Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
online
Availableatonline
www.sciencedirect.com
at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ProcediaProcedia
CIRP 00CIRP
(2017)
104000–000
(2021) 1251–1256
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
th
54 CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems
54th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems
Towards predictive quality in production by applying a flexible
Towards predictive quality
28th CIRP Design in production
Conference,
process-independent May 2018, by applying
Nantes,
meta-model France a flexible
process-independent meta-model
A new methodology to analyze
Junjie Liang *, Lukas
a, theMüller
Pelzerc, Kai functional
d
, Simonand physical
Cramer a architecture
, Christoph Grebd, of
existingJunjie
products
Lianga,*,for an Pelzer
Lukas assembly
Christian
c
Hopmann oriented
, Kai Müller
c d
product
, Simon
, Robert H. Cramera,bfamily
Schmitt
a
identification
, Christoph Grebd,
a
Christian Hopmann , Robert H. Schmitt
c a,b
RWTH Aachen University, Laboratory for Machine Tools and Production Engineering, Campus-Boulevard 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany
a
b
Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat
Fraunhofer
RWTH Aachen University, Institutefor
Laboratory forMachine
Production Technology
Tools IPT, Steinbachstraße
and Production 17, 52074 Aachen, 30,
Engineering, Campus-Boulevard Germany
52074 Aachen, Germany
c
RWTH
b Aachen Institute
Fraunhofer University,
for Institute
Productionfor Technology
Plastics Processing, Seffenter Weg17,
IPT, Steinbachstraße 201, 52074
52074 Aachen,
Aachen, Germany
Germany
École NationalecdRWTH
Supérieure
RWTH d’Arts
Aachen
Aachen et Métiers,
University,
University, Arts et
Institut
InstitutefürMétiers
for ParisTech,
Textiltechnik,
Plastics LCFC EA 4495,
Weg4201,
Otto-Blumenthal-Straße
Processing, Seffenter Rue Augustin
1, 52074
52074 Fresnel,
Aachen,
Aachen, Metz 57078, France
Germany
Germany
* Corresponding author. Tel.:RWTH Aachen University, Institut für Textiltechnik,
E-mailOtto-Blumenthal-Straße 1, 52074 Aachen, Germany
d
+49-241-80-26940; fax: +49-241-80-22359. address: j.liang@wzl.rwth-aachen.de
**Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: paul.stief@ensam.eu
Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-241-80-26940; fax: +49-241-80-22359. E-mail address: j.liang@wzl.rwth-aachen.de

