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

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

In addition to owning example of this relationship is that of an original equipment manu- physical resources. 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. etc.jmsy. The input to the PRP group is the man. PRPs join the CM and drawings. These requirements are then contrac- network based upon their expertise alone. including but not limited to machining uct level requirements to suppliers. Physical resource providers (PRPs) 21st century industry is dominated by hierarchical supply Physical resource providers (PRPs) own and operate man.04.2. Ideally as a whole. the opportunity to enhance the cloud as a service. http://dx. PRPs have the know-how and experience to facturer (OEM) who develops product level requirements from the utilize these machines effectively and efficiently. and severely limited by their rigid nature. Key characteristics profit. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.2013. between users and resource providers for a portion of the product 2. offering users instan. rather. Wu et al. tually enforced with a first-tier supplier. prove to be difficult and costly to dissolve.) are ufacturing data created by the cloud based applications. A classic aging technologies. These PRPs are perspective of technology function and integration (specifications not limited by geographic location. inspection technologies.org/10. et al. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. the work and core competencies.1. No. Customer centricity 2. 2. suppliers to assist with the product development process. chains in which requirement originating parties flow down prod- ufacturing equipment. 1. finishing technologies. While often these relationships taneous access to manufacturing capabilities provided through can be fruitful for all parties involved.3.1016/j. for example). they can often requirements. when tradi- the output is a finalized product in conformance with user tional supplier relationships prove to be undesirable. Strategic vision for CM.doi.1. pack. and testing resources.2. Furthermore. improve quality.008 . / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 3 Fig. the consumer experience (reduce costs. who can then engage sub-tier technologies. of Pages 16 D. J Manuf Syst (2013).

The inte- ships will be customer-centric.04. Temporary. ple cost and schedule scenarios for consideration by the consumer. et al. lead time. The ability to quickly reconfigure and repurpose manufactur. Demand driven. the CM environment Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. of small jobs without disruption of larger jobs. 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. In order to flow manufacturing requirements from the cloud to ate numerous options for the users based upon their specifications automated resources. Comparison of CM and traditional supply chains. In the CM environment. the user. The CM Another distinguishing characteristic of CM is the dynamic. to resource distribute tasks among manufacturing locations. and quality.2. demand intelligent dispersed manufacturing sites with minimized down time. and in other instances humans will still interact from many different PRPs. schedule. as a measure of quality assurance and error prevention. Wu et al. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art.4. J Manuf Syst (2013). ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. CM production lines are meant point where no job would be turned away. it is also 2. reconfigurable. To Like any manufacturing entity today. ensuring compat- providers who can fulfill those needs while meeting cost. which in many industries is already present reduced cost.2. defined by enhanced efficiency.1016/j. the CM to be temporary in nature. The key to ensure multi-resource cooperation. Where transportation is a cost driver. the cloud based application layer can initiate searches for alternative 2. These control systems will act as the central nervous sys- such as cost. System flexibility will rely upon the ability to rapidly recon- figure and repurpose manufacturing equipment across multiple 2.doi. and different choices that fit tem. No. and quality objectives of the user. does not necessarily imply the absence of human beings. 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.jmsy. [53] the CM environment. In addition. 2. flex. 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.org/10. Turn no job away crucial to understand collaborative relationships between cloud Due to the wide range of PRPs connected. with needs. Unlike tra- to ensure that the division of tasks can be properly flowed down ditional manufacturing enterprises. dynamic manufacturing protocols that would result in lower cost.3. allowing for efficient processing well. for example. environment can optimize the manufacturing environment to the ible nature of resource provisioning. The ICS will coordinate and goal of a CM environment is linking users.2. 2 for a comparison of sup- ply chains in traditional and CM environments. specific. http://dx. as the cloud based application layer can be used to gener. or even task.2013. to multiple. on small jobs that were once too disruptive and costly to tackle. ibility of efforts and final products. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. See Fig. of Pages 16 4 D.008 . gration of automation. manufacturing supply chain relation. These benefits will be derived from the creation of flexi. This increased effi- ing resources allows for high efficiency. In addition. distributed shop floors with minimal effort. Wu et al. monitoring and controlling resources at the shop floor level within those ranges would be provided for consideration). increased flexibility. Solutions will be customer. minimized down time. Depending upon the application. settings. Cloud based applications can develop multi- introduce a new framework to visualize such implicit collabora. the entire manufacturing process ble manufacturing sequences enabled by the pooling of resources may be automated. the extent to which the CM accomplish such a task. however. industrial control systems (ICSs) will also be (the user would be allowed to specify key aspects of the desired job.2. required. a high level of automation will be required environment is exercised will be driven by user demand. and improved capabilities for today. and ciency should increase the ability and willingness of PRPs to take instant response to demand.

