You are on page 1of 16

ARTICLE IN PRESS

G Model
JMSY-212; No. of Pages 16

Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Manufacturing Systems
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmansys

Review

Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art夽
Dazhong Wu, Matthew John Greer, David W. Rosen, Dirk Schaefer ∗
The George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 813 Ferst Drive, NW, Atlanta, GA 30332-0405, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cloud manufacturing, a service oriented, customer centric, demand driven manufacturing model is
Received 9 December 2012 explored in both its possible future and current states. A unique strategic vision for the field is docu-
Received in revised form 25 March 2013 mented, and the current state of technology is presented from both industry and academic viewpoints.
Accepted 4 April 2013
Key commercial implementations are presented, along with the state of research in fields critical to
Available online xxx
enablement of cloud manufacturing, including but not limited to automation, industrial control systems,
service composition, flexibility, business models, and proposed implementation models and architec-
Keywords:
tures. Comparison of the strategic vision and current state leads to suggestions for future work, including
Cloud manufacturing (CM)
Distributed systems
research in the areas of high speed, long distance industrial control systems, flexibility enablement,
Resource sharing business models, cloud computing applications in manufacturing, and prominent implementation archi-
Automation and control tectures.
© 2013 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2. Strategic vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.1. Provider–consumer interaction model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.1.1. Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.1.2. Application providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.1.3. Physical resource providers (PRPs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2. Key characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2.1. Customer centricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2.2. Temporary, reconfigurable, dynamic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2.3. Turn no job away . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2.4. Demand driven, demand intelligent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2.5. Shared burden, shared benefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.3. Cloud manufacturing topics map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3. Current state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.1. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2. Current implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2.1. Commercially viable implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2.2. Key research implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.3. Low-hanging fruit: cloud-computing in manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.4. Automation, industrial control systems, machine-to-machine cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.5. Service composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.6. Manufacturing resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.7. Flexibility and agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.8. Business models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.9. Implementation architectures, models and frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00

夽 This is an expanded version of paper number MSEC2013-1106, published in the ASME 2013 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 404 385 2192.
E-mail address: dirk.schaefer@me.gatech.edu (D. Schaefer).

0278-6125/$ – see front matter © 2013 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2013.04.008

Please cite this article in press as: Wu D, et al. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. J Manuf Syst (2013),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2013.04.008

. . . . . . . . . . According to Friedman. . . industry is going to have to rethink the traditional models of of resource providers through the application layer. . . . . . Potential impact . . . . . . . . . . . . Using the work of the NIST [3] application providers. . . . . . . . . Automation and control . . . . . on-demand network access to a shared pool of 2. . . . The latter locating the required resources. . . the application layer is responsible for manufacturing environment and cloud manufacturing. . . . . . resulting in a power-shift from the once mighty hierarchical busi. . Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The term. . . . . . . . . / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 4. . . . Friedman [1] temporary. . but do not possess the (CM) will be the focus of this paper [6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Information and resource sharing . . . . . . . . these individuals or groups many paradigm shifts still in their infancy. . . con- venient. . . . . . . and allow for optimal alization 3. . . . . . . . http://dx. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and then making recommendations Tapscott and Williams [2] explain that the advent of the internet for future research. . . .” [54] com boom. . . . . . . . . . . [42]. . . No. . . . . . . . and managing resources in the event of a service interrup- cal manufacturing resources in lieu of computing resources – this tion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction and Smith [4] as a foundation.2. et al. . . . . . . . These traditional business models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . applications. .org/10. . 00 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Users can range ber of manufacturing resources and expertise are shared to provide anywhere from individuals to large OEMs – any group that can consumers with enhanced experiences. . . . who offer their services as an intermediary Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. . . . . . . 00 4. . . of Pages 16 2 D. . . . . . . . . . . . and services) that can be rapidly provisioned all aspects of the CM environment and interprets user require- and released with minimal management effort or service ments into data required for production of the desired objects. . and Schaefer cloud based applications. . . stor- The cloud based application layer is responsible for managing age. . . .1. . This paper will focus on developing a strategic vision for the CM laborating in areas once dominated by less-connected western environment. . . . . . . .008 .0.” Simply providers. . . . . . . . . . . . . as will be defined capabilities to do so. . . . . . . . . ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. Distributed system simulation . . . . . . . Strategic vision ness model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Potential impact and future work . . . . . some of which are mentioned by Tapscott and Williams 2. . .2. .doi. .04. . . . . . a user desired product may require the development Building on NIST’s definition of cloud computing. . . . . . . . . ..1. . . . .1. . . . . . Xu discerns between two forms of cloud manufac. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0. . . . . .2. . . . These engineering National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) offers the requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . the old hierarchical ways of organizing work and innovation do not CM will require interaction between three groups: the afford the level of agility. Wu et al. . . . . . This tri-group business operation. .1016/j. Cost estimation . . . . . . . . . pending them to the engineering is a replication of the cloud-computing environment using physi. . . . . . . CM follows naturally from generate engineering requirements to be used in a manufactur- the introduction and success of cloud computing. . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . including Li et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The application layer will be managed and controlled by idea will be the focus of this paper. Finally. . . . many authors of a CNC tool path program and process planning to achieve a have proposed definitions of CM. . . [8]. . . . . 00 1. . . .” For example. . . . . . . reduce product lifecycle costs. . . . . . . . [41].4. . . . J Manuf Syst (2013). . . . . . . . . . . Of the Users are the consumers in CM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Users (mass collaboration and self-organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . began around the year 2000 and was enabled by resource loading in response to variable-demand customer gen- the expansion of the internet on a global basis during the dot- erated tasking. . . . . . . . . .2013. . . cloud manufacturing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wu et al. . . . . . . . . . . The needs of users will be matched with the capabilities put. . . . . . . . . . . as the amount of internal expertise they hold model represents the simple supply-demand market that will moti- is dwarfed by that held by the global mass of peoples connected vate the existence of CM. . . . . 00 4. . . . . . . . . . documenting the current state of academic research economies. . . . . . . . . Future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM. the following definition of CM is offered: The force of globalization has served to instantaneously connect “Cloud Manufacturing (CM) is a customer-centric manufactur- peoples from all across the globe.1. . . . . Provider–consumer interaction model where mass collaboration can reshape an industry overnight. . .3. . . . . . . . 00 References . . . .1. for which the ing setting can participate in CM partnerships.8]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . and physical resource nies require to remain competitive in today’s environment. . . . . . . . . . has led to the development of cooperative collaboration networks. . . [7]. . . . . . . . . . . . was first used by Li et al. . . . . . The provider–consumer model is shown through globalization. . . reconfigurable production lines which enhance effi- explains that the latest globalization phase. . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . Furthermore.0 is defined by individuals and small groups from across the globe col. . Zhang et al. . . . . . . . . . sequencing can be carried out through automated applications [41] in 2010. . . . . . which describe the desired object and its final con- following definition [3]: ditions. . . . . . . creativity. . . . . . which he coins Glob- ciency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . networks.1. . . . . . . and industry implementation. 00 4. . . . . and connectivity that compa. . . . . . . . . . servers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . job. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [5]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . cloud manufacturing have the need to manufacture something. . .5. . application providers.2. . to gain a competitive advantage by utilizing CM. . . . . . . Zhang final desired plating condition – these would be created by the et al. . . . . . . users (consumers). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Xu [6]. . . . . . . . . . . . Many engineering paradigms have evolved as result of Global- ization 3. . for example). . . . . or they possess the capabilities but stand shortly. . . . . . . Globalization 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . that determine the numerous production paths that could lead to turing: the introduction of cloud-computing technologies into the the desired object. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . according to the authors. . . . . . . . . .jmsy. . . . provider interaction. . . . . . . production planning and et al. . benefits from the share-to-gain philosophy as a wide num. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in Fig. . “Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous. . are provided to the cloud based application layer for interpretation. Application providers configurable computing resources (e. . . .g. . . . . . . . . . . . bringing with it game-changing ing model that exploits on-demand access to a shared collection opportunities to share knowledge and expertise to benefit in a of diversified and distributed manufacturing resources to form collective manner (sometimes called share-to-gain). can no longer sustain successful innovation: “In an age 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Business model . . . 00 4. .

