often have the ability
to minimize the negative environmental impact of production by reusing
materials, reducing energy use, and decreasing the need to landfill industrial products. For example, Interface Fabrics estimates that Fords use of

THE FUTURE OF WORK 11

post-industrial recycled materials conserves up to 600,000 gallons of water,

1.8 million pounds of carbon dioxide equivalents, and the equivalent of
more than 7 million kilowatt hours of electricity (Reliable Plant 2015).
It is important for manufacturing companies to move toward sustainability by also considering the linkage between the smart grid and the
manufacturing operations management. Consequently, the capability is
developed to communicate with the grid to reduce energy consumption.
However, it remains to be a challenge to deal with the power interruptions
which are reported to cost European Union businesses 150 billion Euro
each year. Similarly, the outages cost the U.S. economy an average of $80
billion each year. In a recent study on Indian manufacturing, the average
reported level of shortages is found to reduce annual plant revenues and
producer surplus of the average plant by 5 percent-10 percent (Allcott,
Collard-Wexler, and OConnell 2015). In response to power shortages,
Chinas firms from 1999 to 2004 have exhibited a shift from make to
buy of intermediate inputs to production, as a result of which unit production cost has increased by eight percent (Fisher-Vanden, Mansur, and
Wang 2015). Furthermore, the power interruptions cost utilities in penalties, repairs, overtime and customer service. The smart grid technologies
of companies aim to overcome these challenges, leading to an increasing
number of success stories.
A well-reported example of the manufacturing sustainability practice
is to integrate the shifting patterns of electricity usage with the production
operations and subsequently reduce the demand on the electrical grid. A
recent application of this electricity demand response approach is reported
in Brundage et al. (2015). Specifically, the authors discuss the integration
of the manufacturing facilitys HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) system with the production operations to optimize energy cost
savings.
Another example comes from EDF Energy which is one of Great
Britains largest energy companies. EDF Energy is known to have worked
with GE to create automatic fault isolation and re-routing schemes by utilizing the GE Distribution Management System hardware and software. As
a result, fewer consumers are affected by outages and service is restored
faster. The system has been reported to result in a 20 percent reduction in
customer interruptions and a 30 percent reduction in customer minutes lost
in the first 18 months of the operation.
A recently released GE report presents the worlds first smart solar grid,
a prototype for an end-to-end system from the consumer to storage to the
distribution grid, which could one day allow cities, and hence, manufacturing facilities, to function with the generation of more renewable energy
(Egan 2016). More specifically, a GE business and a French distribution

12 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

grid operator have spent four years in building the grid at a location relying
on a single electricity supply line, which drives up the risk of outages, especially during summer months when demand becomes significantly higher.
The team has modernized the existing grid with software and automatic
switches, placed solar panels on buildings and installed a centralized onemegawatt battery to store and release excess electricity. The result is a smart
grid that can be more flexible and efficient in sending power to the grid. It
is natural to expect such a smart grid, which is expected to cut generation
costs by 20 percent by reducing the need for building up excess power
generation capacity, to have direct impact on the sustainability efforts of
the manufacturing industry.
As we move to being always connected, we expect to encounter an
increasing number of similar smart-grid examples for sustainability. Hence,
the smart grid will naturally play a critical role in the adoption of energy
innovation. As a result of being connected to automated and secure network infrastructures, we expect smart grids to save energy, reduce costs and
increase the reliability of always-on electricity. Therefore, it will continue to
be important to innovate integrated solutions for smart grid, ranging from
demand optimization to distribution, transmission, asset and workforce
optimization. Driven by the need to offer enhanced service to their customers, we expect software sciences and analytics to play roles of increasing
importance on a variety of areas including network operations, load management and system balancing, data hosting and data security management.

