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

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

) are ufacturing data created by the cloud based applications. Furthermore. These PRPs are perspective of technology function and integration (specifications not limited by geographic location. inspection technologies. The input to the PRP group is the man. prove to be difficult and costly to dissolve.org/10. the consumer experience (reduce costs.008 . etc.1. 2. tually enforced with a first-tier supplier. who can then engage sub-tier technologies. In addition to owning example of this relationship is that of an original equipment manu- physical resources. the opportunity to enhance the cloud as a service. Customer centricity 2. and severely limited by their rigid nature. offering users instan. pack. Strategic vision for CM. PRPs join the CM and drawings.3. rather.1. suppliers to assist with the product development process. Ideally as a whole. Physical resource providers (PRPs) 21st century industry is dominated by hierarchical supply Physical resource providers (PRPs) own and operate man. finishing technologies. These requirements are then contrac- network based upon their expertise alone. et al. A classic aging technologies. Key characteristics profit. Wu et al. While often these relationships taneous access to manufacturing capabilities provided through can be fruitful for all parties involved. improve quality. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212.1016/j. including but not limited to machining uct level requirements to suppliers. the work and core competencies.2. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 3 Fig. they can often requirements. http://dx. when tradi- the output is a finalized product in conformance with user tional supplier relationships prove to be undesirable. chains in which requirement originating parties flow down prod- ufacturing equipment. between users and resource providers for a portion of the product 2. for example).jmsy.04. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. of Pages 16 D. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art.2. 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. 1.2013. PRPs have the know-how and experience to facturer (OEM) who develops product level requirements from the utilize these machines effectively and efficiently.doi. and testing resources. No. J Manuf Syst (2013).

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

data rights are easily field of study. 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]. and will require and configuration management were omitted due to the wide range propositions as to what value the customer will receive. 3. the cloud will introduce a change in how users calculate the cost of in their combination. 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. will be highly flexible in CM. through efficient processes. The physical resource layer might also try and argue it is their when a combination of vertical and horizontal mills could be used data.3. Current state cloud will cause a shift in how value is added to the product. why they care about your to enable CM. 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. A business model is the cell). sition. For example. Amazon is not just a of key interest. upon the value they can add to the product. as the cloud will take over some of the activities that contribute to the As CM is in the juvenile stages of development. informa- The organizing business models that will someday define CM. 3 shows a converging mind map. requiring them to current status information. and business models. manufacturing. enabled in the CM field by automation. because without their expertise it would be of little use. For example. describes the positioning within the value network or ecosystem. In traditional business models. For example.doi. ketplace. For one. Cloud robustness and infor- adder is separated from the others. collaboration between suppliers will be required to successfully For this reason. Business organizations often vary widely across industries. of Pages 16 D. like. 2.2013. 3. however. and they are compensated based mation security are two very important enabling aspects for CM. what mar- of accepted industry specifications regarding these subjects and ket there is for such a business and so on. and appli- argument as to why the company will succeed – it explains critical cation providers (shown in a blue cell). the map. including but not limited to distributed adjust their business models accordingly. the current state of qual- users with the products they desire while utilizing less resources ity assurance (QA). Users may claim that data produced by the cloud is their prop- ing manufacturing resources “B” and “C”. a brainstorming tool was used to record areas discount product marketplace. configuration management. data compatibility. of the field must be collected from many different specialties which. will be defined by an IP sharing model that aids in cooperation and collaboration. et al. the current state revenue models of both the users and resource providers. the even be different across corporations within the same industry. the cloud will remove some opportunity CM. tion security. Cloud manufacturing topics map a tiered structure of control. Secondly. 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. CM will require the formation of new and information security were not researched nor documented. enabling issues are while not unprecedented altogether. How will value added be determined when 3 explore. a product. it is an online discount product mar- of research that would be critical to those using CM resources. The result is shown in Fig. however they are far out of the core competencies of the authors. 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. CM to process the same job. 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. QA business models altogether (by all vested parties). which can be read from the value chain.2. provide a foundation for the advancement of doing business. which acts together to create value. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. 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. Specifically. it the core outwards or from the outward fringes toward the center. No. etc. Through documentation of this work. Value will be added by Not all of the topics shown in Fig. CM will likely cause a shift in the revenue models currently used by design firms and manufacturers alike.04. In order to discover and document possible areas the product or service it offers. 3 are addressed in this resource providers sharing expertise and collaborating to provide report. will require a shift from tradi- broken down further where appropriate. Traditionally. network. 