between users and resource providers for a portion of the product 2. Strategic vision for CM. offering users instan. of Pages 16 D. et al. Ideally as a whole. prove to be difficult and costly to dissolve. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 3 Fig.2013.04.doi. http://dx. No. including but not limited to machining uct level requirements to suppliers. when tradi- the output is a finalized product in conformance with user tional supplier relationships prove to be undesirable. the work and core competencies. who can then engage sub-tier technologies.org/10. and testing resources.) are ufacturing data created by the cloud based applications. the consumer experience (reduce costs. finishing technologies. Furthermore. Wu et al.jmsy.1016/j. Physical resource providers (PRPs) 21st century industry is dominated by hierarchical supply Physical resource providers (PRPs) own and operate man. improve quality. chains in which requirement originating parties flow down prod- ufacturing equipment. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212.2.008 . In addition to owning example of this relationship is that of an original equipment manu- physical resources.3. etc. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. 1. the opportunity to enhance the cloud as a service. Customer centricity 2. J Manuf Syst (2013). While often these relationships taneous access to manufacturing capabilities provided through can be fruitful for all parties involved.1. inspection technologies. suppliers to assist with the product development process. A classic aging technologies. Key characteristics profit. they can often requirements. pack. who can then contract out the PRP network would represent every type of manufacturing sections of the work to sub-tier suppliers based upon the nature of capability available in the marketplace. These PRPs are perspective of technology function and integration (specifications not limited by geographic location.2. The input to the PRP group is the man. PRPs have the know-how and experience to facturer (OEM) who develops product level requirements from the utilize these machines effectively and efficiently. rather.1. for example). Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. These requirements are then contrac- network based upon their expertise alone. and severely limited by their rigid nature. tually enforced with a first-tier supplier. PRPs join the CM and drawings. 2.

System flexibility will rely upon the ability to rapidly recon- figure and repurpose manufacturing equipment across multiple 2. This increased effi- ing resources allows for high efficiency. In addition. et al. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. the user. Depending upon the application. Temporary. Wu et al. allowing for the production of small lots environment matches tasks with PRPs based upon their equipment but not excluding the opportunity for longer production runs as availability and overall capacity. CM production lines are meant point where no job would be turned away. as the cloud based application layer can be used to gener. tion structures and propose some essential metrics to measure the utilizing access to a wide range of resources to enable saving power and importance of individual suppliers and providers based opportunities not realizable in traditional isolated manufacturing on social network analysis. required. environment can optimize the manufacturing environment to the ible nature of resource provisioning.2. The key to ensure multi-resource cooperation. reconfigurable. manufacturing supply chain relation. the CM environment Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. Turn no job away crucial to understand collaborative relationships between cloud Due to the wide range of PRPs connected. These benefits will be derived from the creation of flexi. and quality. of Pages 16 4 D. In addition. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. and in other instances humans will still interact from many different PRPs.3.doi. See Fig. monitoring and controlling resources at the shop floor level within those ranges would be provided for consideration). Solutions will be customer.2. the CM to be temporary in nature. the entire manufacturing process ble manufacturing sequences enabled by the pooling of resources may be automated.2.jmsy. on small jobs that were once too disruptive and costly to tackle. 2. The ICS will coordinate and goal of a CM environment is linking users. and ciency should increase the ability and willingness of PRPs to take instant response to demand. industrial control systems (ICSs) will also be (the user would be allowed to specify key aspects of the desired job. increased flexibility. Wu et al. The inte- ships will be customer-centric. ensuring compat- providers who can fulfill those needs while meeting cost. The ability to quickly reconfigure and repurpose manufactur. jobs that were once service providers and consumers and identify key information and not economically viable will be enabled through the flexibility of resource owners within CM supply chain networks. [53] the CM environment. Where transportation is a cost driver. and quality objectives of the user. however. and improved capabilities for today.4.1016/j. flex. of small jobs without disruption of larger jobs. Demand driven. 2 for a comparison of sup- ply chains in traditional and CM environments. schedule. defined by enhanced efficiency. allowing for efficient processing well. the cloud based application layer can initiate searches for alternative 2. To Like any manufacturing entity today. J Manuf Syst (2013). it is also 2.2013. to multiple. ple cost and schedule scenarios for consideration by the consumer. gration of automation. No.2. to resource distribute tasks among manufacturing locations. These control systems will act as the central nervous sys- such as cost. for example. http://dx. demand intelligent dispersed manufacturing sites with minimized down time. The CM Another distinguishing characteristic of CM is the dynamic. or even task. a high level of automation will be required environment is exercised will be driven by user demand. with needs.008 . Cloud based applications can develop multi- introduce a new framework to visualize such implicit collabora. the extent to which the CM accomplish such a task.org/10. minimized down time. lead time. distributed shop floors with minimal effort. Comparison of CM and traditional supply chains. as a measure of quality assurance and error prevention. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. In the CM environment. Unlike tra- to ensure that the division of tasks can be properly flowed down ditional manufacturing enterprises. ibility of efforts and final products. which in many industries is already present reduced cost. does not necessarily imply the absence of human beings.04. In order to flow manufacturing requirements from the cloud to ate numerous options for the users based upon their specifications automated resources. dynamic manufacturing protocols that would result in lower cost. settings. specific. and different choices that fit tem.

For one.1016/j. yet the desired process can be performed by combin. however.doi. J Manuf Syst (2013). These three groups converge things such as who the customers are. Value will be added by Not all of the topics shown in Fig. the current state of qual- users with the products they desire while utilizing less resources ity assurance (QA). which can be read from the value chain. CM will likely cause a shift in the revenue models currently used by design firms and manufacturers alike. How will value added be determined when 3 explore. Through documentation of this work. and those that help match users and operation: “a business model articulates the customer value propo- providers. configuration management. Starting in the center of the map. process planning. automatically realize and capitalize upon this alternative to avoid Those firms managing the cloud-based applications will certainly excessive loading of manufacturing resource “A”. Amazon is not just a of key interest. http://dx. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 5 will be “demand intelligent” in that the inherent system flexibil. upon the value they can add to the product. tion security. The CM will also require the reversal of traditional beliefs held work that follows in no way defines the full extent of any particular regarding intellectual property.2013. the devel- tional business models of today to ones based on the share-to-gain opment of enabling business models will be concerned with data philosophy. Specifically. through efficient processes. CM to process the same job. why they care about your to enable CM. which describe how value is added to ownership and promoting effective collaboration. In a CM environment. cloud robustness. how you are going to add value to the product. the map. sition. because without their expertise it would be of little use. An example of argue that it is their property for distribution to whomever they such a scenario would be the requirement for a 6-axis CNC machine. different manufacturers combine resources to complete a build- In addition to those topics listed in Fig. if man. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. including but not limited to distributed adjust their business models accordingly. one can see that CM (shown in and it also elaborates on competitive strategy by which the firm a yellow cell) is composed mainly of cloud users (shown in a red gains and holds advantage over rivals” [40]. Following the physical resource provider branch of product or service. network. ments will likely not differ significantly from their implementation the value chain and revenue models are firmly defined – each value in today’s distributed environments. Mari Sako explains that business models define business those providing the resources. provide a foundation for the advancement of doing business. For example. Numerous fields of study were used to compile the following for service providers to add value to products. will be defined by an IP sharing model that aids in cooperation and collaboration. 3. and business management. CM will require the formation of new and information security were not researched nor documented. Current state cloud will cause a shift in how value is added to the product. or will it be shared based upon time and implementation of CM. et al. requiring them to current status information. Cloud manufacturing topics map a tiered structure of control.008 . and business models. what mar- of accepted industry specifications regarding these subjects and ket there is for such a business and so on. No. collaboration between suppliers will be required to successfully For this reason. data rights are easily field of study. Traditionally. Wu et al. manufacturing. of the field must be collected from many different specialties which. shared benefit Traditional business organizations and relationships rely upon 2. these issues will be left for other researchers to complete a project. a brainstorming tool was used to record areas discount product marketplace. ketplace. The physical resource layer might also try and argue it is their when a combination of vertical and horizontal mills could be used data. the current state revenue models of both the users and resource providers. Secondly. as the cloud will take over some of the activities that contribute to the As CM is in the juvenile stages of development. The appropriate business their already wide application to distributed suppliers in industry model for CM may be difficult to determine when it comes to value today. Consider now that cloud based appli- or interchangeable manufacturing resources.5.04. will be highly flexible in CM. etc.3. enabling issues are while not unprecedented altogether. QA business models altogether (by all vested parties). however they are far out of the core competencies of the authors.org/10. many resources spent? These are the questions that will determine how research topics as shown in Fig. it identifies a market segment. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. this report docu- to-print order? Will the overall value of the final parts be divided ments the numerous architectures and frameworks envisioned for evenly between suppliers. and appli- argument as to why the company will succeed – it explains critical cation providers (shown in a blue cell). QA and configuration management as applied to CM environ- chain structure and revenue models. it documents those aspects most important understood – design authorities own the rights to product designs. of Pages 16 D. we can further see that physical resource providers will be and how you will make money. like. In order to discover and document possible areas the product or service it offers. 2. the even be different across corporations within the same industry. which acts together to create value. will require a shift from tradi- broken down further where appropriate. value chains are structured and how wealth sharing will occur. and can As CM is as of yet a relatively undefined field of study. to the enablement of CM. virtual enterprises. the cloud will remove some opportunity CM. cations will be used to generate much of the value once produced ufacturing resource “A” is more heavily utilized than others in the by manufacturers (tool path programming. and they are compensated based mation security are two very important enabling aspects for CM. 3 are indirectly addressed. it the core outwards or from the outward fringes toward the center. For example. and will require and configuration management were omitted due to the wide range propositions as to what value the customer will receive. it specifies the revenue generation mechanisms. data compatibility. describes the positioning within the value network or ecosystem. From there. Shared burden. For example. physical resource providers (shown in a green cell). 3 are addressed in this resource providers sharing expertise and collaborating to provide report. the CM environment will erty because they paid for access to the cloud-based applications. In traditional business models. The result is shown in Fig. informa- The organizing business models that will someday define CM.). The introduction of the 3.jmsy. 3 shows a converging mind map. enabled in the CM field by automation. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. A business model is the cell). The number of research areas within this field is only limited by the organization of a business often defines a company as much as does imagination. Users may claim that data produced by the cloud is their prop- ing manufacturing resources “B” and “C”. Cloud robustness and infor- adder is separated from the others. Value chains. Business organizations often vary widely across industries. most are. the cloud will introduce a change in how users calculate the cost of in their combination. and manufacturers of those designs own the manufacturing data ity will be utilized to ensure even load sharing across equivalent that is used to produce them. rather. it is an online discount product mar- of research that would be critical to those using CM resources.2. a product. it defines the structure of Fig. 3.