1.4 3D PRINTING FOR SUSTAINABLE

MANUFACTURING
3D printing, also known as Additive Manufacturing, enables not only the
engineers at a company but also individuals in their homes to print threedimensional objects. This is done by feeding the 3D printer with a welldesigned electronic blueprint or design file that describes where to place
the raw material in a layer-by-layer fashion. 3D printers do not cut or mold
things into shape the way traditional manufacturing machines do. Creating
an object in layers opens up the possibility to physically output a broader
range of digital concepts.
3D printing is not a new technology. 3D printers have been used in the
manufacturing industry for decades. Nevertheless, only 0.02 percent of all
goods in the United States are produced by using 3D printing today. Boeings 787 Dreamliner is known to have at least thirty-two different 3D parts.
Dental labs print custom crowns in less than an hour from X-rays while there
are many people using printed titanium and ceramic replacement knees all

THE FUTURE OF WORK 13

over the world (Lipson and Kurman 2013). 3D printing also enables the
production of geometrically complex structures such as aircraft engine
brackets with substantially reduced weight (Annunziata and Biller 2014).
It is, therefore, no surprise that 3D printing technology has received considerable attention as the future of manufacturing in recent years. This is
primarily due to the advances in computing power, new design software,
new materials and the Internet. It is projected that over 100,000 parts may
be additively manufactured by GEs Aviation business by 2020. It is also
estimated that the weight of a single aircraft could be reduced by 1,000
pounds and this would lead to reduced fuel consumption. These characteristics make 3D printing a valuable technology in an effort to increase
efficiency, reduce waste, and make the manufacturing industry more sustainable than it is today.
Lipson and Kurman (2013) identify the ten principles of 3D printing as follows: (1) free manufacturing complexity; (2) free variety; (3) no
assembly required; (4) zero lead time; (5) unlimited design space; (6) zero
skill manufacturing; (7) compact, portable manufacturing; (8) less waste by
product; (9) infinite shades of materials; and (10) precise physical replication. In particular, principle eight hints on the potential of 3D printing as a
sustainable manufacturing technology. For example, 3D printers that work
with metal create less waste than do the conventional metal manufacturing
equipment, which is estimated to turn 90 percent of the original metal into
waste. Nevertheless, there is still ambiguity around the quality management for 3D printed products. As printing materials improve and quality
of a 3D printed object is better managed, additive manufacturing could be
a greener way to make things. In addition, storing ready-to-print design
files, or digital inventories, is more eco-friendly than maintaining environmentally costly warehouses that are full of physical inventory. Being able
to print a replacement part when it is needed and where it is needed can
improve order fulfillment, and hence, customer satisfaction. This can also
avoid the costs and risks of shipping the part from a production facility,
eliminating a considerable portion of the transportation phase from the supply chain. Furthermore, 3D printing technologies have great potential to
work with recycled and earth-friendly printing materials with the capability
to enable green supply chain management (Lipson and Kurman 2013).
Today, the environmental and economic benefits of 3D printing are
projected to transform traditional manufacturing through cost reductions,
energy savings, and reduced CO2 emissions. Hardcastle (2015) proposes
that 3D printing can potentially reduce manufacturing costs by $170 billion
to $593 billion, energy use by 2.54 to 9.30 exajoules, and CO2 emissions
by 130.5 to 525.5 metric tons by 2025. The range within each saving is due
to the immature state of the technology and the associated uncertainties

14 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

of predicting market developments. As the progress in the development

of additive manufacturing capabilities continues, it is expected to collect
more test data and enhance our prediction of the untapped potential future
of additive manufacturing for manufacturing sustainability.

1.5 SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING IN THE AGE

OF BIG DATA
Today we live in an era of Big Data. This presents us with an opportunity
to use advanced analytics to extract information from data and use this
information to make better decisions resulting in greater operational efficiency accompanied by reductions both in cost and risk. At the same time,
we witness the digital transformation of the world to be more connected
through intelligent machines and people at work. We call this concept the
Industrial Internet (Evans and Annunziata 2012).
Specifically, the combination of Big Data analytics with the Internet
of Things (IoT) forms the core of Industrial Internet, which is considered
to be composed of three main elements:

Intelligent Machines: Connects the worlds machines, facilities,

fleets, and networks with advanced sensors, controls, and software
applications
AdvancedAnalytics: Combines the power of physics-based analytics,
predictive algorithms, automation, and deep domain expertise
People at Work: Connection at work or on the move, any time to
support more intelligent design, operations, maintenance and higher
service quality, and safety.
It is, therefore, natural to expect significant advances in the journey to
sustainable manufacturing in the age of Big Data.
Annunziata and Biller (2014) identify an important impact of the digital transformation on the manufacturing world as the ability to shift to preventive, condition-based maintenance and, subsequently, to zero unplanned
down time. Arming the machines with sensors, it is possible to collect enormous amount of data that can be used to obtain the machines operational
profile. It is also the case that the sensors are showing significant improvements in terms of delivering more data both in quantity and quality. The
machine-learning algorithms are especially well suited to learn from the
collected data. For example, the prototype, developed by Shin, Woo, and
Rachuri (2014) to carry out predictive analytics for power consumption in
manufacturing, is built with a machine-learning tool. Data analytics and

THE FUTURE OF WORK 15

machine learning also form the core of the machine monitoring system
developed by Bhinge et al. (2014) for the prediction of energy usage of a
milling machine. This is an example of an integration of digital and physical
worlds of software and hardware into a single unit. The resulting improvement in the operational efficiency will naturally lead to significant energy
savings, contributing to sustainable manufacturing.
It is plausible to expect the benefits of the Industrial Internet to go
beyond a manufacturing facility. As the sensors get smaller and more
durable, we see examples of data collection from the test products after
they leave the manufacturing facility. The data collected in this manner
may still contribute to the manufacturing processes in place. Mars (2015)
notes that BMW outfits test cars with thousands of sensors that send data
to the manufacturing facility where predictive analytics is utilized to make
improvements in the next manufacturing stage. Mars (2015) also notes that
the practice of utilizing the power of real-time analysis of big data to benefit
equipment maintenance is followed by an increasing number of companies
including General Electric, John Deere, and Pratt & Whitney. As the examples of these practices become more widespread, we also expect that Big
Data, together with artificial intelligence, machine learning, and the IoT,
will enable the transformation of the electric grid so as to be cleaner, more
affordable, and more reliable.
Next, we discuss the Industrial Internet Consortium (IIC) with the
potential to play a role in todays digital industrial transformation. IIC was
founded in 2014 by General Electric together with AT&T, Cisco, IBM, and
Intel to bring together industry playersfrom multinational corporations
to academia and governmentsto accelerate the development, adoption
and widespread use of Industrial Internet technologies. Today, IIC has 237
companies as members.
Another consortium demonstrating the industry momentum for Industrial Internet is the AllSeen Alliance and Open Interconnect Consortium.
However, this consortium focuses on device-level connectivity while IIC
has the following three primary areas of activity: Community engagement,
technology and security, and testbeds. Specifically, a testbed is a controlled
experimentation platform, conforming to IIC technical references, where
solutions can be deployed and tested in an environment that resembles realworld conditions. Testbeds explore real-world implementation of Industrial
Internet solutions and have the potential to generate requirements and priorities for establishing organizational standards.
The two IIC approved testbeds are the Industrial Digital Thread testbed
and the Smart Grid Management testbed sponsored by selected members of the IIC. The Industrial Digital Thread testbed is projected to capture and analyze real-time sensory and historical data sets at the design,

16 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

manufacturing, field testing, and service phases of production. This testbed

is, therefore, expected to generate insights that can help field engineers and
service teams better identify the root cause of component failure and provide faster corrections to flaws in design engineering and manufacturing
operations as a step forward to enhanced sustainability. The Smart Grid
Testbed is, on the other hand, the consortiums first energy-focused testbed
with the objective of integrating real-time analytics with energy management to increase efficiencies. The insights to be generated from this testbed
may be beneficial for further integration with the production systems to
contribute to the future of work for sustainable manufacturing.