Shared burden. In traditional business models. what mar- of accepted industry specifications regarding these subjects and ket there is for such a business and so on. and they are compensated based mation security are two very important enabling aspects for CM. CM will likely cause a shift in the revenue models currently used by design firms and manufacturers alike. of the field must be collected from many different specialties which. or will it be shared based upon time and implementation of CM. collaboration between suppliers will be required to successfully For this reason. and business models. The result is shown in Fig. 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. to the enablement of CM. 3 shows a converging mind map. however. different manufacturers combine resources to complete a build- In addition to those topics listed in Fig. 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. value chains are structured and how wealth sharing will occur. process planning. why they care about your to enable CM. will be highly flexible in CM. Consider now that cloud based appli- or interchangeable manufacturing resources. A business model is the cell). and those that help match users and operation: “a business model articulates the customer value propo- providers. Cloud manufacturing topics map a tiered structure of control. CM to process the same job. 3. 3 are indirectly addressed. the map. enabled in the CM field by automation. of Pages 16 D. informa- The organizing business models that will someday define CM. Value will be added by Not all of the topics shown in Fig. it identifies a market segment. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 5 will be “demand intelligent” in that the inherent system flexibil. In a CM environment. requiring them to current status information. physical resource providers (shown in a green cell). virtual enterprises. In order to discover and document possible areas the product or service it offers. it defines the structure of Fig. a brainstorming tool was used to record areas discount product marketplace. which describe how value is added to ownership and promoting effective collaboration. the current state of qual- users with the products they desire while utilizing less resources ity assurance (QA). 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. a product. network. For example. it specifies the revenue generation mechanisms. it documents those aspects most important understood – design authorities own the rights to product designs. and business management. QA business models altogether (by all vested parties).). Current state cloud will cause a shift in how value is added to the product. yet the desired process can be performed by combin.doi. sition. Value chains. 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. the CM environment will erty because they paid for access to the cloud-based applications. etc.5.jmsy. CM will require the formation of new and information security were not researched nor documented.org/10.3. including but not limited to distributed adjust their business models accordingly. http://dx. we can further see that physical resource providers will be and how you will make money. because without their expertise it would be of little use.1016/j. Following the physical resource provider branch of product or service. will require a shift from tradi- broken down further where appropriate. cloud robustness. and will require and configuration management were omitted due to the wide range propositions as to what value the customer will receive. Business organizations often vary widely across industries. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. like. Mari Sako explains that business models define business those providing the resources. rather. Secondly. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. 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]. data compatibility. 3. For example. Through documentation of this work. 2. et al. upon the value they can add to the product. if man. 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. 3 are addressed in this resource providers sharing expertise and collaborating to provide report. Traditionally. 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. provide a foundation for the advancement of doing business. The introduction of the 3. data rights are easily field of study. For example. these issues will be left for other researchers to complete a project. however they are far out of the core competencies of the authors. Numerous fields of study were used to compile the following for service providers to add value to products.2. Amazon is not just a of key interest. the cloud will introduce a change in how users calculate the cost of in their combination.2013.04. QA and configuration management as applied to CM environ- chain structure and revenue models. through efficient processes. These three groups converge things such as who the customers are. many resources spent? These are the questions that will determine how research topics as shown in Fig. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. as the cloud will take over some of the activities that contribute to the As CM is in the juvenile stages of development.008 . manufacturing. tion security. it the core outwards or from the outward fringes toward the center. From there. J Manuf Syst (2013). the even be different across corporations within the same industry. describes the positioning within the value network or ecosystem. How will value added be determined when 3 explore. and appli- argument as to why the company will succeed – it explains critical cation providers (shown in a blue cell). Wu et al. 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. it is an online discount product mar- of research that would be critical to those using CM resources. configuration management. which can be read from the value chain. most are. how you are going to add value to the product. the cloud will remove some opportunity CM. 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. Users may claim that data produced by the cloud is their prop- ing manufacturing resources “B” and “C”. Starting in the center of the map. No. 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 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. and can As CM is as of yet a relatively undefined field of study. automatically realize and capitalize upon this alternative to avoid Those firms managing the cloud-based applications will certainly excessive loading of manufacturing resource “A”. For one. will be defined by an IP sharing model that aids in cooperation and collaboration. the current state revenue models of both the users and resource providers. enabling issues are while not unprecedented altogether. Cloud robustness and infor- adder is separated from the others. Specifically. which acts together to create value. shared benefit Traditional business organizations and relationships rely upon 2. ketplace.

jmsy. difficult to find financing.1. CM systems.org/10.doi. implications of the internet for design and rapid manufacturing technologies [36]. etc. and the ability to make the factory floor ditions. Instead of dealing with unknown market con- job regardless of size. provided a review of the application of grid technology in manu- A 1998 source published by Rajagopalan et al. most notably in the consumer product industry with The stated purpose for such an infrastructure is to allow for the rapid prototyping manufacturing resources. Wu et al. These authors have a similar vision to that presented In an article from 1990. 3.04. CM topics map. manufacturing resource integration and allocation. manufac. This work Surprisingly. and The DLA Piper legal group [28] explains that internet enabled also discuss the ability for mass customization as a result of CIM. 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. 3. 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. this work rep. the concept of the manufacturing grid was pro- the year in which the document was written. manufacturing. It is likely that internet capabilities (speed. crowd funding.62. resents a significant precursor to the vision of CM presented in this enterprise information management. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. of manufacturing services available over the internet. which standing the possible capabilities and advantages of a CM style ended in the year 2000. environment. 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. significant literature on manufacturing-as-a. as the internet was posed. et al.63].2. These authors discuss an internet infrastructure 3. 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. focused operation to one driven by information technology.) were not able to accommodate the A 1996 source by Erkes et al. Tao et al. Quirky offers Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. the design ventures. History allows connection with the process broker to communicate design requirements to the manufacturing services providers. Commercially viable implementations these authors describe the existence of design clients. http://dx. [65] paper. and strict vendor relationships. cloud-based activities offer flexibility and enable competiveness in they fail to realize the potential of networking multiple factories a cutthroat marketplace.2013. which in some respect is similar to that of CM [48.2. J Manuf Syst (2013). These could lead to exploitation of various enterprises based upon their authors discuss transformation of the factory from a mechanical competencies. and process brokers which act as intermediaries. [34] discusses the implementation visions presented by these papers at the time of their creation. of Pages 16 6 D. Like so many of the more recent papers which will be reviewed in this report. is very clearly applicable to the vision of CM presented in this service was created in the late 1990s. In the described work. together into a virtual “smart” enterprise. According to The Economist [31]. and connect designers with manufacturing resources client uses software that augments traditional CAD programs and over the internet. product design. 3.1016/j. interfaces. While Goldhar and Jelinek envision the “smart” factory. Regardless.1. This is undoubtedly due In the 2000s. 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. A limited number of commercial companies have implemented turing services.008 . / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. including the ability to fulfill any demanded today’s marketplace. discusses the facturing. No. data transfer capability. intelligent. Current implementations that connects designers and manufacturing services. Goldhar and Jelinek [35] discuss future in this report. and scheduling.