2013. provided a review of the application of grid technology in manu- A 1998 source published by Rajagopalan et al.62. is very clearly applicable to the vision of CM presented in this service was created in the late 1990s. the concept of the manufacturing grid was pro- the year in which the document was written. History allows connection with the process broker to communicate design requirements to the manufacturing services providers. significant literature on manufacturing-as-a.org/10. This is undoubtedly due In the 2000s.1. CM systems. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. product design. Like so many of the more recent papers which will be reviewed in this report. as the internet was posed. together into a virtual “smart” enterprise. These could lead to exploitation of various enterprises based upon their authors discuss transformation of the factory from a mechanical competencies. Instead of dealing with unknown market con- job regardless of size.doi. It is likely that internet capabilities (speed. discusses the facturing. environment. which standing the possible capabilities and advantages of a CM style ended in the year 2000.1016/j. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig.008 .) were not able to accommodate the A 1996 source by Erkes et al. which in some respect is similar to that of CM [48. These companies uti- separation of design and manufacturing – both in a geographic lize the foundations of CM as enabling technologies for their and organizational manner. It is expected that much of report and represents a significant advancement toward under- this literature was developed as part of the dot-com boom. Current implementations that connects designers and manufacturing services. These authors discuss an internet infrastructure 3.04. [65] paper. manufac. most notably in the consumer product industry with The stated purpose for such an infrastructure is to allow for the rapid prototyping manufacturing resources. [34] discusses the implementation visions presented by these papers at the time of their creation. 3. and process brokers which act as intermediaries. including the ability to fulfill any demanded today’s marketplace. Commercially viable implementations these authors describe the existence of design clients. Wu et al.2. intelligent. and advertising through social Much of the future envisioned by Goldhar and Jelinek matches the media represent a revolutionary method of value production in strategic vision for CM. resents a significant precursor to the vision of CM presented in this enterprise information management. interfaces.1. of manufacturing services available over the internet. A limited number of commercial companies have implemented turing services. Quirky offers Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. and connect designers with manufacturing resources client uses software that augments traditional CAD programs and over the internet. of Pages 16 6 D. cloud-based activities offer flexibility and enable competiveness in they fail to realize the potential of networking multiple factories a cutthroat marketplace. manufacturing resource integration and allocation. etc. showing how networked manufacturing networks implications of computer integrated manufacturing (CIM). and discusses and as such CM has been awaiting arrival of today’s internet for the creation of integrated products and processes through similar implementation. This work Surprisingly. et al. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. the design ventures. http://dx. Goldhar and Jelinek [35] discuss future in this report.63]. While Goldhar and Jelinek envision the “smart” factory. and The DLA Piper legal group [28] explains that internet enabled also discuss the ability for mass customization as a result of CIM.2. 3. and the ability to make the factory floor ditions. Regardless. and strict vendor relationships. Tao et al. difficult to find financing. data transfer capability. manufacturing. this work rep. crowd funding. CM topics map. 3. According to The Economist [31]. not yet prominent in the year 1990 and inter-factory cooperation The idea of the manufacturing grid is to apply grid computing to may have not been a reality at that time. In the described work. implications of the internet for design and rapid manufacturing technologies [36]. These authors have a similar vision to that presented In an article from 1990. and scheduling. J Manuf Syst (2013).jmsy. focused operation to one driven by information technology. No.