3 are indirectly addressed. many resources spent? These are the questions that will determine how research topics as shown in Fig. automatically realize and capitalize upon this alternative to avoid Those firms managing the cloud-based applications will certainly excessive loading of manufacturing resource “A”. http://dx. and those that help match users and operation: “a business model articulates the customer value propo- providers. Starting in the center of the map. Mari Sako explains that business models define business those providing the resources. Numerous fields of study were used to compile the following for service providers to add value to products. if man. it identifies a market segment. the CM environment will erty because they paid for access to the cloud-based applications. we can further see that physical resource providers will be and how you will make money. Value chains. it documents those aspects most important understood – design authorities own the rights to product designs. which describe how value is added to ownership and promoting effective collaboration. to the enablement of CM. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 5 will be “demand intelligent” in that the inherent system flexibil. different manufacturers combine resources to complete a build- In addition to those topics listed in Fig. rather.jmsy. Wu et al. shared benefit Traditional business organizations and relationships rely upon 2. Following the physical resource provider branch of product or service. 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. how you are going to add value to the product. The introduction of the 3. process planning. value chains are structured and how wealth sharing will occur.5. In a CM environment. Consider now that cloud based appli- or interchangeable manufacturing resources. these issues will be left for other researchers to complete a project. yet the desired process can be performed by combin. From there. and business management.).008 . QA and configuration management as applied to CM environ- chain structure and revenue models. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. most are. or will it be shared based upon time and implementation of CM. virtual enterprises. 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.1016/j. These three groups converge things such as who the customers are.org/10. it defines the structure of Fig. physical resource providers (shown in a green cell). and can As CM is as of yet a relatively undefined field of study. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. J Manuf Syst (2013). Shared burden. it specifies the revenue generation mechanisms. 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. cloud robustness.

A limited number of commercial companies have implemented turing services. 3.2013. etc. 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 is undoubtedly due In the 2000s. In the described work. intelligent. These authors have a similar vision to that presented In an article from 1990.008 . 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. It is likely that internet capabilities (speed. These could lead to exploitation of various enterprises based upon their authors discuss transformation of the factory from a mechanical competencies. interfaces.63]. the design ventures. and the ability to make the factory floor ditions. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Fig. difficult to find financing. which standing the possible capabilities and advantages of a CM style ended in the year 2000. showing how networked manufacturing networks implications of computer integrated manufacturing (CIM). According to The Economist [31]. resents a significant precursor to the vision of CM presented in this enterprise information management.jmsy. Goldhar and Jelinek [35] discuss future in this report. Regardless. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. This work Surprisingly. [65] paper. and connect designers with manufacturing resources client uses software that augments traditional CAD programs and over the internet. 3. CM topics map. 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. No. and process brokers which act as intermediaries. While Goldhar and Jelinek envision the “smart” factory.) were not able to accommodate the A 1996 source by Erkes et al.1. crowd funding. together into a virtual “smart” enterprise. and scheduling.doi.04. significant literature on manufacturing-as-a.1. manufacturing.2. the concept of the manufacturing grid was pro- the year in which the document was written. cloud-based activities offer flexibility and enable competiveness in they fail to realize the potential of networking multiple factories a cutthroat marketplace. 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. environment. provided a review of the application of grid technology in manu- A 1998 source published by Rajagopalan et al. product design. manufacturing resource integration and allocation. is very clearly applicable to the vision of CM presented in this service was created in the late 1990s. focused operation to one driven by information technology. and strict vendor relationships. discusses the facturing. 3. and The DLA Piper legal group [28] explains that internet enabled also discuss the ability for mass customization as a result of CIM.2. Tao et al.62.org/10.1016/j. implications of the internet for design and rapid manufacturing technologies [36]. These authors discuss an internet infrastructure 3. which in some respect is similar to that of CM [48. [34] discusses the implementation visions presented by these papers at the time of their creation. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. CM systems. including the ability to fulfill any demanded today’s marketplace. Wu et al. 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. Instead of dealing with unknown market con- job regardless of size. History allows connection with the process broker to communicate design requirements to the manufacturing services providers. Like so many of the more recent papers which will be reviewed in this report. this work rep. et al. Current implementations that connects designers and manufacturing services. data transfer capability. as the internet was posed. http://dx. 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. of manufacturing services available over the internet. J Manuf Syst (2013). of Pages 16 6 D. Commercially viable implementations these authors describe the existence of design clients. Quirky offers Please cite this article in press as: Wu D.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. http://dx. from [20].jmsy. No. Fig. 11.1016/j.04. of Pages 16 D. from [20].org/10. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 13 Fig. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. J Manuf Syst (2013). Cloud manufacturing abstract. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. 10.2013.008 . et al.doi. Ten layer architecture. Wu et al.