Abstract
Abstract
Abstract
Predictive Analytics is increasingly applied as a basis for decision-making in product and process optimization of manufacturing companies. In
InPredictive
today’s
this context,business environment,
Predictive
Analytics theapplied
Quality enables
is increasingly trend towards
companies tomore
as a basis for product
make variety
data-driven
decision-making and customization
predictions of product
in product isquality,
unbroken.
and process withDue
data to
optimization ofthis development,
integration being one
manufacturing the need
of the
companies. of
most
In
agile and reconfigurable
significant
this context, challenges. production
Predictive This paper
Quality systems
provides
enables emerged
insights
companies to exemplary
tointo
make cope with various
data-driven products
applications
predictions and product
ofofa product
flexible families. To integration
process-independent
quality, with data design and being
optimize
meta-model toone production
integrate data
of the most
systems
for as well
multi-step
significant as to choose
manufacturing
challenges. the optimal
processes.
This paper provides product
Three matches,
application
insights product
use analysis
casesapplications
into exemplary methods
from different are needed.
of aproduction
flexible Indeed,
domains aremost ofmeta-model
the demonstrating
presented,
process-independent known to methods theaim
integrate to
meta-
data
analyze
model’s a product or
applicabilityone
forproduct family
Predictive on
Quality the physical
applications level.
in Different
manufacturing product families,
companies however,
without may differ
restrictions largely
regarding in
the
for multi-step manufacturing processes. Three application use cases from different production domains are presented, demonstrating the meta- terms
product of
or the number and
manufacturing
nature of applicability
process.
model’s components.for This fact impedes
Predictive Qualityanapplications
efficient comparison and choice
in manufacturing of appropriate
companies product family
without restrictions combinations
regarding the productfororthe production
manufacturing
system.
process.A new methodology is proposed to analyze existing products in view of their functional and physical architecture. The aim is to cluster
these
© 2021products in new assembly
The Authors. Publishedoriented product
by Elsevier B.V.families for the optimization of existing assembly lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
© 2021 The
assembly Authors.
systems. Published
Based on Datumby Elsevier
Flow B.V.the physical structure of the products is analyzed. Functional subassemblies are identified, and
Chain,
This
© is
2021
This an
The
is an open access
Authors.
open article
accessPublished under the CC
by Elsevier
article under BY-NC-ND
B.V.
the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
aThis
functional
Peer-review analysis
is an openunder is performed.
responsibility
access article underof Moreover,
the scientific
thescientific a
CC BY-NC-ND hybrid functional
committee of the and
54 physical
th CIRP architecture
Conference graph (HyFPAG)
on Manufacturing is the output which depicts the
System
Peer-review under responsibility of the committeelicense
of the (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
54th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing System
similarity
Peer-review between
under product families
responsibility by scientific
of the providingcommittee
design support
of the to
54thboth,
CIRP production
Conference system planners andSystem
on Manufacturing product designers. An illustrative
example
Keywords:of Predictive
a nail-clipper is used
Quality; to explain
Process the proposed
Data; Production methodology.
Data; Meta-Model; AnAnalytics
Data industrial case study on two product families of steering columns of
thyssenkrupp
Keywords: Predictive Quality; Process Data; Production Data; Meta-Model; Data Analyticsof the proposed approach.
Presta France is then carried out to give a first industrial evaluation
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP Design Conference 2018.
1. Introduction data analytics categories by previous works [4, 5]. In this
Keywords: Assembly; Design method; Family identification
1. Introduction context,
data the term
analytics Predictive
categories is introduced,
Quality works
by previous [4, 5]. Inwhich
this
As Industry 4.0 strategies seek broader adaptation to the describes the ability to make data-driven predictions
context, the term Predictive Quality is introduced, which of product
dynamic production
As Industry environment,
4.0 strategies seekanbroader
abundance of networked
adaptation to the and process-related
describes the ability toquality during the
make data-driven manufacturing
predictions of
of product
sensors is integrated into the physical world of production [1]. physical products [6]. Hence, Predictive Quality enables
1.dynamic production environment, an abundance of networked
Introduction and process-related quality during the manufacturing of