J Manuf Syst (2013).000 manufacturers in 50 owning the enabling technologies. Automation and gic vision of CM as presented in this report. a Software-as-a-service (Saas) format. “[The Manu. data storage. Wu et al. and processing equipment will be required both within single fac- The ManuCloud project architecture is very similar to the strate. sion’s Seventh Framework Program for Research (FP7). Suppliers are selected Edstrom [25] presents that typical server usage lingers at based upon their manufacturing capabilities. Shapeways offers users imme.org/10.2. Review of multi-tenant architectures which allow use of the resource by the Ponoko website [38] shows that a number of 2D and 3D man. Xu [6] presents that the implementation of cloud computing in Quirky is enabled by manufacturing resources virtualized over manufacturing can take two (2) forms. users with access to a complete product creation enterprise. and computational power. According to the authors. Simplified version of artwork shown in [31]. buyers request services by computing can aid manufacturing and engineering by providing providing technical product specifications. 5. The Economist [31] also technologies into the manufacturing industry. 4. roughly 8–15% of total capacity. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. 4 below. In contrast to the vetting process used manufacturing industry can be termed the “low hanging fruit”. Automation and control technologies will enable inter.2013. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. The MFG.jmsy.com. Key research implementations over data security. funded under the European Commis. The is discussed in the strategic vision section – that is. In fact. While not a pure cloud-based manufacturing environment. Accord- ing to Meier et al. which are communi. The ManuCloud Project. and represents a major control system technologies are crucial to the ability to efficiently advancement toward the realization of CM. the ManuCloud project is meant to 3. As parts and assemblies are rarely manufactured by one by a set of software-as-a-service applications”. facilitating the abil- manufacturing capabilities of configurable. supported the cloud. The first form is that which the internet and available for use by distributed designers. of Pages 16 D.1016/j. demand system truly beneficial and cost effective. yet allow company specific attributes to be ufacturing services are offered to designers. http://dx. [29]. based on cloud-enabled.008 .3. This company latest software yet avoid the cost and hassle of maintaining the prices products based upon the materials they require and the resource. Symonds [23] presents that the use of cloud- Chafkin of Inc. Symonds presents that Saas is facilitated by the use of amount of machine time needed to make the part [32]. provided in website which providers designers with access to the manufactur. virtualized production ity to automatically execute manufacturing tasking generated by networks.4. in the Quirky business model. makes a usage based pay on- the final product [37]. data storage in the cloud has been slow to gain popularity because of concerns 3. is perhaps the research project most relevant to CM today [39]. The implementation of cloud-computing technologies in the vices over the internet. which of as a utility service which can be accessed on-demand without connects consumers with over 200. Cloud-computing. coordination and cooperation among machines reproduced in Fig.com platform hosts all resources based upon peak usage rates. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 7 Fig. The sec- the wealth sharing model and provides them with a portion of ond form deals simply with the incorporation of cloud computing the profits that their products yield. Low-hanging fruit: cloud-computing in manufacturing summarized in Fig. meeting regulatory compliance requirements. Automation. Magazine discusses Ponoko. numerous companies. According to Katzel. machine-to-machine enable creation of integrated manufacturing networks spanning cooperation multiple enterprises which are facilitated by service oriented information technologies. tories and among multiple cooperative factories. federated factories. cated to appropriate suppliers for quoting. can be thought One of the most promising CM companies is MFG. and cloud performance.com. expertise. and instan. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. cloud- states [31]. enables manufacture of electronic components by offering access to Katzel [24] presents that the manufacturing sector in defined hundreds of electronic components which the designer can specify by computing needs which vary significantly with the product life- and create designs with.and Cloud architecture] provides users with the ability to utilize the intra-factory cooperation in CM environments.04. a company which offers 3D printing ser. as stated by Katzel. significant numbers. et al. and the website even accommodated. industrial control systems. the mimicking Quirky business model incorporates the originating designers into of the cloud computing environment in manufacturing. as this requires little investment as compared to CM. cycle phase. Quirky development process. a product creation based enterprise resource planning (ERP) software. This architecture is piece of equipment. The need to oversize computing taneous production capacity. as 3. Schultz [27] presents that despite its clear benefits.2. discusses Shapeways. software services.doi. diate access to 3D printers to make any object which they cloud computing adoption has already begun to take place in desire. No. route jobs through the required processing steps to completion. According to MFG. in addition to the cost activities from creating the Request for Quote to the shipping of of maintaining these technologies. allows users to utilize the ing resources they need to realize their products.

Developments in open architecture standards and tualized manufacturing resources made available to consumers communication protocols will serve to facilitate automation through the cloud. [13] discuss the enabling [14] are a relatively new form of ICS which focus on emerging nature of Web Services (machine-to-machine communication over issues that limit ICS effectiveness. tion language between the shop floor and the plant scheduling Programmable Automation Controllers (PACs) as described in level in [11. and serial. No. Distributed communications and promote interoperability between existing Control Systems (DCSs).2013. ing to [14]. Language (XML). Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Similarly.1016/j. In order to optimize product value. PLCs are computer col developed for communication with CNC machines over public based logic devices that control equipment and processes. which are vir- munications. and are networks [18]. and enterprise data integration. The formation of CM services is enabled by the through promotion of “plug and play” technologies which can ability to identify. The MTConnect Insti. This task becomes increasingly difficult in Much work has recently been done to establish open standards multiple-factory production environments. The TIA system is based upon an open ufacturing operations [45–49]. digital. includ. Finally. Hao et al. Additionally. the World Wide Web) for the development of distributed manufac- device interoperability. system architecture. These standards allow for machine-to-machine ing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA). ManuCloud architecture. Xu presents numerous methodologies for identifying tute [19] has developed open (non-proprietary) and royalty free distributed resources. of Pages 16 8 D. Service composition as analog.008 . and Programmable Logic Controllers technologies. CM environments will need to effectively and efficiently combine ability with existing assets. Wu et al. One of the most advanced control systems demonstrated in The intrinsic value of a product is created by the combina- industry is the Siemens Totally Integrated Automation (TIA) system. which promotes modularity and interoper.org/10.doi. ble resources. tion of numerous materials. et al. and is interoperability. DCSs are used Research regarding machine-to-machine communication is also to control industrial process variables around a set target. communication specifications that also promote connectivity and facturing enterprises which are distributed over a large area. and package both tangible and intangi- be offered from a wide variety of sources. CyberOPC is a dedicated proto- common in process intensive industries. http://dx. [12] discuss typical ICSs utilized in both process communication standards based upon the Extensible Markup based and discrete-based manufacturing environments. processes. from [29]. The use of STEP-NC is discussed as a communica- often employed as part of a DCS system. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.5. manufacturing services. Accord. J Manuf Syst (2013). and are common in the academic realm. including such technologies as RFID. the OPC Foundation [14] offers seven open (PLCs). Stouffer et al. 5. open (non-proprietary) architectures. virtualize. such as network connectivity.04. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. typically utilized in the gas and utilities industries.50–52]. SCADA is a type of control system used to control manu. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. and the ability to monitor multiple signal types such 3. turing management frameworks. and tasks performed by the which offers a wide range of control technologies in both SCADA manufacturer – value is added successively through planned man- and DCS environments [15]. Xu [6] discusses the creation of CM services.jmsy. PACs feature modular designs. promoting technology connectivity and machine-to-machine com.

