The Cyber-physical E-machine Manufacturing System: Virtual Engineering for Complete Lifecycle Support
Open accessAbstract
Electric machines (e-machines) will form a fundamental part of the powertrain of the future. Automotive manufacturers are keen to develop e-machine manufacturing and assembly knowledge in-house. An on-going project, which aims to deliver an e-machine pilot assembly line, is being supported by a set of virtual engineering tools developed by the Automation Systems Group at the University of Warwick. Although digital models are a useful design aid providing visualization and simulation, the opportunity being exploited in this research paper is to have a common model throughout the lifecycle of both the manufacturing system and the product. The vision is to have a digital twin that is consistent with the real system and not just used in the early design and deployment phases. This concept, commonly referred to as Cyber Physical Systems (CPS), is key to realizing efficient system reconfigurability to support alternative product volumes and mixes. These tools produce modular digital models that can be rapidly modified preventing the simulation, test, and modification processes forming a bottleneck to the development lifecycles. In addition, they add value at more mature phases when, for example, a high volume line based on the pilot is created as the same models can be reused and modified as required. This research paper therefore demonstrates how the application of the virtual engineering tools support the development of a CPS using an e-machine assembly station as a case study. The main contribution of the work is to further validate the CPS philosophy by extending the concept into practical applications in pilot production systems with prototype products.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Digital twins monitor a single process.
“a single process [34,36,44,45]”
From Review of digital twin applications in manufacturing (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Section 3.2, “Workflow for engineering CPS” (page unavailable), says runtime data from the physical system is used for monitoring and describes this as a pathway to realizing the digital twin. It does not limit that monitoring to a single process; the model covers components and the wider production system. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe reviewed articles can be divided into two categories by cloud usage: those that effectively use a cloud and build a cloud-based DT application, and those that construct the DT application in a virtual space with software highlighting the possibility to build it also in a cloud-based environment.
“For this aspect, the articles considered can be divided into two different categories: (i) those that effectively use a cloud and build a cloud-based DT application, marked in the table as [27,34,37,43,47,48,54,56,62,67,74-76], (ii) those that construct the DT application in a virtual space with the use of a software highlighting the possibility to build it also in a cloud”
From Review of digital twin applications in manufacturing (2019) · cites this paper as [47]
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 describe the vueOne virtual-engineering software and its use to realize a digital twin, supporting the description of a software-based DT application. Our copy does not say that this application could also be built in a cloud environment. The division of reviewed articles into two categories is the citing authors’ framing, not a classification made by this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe reviewed articles can be divided into two categories by cloud usage: those that effectively use a cloud and build a cloud-based DT application, and those that construct the DT application in a virtual space with software highlighting the possibility to build it also in a cloud-based environment.
“For this aspect, the articles considered can be divided into two different categories: (i) those that effectively use a cloud and build a cloud-based DT application, marked in the table as [27,34,37,43,47,48,54,56,62,67,74-76], (ii) those that construct the DT application in a virtual space with the use of a software highlighting the possibility to build it also in a cloud”
From Review of digital twin applications in manufacturing (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredDigital twins can also be used to support the lifecycle of a machine process.
“The DT can also be used to 'Support the lifecycle' of a machine process [47]”
From Review of digital twin applications in manufacturing (2019) · cites this paper as [47]
Five reviewed articles use a 3D dynamical Finite Element Method (FEM)-based model.
“Five articles use a 3D dynamical Finite Element Method (FEM)-based model [32,34,38,55,66]”
From Review of digital twin applications in manufacturing (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Section 3.1 describes component-based virtual models, CAD geometry conversion, and state-transition diagrams; section 4.1 describes a simulated assembly-station prototype. Neither section identifies a 3D dynamical finite-element model. Searches for “Finite Element Method,” “FEM,” and dynamic finite-element simulation found no passage establishing that this paper is one of the five articles described. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 39
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- E. A. Lee, "Cyber physical systems: Design challenges," in 2008 11th IEEE International Symposium on Object and Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC), 2008, pp. 363-369: IEEE.