1.6 CONCLUSION
This chapter provides an overview of the selected examples from sustainable manufacturing practices reported to date. The chapter also discusses the impact of disruptive technologies3D printing and Industrial
Interneton the future of work for sustainable manufacturing. With the
increasing amounts of education and awareness campaigns on sustainability and consumer recycling incentives, we expect more and more companies
to engage in Energy Treasure Hunts to achieve the first-step energy savings. The second step, which poses the key challenge, is to recognize the
connection among intelligent machines, analytics, and people at work and
determine the manufacturing decisions to lead to even more significant
energy savings. However, this requires the widespread use of the sensors
from design to manufacturing to market to collect reliable data. Additionally, the development of advanced analytics to enable learning from the
connected world becomes another key challenge for the analytics community to overcome. We expect the successful advances in this domain to have
a critical impact on the future of work for sustainable manufacturing.

REFERENCES
Allcott, H., A. Collard-Wexler, and S.D. OConnell. 2015. How Do Electricity
Shortages Affect Industry? Evidence from India. American Economic Review
106, no. 3, pp. 587624.
Annunziata, M., and S. Biller. 2014. The Future of Work. GE Report.
Bhinge, R., N. Biswas, D. Dornfeld, M. Helu, K.H. Law, J. Park, and S. Rachuri.
2014. An Intelligent Machine Monitoring System for Energy Prediction using
a Gaussian Process Regression. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Big
Data, IEEE, Washington, DC, 97886.

THE FUTURE OF WORK 17

Bohringer, C., U. Moslener, U. Oberndorfer, and A. Ziegler. 2012. Clean and
Productive? Empirical Evidence from the German Manufacturing Industry.
Research Policy 41, no. 2, pp. 44251.
Brundage, M.P., Q. Chang, J. Zou, Y. Li, J. Arinez, and G. Xiao. 2015. Energy
Economics in the Manufacturing Industry: A Return on Investment Strategy.
Energy 93, pp. 142635.
Cagno, E., G.J.L. Micheli, and P. Trucco. 2012. Eco-Efficiency for Sustainable
Manufacturing:An Extended Environmental Costing Method. Production Planning and Control 23, no. 2, pp. 7982.
Confino, J. 2014. Best Practices in Sustainability: Ford, Starbucks and More. The
Guardian, USA.
Despeisse, M., F. Mbaye, P.D. Ball, and A. Levers. 2011. The Emergence of
Sustainable Manufacturing Practices. Production Planning and Control,
pp. 123.
Despres, J., N. Hadjsaid, P. Criqui, and I. Noirot. 2015. Modeling the Impacts of
Variable Renewable Sources on the Power Sector: Reconsidering the Typology
of Energy Modeling Tools. Energy 80, pp. 48695.
Dreher, J., M. Lawler, J. Stewart, G. Strasorier, and M. Thorne. May 14, 2009.
General Motors: Metrics for Sustainable Manufacturing. Laboratory for Sustainable Business.
Egan, M. 2016. That is So Nice: Electricitys Digital Future Has Dawned on the
French Riviera. GE Report.
Energy Star. 2014. Energy Treasure Hunt Guide: Simple Steps to Finding Energy
Savings. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Document Number 430-R-14-001, Washington D.C.
Evans, P.C., and M. Annunziata. 2012. Industrial Internet: Pushing the Boundaries
of Minds and Machines. GE Report.
Fisher-Vanden, K., E. Mansur, and Q.J. Wang. 2015. Electricity Shortages and Firm
Productivity: Evidence from Chinas Industrial Firms. Journal of Development
Economics 114, pp. 17288.
General Electric. 2016. Optimizing GEs Energy Use. Available at http://www.
gesustainability.com/building-things-that-matter/energy-and-climate/optimizing-ges-energy-use/
General Electric. 2016. Optimizing GEs Energy Use. www.gesustainability.com/
GRI. 2002. The Global Reporting Initiative: An Overview. Boston: Global Reporting Initiative.
Guide, V.D.R., V. Jayaraman, R. Srivastava, and W.C. Benton. 2000. Supply-Chain
Management for Recoverable Manufacturing Systems. Interfaces 30, no. 3,
pp. 12542.
Guide, V.D.R., and L.N. Van Wassenhove. 2009. OR Forum-The Evolution
of Closed-Loop Supply Chain Research. Operations Research 57, no. 1,
pp. 1018.
Haapala, K.R., F. Zhao, J. Camelio, J.W. Sutherland, S.J. Skerlos, D.A Dornfeld, I.S.
Jawahir, A.F. Clarens, and J.L. Rickli. 2013. A Review of Engineering Research
in Sustainable Manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Science Engineering
135, no. 4, p. 041013.