and computational power. which are communi. 5. the ManuCloud project is meant to 3.com platform hosts all resources based upon peak usage rates.org/10. This architecture is piece of equipment. The first form is that which the internet and available for use by distributed designers. Accord- ing to Meier et al. software services. et al. cloud- states [31]. makes a usage based pay on- the final product [37].04. While not a pure cloud-based manufacturing environment. buyers request services by computing can aid manufacturing and engineering by providing providing technical product specifications. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. provided in website which providers designers with access to the manufactur. is perhaps the research project most relevant to CM today [39]. industrial control systems. cated to appropriate suppliers for quoting. 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. Quirky development process. tories and among multiple cooperative factories. Symonds [23] presents that the use of cloud- Chafkin of Inc. Suppliers are selected Edstrom [25] presents that typical server usage lingers at based upon their manufacturing capabilities.1016/j.com. and represents a major control system technologies are crucial to the ability to efficiently advancement toward the realization of CM. According to the authors. users with access to a complete product creation enterprise. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 7 Fig.doi. data storage.2. The need to oversize computing taneous production capacity. Wu et al. coordination and cooperation among machines reproduced in Fig. The MFG. route jobs through the required processing steps to completion. Xu [6] presents that the implementation of cloud computing in Quirky is enabled by manufacturing resources virtualized over manufacturing can take two (2) forms. Shapeways offers users imme. This company latest software yet avoid the cost and hassle of maintaining the prices products based upon the materials they require and the resource. meeting regulatory compliance requirements. J Manuf Syst (2013). Low-hanging fruit: cloud-computing in manufacturing summarized in Fig. The ManuCloud Project.jmsy. and the website even accommodated. discusses Shapeways. Symonds presents that Saas is facilitated by the use of amount of machine time needed to make the part [32]. and processing equipment will be required both within single fac- The ManuCloud project architecture is very similar to the strate. and cloud performance. The is discussed in the strategic vision section – that is.4. The Economist [31] also technologies into the manufacturing industry.2. Automation and gic vision of CM as presented in this report. significant numbers. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. a Software-as-a-service (Saas) format. federated factories.and Cloud architecture] provides users with the ability to utilize the intra-factory cooperation in CM environments. in addition to the cost activities from creating the Request for Quote to the shipping of of maintaining these technologies. in the Quirky business model. “[The Manu. 4. a company which offers 3D printing ser. In fact. Automation. sion’s Seventh Framework Program for Research (FP7). numerous companies. data storage in the cloud has been slow to gain popularity because of concerns 3. 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. The implementation of cloud-computing technologies in the vices over the internet. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. expertise. diate access to 3D printers to make any object which they cloud computing adoption has already begun to take place in desire. the mimicking Quirky business model incorporates the originating designers into of the cloud computing environment in manufacturing. 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. yet allow company specific attributes to be ufacturing services are offered to designers. As parts and assemblies are rarely manufactured by one by a set of software-as-a-service applications”. and instan. as 3. funded under the European Commis. Magazine discusses Ponoko. allows users to utilize the ing resources they need to realize their products. Schultz [27] presents that despite its clear benefits. as this requires little investment as compared to CM. In contrast to the vetting process used manufacturing industry can be termed the “low hanging fruit”. virtualized production ity to automatically execute manufacturing tasking generated by networks. cycle phase. of Pages 16 D. Cloud-computing.008 . Simplified version of artwork shown in [31]. [29]. 4 below. which of as a utility service which can be accessed on-demand without connects consumers with over 200. demand system truly beneficial and cost effective. According to Katzel. roughly 8–15% of total capacity. as stated by Katzel.3. a product creation based enterprise resource planning (ERP) software. Automation and control technologies will enable inter.000 manufacturers in 50 owning the enabling technologies. machine-to-machine enable creation of integrated manufacturing networks spanning cooperation multiple enterprises which are facilitated by service oriented information technologies. supported the cloud. can be thought One of the most promising CM companies is MFG. based on cloud-enabled.com.2013. No. http://dx. facilitating the abil- manufacturing capabilities of configurable. Key research implementations over data security. According to MFG.

manufacturing services. PLCs are computer col developed for communication with CNC machines over public based logic devices that control equipment and processes. and package both tangible and intangi- be offered from a wide variety of sources. and the ability to monitor multiple signal types such 3.50–52]. and are networks [18]. The formation of CM services is enabled by the through promotion of “plug and play” technologies which can ability to identify. Language (XML). and serial. The TIA system is based upon an open ufacturing operations [45–49]. which are vir- munications. Similarly.008 . ing to [14].org/10. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. Stouffer et al. DCSs are used Research regarding machine-to-machine communication is also to control industrial process variables around a set target. 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]. [12] discuss typical ICSs utilized in both process communication standards based upon the Extensible Markup based and discrete-based manufacturing environments. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. such as network connectivity.5.1016/j. Wu et al. the OPC Foundation [14] offers seven open (PLCs). processes. No.jmsy. Xu [6] discusses the creation of CM services. Developments in open architecture standards and tualized manufacturing resources made available to consumers communication protocols will serve to facilitate automation through the cloud. ble resources. typically utilized in the gas and utilities industries. including such technologies as RFID. includ. Additionally. which promotes modularity and interoper. and enterprise data integration. communication specifications that also promote connectivity and facturing enterprises which are distributed over a large area. Service composition as analog. ManuCloud architecture. This task becomes increasingly difficult in Much work has recently been done to establish open standards multiple-factory production environments. open (non-proprietary) architectures. Distributed communications and promote interoperability between existing Control Systems (DCSs).2013. http://dx. CyberOPC is a dedicated proto- common in process intensive industries. J Manuf Syst (2013). tion language between the shop floor and the plant scheduling Programmable Automation Controllers (PACs) as described in level in [11.04. turing management frameworks. SCADA is a type of control system used to control manu. tion of numerous materials. Hao et al. and are common in the academic realm. CM environments will need to effectively and efficiently combine ability with existing assets. 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. [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. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. These standards allow for machine-to-machine ing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA). digital. and Programmable Logic Controllers technologies. In order to optimize product value. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. the World Wide Web) for the development of distributed manufac- device interoperability. Xu presents numerous methodologies for identifying tute [19] has developed open (non-proprietary) and royalty free distributed resources. and is interoperability. Accord.doi. promoting technology connectivity and machine-to-machine com. of Pages 16 8 D. 5. The MTConnect Insti. virtualize. from [29]. PACs feature modular designs. Finally. et al. The use of STEP-NC is discussed as a communica- often employed as part of a DCS system. system architecture.