CM systems must possess flexi- production facility. resource expressing layer.008 . and quality Zhang et al. 3. and correlation. present an approach which utilizes service-oriented architecture. which is resources. posed using OWL-S. Action. consisting of a manufacturing resource layer. multi-disciplinary collaboration. based resource discovery. and a resource interface layer.org/10. it is possible for cloud among others. and investigate their distribution in CoRCS-Net.1016/j.44]. monitors for environment. pool of design and manufacturing resources. Hao et al. [5]. In order which consumers can select particular MCSs to form their required to survive in such environments. resource service. [45] present an example about “online purchasing the semantic matchmaking of manufacturing service capabilities. [60] present a manufacturing resource methods. The ability to seek out alternate processes when the main process plan is interrupted.doi. the manufacturing cloud These authors promote the management of RSC through the service can only offer a limited capability to quickly provide such adoption of a Flexibility Management Architecture. resource registration. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. [59] discuss Adaptive Chaos Optimization with Reflex Migration (FC-PACO-RM). manufacturing grid system in order to share distributed manufac- ing with three serial algorithms and seven commonly used parallel turing resources. turing environment [13]. would be converted into virtual machines using agent based tech. to address web- proposed model by comparing the quality of service of correlation. Zhang et al. of Pages 16 D. or when the market 3. are adaptive to changing market conditions and variable customer ment. they these authors. Panchal and Schaefer [16] define agility as the abil- numerous variables. That is. The RSC lifecycle is initiated and maintained ity to successfully and quickly adapt to changes in the operating through a tri-modular system which executes the RSC. match and search framework and key technologies associated with Tao et al. http://dx. five (5) forms service can offer rapid scalability in some situations at certain lev. [30] describe the importance of Manufacturing Service Flexibility in CM will be facilitated almost exclusively by the Descriptions (MSDs) and Manufacturing Service Description Lan. and Query to identify a machine system called ManuHub that facilitates efficient. No. categories are summarized in Table 1. [61] a correlation-aware composite service description model is pro. In order to enhance the quality to-peer architecture support effective and efficient manufacturing of services composition. [47] focus on combinable relationship-based hierarchy model.2013. cost. such as manufacturing cells. the parallel intelligent algorithm called Full Connection based Parallel associated matching algorithms are proposed. and hardware resources formal representation of manufacturing resources is crucial [43. and post-processing) which can be affected by requirements. QoS. The Function module Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. MSDs describe available services and their limits. automobiles parts (OPAP)” to illustrate the concept of service com. [55] propose a Semantic Web-based approach to nologies for distributed control and communication. flow. they investigate the issue of correlation. cated tools and equipment are required. general purpose machine tools. Cai et al. A case study is conducted which validates the search agents.jmsy. execution. discuss how the life- amount of resources needed in order to satisfy the demand that cycle of RSCs can be affected by numerous factors. These authors explain that MCSs can be CM will create an even more dynamic environment with the com- categorized and combined into related manufacturing clouds. Packaging discover distributed manufacturing resources for cross-enterprise resources and making them available as cloud based services. et al. Dong et al. The method of resource virtualization depends upon service consumers to find some dedicated tools and equipment for the form of resource being virtualized. and task. tualized and encapsulated. ing is used to quantify the reputation of peers. The constructed ontology enables according to Xu. [5] define Resource Service Composition (RSC) as the compliance. and propose a word. [20] present that the CM environment is in-part enabled by the cre. Tao et al. [57] present an ontology-based service oriented peer- position in the context of CM. The manufacturing environment is dynamic and ever-changing. Specifically. They introduce the con. Yin et al. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. matic retrieval of the required manufacturing services derived from Guo et al. and adjusts the RSC based upon system ther state that agility in the manufacturing realm often deals with changes. as stated in Section 3.04. service discovery. both expected and unexpected. Flexibility and agility ation of Manufacturing Cloud Services (MCSs). deploy. However. A reputation based trust model for decision mak- aware composite service [49] in virtual enterprises. from bination of multiple factories into production networks. would be accomplished through description lan. These authors is either predictable or unexpected [26].6. number and entity information. given that the cloud is a huge shared service composed of three functional modules.7. These flexibility standardized machine components. used in cloud computing technologies. Manufacturing resources demands change should be the goal of any CM flexibility function- ality. Tao et al. et al. Shi et al. Wu et al. J Manuf Syst (2013). Cai et al. [46] formulate service composition optimal selection it. [56] present a prototype semantic web (STRL). ability to adjust the manufacturing process plan to accommodate guages (MSDLs) in the virtual marketplace. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 9 wireless sensor networks. which changing market conditions. sentence. According to these changes in the manufacturing environment or to accommodate authors. knowledge discovery by incorporating graph search and seman- guages. the RSC has a four stage lifecycle (design. The manufacturing cloud argue that based upon the possible RSC interruptions. In the situations where dedi. computational and knowl. which uses an URL. of RSC flexibility are required for maximum system adaptability: els. the ability to quickly adapt a manufacturing resource to produce a In research that stems from the ManuCloud project. Tao et al. expression and encapsulation using XML in a The performance of the proposed algorithm is validated by compar. [58] define a resource service aware web services composition in virtual enterprises. a composite service network (CoRCS-Net). According to manufacturing systems are geared toward agility – that is. In order to facilitate rapid scalability. in order cept of combinable strength and variation of combinable strength to aggregate and share manufacturing resources. These authors fur- factors affecting lifecycle. [13] state that advanced can be used to address complex manufacturing tasks. and Global Positioning System (GPS). One example of a CM service is STEP Resource Locator tic reasoning. and the resource semantic model. MCSs are cloud services that are formed when manufacturing resources are vir. Many authors have presented definitions of agility and integration of existing resources to form composite services which flexibility in manufacturing. CM environments should the user community can then assemble into virtualized value allow for variation in the marketplace and changes in the manufac- chains. bility and agility which will help ensure schedule.2. One implication of CM is the ability to dynamically adapt the Zhang et al. Rauschecker different component or assembly. some specific products available in the manufacturing cloud that edge resources would be virtualized in a similar manner to that can satisfy their requirements. accurate and auto- and task it with some requested service instructions. The resource services are classified into four categories including (SCOS) with multiple objectives and constraints. Furthermore.

as a collective whole. the Monitoring module monitors those vari. priation. same time. and as such indus. Flexibility type Implication Task flexibility RSCs can be constructed to adapt to many different tasks Flow flexibility Many RSC paths can be used to reach the required final condition Resource service flexibility Single resource services can complete many different tasks Quality of service (QoS) flexibility RSC can maintain a certain QoS. CM allows the consumer direct access to the duration. both background IP interests can be protected and agreements can At the end of the day. tures and collaborations is to share information and expertise in ketplace challenge. a CM network may include numerous cific knowledge that. Two of the most relevant social psychology theories for future CM environments are equity theory and game theory. Social psychology has offered hypotheses. One challenge to center around the use and control of background and foreground increased system flexibility is the ability of automated machin.jmsy. all of which will help develop effective business models. No. according to Parker. will help create environments which foster teamwork. 6.1016/j. For example. The work of these authors builds upon collaboration and cooperation to an unprecedented extent. The 4 propositions of equity theory. which may impede the ability and will- ingness of collaborators to work together. Equity theory is composed of 4 propositions as shown in Fig. LaSelle states that CM meets this goal by allowing Parker states that intellectual property considerations occur manufacturing to keep pace with the ever-changing customer throughout a four (4) stage life cycle (pre-contractual. In many ways. which is flexible Correlation flexibility RSC can adapt to changes in correlations among resources Created from [5]. under contractually enforced terms. Using data from 186 manufacturing compa- the mere survival of CM value chains will be reliant upon effi.doi.8. of Pages 16 10 D. basis it must have a feasible and value-generating business model. while collab- dination module then invokes corresponding adjustments to the orative relationships involve 2 or more parties working together RSC to ensure continued operations. environment. Wagner et al. and PRPs) must benefit in collaborative environments. obtained. and begins the execution phase. Equity theory is important to the development of CM business models because it enforces the need for just and fair reward shar- ing among CM collaborators. Business models a joint venture. et al. Wagner et al. Game theory [10] deals with how rational individuals make decisions in mutually interdependent roles. enables autonomous plating houses. Game theory will help recognition of the motivations in cooperative environments and Fig. One solution proposed is the collection of task spe. and termination) of collaborative relationships.008 . the CM environment may create the need for these plat- ing houses to collaborate to develop an improved plating process. Foreground rights are those generated through the often need repetitive adjustment before an acceptable result is action of both parties throughout the length of the venture [21]. on demand. for CM to be implemented on a wide spread be made as to the use of foreground rights. http://dx. Inequitable relationships will result in stressed relationships. out the entire collaborative relationship. and how these concepts affect the attitudes and behaviors In a broad sense. the CM environment will utilize relationships During RSC execution. 6. CM business models will need to support of participating parties. rights. Through- manufacturing industry through the internet. The Coor. where for- mal cooperation agreements are utilized. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. Parker [21] ables which affect the RSC lifecycle. J Manuf Syst (2013). constructs the RSC. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. In short. and transmits information explains that joint ventures involve the formation of a legal entity regarding abnormal changes to the Coordination module. each with existing plating process specifications process control without the need for machinery to “practice” that they will want to protect as IP (background rights). numerous theories surrounding cooperation and collective deci- sion making. are those that each ery to adapt to new tasks while maintaining acceptable quality of company holds prior to the relationship and intends to contribute service levels. Adapted from [9]. These authors offer a number of from the venture and must receive additional value on top of the hypotheses regarding the link between value creation and appro- value received in traditional manufacturing relationships. Through proper negotiations between CM parties. in which individuals can act together but are not bound by formal agreements. which would be the equivalent of foreground rights resulting from 3.04. [17] offer research regarding value management All parties (users. Table 2 summarizes their findings. Game theory can be non-cooperative. nies. At the tasks. the most important issues try can react to changing demand in real time. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Table 1 RSC flexibility types.2013. showed support for all but one of their eleven cient and effective group action. a luxury which cannot be afforded in a world of mass Similar background and foreground rights will exist in the CM customization. information. formation. The purpose of both joint ven- LaSelle [22] presents that mass customization is the new mar. LaSelle presents that robotic machinery programs to the venture.org/10. Background rights. one which would be well served by a supply order for all parties involved to do something they otherwise could chain that can produce unique products of varying complexity not. optimizes it. application providers. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. as the equity theory. or it can be cooperative. separate from the parties coordinating the venture. Wu et al. that resemble those of joint ventures or collaborations. Equity theory [9] deals with why individuals participate in groups and how they react when outcomes are disproportionately dis- tributed.