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

Hence. 2278–82. So far little work has sought to speed. In: IEEE international conference on industrial engineering & engineering management. Department of Commerce. Wikinomics: the art and science of peer production. However. No. and point out some of the key mized and distributed in accordance with value added? future directions. • How can we capture material flows and evaluate performances research in the area of artificial intelligence and its possible appli. Product costing is defined as a process of estimating the cost of Moreover. patterns between service providers and consumers in order [11] Li P. composition in cloud manufacturing. Information and resource sharing Institute of Standards and Technology. Therefore. Rosen DW.com/2005/04/03/magazine/03DOMINANCE. The research question is With limited examples of commercially viable implementa.S. present current status of CM. the product design stage. and simulation allows us to model behavioral properties such as tion environments. 7–33.3. providing coordination among value cost at the early stage of product development processes is crucial chain members during the manufacturing process. National 4. One of the key research questions [8] Schaefer D. Towards a cloud-based design and manufacturing paradigm: looking backward. This review aims to • How will equity be assured when value is delivered as a result of highlight the motivations and drivers of CM.rcim. [3] Mell. From cloud computing to cloud manufacturing. Web Link: information needs to be shared across upstream design and down. and throughput etc. In addition. 2009. a key component of such seamless informa. Therefore. 4.2011. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 15 for improvement within the field of ICS [12].. providers and consumers in CM networks? NIST Special Publication 2008. and long distance range. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art.. Flexible management of resource service traditional manufacturing systems lack frameworks for seam. service provides and consumers. for production mangers to make decisions. 2008. and why? Perhaps a hybrid environment would be best? [1] Friedman TL. Hu T. 2010.2. of Pages 16 D.doi. Si N. http://dx. Robotics communication and collaboration in distributed and collaborative and Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2011. flexibility will also be enabled by open communication final product at design stage. Specifically.5.pdf stream manufacturing in CM. In order to environments. are autonomously reconfigured with minimal human intervention. 2012. Business model added manufacturing activities for CM. U. Guide to industrial control systems (ICS) security. Therefore.1016/j. less information and resource sharing mechanisms that facilitate [6] Xu X. 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. 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]. enabling geographically distributed reachability. Zhang C. 2001.com/files/wp/m2mCloudComputing. and non-value 4. it is very worthwhile to develop cost models to provide insights into cost drivers. and education. Boston. the implicit and complex collaboration structure.1016/j. validate the performance of CM. T. These authors are dis. P. after all. Guo H. ing paradigm for the next generation manufacturing systems. It’s a flat world. Discrete-event modeling they are typically not well suited for long distance communica. The to move manufacturing business to the Cloud. • How can we investigate the communication and interaction [10] Romp G. to capture the implicit collaboration structure and key service [12] Stouffer K.002. USA: Penguin Group Inc. are normally executed in intra-factory the design.jmsy. it is critical to justify ultimate goal should be to enable robust service compositions that the perceived cost savings by estimating the cost quantitatively. Equity: theory and research. Thames JL.numerex.org/10. OUP Catalogue. 