used in cloud computing technologies. According to manufacturing systems are geared toward agility – that is. resource service. [59] discuss Adaptive Chaos Optimization with Reflex Migration (FC-PACO-RM). given that the cloud is a huge shared service composed of three functional modules. http://dx. [45] present an example about “online purchasing the semantic matchmaking of manufacturing service capabilities. the RSC has a four stage lifecycle (design. In order which consumers can select particular MCSs to form their required to survive in such environments. which uses an URL.7. categories are summarized in Table 1. such as manufacturing cells. Many authors have presented definitions of agility and integration of existing resources to form composite services which flexibility in manufacturing. [30] describe the importance of Manufacturing Service Flexibility in CM will be facilitated almost exclusively by the Descriptions (MSDs) and Manufacturing Service Description Lan. turing environment [13]. Cai et al.44]. cost. would be accomplished through description lan. 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. Action. flow. number and entity information. the parallel intelligent algorithm called Full Connection based Parallel associated matching algorithms are proposed. Furthermore. some specific products available in the manufacturing cloud that edge resources would be virtualized in a similar manner to that can satisfy their requirements. CM systems must possess flexi- production facility. Rauschecker different component or assembly. [58] define a resource service aware web services composition in virtual enterprises. [47] focus on combinable relationship-based hierarchy model.doi. deploy. they investigate the issue of correlation. and quality Zhang et al. resource expressing layer. One example of a CM service is STEP Resource Locator tic reasoning. multi-disciplinary collaboration. which changing market conditions. In order to facilitate rapid scalability. Zhang et al. Yin et al. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. MSDs describe available services and their limits. These authors is either predictable or unexpected [26]. The Function module Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. and Global Positioning System (GPS). computational and knowl.1016/j. Hao et al. These authors fur- factors affecting lifecycle. CM environments should the user community can then assemble into virtualized value allow for variation in the marketplace and changes in the manufac- chains. [61] a correlation-aware composite service description model is pro. which is resources. One implication of CM is the ability to dynamically adapt the Zhang et al. That is. [56] present a prototype semantic web (STRL). Tao et al. ability to adjust the manufacturing process plan to accommodate guages (MSDLs) in the virtual marketplace. A case study is conducted which validates the search agents. [20] present that the CM environment is in-part enabled by the cre. present an approach which utilizes service-oriented architecture. automobiles parts (OPAP)” to illustrate the concept of service com. MCSs are cloud services that are formed when manufacturing resources are vir. as stated in Section 3. Wu et al. the ability to quickly adapt a manufacturing resource to produce a In research that stems from the ManuCloud project. and a resource interface layer. service discovery.6. These flexibility standardized machine components. it is possible for cloud among others. They introduce the con. would be converted into virtual machines using agent based tech. According to these changes in the manufacturing environment or to accommodate authors. five (5) forms service can offer rapid scalability in some situations at certain lev. and task. No. [57] present an ontology-based service oriented peer- position in the context of CM. et al. sentence. and Query to identify a machine system called ManuHub that facilitates efficient. Cai et al. bility and agility which will help ensure schedule. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. cated tools and equipment are required. resource registration. and adjusts the RSC based upon system ther state that agility in the manufacturing realm often deals with changes. The resource services are classified into four categories including (SCOS) with multiple objectives and constraints. [55] propose a Semantic Web-based approach to nologies for distributed control and communication. based resource discovery. pool of design and manufacturing resources. Tao et al. to address web- proposed model by comparing the quality of service of correlation. 3. or when the market 3.org/10. discuss how the life- amount of resources needed in order to satisfy the demand that cycle of RSCs can be affected by numerous factors. accurate and auto- and task it with some requested service instructions. match and search framework and key technologies associated with Tao et al. Shi et al. both expected and unexpected.jmsy. matic retrieval of the required manufacturing services derived from Guo et al. Specifically. monitors for environment. QoS. are adaptive to changing market conditions and variable customer ment. Dong et al. and investigate their distribution in CoRCS-Net. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 9 wireless sensor networks. and the resource semantic model.2013. 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. et al. J Manuf Syst (2013). Packaging discover distributed manufacturing resources for cross-enterprise resources and making them available as cloud based services. The manufacturing environment is dynamic and ever-changing. The constructed ontology enables according to Xu. A reputation based trust model for decision mak- aware composite service [49] in virtual enterprises. and post-processing) which can be affected by requirements. posed using OWL-S. consisting of a manufacturing resource layer. In the situations where dedi. and correlation. The ability to seek out alternate processes when the main process plan is interrupted. Tao et al. The manufacturing cloud argue that based upon the possible RSC interruptions.2. [5] define Resource Service Composition (RSC) as the compliance.008 . [5].04. However. In order to enhance the quality to-peer architecture support effective and efficient manufacturing of services composition. of Pages 16 D. The method of resource virtualization depends upon service consumers to find some dedicated tools and equipment for the form of resource being virtualized. manufacturing grid system in order to share distributed manufac- ing with three serial algorithms and seven commonly used parallel turing resources. a composite service network (CoRCS-Net). 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. and hardware resources formal representation of manufacturing resources is crucial [43. Manufacturing resources demands change should be the goal of any CM flexibility function- ality. general purpose machine tools. tualized and encapsulated. [13] state that advanced can be used to address complex manufacturing tasks. Flexibility and agility ation of Manufacturing Cloud Services (MCSs). and propose a word. ing is used to quantify the reputation of peers. from bination of multiple factories into production networks. execution. Panchal and Schaefer [16] define agility as the abil- numerous variables. they these authors. [46] formulate service composition optimal selection it. knowledge discovery by incorporating graph search and seman- guages. in order cept of combinable strength and variation of combinable strength to aggregate and share manufacturing resources. of RSC flexibility are required for maximum system adaptability: els. [60] present a manufacturing resource methods. expression and encapsulation using XML in a The performance of the proposed algorithm is validated by compar.