18 SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AUTOMATION

Hardcastle, J.L. 2015. Is 3D Printing the Future of Sustainable Manufacturing?
Environmental Leader. November 24, 2015. Available at http://www.environmentalleader.com/2015/11/is-3d-printing-the-future-of-sustainable-manufacturing/
Hower, M. 2013. GE Generates $25 Billion in Revenues from Sustainability Investments.Available at http://www.sustainablebrands.com/news and views/articles/
ge-generates-25-billion-revenues-sustainability-investments. July 1, 2013.
Johnson, C., B. Biller, S. Wang, and S.R. Biller. 2016. An Analytics Approach for
Incorporating Market Demand into Production Design and Operations Optimization. In Advances in Battery Manufacturing, Service, and Management
Systems, eds. J. Li, S. Zhou, and Y. Han, 99126. Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers Press Series on Systems Science and Engineering, Wiley.
Kanoglu, M., and I. Karabay. 2008. Energy Saving Studies in Industrial Facilities, 2008 ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). Conference
Proceedings of Energy Sustainability, pp. 291302, Jacksonville, Florida:
American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Labuschagnea, C., A.C. Brenta, P.G. Ron, and P.G. Van Ercka. 2005. Assessing
the Sustainability Performances of Industries. Journal of Cleaner Production
13, pp. 37385.
Lipson, H., and M. Kurman. 2013. Fabricated: The New World of 3D Printing.
Indianapolis, IN: John Wiley & Sons.
Mars, R.D. 2015. Predictive Analytics in Manufacturing Starts to Take Hold. Available at http://searchmanufacturingerp.techtarget.com/tip/Predictive-analyticsin-manufacturing-starts-to-take-hold
Narayan, A. 2016. How Software Can Eat the Energy Industry and Help Save the
World. GE Report.
Ness, B., E. Urbel Piirsalu, S. Anderberg, and L. Olsson. 2007. Categorizing Tools
FOS Sustainability Assessment. Ecological Economics 60, pp. 498508.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 1998.
Towards Sustainable Development: Environmental Indicators. Paris, France:
OECD.
Reliable Plant. 2015. Ford Motor Company Outlines its Top 10 Green Initiatives.
www.reliableplant.com/Read/5906/green-initiatives-ford
Shin, S., J. Woo, and S. Rachuri. 2014. Predictive Analytics Model for Power Consumption in Manufacturing. 21st CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering
15, pp. 15358.
Singh, R.K., H.R. Murty, S.K. Gupta, and A.K. Dikshit. 2011. An Overview
of Sustainability Assessment Methodologies. Ecological Indicators 15,
pp. 28199.
Smart Manufacturing Leadership Coalition. 2011. Implementing 21st Century
Smart Manufacturing. Workshop Summary Report.
Spohn, O.M. 2004. Sustainable Development Indicators within the German Water
Industry a Case Study Carried Out at Chalmers. Sweden: University of
Technology.

THE FUTURE OF WORK 19

Swisher, S. 2006. Sustainable Production: Definition, Comparison and Application. The Park Place Economist 14, no. 1.
Weisman, R. 2015. Top 5 Benefits from Incorporating Factory Manufacturing Sustainability Initiatives. Aptean White Paper. February 22, 2015.
Winter, M., W. Li, S. Kara, and C. Herrmann. 2014. Determining Optimal Process
Parameters to Increase the Eco-Efficiency of Grinding Processes. Journal of
Cleaner Production 66, no. 1, pp. 64454.