of the product range and characteristics manufactured and/or
Large amounts
sensors is integratedof into
datatheare generated
physical worldwhen digitalizing
of production [1]. manufacturing
physical products companies to act prospectively
[6]. Hence, and thus enables
Predictive Quality control
assembled in this system. In this context, the main challenge in
production processes. Understanding the
Large amounts of data are generated when digitalizing data has enormous the quality of future products.
manufacturing companies to act prospectively and thus control
Due to the fast development in the domain of modelling and analysis is now not only to cope with single
potential
production forprocesses.
manufacturing companies the
Understanding to obtain
data hasmoreenormous
in-depth theThe major
quality challenge
of future in implementing data-driven decision
products.
communication and an ongoing trend of digitization and products, a limited product range or existing product families,
insights into their production processes [2]. The
potential for manufacturing companies to obtain more in-depth data analytics support through
The major challenge in Quality
Predictive concerns
implementing the pre-processing
data-driven decision
digitalization, manufacturing enterprises are facing important but also to be able to analyze and to compare products to define
applications facilitate this understanding by generating
insights into their production processes [2]. The data analytics data- and
support through Predictive Quality concerns the[7].
integration of heterogeneous data sources Because of
pre-processing
challenges in today’s market environments: a continuing new product families. It can be observed that classical existing
driven models
applications of the production
facilitate process; by
this understanding thus, data analytics
generating data- the
and various
integrationsources, a multitude data
of heterogeneous of formats
sourcesand[7].datatypes
Because of is
tendency towards reduction of product development times and product families are regrouped in function of clients or features.
gained attention from manufacturing companies
driven models of the production process; thus, data analytics [3]. With data- presented [8]. The existing data management
the various sources, a multitude of formats and datatypes is methods, like
shortened product lifecycles. In addition, there is an increasing However, assembly oriented product families are hardly to find.
driven
gained knowledge
attention from extraction, the manufacturing
manufacturing companies [3]. company
With data- can Data Warehouse
presented [8]. The by existing
Bauer and Guenzel
data [9] and Smart
management Factory
methods, like
demand of customization, being at the same time in a global On the product family level, products differ mainly in two
make forecasts, such as predicting the defect
driven knowledge extraction, the manufacturing company can occurrence in a Information Service Bus by Yoon et al.
Data Warehouse by Bauer and Guenzel [9] and Smart Factory [10], mainly
competition with competitors all over the world. This trend, main characteristics: (i) the number of components and (ii) the
production
make forecasts, line.suchSuch a data theanalytics
as predicting approach in isa
defect occurrence concentrate
Information on the technical
Service Bus by implementation
Yoon et al. and [10], pay less
mainly
which is inducing the development from macro to micro type of components (e.g. mechanical, electrical, electronical).
named Predictive Analytics and defined
production line. Such a data analytics approach is as the third stage of the attention to the structuring of the relevant
concentrate on the technical implementation and pay less meta-data. To
markets, results in diminished lot sizes due to augmenting Classical methodologies considering mainly single products
named Predictive Analytics and defined as the third stage of the attention to the structuring of the relevant meta-data. To
product varieties (high-volume to low-volume production) [1]. or solitary, already existing product families analyze the
2212-8271
To cope with© 2021 Theaugmenting
this Authors. Published by Elsevier
variety as wellB.V. as to be able to product structure on a physical level (components level) which
This is an open access
Thearticle under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
identify
2212-8271 possible
© 2021 optimization
Authors. Published potentials in the existing
by Elsevier B.V. causes difficulties regarding an efficient definition and
Peer-review under
This is an open responsibility
access article of the
under the scientific committee
CCtoBY-NC-ND of the
license 54th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing System
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
production system, it is important have a precise knowledge comparison of different product families. Addressing this
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 54 CIRP Conference on Manufacturing System
th