Social psychology has offered hypotheses. for CM to be implemented on a wide spread be made as to the use of foreground rights. 6. Wu et al. 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). a CM network may include numerous cific knowledge that.org/10. The work of these authors builds upon collaboration and cooperation to an unprecedented extent. of Pages 16 10 D.8. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Table 1 RSC flexibility types. Two of the most relevant social psychology theories for future CM environments are equity theory and game theory. enables autonomous plating houses. Game theory will help recognition of the motivations in cooperative environments and Fig. separate from the parties coordinating the venture. At the tasks. as a collective whole. 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. http://dx. showed support for all but one of their eleven cient and effective group action. and how these concepts affect the attitudes and behaviors In a broad sense. Adapted from [9]. as the equity theory. et al. Through proper negotiations between CM parties. or it can be cooperative. optimizes it. CM business models will need to support of participating parties. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. LaSelle presents that robotic machinery programs to the venture. and termination) of collaborative relationships. a luxury which cannot be afforded in a world of mass Similar background and foreground rights will exist in the CM customization. environment. which would be the equivalent of foreground rights resulting from 3. and transmits information explains that joint ventures involve the formation of a legal entity regarding abnormal changes to the Coordination module.008 .04. and PRPs) must benefit in collaborative environments. both background IP interests can be protected and agreements can At the end of the day. Through- manufacturing industry through the internet. while collab- dination module then invokes corresponding adjustments to the orative relationships involve 2 or more parties working together RSC to ensure continued operations. obtained. 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. 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]. Game theory can be non-cooperative. 6. all of which will help develop effective business models. Equity theory is composed of 4 propositions as shown in Fig. the Monitoring module monitors those vari. application providers. where for- mal cooperation agreements are utilized. One solution proposed is the collection of task spe. information. In short.jmsy. Equity theory [9] deals with why individuals participate in groups and how they react when outcomes are disproportionately dis- tributed. CM allows the consumer direct access to the duration. the most important issues try can react to changing demand in real time. [17] offer research regarding value management All parties (users. The Coor. The purpose of both joint ven- LaSelle [22] presents that mass customization is the new mar. The 4 propositions of equity theory. tures and collaborations is to share information and expertise in ketplace challenge. on demand. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. according to Parker. Wagner et al. Inequitable relationships will result in stressed relationships. Business models a joint venture. constructs the RSC. 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. out the entire collaborative relationship. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. in which individuals can act together but are not bound by formal agreements.2013. Table 2 summarizes their findings. under contractually enforced terms. priation. the CM environment will utilize relationships During RSC execution. numerous theories surrounding cooperation and collective deci- sion making. rights. same time. will help create environments which foster teamwork. and as such indus. Background rights. and begins the execution phase. which may impede the ability and will- ingness of collaborators to work together. that resemble those of joint ventures or collaborations. One challenge to center around the use and control of background and foreground increased system flexibility is the ability of automated machin. 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.1016/j. 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. For example. In many ways. 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. Wagner et al. Game theory [10] deals with how rational individuals make decisions in mutually interdependent roles. No. Parker [21] ables which affect the RSC lifecycle. Using data from 186 manufacturing compa- the mere survival of CM value chains will be reliant upon effi. basis it must have a feasible and value-generating business model. nies. formation. the CM environment may create the need for these plat- ing houses to collaborate to develop an improved plating process.doi. which is flexible Correlation flexibility RSC can adapt to changes in correlations among resources Created from [5]. J Manuf Syst (2013).

[7] propose a Cloud Based Design and Manufacture demonstrated potential. the GSL is a cloud plat- form and provides services using the Platform-as-a-service (Paas) 3. and an application layer. J Manuf Syst (2013). can be accessed and invoked in the cloud. the resource providers take some control of the process • Collaborators compare their awards with those of others. Xu discusses the Application Layer. and managers. The cloud broker is an intermediate party between the consumers Xu [6] proposes a four (4) layer CM framework consisting of and providers. depending upon the task demanded. CM layered framework. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. of Pages 16 D. (Saas) and Infrastructure-as-a-service (Iaas) delivery models. including Hardware-as-a-service (Haas). the Manufacturing Resource Layer contains the physical man. – rather. and Virtual Service Layer identifies. the manufactur- ing process asset group is composed of hardware and software resources used in the CBDM environment. Finally. the cloud carriers enable the exchange of ser- service layer. models and frameworks model. performance. ufacturing resources and capabilities of the shop floor. 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. 7. and level of Wu et al. Development of feasible implementation structures should be a cloud broker. a global of services. the GSL does not handle all CM related activities • Satisfaction is most higly driven by value appropriation. The Software-as-a-service (Saas). The particulars of these service resources as CM services. a virtual service layer. As can be seen in Fig.9. Finally. [8] propose a Distributed Infrastructure with Centralized Interfacing System (DICIS) as a CBDM structur- ing architecture. These resources are virtualized and encapsu- lated into Manufacturing Cloud Services (MCSs). posed structures vary in their complexity. 9. [33]. and manages the use. clusions: can operate in both partial and complete services modes. net- work security. According to vices between providers and consumers through the provisioning Xu. No. Implementation architectures. which provides the user-resource exchange portal. communication. Through the Application layer.doi. Human assets include consumers. The DICIS is composed of three asset groups (human. (CBDM) model composed of a cloud consumer. 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 . These pro. In the par- tial service mode. [20] propose a four stage CM model where manufac- turing resources are controlled through the internet via intelligent monitoring systems. conclude their research with three (3) main con. Wu et al. and their relationships to the attitudes and behaviors of collaborating parties.1016/j. Most importantly. of transport networks. flow and the GSL helps administratively manage the CM activities. cloud provider. however. in contrast to the actual physical resources they represent. 7. and the centralized inter- face enables the system to function as a whole. virtualizes. The communication assets proposed include a communication network (internet). • The open and frequent exchange of information can ease tensions The complete service mode. Architectures.008 . and 2 interfaces for communicating with the human and manufacturing process asset groups. Wu et al. the entire CM activity. lar services. These MCSs. the MCSs are categorized and organized into manufacturing clouds of simi- Fig. maturity. and frameworks for implementation the user can construct manufacturing applications from the virtu- of CM have been presented by numerous authors. 8.04.2013. 9. the three asset groups are combined together in the distributed infrastructure. Platform-as-a-service (Paas). and manufacturing process) bounded by a centralized interface and a distributed infrastructure. See Fig. while the providers help demonstrate the possible capabilities of a CM environment have the equally obvious role of providing services in the cloud. et al. milling services may be represented by Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. models. / 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. and cloud carriers. Finally. See Fig. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Tao et al. coordinates and manages between competitors. For example. The GSL. from [6]. 8.org/10. and packages the Infrastructure-as-a-service (Iaas).jmsy. and delivery a manufacturing resource layer. After creation of many different MCSs based upon the manufacturing resources available. producers. specify that there are are ultimately provided to the customer in Software-as-a-service four cloud service types. Schaefer et al. Service Layer (GSL). alized manufacturing resources. http://dx. See Fig. 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. which are then managed using the Global types are shown below in Table 3. which As can be seen in Fig.