INDEX

A
Adaptive defuzzification, 190
Adaptive remanufacturing process
routings, 180190
Algorithms, optimization of complex
systems, 5051
Analytical approach, energy efficiency,
3435
Automotive industry, energy
consumption, 6062
Average model, energy efficiency,
3233, 38
B
bECC. See Buffer energy-capacity
coupling
Bernoulli serial lines analysis
machine startup/shutdown
scheduling, 117121
state-based machine switch-on/off
control, 111117
Bernoulli serial lines, transient
performance
extensions, 109111
multi-machine line case, 108109
two-machine line case, 105107
Big Data, sustainable manufacturing,
1416
Branching routing, 174
Brewing operations, energy-efficient
production, 9899
Buffer energy-capacity coupling
(bECC), 103
C
Complex systems, optimization of,
5051
Component operating modes, 24
Constant energy, 28
Consumption energy zone model, 8587

Consumption rate, 104

Controller design, energy-sensitive
strategy, 89
Conveyor system, 81
Curing, 8283
D
Decomposition, machine tool, 23
Discrete sequence optimization, 6566
3D printing, sustainable
manufacturing, 1214
E
Energy assessment, machine tool
decomposition, 23
energy states, 2426
power profile of, 2630
Energy-consuming apparatus
conveyor system, 81
curing, 8283
paint application, 82
pretreatment, 82
Energy consumption
automotive industry, 6062
model of buffers, 103
model of machines, 102
Energy consumption evaluation
general distributed processing time
case, 138143
sequence-dependent vs. independent
systems, 136138
state space, 133135
transition matrix, 135136
transition rates, 133135
Energy consumption per part, 104
Energy-efficient production
brewing operations, 9899
literature review, 100101
machining operations, 98
manufacturing systems, 9899

202 INDEX
performance measures, 104105
preventive maintenance, 99
research background, 9799
system modeling, 102104
Energy efficiency
definition of, 22
future directions of, 5051
machine tool model, 3040
Energy Efficiency Directive
2012/27/EU, 22
Energy efficient machine tool model
analytical approach, 34
average model, 3233, 38
examples of, 3638
input data type, 3536
machine working state, 31
model type, 3234
numerical approach, 34
parametric model, 3334, 3839
power breakdown, 38
process-based model, 34, 3940
Energy efficient strategies
description, 4041
machine design, 41
process control, 4144
reuse and recovery systems, 41
state control, 4449
Energy Labelling Directive 2010/30/EU,
22
Energy measurement, robot operations,
7172
Energy-oriented simulation
contributions, 7879
literature review, 7980
research gap, 78
Energy-sensitive control
literature review, 8081
system description, 8183
Energy-sensitive control strategy
controller design, 89
offline analysis, 89
online control, 90
requirements, 88
Energy states, machine tool, 2426
Energy zone concept, 8384
Energy zones with modeling
consumption model, 8587
energy zone concept, 8384
equipment classes, 8485
input data collection, 87
manufacturing system models,
83
Experimentation, 34

Fixed power, 29
Fuzzification, 186
Fuzzy color Petri net (FCPN), 182185
Fuzzy learning module, 185190
Fuzzy membership function, 193194
Fuzzy rule learning, 189

F
FCPN. See Fuzzy color Petri net
Feedback routing, 173174

L
Linear routing, 173
Load dependent power, 29

G
General distributed processing
time case
assumptions and formulation, 138
energy consumption evaluation,
138143
GERT. See Graphical evaluation and
review technique
Graphical evaluation and review
technique (GERT)
basic theory, 171173
branching routing, 174
feedback routing, 173174
illustration example, 174180
linear routing, 173
logical nodes, 171
probability and time distribution, 178
skipping routing, 173
H
Hybrid robot operations, 6364
constructing, 68
continuous problem, 6667
discrete sequence optimization,
6566
energy measurement, 7172
operation sequence optimization,
6465
sending events, 6869
sequence planner, 7071
transformation services, 69
transforming events, 6869
I
International Energy Agency, 22
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), 22
ISO. See International Organization for
Standardization
ISO 14955-1:2014, 22
J
Japanese Standards Association (JSA),
22
JSA. See Japanese Standards
Association