- R. Harrison, D. Vera, and B. Ahmad, "Engineering methods and tools for cyber-physical automation systems," Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 104, no. 5, pp. 973-985, 2016.
- F. Demoly, O. Dutartre, X.-T. Yan, B. Eynard, D. Kiritsis, and S. Gomes, "Product relationships management enabler for concurrent engineering and product lifecycle management," Computers in Industry, vol. 64, no. 7, pp. 833-848, 2013.
- "Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council," Official Journal of the European Union, 2006.
- E. Westkämper and L. Jendoubi, "Smart factories-Manufacturing environments and systems of the future," in Proceedings of the 36th CIRP International Seminar on Manufacturing Systems, 2003, pp. 13-16.
- X. Kong, B. Ahmad, R. Harrison, Y. Park, and L. J. Lee, "Direct deployment of component-based automation systems," in Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 17th International Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA 2012), 2012, pp. 1-4: IEEE.
- M. Bergert and J. Kiefer, "Mechatronic data models in production engineering," IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 60-65, 2010.
- P. Hoffmann, R. Schumann, T. M. Maksoud, and G. C. Premier, "Virtual Commissioning Of Manufacturing Systems A Review And New Approaches For Simplification," in ECMS, 2010, pp. 175-181.
- L. Exel, G. Frey, G. Wolf, and M. Oppelt, "Re-use of existing simulation models for DCS engineering via the Functional Mock-up Interface," in Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Emerging Technology and Factory Automation (ETFA), 2014, pp. 1-4: IEEE.
- A. Strahilov et al., "Improving the transition and modularity of the virtual commissioning workflow with AutomationML," in 4th AutomationML User Conference, Esslingen, Germany, 2016.
- R. Drath, A. Lüder, J. Peschke, and L. Hundt, "AutomationML-the glue for seamless automation engineering," in Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, 2008. ETFA 2008. IEEE International Conference on, 2008, pp. 616-623: IEEE.
- A. Brusaferri, A. Ballarino, F. A. Cavadini, D. Manzocchi, and M. Mazzolini, "CPS-based hierarchical and self-similar automation architecture for the control and verification of reconfigurable manufacturing systems," in Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Emerging Technology and Factory Automation (ETFA), 2014, pp. 1-8: IEEE.
- S. Weyer and T. Meyer, "Open semantic meta-model as a cornerstone for the design, engineering and management of CPS-based Factories," in 4th AutomationML User Conference, Esslingen, Germany, 2016.
- L. Wang, M. Törngren, and M. Onori, "Current status and advancement of cyber-physical systems in manufacturing," Journal of Manufacturing Systems, vol. 37, no. Part 2, pp. 517-527, 2015.
- L. Monostori et al., "Cyber-physical systems in manufacturing," CIRP Annals -Manufacturing Technology, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 621-641, // 2016.
- P. Carey, J. Farrell, M. Hui, and B. Sullivan, "Heyde's MODAPTS: A language of work," Heyde Dynamics Party ltd, pp. 27-94, 2001.
- B. Alkan, D. Vera, M. Ahmad, B. Ahmad, and R. Harrison, "A lightweight approach for human factor assessment in virtual assembly designs: an evaluation model for postural risk and metabolic workload," Procedia CIRP, vol. 44, pp. 26-31, 2016.
- Authors
- Konstantinov, S., Ahmad, M., Ananthanarayan, K., & Harrison, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Warwick (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Konstantinov, Sergey
- Venue
- Procedia CIRP
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 63
- Pages
- 119-124
- ISSN
- 2212-8271 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2613599079
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 4.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Procedia CIRP (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
- University of Warwick (cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/K018191/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Digital Transformation in Industry
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Flexible and Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Manufacturing Process and Optimization
- Keywords
- electric machines, electric machine manufacturing, cyber-physical systems, digital twin, virtual engineering, product life cycle, assembly line, automotive powertrain
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