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

J Manuf Syst (2013). et al. Cloud manufacturing abstract. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art.org/10. 11.doi.008 . No. of Pages 16 D. from [20]. Wu et al. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.jmsy.2013.1016/j. from [20]. http://dx. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 13 Fig.04. 10. Ten layer architecture. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. Fig.

One of the criti- environments. In the long term. mass collaboration. the impact improved efficiency. its current state does not yet fully support itate a CM environment. such as manufacturing cells. Automation and control reduced cost.008 . However. thin client keting channels for information and resource sharing which will and thick server. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Stouffer et al. manufacturing. No. Wu et al.2. and inter-connected design knowledge pool capabilities which CM may have the potential to possess. The potential impact of cm across sectors [54]. CM has the potential to offer rapid scalability in some situations at certain levels. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. cal issues still not fully addressed is scalability. and peer-to-peer which are enabled technolo- transform the traditional product realization process into a value gies such as the Web. CM is still a poorly defined field of study and would benefit ufacturing. the impact area is distributed man. and 4. 4. improved engineering design are ubiquitous access to design information. approaches are lack of socio-technical network. Future work Manufacturing: In the short term. allowing the cloud service 4. Much work is required to Although much progress has been made with regard to dis. et al. 12. both web and agent-based social media such as Facebook. and enhanced user experience. as ufacturing processes requiring tools. http://dx.2013. Potential impact providers to rapidly scale up and down manufacturing capacity.org/10. the most important research works in of information. Blogs. the benefits of CM Engineering design: In the short term. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx that CM platforms can be public. 4.2. long term. or hybrid the needs of modern manufacturing enterprises. In the area is customer co-creation. CM has the potential to create new mar- sified into three categories: thin server and thick client. J Manuf Syst (2013). Marketing and service: In the short term.1. rather than functions. and affordable computing resources. provide evidence of room Fig. However. the 3D printers connected in the cloud also help rapid As illustrated in Fig. Twitter.1. manufacturing engineers.1016/j. the agent technology allows developers to focus on objects by CM can engage customers.jmsy. private. Potential impact and future work and standardized machine components. HTML. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. 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. providing applications that are modular. of Pages 16 14 D. well as marketing and service. general purpose machine tools. rapid prototyping. 12. 3D printing technology does not require tooling. ActiveX.04. the benefits of CM on on marketing and service are reduced time-to-market. community. collaboration. from detailed research in many areas.doi. and CORBA. For example. In addition. there is an increasing need to establish a new form In the past two decades. develop inter-factory industrial control systems which could facil- tributed manufacturing. the co-creation process enhanced design. Specifically. service. emphasizes the generation and realization of various product The architectures for web-based collaborative design can be clas- stakeholders’ value. and online forums. knowledge and resource sharing mechanism that collaborative design are web-based design and agent-based design. and production managers to communicate with each other through decentralized and changeable. the benefits of CM on man- ufacturing are improved resource sharing. designers. we envision a possible impact of CM on tooling which makes rapid scalability possible for traditional man- three key sectors including engineering design. In agent-based co-creation process. In the long term.

present current status of CM. Harnessing the power of cloud computing for M2M.008 .04. of production processes for CM systems? cations to the CM field will help ensure flexibility in manufacturing. Ensuring shop percentage of manufacturing cost of a product is determined at floor connectivity will allow for efficient and effective machine.4. after all.nist. However. [9] Hatfield E. Boston. Discrete-event modeling they are typically not well suited for long distance communica. The develop. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. and why? Perhaps a hybrid environment would be best? [1] Friedman TL.5. high reliability. Hu T. A unified communication framework for intelligent inte- grated CNC on the shop floor. This review aims to • How will equity be assured when value is delivered as a result of highlight the motivations and drivers of CM. • Should collaborators within the CM environment be bound by formal operating agreements. The NIST definition of cloud computing. looking forward. identifying key 1–14. p. accurate estimating product to-machine communication.1016/j. ing paradigm for the next generation manufacturing systems. Rosen DW. • How can we investigate the communication and interaction [10] Romp G. Equity: theory and research. U. 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]. AC 2012–3017: Distributed collaborative design and manu-facture in terms of information and resource sharing: in the cloud-motivation. In order to environments. about background and foreground rights? In: Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes everything.2011..com/2005/04/03/magazine/03DOMINANCE. OUP Catalogue. Business model added manufacturing activities for CM. 1978. 7–33. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. 2009. 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. J Manuf Syst (2013). / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 15 for improvement within the field of ICS [12]. development. Thames JL. et al. composition in cloud manufacturing. Distributed system simulation cussing that DSC and PLC communications. and configuration of systems. 2010.doi.html • How should IP be handled in collaborative environments? What [2] Tapscott D. The future trend should be to move away from automation towards 4. Wikinomics: the art and science of peer production. structure and behavior analyses for CM. http://dx. 2001. of Pages 16 D.com/files/wp/m2mCloudComputing. machine require control systems which have the characteristics of high utilization. 2010. and liveness. and education.jmsy. and point out some of the key mized and distributed in accordance with value added? future directions. and simulation allows us to model behavioral properties such as tion environments. p. Grance. it is critical to conduct quantitative able and allow faster transmittal of data than do SCADA systems. Game theory: introduction and applications. T.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145. 2012. P.2.nytimes. Hence. settings.15:840–7.. Shaefer D. 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. it is critical to justify ultimate goal should be to enable robust service compositions that the perceived cost savings by estimating the cost quantitatively. to capture the implicit collaboration structure and key service [12] Stouffer K.. multiple-party work? How will value be maxi. No.002.S. Williams AD. Scarfone K. 4.1016/j. MA: Allyn and Bacon. Towards a cloud-based design and manufacturing paradigm: looking backward. Guo H. Procedia Engineering 2011.org/10. Therefore. Falco J. and long distance range. It turns out that the predominant standards as proposed by the MTConnect Institute.pdf stream manufacturing in CM. enabling geographically distributed reachability. 2008. While these communications are usually more reli. which are typically used Manufacturing system performance is often a central issue in in a manufacturing industry. Therefore. Therefore. • How can we capture material flows and evaluate performances research in the area of artificial intelligence and its possible appli. 2011. Specifically. Zhang C. It’s a flat world. service provides and consumers. IDETC/CIE. Web Link: http://www. Therefore. propose a strategic shared-interest. the main SCADA system. USA: Penguin Group Inc. of CM.2. Information and resource sharing Institute of Standards and Technology.pdf [4] Smith J. Berscheid E. validate the performance of CM. Web Link: information needs to be shared across upstream design and down. So far little work has sought to speed.800:82. In addition. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Flexible management of resource service traditional manufacturing systems lack frameworks for seam. value added. providing coordination among value cost at the early stage of product development processes is crucial chain members during the manufacturing process. less information and resource sharing mechanisms that facilitate [6] Xu X. flexibility will also be enabled by open communication final product at design stage. One of the key research questions [8] Schaefer D. tion and resource sharing mechanism is a framework for capturing [7] Wu D. Guide to industrial control systems (ICS) security.3. and non-value 4. Web A huge amount of data and unstructured manufacturing-related Link: http://csrc. 2005. for production mangers to make decisions.07. and throughput etc. The to move manufacturing business to the Cloud. other essential factories which can be controlled in an inter-factory style ICS will manufacturing performance metrics include cycle time. or should they be subject to a free References market style environment? Does this vary based upon the situa- tion.2013. From cloud computing to cloud manufacturing. many ing environment over a traditional manufacturing environment? research studies on CM have been conducted.numerex. Department of Commerce. In: IEEE international conference on industrial engineering & engineering management.doi. These authors are dis.org/10. 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. The research question is With limited examples of commercially viable implementa. the product design stage. [3] Mell. boundedness. providers and consumers in CM networks? NIST Special Publication 2008. http://www. the following: tions. Walster GW. it is still undetermined as to what applications are feasible for CM. Product costing is defined as a process of estimating the cost of Moreover. http://dx.2.2. research question in this area is: Additionally. Si N. 2278–82. Luo YL. it is very worthwhile to develop cost models to provide insights into cost drivers. National 4. are normally executed in intra-factory the design. vision. Wu et al. patterns between service providers and consumers in order [11] Li P.rcim. CM systems can only be as flexible and robust as their controlling logic and control systems permit. a key component of such seamless informa.2. infrastructure. Tao F. Robotics communication and collaboration in distributed and collaborative and Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2011. A primary technical barrier is that [5] Zhang L. the implicit and complex collaboration structure. are autonomously reconfigured with minimal human intervention.