and cloud carriers. No. the GSL does not handle all CM related activities • Satisfaction is most higly driven by value appropriation. • The open and frequent exchange of information can ease tensions The complete service mode. coordinates and manages between competitors. See Fig. cloud provider. from [6]. These pro. the Manufacturing Resource Layer contains the physical man. lar services. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. of Pages 16 D. Architectures.008 . Xu discusses the Application Layer. 7. the three asset groups are combined together in the distributed infrastructure. the MCSs are categorized and organized into manufacturing clouds of simi- Fig. 8.2013. the manufactur- ing process asset group is composed of hardware and software resources used in the CBDM environment. These resources are virtualized and encapsu- lated into Manufacturing Cloud Services (MCSs). See Fig. alized manufacturing resources. can be accessed and invoked in the cloud. while the providers help demonstrate the possible capabilities of a CM environment have the equally obvious role of providing services in the cloud. and Virtual Service Layer identifies. including Hardware-as-a-service (Haas).jmsy. virtualizes. flow and the GSL helps administratively manage the CM activities. Platform-as-a-service (Paas). and manufacturing process) bounded by a centralized interface and a distributed infrastructure. of transport networks. conclude their research with three (3) main con. The DICIS is composed of three asset groups (human. a global of services. maturity. [20] propose a four stage CM model where manufac- turing resources are controlled through the internet via intelligent monitoring systems. and manages the use.9. which are then managed using the Global types are shown below in Table 3. Schaefer et al. Tao et al. Hypothesis Hypothesis statement Hypothesis supported designation by research? H1 Relational satisfaction has a positive impact on relational trust Yes H2a Relational satisfaction has a positive impact on the company’s future collaboration intent No H2b Relational trust has a positive impact on the company’s future collaboration intent Yes H3a Relational trust has a positive impact on value creation Yes H3b Relational trust has a positive impact on value appropriation Yes H4 Relational satisfaction has a negative impact on value appropriation Yes H5a Value creation has a positive impact on value appropriation Yes H5b Value appropriation has a positive impact on the focal partner’s level of project satisfaction Yes H5c Given H5a and H5b . Development of feasible implementation structures should be a cloud broker. 8. Wu et al. et al. Service Layer (GSL). clusions: can operate in both partial and complete services modes. and 2 interfaces for communicating with the human and manufacturing process asset groups. the cloud carriers enable the exchange of ser- service layer. Wu et al. After creation of many different MCSs based upon the manufacturing resources available. The cloud consumers serve the key area of interest for academia and industry alike as they will obvious role of utilizing the cloud’s services. Finally. which As can be seen in Fig. The GSL.1016/j. (CBDM) model composed of a cloud consumer. and delivery a manufacturing resource layer. The particulars of these service resources as CM services. 9. and managers. According to vices between providers and consumers through the provisioning Xu. the resource providers take some control of the process • Collaborators compare their awards with those of others. milling services may be represented by Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. 9. Implementation architectures. The Software-as-a-service (Saas). value creation has a negative direct impact on the focal partner’s level of project satisfaction Yes H6 Information exchange positively moderates the direct link between value creation and project satisfaction Yes H7 Project satisfaction has a positive impact on future collaboration intentions Yes Wagner et al.04. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. These MCSs. Most importantly. Through the Application layer. As can be seen in Fig. [8] propose a Distributed Infrastructure with Centralized Interfacing System (DICIS) as a CBDM structur- ing architecture. depending upon the task demanded. Human assets include consumers. and the centralized inter- face enables the system to function as a whole. in contrast to the actual physical resources they represent. The cloud broker is an intermediate party between the consumers Xu [6] proposes a four (4) layer CM framework consisting of and providers. ufacturing resources and capabilities of the shop floor. and an application layer. specify that there are are ultimately provided to the customer in Software-as-a-service four cloud service types. models and frameworks model. and their relationships to the attitudes and behaviors of collaborating parties. (Saas) and Infrastructure-as-a-service (Iaas) delivery models. posed structures vary in their complexity.doi. [33]. CM layered framework. producers. See Fig.org/10. – rather. and packages the Infrastructure-as-a-service (Iaas). The communication assets proposed include a communication network (internet). In the par- tial service mode. net- work security. models. http://dx. 7. however. the entire CM activity. For example. [7] propose a Cloud Based Design and Manufacture demonstrated potential. communication. J Manuf Syst (2013). and frameworks for implementation the user can construct manufacturing applications from the virtu- of CM have been presented by numerous authors. Finally. performance. Finally. the GSL is a cloud plat- form and provides services using the Platform-as-a-service (Paas) 3. a virtual service layer. which provides the user-resource exchange portal. and level of Wu et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 11 Table 2 Hypotheses offered by [17] regarding value creation and appropriation. yet many have similar characteristics.

2013. cloud implementation. In addition to the CM model through an application layer. also state Fig. The seven functional layers of the shown in Fig. CBDM model. Tao et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. that pro- cloud. Wu et al.jmsy. Iaas Consumers can access computing resources for exploitation without purchasing or maintaining them. Paas Consumers can access tools necessary for product development process within the CBDM environment. providers. and a network such as the internet. 11. DICIS. of Pages 16 12 D. the lowest level. 9. and operators. These resources are then virtualized and managed As can be seen in Fig. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. 10. security. http://dx.008 .1016/j. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. J Manuf Syst (2013). the CM environment is enabled by in a cloud environment. which is shown in Fig. 8. See Fig. and then made available to consumers consumers. from [7]. Users can then search the manufacturing clouds for services posed in [20] consists of manufacturing resources and abilities at and combine MCSs to fit their needs. 10. propose a ten layer architecture for CM architecture are facilitated by the three layers of knowledge. Tao et al.doi. 10. et al. from [8]. Saas Consumers can utilize software using thin client interfaces without purchasing licenses.org/10. Table 3 Services types described by [7].04. multiple MCSs which are then organized into one manufacturing In similar fashion to other architectures presented. Service type Description Haas Providers can rent hardware to consumers through the CBDM environment. No.

1016/j. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.04. http://dx. Wu et al. No. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. J Manuf Syst (2013).2013.jmsy.008 .doi. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 13 Fig. Cloud manufacturing abstract.org/10. 11. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. of Pages 16 D. from [20]. Fig. 10. Ten layer architecture. et al. from [20].

No. Potential impact providers to rapidly scale up and down manufacturing capacity. its current state does not yet fully support itate a CM environment. the benefits of CM Engineering design: In the short term. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx that CM platforms can be public. the 3D printers connected in the cloud also help rapid As illustrated in Fig. For example. the benefits of CM on man- ufacturing are improved resource sharing. J Manuf Syst (2013). there is an increasing need to establish a new form In the past two decades. Much work is required to Although much progress has been made with regard to dis. develop inter-factory industrial control systems which could facil- tributed manufacturing. One of the criti- environments. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. and enhanced user experience. the benefits of CM on on marketing and service are reduced time-to-market. designers. In addition. Potential impact and future work and standardized machine components. In the long term. In the area is customer co-creation. However. rather than functions. private.2. both web and agent-based social media such as Facebook. allowing the cloud service 4. Future work Manufacturing: In the short term. well as marketing and service. community. providing applications that are modular.jmsy. approaches are lack of socio-technical network. and production managers to communicate with each other through decentralized and changeable. improved engineering design are ubiquitous access to design information. the agent technology allows developers to focus on objects by CM can engage customers. Marketing and service: In the short term. or hybrid the needs of modern manufacturing enterprises. mass collaboration. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. CM has the potential to create new mar- sified into three categories: thin server and thick client. the co-creation process enhanced design. HTML. CM is still a poorly defined field of study and would benefit ufacturing. provide evidence of room Fig. 4. and 4.008 . ActiveX. Stouffer et al. 12. manufacturing engineers.doi. 3D printing technology does not require tooling. 4. such as manufacturing cells. However. as ufacturing processes requiring tools. we envision a possible impact of CM on tooling which makes rapid scalability possible for traditional man- three key sectors including engineering design. collaboration. CM has the potential to offer rapid scalability in some situations at certain levels. general purpose machine tools. manufacturing. Blogs. et al.1016/j. and peer-to-peer which are enabled technolo- transform the traditional product realization process into a value gies such as the Web. http://dx. Twitter.2. the impact area is collaborative design which is to sup- In order for manufacturing enterprises to create value through port engineering design in geographically dispersed environments. thin client keting channels for information and resource sharing which will and thick server. the impact improved efficiency. knowledge and resource sharing mechanism that collaborative design are web-based design and agent-based design. and online forums. and CORBA. The potential impact of cm across sectors [54]. Wu et al. long term. service.04.2013. cal issues still not fully addressed is scalability. of Pages 16 14 D.1. 12. emphasizes the generation and realization of various product The architectures for web-based collaborative design can be clas- stakeholders’ value.1. from detailed research in many areas. the impact area is distributed man. the most important research works in of information. In agent-based co-creation process. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. and affordable computing resources. rapid prototyping. and inter-connected design knowledge pool capabilities which CM may have the potential to possess. In the long term.org/10. Automation and control reduced cost. Specifically.