INDEX 203
M
Machine blockage, 104
Machine design, 41
Machine energy-capacity coupling
(mECC), 102
Machine energy demand, 26
Machine operational state, 24
Machine startup/shutdown scheduling,
Bernoulli serial lines, 117121
Machine starvation, 104
Machine tool
decomposition, 23
energy states, 2426
power demand, 29
power profile of, 2630
Machine tool energy model, 3032
analytical approach, 34
average model, 3233, 38
examples of, 3638
input data type, 3536
machine working state, 31
model type, 3233
numerical approach, 34
parametric model, 3334, 3839
power breakdown, 38
process-based model, 34, 3940
Machining operations, energy-efficient
production, 98
Manufacturing systems
energy-efficient production, 9899
energy zones, 83
Material removal rate (MRR), 39
mECC. See Machine energy-capacity
coupling
Metrics, sustainability performance
measurement, 56
Modeling, energy zones
consumption model, 8587
energy zone concept, 8384
equipment classes, 8485
input data collection, 87
manufacturing system models, 83
Model of buffers, 103
Model of machines, 102
Monotonic properties
buffer capacity, 145146
setup times, 143145
MRR. See Material removal rate
Multi-machine line case, 108109
Multiple machine states, 50
Multi-product manufacturing systems
description, 127129
energy consumption evaluation,
133138
general distributed processing time
case, 138143
literature review, 129131

monotonic properties, 143146

non-monotonic properties, 146151
problem formulation, 131133
system description, 131133
N
National Network for Manufacturing
Innovation (NNMI), 22
NNMI. See National Network for
Manufacturing Innovation
Non-monotonic properties
arrival rates, 150151
process rate, 147150
Nonstationary operation time, 169
N-policy, 48
Numerical approach, energy efficiency,
34
O
Offline analysis, energy-sensitive
strategy, 89
Online control, energy-sensitive
strategy, 90
Operation sequence optimization, 6465
Operation time, 169
P
Paint application, 82
Parametric model, 3334, 3839
Performance measures, energy-efficient
production, 104105
Petri net, 182185
PM. See Preventive maintenance
Power breakdown, 38
Power demand, 29
Preventive maintenance (PM), 99
Process-based model, 34, 3940
Process control, 4144
Production rate, 104
Production system, sustainability
performance measurement, 68
R
Remanufacturing process flow, 166
Remanufacturing process routings
(RPRs)
adaptive model for, 180190
case study, 191
challenge and solutions, 169170
comparison results, 195196
GERT-based approach, 170180
learning process illustration, 192195
manufacturing vs., 163164
nonstationary operation time, 169
process flow, 166
reverse logistic model, 166
selection module, 190191

204 INDEX
simulation implementation, 192
stochastic, 167169
variability of, 167169
waiting time, 169
Reuse and recovery systems, 41
Reverse logistic model, 166
RPRs. See Remanufacturing process
routings

definition of, 1
3D printing for, 1214
examples for, 812
System modeling, energy-efficient
production
model of buffers, 103
model of machines, 102
operation system, 103104

S
Scrap rate due to buffers, 104
Scrap rate due to machines, 104
SDS. See Sequence-dependent systems
Sending events, 6869
Sequence-dependent systems (SDS),
136138
Sequence-independent systems (SIS),
136138
Sequence planner, 7071
Shift energy consumption, 104
Simulation, 3435
SIS. See Sequence-independent systems
Skipping routing, 173
State-based machine switch-on/off
control, Bernoulli serial lines,
111117
State control, 4449
State space, 133135
Stochastic remanufacturing process
routings, 167169
Sustainability performance
measurement
metrics development, 56
with production system, 68
Sustainable manufacturing
in Big Data, 1416

T
Test case, paint system
case description, 9091
results, 9192
Time variant behavior, 50
T-policy, 48
Transformation services, 69
Transforming events, 6869
Transient performance evaluation
extensions, 109111
multi-machine line case, 108109
two-machine line case, 105107
Transition matrix, 135136
Transition rates, 133135
Two-machine line case, 105107
U
Uncertainty management
description, 163165
problem statement, 165170
V
Variable energy, 28
W
Waiting time, 169
Work-in-process, 104