Journal of Business Research 2010. Rosen DW. Sun LJ. Cai M. Zhao D.4(4):315–27.com. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing munications of the ACM 1996. Chen G. The International Journal of [14] OPC Foundation. M. Towards achieving agility in web-based virtual neering Manufacture 2012. [22] LaSelle R. Jagadeesan A.12]. ponoko. 1998. Sobolewski MW. Modeling of combinable relationship-based [19] MTConnect.45(6). Greer MJ. Venkatesh VC.12]. 26–8. Utility modelling. Cloud manufacturing: drivers. Striving for a total integration of CAD.58:16–21. Jour.com/about-mfgcom matics 2007:282–95. Assembly automation: manufacturing in the cloud. 2013.1016/j. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2010. A reputation-based peer-to-peer architecture http://www. Advanced Engineering Infor- [37] About MFG.assemblymag. Shi ZB. http://dx. A study of optimal allocation of comput- management framework. Chen Y. Luo Y. Man. Fang ML. Si N. [39] Project Overview: ManuCloud Fact Sheet.51:40–3.37(9):1022–41. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.201(1):129–43. Zhang L.doi.11:1258–64.2232936.com/ Transactions on System.41(3).20:169–77. Computers in Industry 2005. 2011. Control Engineering 2011. [49] Tao F. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Web service-oriented manufacturing resource automation science and engineering. tion of resource service transaction in service-oriented manufacturing system.16(1):1–7. International Journal of [40] Sako M. In: International Journal of Production Research 2009. Cloud manufacturing: a com- tous manufacturing and an architecture. Enterprise Information Systems 2012. 2011. Luo Y. DLA Piper.12. MFG. Cao JW. International Journal of Internet Man. aspx/01 about/01 history. [32] Chafkin. Zhou ZD. Tao F. Long Y. a social network analysis. et al. Production Machining compliant NC research: the search for intelligent CAD/CAPP/CAM/CNC inte- 2010. rapid manufacturing over the Internet. [62] Tao F. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2012. Web Link: http://www. [54] Wu D.12.com/make-and-sell/how-it-works [accessed: 07. SWMRD: a semantic web-based [30] Rauschecker U. Information Technology Journal 2012. Hu Y. Zhao D. [64] Liu LL. Cloud. 21 April 2012. ManuCloud: the next-generation manufactur.20(2):101–9. The International Journal of Advanced on Industrial Informatics 2012. 2011.15(2):168–77. of Pages 16 16 D.org/media/7312/getting composition service network and the theoretical proof of its scale-free charac- started with mtconnect . Zhang S. The International Journal of Advanced Manufactur- Institution of Mechanical Engineers. laborative relationships. manufacturing science and engineering conference (MSEC13). and coordina- [15] Siemens. [35] Goldhar JD.225(10):1969–76. Jiang XD. Ren L. Manuhub: a semantic web system for ontology- 11 conference proceedings. Zhang L. [65] Tao F. CAM and CNC. Web Link: http://mtconnect. Kramer TR. European Research Consortium for Informatics MSEC2013-1106. Correlation-aware web services composition ufacturing and Services 2007.dlapiper. (ICED13). Hong HD. [34] Erkes JW.12]. [23] Symonds M. http://www. European Journal of Operational nal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2007. Chang Z.siemens. Integrated design and Integrated Manufacturing 2007. [59] Yin Y. 2012.12]. Cheng Y. and innovation. Intellectual property issues in joint ventures and collaborations.doi. and optimal-selection in manufacturing grid. The Future of Manufacturing. A cloud-based collaborative manufacturing resource [53] Wu D. Correlation-aware resource service composition [21] Parker N.49(13): manufacturing paradigm. [24] Katzel J.com/salesmaterial. Manufacturing Systems 2010. Wang H. Zhang L.jmsy. Computer Integrated Manufacturing System (China) new service-oriented networked manufacturing model.10:28–31. Zhang L. Tao F. Cloud-based design and manufacturing systems: sharing services. IEEE [31] All together now. Jelinok M. Cheng Y. http://www.008 . rent status. Yip A. 2013. and future trends.12. In: Proceedings of IEEE transactions on [61] Dong B. Gupta SK. International Journal of Computer [36] Rajagopalan S. et al.pdf teristics. in a manufacturing grid for resource sharing. Towards a cooperative distributed manufacturing [43] Laili Y. Com. enterprises: a decision-centric approach. Schaefer D. Yu T. J Manuf Syst (2013). assembly mag. [47] Tao F.2(11):729–41..12. 2012. et al.2012. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. Wisconsin.226(6):1099–117.1(1):51–74. [50] Suh SH. Part B: Journal of Engi- [16] Panchal JH. Lewis JW. 2012.com/articles/ compliant CNC. Su S. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 87223-assembly-automation-manufacturing-in-the-cloud 2002. Corney J. Nee AYC. Zhou Z.eu/index. Computers in Industry 1990. Zhang K. Computer Integrated 2003. Cloud ERP meets manufacturing. Wang L. Paper Number: ing as a service environment.mfg. Schaefer D. ManuCloud. Zhou Z. Xu L. 2012. selection based on particle swarm optimization in manufacturing grid system. manufacturing resource discovery system for cross-enterprise collaboration. Power of the cloud. 2009.63(5):671–90. Zhang L.economist. Sarachan BD. applications for networked product development. Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture ing Technology 2008.automation. [52] Xu XW. Zhou Z. Cheng Y.com/magazine/20091001/the-future-of-manufacturing. Hu YF. Cheng Y. Zhang L. Cloud computing in manufacturing. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 international [29] Meier M. Cloud manufacturing: a new in manufacturing. Tian Q. Proctor FM. Zhang L. [63] Tao F. [58] Tao F. and QoS computation model in virtual enterprise. Schaefer D.12.43(17):3703–43. The world’s easiest making system. http://www.60(1):191–200. cur- April 2011. http://dx. Kenny KB. Zhang X. BNP Media [51] Xu XW.asp?MID=AboutOPC [44] Tao F.org/10. Tu XY.63(8):840–8. de Oliveira JFG. Zhang W. STEP- [25] Edstrom D. Muckenhirn R.2013. http://www. Sarker BR.com.48(12):3445–60. Journal of Engineering 2012.04.14:225–45. Losleben P. BNP media. Qi G. Cloud Storage a STEEP CLIMB. Mezgár I.10(3):127–34. Proceedings of the optimal-selection system.56(1):71–84.org/10. 2011. [26] Ding B. Zhang L. [55] Cai M. Mo R. Seidelmann J. IEEE Transactions over public IP networks using CyberOPC.12. He Q. Chen Z. Research 2010. [46] Tao F. Computerworld 2011. [20] Tao F. Advanced manufacturing systems and enterprises: Cloud and ubiqui.com [accessed 07. 2011. 4119–55. No. Cloud manufacturing: a [48] Tao F. Li S. ing resources in cloud manufacturing systems. Lindemann E.12].9(6):449–55. [45] Guo H. Eggert A. Application and modeling of resource service manucloud-project. Web Link: http://www. Web Link: [57] Zhang W. 2011.6(4):373–404. Communications of the ACM 2012. Yang H.final. and Cybernetics – Part A: Systems and Humans node/21552902 [accessed 07. Venkatesh VC.55:22–4. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2008. On the architecture of intelligent STEP- azine.39(2):34–45. Zhao D. trust-QoS evaluation in manufacturing grid system.225(10):1969–76. Meier M. Manufacturing as a Service Business: CIM in the 21st [60] Shi S. Liu Y. Yefa H. Technology strategy and management: business models for strategy Production Research 2009. Web Link: http://www.html for semantic service discovery in distributed manufacturing environments. Resource service composition and its optimal- [38] Ponoko. as/brochure/en/brochure totally integrated automation overview en.inc.pdf Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 2012. Wang SL. Zu De Zhou. Mao J. Zhang W. Li BH. CAPP. Self-organization manufacturing grid and its [41] Li BH. ufacturing grid environment. Cho JH. Enterprise Information Systems 2012:1–21. International Journal of Production Research 2005. Journal of Applied Engineering Science puting and service oriented manufacturing model. Inc. Manufacturing Technology 2012. Rosen DW.47(6):1521–50. In: International conference on engineering design [27] Schultz B. Tao F. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 2004. Hu YF. Remote monitoring for high-speed CNC processes position optimal-selection in cloud manufacturing system. The Economist. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 2012. Web Link: http://www. Cloud manufacturing: a task scheduling algorithm. Magazine. Zhang L.83:33–4.opcfoundation. [33] Putnik G.php?id=185 [accessed 07. Manufacture 2011. Shen W. Wu et al. Zhang K. International information management corporation limited: eChallenges e-20 [56] Cai M. Sum Jr RN. FC-PACO-RM: a parallel method for service com- [18] Torrisi NM. [accessed 07. gration. The International Journal of [17] Wagner SM. Madison. Tao F. quality magazine. Guo H. based manufacturing-as-a-service environment for customized products. A review of the application of grid technology [42] Zhang L.51(5):817–27. Pinilla JM. [accessed 07. Technology 2008. Creating and appropriating value in col. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx [13] Hao Q. Information service of the resource node in a man- Implementing shared manufacturing services on the World-Wide Web. Newman ST. Study on manufacturing grid & its resource service computing and service-oriented manufacturing model. and Mathematics News 2010. p. equilibrium.1109/TII.12]. LaiLi Y. International Journal of Production Research 2011. based service management in distributed manufacturing environments. et al. Gu X.org/Default. An implementation of modeling resource Century. Wei X. Luo Y. [28] Cloud manufacturing: using the cloud to make more than hot air. US.