2010.nist. the following: tions. While these communications are usually more reli. which are typically used Manufacturing system performance is often a central issue in in a manufacturing industry. identifying key 1–14. propose a strategic shared-interest. The NIST definition of cloud computing. multiple-party work? How will value be maxi. or should they be subject to a free References market style environment? Does this vary based upon the situa- tion.2. development.2. boundedness. Wu et al. of production processes for CM systems? cations to the CM field will help ensure flexibility in manufacturing. looking forward. Grance. of CM. CM systems can only be as flexible and robust as their controlling logic and control systems permit. it is critical to conduct quantitative able and allow faster transmittal of data than do SCADA systems. structure and behavior analyses for CM. Berscheid E. about background and foreground rights? In: Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes everything. and configuration of systems. Luo YL. p. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. machine require control systems which have the characteristics of high utilization. MA: Allyn and Bacon. Therefore. settings.800:82. http://dx.pdf [4] Smith J. It turns out that the predominant standards as proposed by the MTConnect Institute. the main SCADA system. infrastructure. The develop. 1978.04. many ing environment over a traditional manufacturing environment? research studies on CM have been conducted. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. Web A huge amount of data and unstructured manufacturing-related Link: http://csrc. 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. Ensuring shop percentage of manufacturing cost of a product is determined at floor connectivity will allow for efficient and effective machine.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145. Shaefer D. vision. Procedia Engineering 2011. other essential factories which can be controlled in an inter-factory style ICS will manufacturing performance metrics include cycle time. it is still undetermined as to what applications are feasible for CM.nytimes.org/10.15:840–7. A unified communication framework for intelligent inte- grated CNC on the shop floor. value added. accurate estimating product to-machine communication. 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. Game theory: introduction and applications. • Should collaborators within the CM environment be bound by formal operating agreements.2. et al. J Manuf Syst (2013).. Williams AD. research question in this area is: Additionally.008 . The future trend should be to move away from automation towards 4. AC 2012–3017: Distributed collaborative design and manu-facture in terms of information and resource sharing: in the cloud-motivation. tion and resource sharing mechanism is a framework for capturing [7] Wu D. Scarfone K. high reliability. 2005.07. Web Link: http://www.doi.4. Falco J. A primary technical barrier is that [5] Zhang L. 2011. http://www. Tao F. Harnessing the power of cloud computing for M2M. p. [9] Hatfield E. Distributed system simulation cussing that DSC and PLC communications. and liveness.html • How should IP be handled in collaborative environments? What [2] Tapscott D. IDETC/CIE.2013.2. Walster GW.

15(2):168–77. Part B: Journal of Engi- [16] Panchal JH. quality magazine. [62] Tao F. Journal of Business Research 2010. [65] Tao F. Lindemann E. Zhang L. Towards achieving agility in web-based virtual neering Manufacture 2012.04. The International Journal of [17] Wagner SM.jmsy. Zhou Z.48(12):3445–60. IEEE [31] All together now. BNP Media [51] Xu XW.doi.12. manufacturing science and engineering conference (MSEC13). Jour. http://www. rent status. Technology 2008. aspx/01 about/01 history. Mo R. in a manufacturing grid for resource sharing. International Journal of Internet Man. Eggert A. The International Journal of Advanced on Industrial Informatics 2012. Cheng Y. Schaefer D. Meier M. de Oliveira JFG. Cloud manufacturing: a new in manufacturing. Su S. Information Technology Journal 2012. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 2012. Manufacturing Technology 2012.4(4):315–27. Hu YF.doi. Proceedings of the optimal-selection system. [35] Goldhar JD.225(10):1969–76. Venkatesh VC. Cloud manufacturing: a [48] Tao F. http://www. Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture ing Technology 2008. http://www. Zhang L.mfg. Journal of Applied Engineering Science puting and service oriented manufacturing model. Cho JH. Cloud. Venkatesh VC. Li BH. Remote monitoring for high-speed CNC processes position optimal-selection in cloud manufacturing system. [45] Guo H.economist.12]. 1998. http://dx.eu/index. Zhao D. Wu et al. based manufacturing-as-a-service environment for customized products. Jiang XD.20(2):101–9. [50] Suh SH. Enterprise Information Systems 2012. MFG. and QoS computation model in virtual enterprise. Sarachan BD.12. [58] Tao F. Long Y.51(5):817–27. International Journal of Computer [36] Rajagopalan S. Tao F. Journal of Engineering 2012. Intellectual property issues in joint ventures and collaborations. Inc. [34] Erkes JW. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 87223-assembly-automation-manufacturing-in-the-cloud 2002.83:33–4. The International Journal of [14] OPC Foundation. Self-organization manufacturing grid and its [41] Li BH. Sarker BR.45(6). laborative relationships. International Journal of [40] Sako M. 26–8. 4119–55.automation. 2012. A reputation-based peer-to-peer architecture http://www. Tu XY. http://www. Communications of the ACM 2012. Seidelmann J.39(2):34–45. Zhang L. Please cite this article in press as: Wu D. 2011. and innovation. Zhang X.12]. Sobolewski MW.com [accessed 07. Cao JW. Zhou ZD.org/Default. Paper Number: ing as a service environment. Cloud-based design and manufacturing systems: sharing services. Zhang K. Zhang L. Fang ML. Utility modelling. [55] Cai M. Zhang W. of Pages 16 16 D. Rosen DW. [26] Ding B. Modeling of combinable relationship-based [19] MTConnect.16(1):1–7.49(13): manufacturing paradigm. 2011.pdf Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Xu L. Technology strategy and management: business models for strategy Production Research 2009. et al. Muckenhirn R. Zhang L.10:28–31.1(1):51–74. Web Link: http://www. Shi ZB. Hu Y. Wang H. [64] Liu LL. Advanced Engineering Infor- [37] About MFG. Manufacturing as a Service Business: CIM in the 21st [60] Shi S.inc. Schaefer D. et al.201(1):129–43. 2012.com/salesmaterial. Zhang W. In: Proceedings of IEEE transactions on [61] Dong B.dlapiper. Gu X.56(1):71–84. and Mathematics News 2010. manufacturing resource discovery system for cross-enterprise collaboration.9(6):449–55. a social network analysis. [49] Tao F.37(9):1022–41. 21 April 2012.final. ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model JMSY-212. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing munications of the ACM 1996. ManuCloud: the next-generation manufactur. 2013.12]. Application and modeling of resource service manucloud-project. Zu De Zhou. Chen G. [39] Project Overview: ManuCloud Fact Sheet. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2008.html for semantic service discovery in distributed manufacturing environments.com/about-mfgcom matics 2007:282–95. 2011. A study of optimal allocation of comput- management framework. LaiLi Y. Hu YF. An implementation of modeling resource Century. CAPP. In: International Journal of Production Research 2009. [24] Katzel J. STEP- [25] Edstrom D.12. 2011.2012. based service management in distributed manufacturing environments. Luo Y. DLA Piper. ufacturing grid environment.2232936. http://dx. rapid manufacturing over the Internet.10(3):127–34.63(5):671–90. Yefa H. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems xxx (2013) xxx–xxx [13] Hao Q.225(10):1969–76. [32] Chafkin.12. Jelinok M. Greer MJ.12]. tion of resource service transaction in service-oriented manufacturing system. Web Link: http://www. Enterprise Information Systems 2012:1–21.pdf teristics. Man. [46] Tao F.php?id=185 [accessed 07. Kenny KB.12. Towards a cooperative distributed manufacturing [43] Laili Y. Cheng Y. Control Engineering 2011. and future trends. Luo Y. (ICED13). Resource service composition and its optimal- [38] Ponoko. Yip A. Zhang S. Cloud ERP meets manufacturing. Information service of the resource node in a man- Implementing shared manufacturing services on the World-Wide Web. Sun LJ. et al. Assembly automation: manufacturing in the cloud. Zhang L.2(11):729–41. Cheng Y. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2012.226(6):1099–117. European Research Consortium for Informatics MSEC2013-1106. Corney J. Computer Integrated 2003.12]. Ren L. 2012. Computerworld 2011. enterprises: a decision-centric approach. Cloud manufacturing: drivers.12]. Wisconsin. ponoko. 2012. Cloud manufacturing: a task scheduling algorithm.. Cheng Y.20:169–77. Mezgár I.51:40–3. International information management corporation limited: eChallenges e-20 [56] Cai M.008 . Cloud computing in manufacturing. Tao F.63(8):840–8. and optimal-selection in manufacturing grid. Web service-oriented manufacturing resource automation science and engineering. Chang Z. [33] Putnik G. European Journal of Operational nal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2007.com. M. Cai M. BNP media. Manufacturing Systems 2010. [22] LaSelle R. Shen W. The International Journal of Advanced Manufactur- Institution of Mechanical Engineers.58:16–21.com/articles/ compliant CNC.org/10. Study on manufacturing grid & its resource service computing and service-oriented manufacturing model. and coordina- [15] Siemens. Web Link: http://www. Research 2010. Integrated design and Integrated Manufacturing 2007. Zhang L. Computers in Industry 2005. Com. Advanced manufacturing systems and enterprises: Cloud and ubiqui. Gupta SK. as/brochure/en/brochure totally integrated automation overview en. Web Link: http://mtconnect. equilibrium. Kramer TR. Yu T. On the architecture of intelligent STEP- azine. Production Machining compliant NC research: the search for intelligent CAD/CAPP/CAM/CNC inte- 2010. Tao F. In: International conference on engineering design [27] Schultz B.12. [52] Xu XW.opcfoundation. Guo H. Tao F. ManuCloud.com/ Transactions on System. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 2004. et al. [28] Cloud manufacturing: using the cloud to make more than hot air. Wang SL. Zhang L. International Journal of Production Research 2005. trust-QoS evaluation in manufacturing grid system.55:22–4.siemens. Zhang K. Yang H. Striving for a total integration of CAD. Zhao D. IEEE Transactions over public IP networks using CyberOPC. ing resources in cloud manufacturing systems. Luo Y. applications for networked product development. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2013 international [29] Meier M. Web Link: http://www.60(1):191–200. Proctor FM. The Future of Manufacturing. Manufacture 2011. gration. [23] Symonds M.asp?MID=AboutOPC [44] Tao F. 2013. Rosen DW. Cloud Storage a STEEP CLIMB. International Journal of Production Research 2011. Power of the cloud. [59] Yin Y. Jagadeesan A.assemblymag. Zhou Z. SWMRD: a semantic web-based [30] Rauschecker U.1109/TII. Hong HD. Cloud manufacturing: Strategic vision and state-of-the-art. Manuhub: a semantic web system for ontology- 11 conference proceedings. A cloud-based collaborative manufacturing resource [53] Wu D. [accessed 07. Zhao D. Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2010. The world’s easiest making system. 2011. 2009.org/media/7312/getting composition service network and the theoretical proof of its scale-free charac- started with mtconnect . Creating and appropriating value in col.14:225–45.com/magazine/20091001/the-future-of-manufacturing. Losleben P. Computers in Industry 1990. A review of the application of grid technology [42] Zhang L. assembly mag. Madison. Chen Y. Cloud manufacturing: a com- tous manufacturing and an architecture.1016/j.com/make-and-sell/how-it-works [accessed: 07. selection based on particle swarm optimization in manufacturing grid system. Si N. Liu Y. cur- April 2011. No. [47] Tao F. Correlation-aware resource service composition [21] Parker N. Chen Z. Newman ST. Computer Integrated Manufacturing System (China) new service-oriented networked manufacturing model. Tian Q. Lewis JW. Zhang L.6(4):373–404. Qi G. Correlation-aware web services composition ufacturing and Services 2007. Web Link: [57] Zhang W. [20] Tao F. Zhou Z. Mao J.41(3).com. Wei X. and Cybernetics – Part A: Systems and Humans node/21552902 [accessed 07.org/10. 2012. J Manuf Syst (2013). Wang L. [accessed 07.2013. p. Pinilla JM.11:1258–64. Li S. CAM and CNC. He Q. Sum Jr RN. [54] Wu D.43(17):3703–43. [63] Tao F. Nee AYC. US. The Economist.47(6):1521–50. Magazine. 2011. FC-PACO-RM: a parallel method for service com- [18] Torrisi NM. Schaefer D.