2.07.2011. structure and behavior analyses for CM. 2012. settings. the product design stage. Berscheid E. machine require control systems which have the characteristics of high utilization. less information and resource sharing mechanisms that facilitate [6] Xu X. and non-value 4. 2005. 2010. National 4. identifying key 1–14. and liveness. or should they be subject to a free References market style environment? Does this vary based upon the situa- tion. of production processes for CM systems? cations to the CM field will help ensure flexibility in manufacturing. patterns between service providers and consumers in order [11] Li P. high reliability. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. 2001. It’s a flat world. and why? Perhaps a hybrid environment would be best? [1] Friedman TL. are normally executed in intra-factory the design. et al. In: IEEE international conference on industrial engineering & engineering management. Harnessing the power of cloud computing for M2M.2. research question in this area is: Additionally. So far little work has sought to speed. are autonomously reconfigured with minimal human intervention. The NIST definition of cloud computing. Game theory: introduction and applications. The research question is With limited examples of commercially viable implementa. While these communications are usually more reli. providers and consumers in CM networks? NIST Special Publication 2008. multiple-party work? How will value be maxi. MA: Allyn and Bacon.pdf [4] Smith J. Scarfone K. A primary technical barrier is that [5] Zhang L. p. flexibility will also be enabled by open communication final product at design stage. little research ment of open communication standards is an area of potential work has been conducted to estimate product cost in the context further research. validate the performance of CM. and education. http://dx.800:82.com/files/wp/m2mCloudComputing. and long distance range.. • How can we capture material flows and evaluate performances research in the area of artificial intelligence and its possible appli. Specifically.. U.002. Web Link: information needs to be shared across upstream design and down.2. Robotics communication and collaboration in distributed and collaborative and Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2011. Business model added manufacturing activities for CM. These authors are dis. AC 2012–3017: Distributed collaborative design and manu-facture in terms of information and resource sharing: in the cloud-motivation. Business model development should focus on a few main • How can we examine the potential cost savings from CM during research questions: early stages of product development? • Who will benefit from this implementation of CM and how? Why As cloud manufacturing (CM) has been recognized as a promis- would those involved in this business model choose a CM operat. Therefore. 2009. In order to environments. p. OUP Catalogue. infrastructure. Procedia Engineering 2011.org/10. Falco J. Zhang C. The to move manufacturing business to the Cloud. about background and foreground rights? In: Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes everything. of CM.jmsy. However. propose a strategic shared-interest. The develop. 2010. tion and resource sharing mechanism is a framework for capturing [7] Wu D. Tao F. 1978. of Pages 16 D. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 15 for improvement within the field of ICS [12].1016/j. and throughput etc. and point out some of the key mized and distributed in accordance with value added? future directions.3. Grance. development.04. Web A huge amount of data and unstructured manufacturing-related Link: http://csrc. Needed is a system evaluate the potential desirable performance such as time saving fit for industrial process control with the range ability of a current and improved machine utilization enabled by CM. One of the key research questions [8] Schaefer D. Hence. Walster GW. value added. the main SCADA system. a key component of such seamless informa. Flexible management of resource service traditional manufacturing systems lack frameworks for seam. Guo H. J Manuf Syst (2013). 2011. Distributed system simulation cussing that DSC and PLC communications. accurate estimating product to-machine communication. present current status of CM. it is very worthwhile to develop cost models to provide insights into cost drivers. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145. it is critical to conduct quantitative able and allow faster transmittal of data than do SCADA systems. vision. Hu T. the following: tions. Department of Commerce.html • How should IP be handled in collaborative environments? What [2] Tapscott D. P. • How can we investigate the communication and interaction [10] Romp G. Boston. IDETC/CIE.2. Discrete-event modeling they are typically not well suited for long distance communica. composition in cloud manufacturing.nytimes. to capture the implicit collaboration structure and key service [12] Stouffer K. which are typically used Manufacturing system performance is often a central issue in in a manufacturing industry.numerex. T. Si N. Shaefer D. From cloud computing to cloud manufacturing. ing paradigm for the next generation manufacturing systems. No. http://www.nist. The future trend should be to move away from automation towards 4.2. http://dx. enabling geographically distributed reachability. service provides and consumers. Information and resource sharing Institute of Standards and Technology. 2008.. USA: Penguin Group Inc.008 . Therefore. looking forward.S. after all.rcim. Web Link: http://www. providing coordination among value cost at the early stage of product development processes is crucial chain members during the manufacturing process. Luo YL. In addition. Rosen DW. and configuration of systems. it is still undetermined as to what applications are feasible for CM. • Should collaborators within the CM environment be bound by formal operating agreements.com/2005/04/03/magazine/03DOMINANCE. Guide to industrial control systems (ICS) security.15:840–7. Product costing is defined as a process of estimating the cost of Moreover. [9] Hatfield E. Williams AD. Ensuring shop percentage of manufacturing cost of a product is determined at floor connectivity will allow for efficient and effective machine. This review aims to • How will equity be assured when value is delivered as a result of highlight the motivations and drivers of CM.pdf stream manufacturing in CM.doi. 4. CM systems can only be as flexible and robust as their controlling logic and control systems permit.doi. A unified communication framework for intelligent inte- grated CNC on the shop floor.2013. Thames JL. Towards a cloud-based design and manufacturing paradigm: looking backward. the implicit and complex collaboration structure. Equity: theory and research. Wikinomics: the art and science of peer production. it is critical to justify ultimate goal should be to enable robust service compositions that the perceived cost savings by estimating the cost quantitatively. Cost estimation integrated intelligence which not only allows automation of tasks With decision makers in manufacturing enterprises hesitating but also allows for autonomy in tasking and task flexibility [64]. Therefore.5. 2278–82.4. other essential factories which can be controlled in an inter-factory style ICS will manufacturing performance metrics include cycle time. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. [3] Mell. 7–33. for production mangers to make decisions. many ing environment over a traditional manufacturing environment? research studies on CM have been conducted. Therefore.1016/j.org/10. It turns out that the predominant standards as proposed by the MTConnect Institute. and simulation allows us to model behavioral properties such as tion environments. boundedness. Wu et al.