2212-8271 © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an©open
2212-8271 2017access article Published
The Authors. under theby CC BY-NC-ND
Elsevier B.V. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-reviewunder
Peer-review under responsibility
responsibility of the
of the scientific
scientific committee
committee of28th
of the the 54th
CIRPCIRP
DesignConference
Conferenceon Manufacturing System
2018.
10.1016/j.procir.2021.11.210
1252 Junjie Liang et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1251–1256
2 Junjie Liang, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
address this issue, the concept of Digital Shadows is introduced
[11]. A Digital Shadow consists of production-relevant traces
captured by the sensors or IT systems involved in the
production process and generates a precise digital
representation of the process and product in real-time. Hence,
a Digital Shadow is recognized as a prerequisite for applying
data analytics in a manufacturing environment [12]. As the
Digital Shadow does not necessarily provide structure to the
data required by Predictive Quality applications, a data model
with a comprehensive data structure is still a fundamental
requirement for the application. Accordingly, Cramer et al.
proposed the Meta-Model of Production Data (MMPD), which
enables the derivation of shop floor ready data models [13].
The MMPD is a product-centric model and emphasizes the
holistic consideration of product-related data in terms of
Digital Shadows. The derived data model from the MMPD
ensures that universal data analytics pipelines can be applied,
generating comparable and reproducible results.
This paper presents three applications of the MMPD. Three
use case specific data models for production data (MPD) are
generated based on the MMPD. We also evaluate the
performance of the MMPD in the use cases to obtain its
applicability in a manufacturing environment.
2. An overview of MMPD
Cramer et al. use the meta-model to generate a data model.
The data model enables organizing and formalizing the
production data during the manufacturing processes [13]. The
derivation of a data model based on the MMPD follows a
hierarchical modeling approach developed by Bruegge and
Dutoit [14]. Accordingly, the derived model is named Model of
Production Data (MPD). An MPD is defined as the
instantiation of the MMPD. In accordance with the definition,
the MPD contains the application-specific representation of the
actual information. Correspondingly, an MMPD includes the
descriptions of objects in specific MPD and their relations. The
modeling language UML is used for constructing the MMPD
and the MPD, so that the modeling approach is standardized.
This ensures the universal application of the MMPD to
generate a use case specific data model.
The MMPD consists of 15 classes. The classes provide
descriptions of all involved data. In an MMPD-based data
model, the instances are generated after the definition of each
class. For each produced part, a Product instance is created.
Each Product instance is associated with its Product
Specification instance, which includes essential information
about the product’s requirements, tolerance, etc. The class
Inter-Product Specification details the inter-product
requirements by executing different process steps. Each
process step forms a Process Step instance linked to the
product. Process Step Specification contains the instances like
the reference parameter and set sensor-reading ranges
connected to all corresponding process steps. Some process
steps need raw material, components, or other necessities like
lubricants. Data about these requirements are instances of Pre-
Product. If the data about these pre-products are available
during incoming goods inspection, they can be directly
provided to the data analytics pipeline via the Pre-Product
instances. All process steps and the corresponding pre-products
are associated with the Process Flow. The class Machine
defines the involved machines executing the corresponding
process step. Tools can be mounted on Machines, and for some
smart tools, sensors are already integrated. The class Sensor is
the base class for Real Sensor and Virtual Sensor. A real sensor
measures the physical quantity, and a virtual sensor is usually
software that simulates the physical measurements. The
recording of the sensor value with timestamp is represented as
an instance of class Sensor Reading. Other classes like
Operator specifying the executor of a process step and
Shop Floor containing multiple machines and environmental
sensors can be included in the MMPD. The MMPD containing
all classes above expressed in Unified Modeling Language
(UML) is shown in Fig. 1.
Inter-Product
Operator
Specification
Process Step
Process Flow Product Specification
Specification
if exists
Pre-Product Process Step Product
Tool Machine
Real Sensor
Sensor Shop Floor
Virtual Sensor
Sensor Reading
Fig. 1 UML class diagram of the MMPD
2.1. Derivation of the MPD
This section describes the derivation of the MPD based on
the MMPD in detail. The construction of the MPD refers to the
definition of the MMPD classes. The MPD has a product-
centric view and contains comprehensive information about
product specification, production processes, involved
production resources, and the relationships among them in
manufacturing. The following necessary tasks are derived from
the work of Cramer et al. and lead to the formation of the MPD.
Task 1: Identification of manufacturing relevant
information
In this step, the relevant information for the construction of
the MPD is gathered. Firstly, the (end) product and its
specification are determined and positioned as the MPD’s
anchor. Based on the product information, the process steps and
their expected range of parameters are identified. If any known
inter-product specification exists, they should be attached to
corresponding process steps. With the process steps, the
necessary pre-products, machines, amounted tools, and
operators associated with each process step are then defined.
Further identification for essential quality control, integrated
sensor reading, shopfloor where the manufacturing takes place
are required to complete the information identification.
Task 2: Categorization of the information into classes
and generating the connection
In this step, the meta-model is used to transform the
information collected in the last step into a model. The type of
 Junjie Liang et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1251–1256 1253
Junjie Liang, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000 3