http://www. 2012. Information service of the resource node in a man- Implementing shared manufacturing services on the World-Wide Web. Eggert A. and QoS computation model in virtual enterprise.12. SWMRD: a semantic web-based [30] Rauschecker U. Luo Y.12. and optimal-selection in manufacturing grid. Ren L. Technology 2008. Luo Y. 2012. Zu De Zhou. assembly mag. Mezgár I.56(1):71–84. Modeling of combinable relationship-based [19] MTConnect. Sobolewski MW. Striving for a total integration of CAD. Manufacturing Systems 2010. Study on manufacturing grid & its resource service computing and service-oriented manufacturing model.63(5):671–90. Magazine. Zhang L.automation.47(6):1521–50. manufacturing resource discovery system for cross-enterprise collaboration. Cao JW. equilibrium. Kramer TR. applications for networked product development. [63] Tao F. Assembly automation: manufacturing in the cloud. aspx/01 about/01 history. Zhang L.. Self-organization manufacturing grid and its [41] Li BH. FC-PACO-RM: a parallel method for service com- [18] Torrisi NM. Web Link: http://www. Zhang S. Manufacture 2011.1109/TII. The International Journal of Advanced Manufactur- Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Madison. A cloud-based collaborative manufacturing resource [53] Wu D. Web Link: http://www. a social network analysis. [32] Chafkin. 2009. No.10:28–31. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Zhou Z. STEP- [25] Edstrom D. Correlation-aware web services composition ufacturing and Services 2007.43(17):3703–43. quality magazine. [55] Cai M. Zhang K. Schaefer D. Jiang XD.12]. Hu YF.37(9):1022–41.dlapiper. Gupta SK. [33] Putnik G. [52] Xu XW. Hong HD. The world’s easiest making system.12]. ing resources in cloud manufacturing systems.org/media/7312/getting composition service network and the theoretical proof of its scale-free charac- started with mtconnect .41(3). Technology strategy and management: business models for strategy Production Research 2009. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2008. European Journal of Operational nal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2007. Paper Number: ing as a service environment. [59] Yin Y. Wei X. Li S.12]. Manufacturing as a Service Business: CIM in the 21st [60] Shi S.12]. Research 2010.siemens.1016/j. ManuCloud.org/10.11:1258–64.226(6):1099–117. http://www.com/ Transactions on System.com/salesmaterial. as/brochure/en/brochure totally integrated automation overview en. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx [13] Hao Q. Chen Z. trust-QoS evaluation in manufacturing grid system. and innovation. Mo R. and Mathematics News 2010.48(12):3445–60.15(2):168–77. A review of the application of grid technology [42] Zhang L. Zhang W. Utility modelling. LaiLi Y. ufacturing grid environment. Journal of Business Research 2010. Shen W.2012. Tao F. Greer MJ. M. Rosen DW. tion of resource service transaction in service-oriented manufacturing system. Luo Y. IEEE Transactions over public IP networks using CyberOPC. In: International conference on engineering design [27] Schultz B. Zhang W.doi. Seidelmann J.60(1):191–200. International Journal of Production Research 2011. et al. [35] Goldhar JD. Wisconsin. Zhang L. Mao J. [58] Tao F. Zhang L. Proceedings of the optimal-selection system. Web Link: [57] Zhang W. p. [45] Guo H. Zhao D. Web Link: http://mtconnect. Enterprise Information Systems 2012:1–21. Gu X. Sarachan BD. IEEE [31] All together now. cur- April 2011. 2011. Information Technology Journal 2012.12]. Yefa H. et al. 2011. [39] Project Overview: ManuCloud Fact Sheet. Zhang L. US. [47] Tao F. 2011. Intellectual property issues in joint ventures and collaborations. Power of the cloud. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2010. [26] Ding B. 2013. The International Journal of Advanced on Industrial Informatics 2012.83:33–4. de Oliveira JFG. Proctor FM. CAM and CNC. The Future of Manufacturing.12. Computers in Industry 1990. Qi G. He Q. Cheng Y. Chang Z.008 .12.com. [accessed 07. Cho JH.14:225–45. Cloud manufacturing: drivers. laborative relationships. Integrated design and Integrated Manufacturing 2007. rapid manufacturing over the Internet.2013. Pinilla JM. http://dx.eu/index. European Research Consortium for Informatics MSEC2013-1106. et al. In: International Journal of Production Research 2009.2(11):729–41. A reputation-based peer-to-peer architecture http://www.9(6):449–55. 2012. Yang H. Tao F. gration. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing munications of the ACM 1996.jmsy. [50] Suh SH.04. International Journal of Internet Man. Sun LJ.225(10):1969–76. Liu Y. 2011. A study of optimal allocation of comput- management framework. Cloud Storage a STEEP CLIMB. Communications of the ACM 2012.com/magazine/20091001/the-future-of-manufacturing. Application and modeling of resource service manucloud-project. [24] Katzel J. Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture ing Technology 2008. Rosen DW.com [accessed 07. Remote monitoring for high-speed CNC processes position optimal-selection in cloud manufacturing system. Tao F. MFG.org/10. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2012. http://www. International information management corporation limited: eChallenges e-20 [56] Cai M. http://www. Towards achieving agility in web-based virtual neering Manufacture 2012. Creating and appropriating value in col. rent status. selection based on particle swarm optimization in manufacturing grid system.12. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 2004. Nee AYC.com/articles/ compliant CNC.php?id=185 [accessed 07. 2011. 2012. Meier M. 2013. Cheng Y. J Manuf Syst (2013). Long Y. Enterprise Information Systems 2012. Manufacturing Technology 2012. Wu et al. Computer Integrated Manufacturing System (China) new service-oriented networked manufacturing model. Schaefer D. [accessed 07. http://dx. [49] Tao F.doi. [64] Liu LL. ponoko. Control Engineering 2011. Kenny KB. Losleben P.225(10):1969–76. 1998.12. and coordina- [15] Siemens. In: Proceedings of IEEE transactions on [61] Dong B. Xu L.pdf teristics. 2011.mfg. Shi ZB.pdf Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. enterprises: a decision-centric approach. Schaefer D. Journal of Engineering 2012. DLA Piper.12].10(3):127–34. International Journal of Computer [36] Rajagopalan S.com/make-and-sell/how-it-works [accessed: 07. Cloud-based design and manufacturing systems: sharing services. [28] Cloud manufacturing: using the cloud to make more than hot air.49(13): manufacturing paradigm.assemblymag. Wang L. The International Journal of [17] Wagner SM. and Cybernetics – Part A: Systems and Humans node/21552902 [accessed 07. based service management in distributed manufacturing environments. Venkatesh VC. Com. Computers in Industry 2005. Jelinok M. Journal of Applied Engineering Science puting and service oriented manufacturing model. BNP media. [46] Tao F. 2012. Lewis JW. Manuhub: a semantic web system for ontology- 11 conference proceedings. (ICED13).201(1):129–43.16(1):1–7.com. Zhang L. [54] Wu D. Cloud manufacturing: a task scheduling algorithm.20(2):101–9. Cloud. BNP Media [51] Xu XW. Zhou Z. in a manufacturing grid for resource sharing. Zhou Z. Sarker BR.1(1):51–74. Chen G. Yip A. Wang H. Web service-oriented manufacturing resource automation science and engineering. Part B: Journal of Engi- [16] Panchal JH. Advanced Engineering Infor- [37] About MFG. 26–8.2232936. Newman ST. Computer Integrated 2003. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 international [29] Meier M. The International Journal of [14] OPC Foundation. et al. Computerworld 2011. Zhao D. Zhang K. and future trends.html for semantic service discovery in distributed manufacturing environments.20:169–77. Production Machining compliant NC research: the search for intelligent CAD/CAPP/CAM/CNC inte- 2010. Si N. [22] LaSelle R. Jagadeesan A. Cloud manufacturing: a [48] Tao F.45(6). Zhang L.com/about-mfgcom matics 2007:282–95. Cheng Y. Tao F. Chen Y. International Journal of Production Research 2005. Zhang L. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.51(5):817–27. Su S. Corney J. Hu Y.55:22–4. Hu YF.inc. Lindemann E. Zhang X. ManuCloud: the next-generation manufactur.39(2):34–45.final. Yu T. Fang ML. Muckenhirn R. Zhou ZD. Cloud manufacturing: a new in manufacturing. based manufacturing-as-a-service environment for customized products.51:40–3. Sum Jr RN. [62] Tao F. 4119–55. Cloud ERP meets manufacturing. Guo H.4(4):315–27. of Pages 16 16 D. Web Link: http://www. The Economist. 21 April 2012. An implementation of modeling resource Century. Web Link: http://www. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212.opcfoundation. Venkatesh VC. [34] Erkes JW. [23] Symonds M. Resource service composition and its optimal- [38] Ponoko.6(4):373–404. Cheng Y.58:16–21. Tian Q. Cloud manufacturing: a com- tous manufacturing and an architecture. manufacturing science and engineering conference (MSEC13). Li BH. Advanced manufacturing systems and enterprises: Cloud and ubiqui. Zhang L.asp?MID=AboutOPC [44] Tao F.org/Default. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 87223-assembly-automation-manufacturing-in-the-cloud 2002. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 2012. Cloud computing in manufacturing. Correlation-aware resource service composition [21] Parker N.63(8):840–8. International Journal of [40] Sako M. CAPP. Tu XY. Inc. Zhao D. Man. Jour. On the architecture of intelligent STEP- azine.economist. [65] Tao F. [20] Tao F. Towards a cooperative distributed manufacturing [43] Laili Y. Cai M. Wang SL.