psp_molybdenum
psp_coil_assy: PSp psp_capsule: PSp
_wire: PSp
psp_burner: PSp
+ geometric + capsule
+ density dimension sealibility + geometric
dimensions pf_armband: PF
pp_molybdenum pp_capsule: + sealibility
pp_coil_assy: PP + [0] ps_cutting
_wire: PP PP
+ [1] ps_quality_control1
+ [2] ps_welding
+ [3] ps_quality_control2
ips1_burner: IPS ips3_burner: IPS ips5_burner: IPS + [4] ps_pinching
+ length short pole + [5] ps_vacuuming
+ coil position + remaining pressure
+ length long pole + [6] ps_sealing

pss3_burner:
pss1_burner:
PSS pss5_burner: pss6_burner: pss7_burner:
PSS
pss2_burner pss4_burner PSS PSS PSS
: PSS + welding : PSS
+ pincer
current + pinch + vacuum + bursting
pressure
+ welding pressure pressure pressure
(target)
speed

p_burner
:P

ps_cutting ps_quality_ ps_welding ps_quality_ ps_pinching ps_vacuuming ps_sealing

: PS control1: PS : PS control2: PS : PS : PS : PS

sr_optical_system1
sr_pincer_pressure : SR sr_optical_system2 sr_pinch_pressure: sr_vacuum_pressure sr_bursting_pressur
: SR : SR SR : SR e: SR
m_bridging + length short m_mounting m_pumping_
+ pressure value :M pole :M pinching: M
+ coil position + pressure value + pressure value + pressure value
+ length long
+ timestamp + timestamp + timestamp + timestamp + timestamp
pole
+ timestamp

s_pincer_presseure: RS s_optical_system1: RS s_optical_system2: RS s_pinch_pressure: RS s_vacuum_pressure: RS s_bursting_pressure: RS

sf_shopfloor: SF

Fig. 2. Exemplary MPD for use case 1. Abbreviations used: Process Flow (PF), Inter-Product Specification (IPS), Process Step Specification (PSS), Product
Specification (PSp), Process Step (PS), Machine (M), Shop Floor (SF), Product (P), Sensor Reading (SR), Real Sensor (S), Pre-Product (PP).

relationship among the classes should be determined. In MPD, Use case 1 is the production of lamps in the automotive
there are two types of relationships, namely association and industry representing a large scale of production. Additive
aggregation. Objects are created according to the manufacturing was chosen as use case 2 because of product
corresponding collected information. The connection is set flexibility (lot size one). Finally, in use case 3, flexible products
according to each class’ definition. The aggregation of Inter- in textile industry are considered which are clearly
Product Specification instances forms the Product distinguished from the other two use cases in terms of their
Specification, and Product Specification is associated with. product properties. The models are generated according to the
Task 3: Expression of the MPD in UML guidance from Cramer et al. [13]. The editable meta-model
According to the relevant information and the structure template and files for three use case specific models can be
generated in the last two steps, the MPD’s formalized and found at the GitHub Repository [15]. Use case specific
graphical description is generated using UML. instances can be generated with the template based on the
The execution of Task 1 to 3 is not restricted by a specific classes; therefore, it is possible to develop MPDs fulfilling
type of product or production process. An MPD constructed requirements according to the use case.
based on the MMPD provides a unified and precise
representation of different products’ related objects. Using an 3.1. Use case 1 in automotive industry
MPD adhering to the MMPD ensures that the universal data
analytics pipeline can be connected. Hence, the data analytics In the first use case, we investigate a headlamp burner’s
pipeline is compatible with any MPD derived from the MMPD. production from a manufacturer in the automotive industry.
The production volume is approximately 100 million parts per
3. Exemplary application of the MMPD year. According to our investigation, the data types are
identified, and the model is derived as shown in Fig. 2.
In this section, we show three examples from the In the first step, we generate an object for the product burner
automotive, additive manufacturing, and textile industries. We as p_burner. The corresponding product specifications,
intend to show the applicability of the MMPD by applying it in including geometric dimensions and sealability, are included in
different manufacturing domains. The use cases were selected the object psp_burner. The next step is to define the process
to cover a wide range of different production conditions. steps from the first step cutting to the last step sealing
1254 Junjie Liang et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1251–1256
4 Junjie Liang, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000

psp_component1: PSp psp_component2: PSp

+ mechanical properties + mechanical properties

+ optical properties + optical properties

pf_component: PF
ips3_component: IPS
+ [0] modelling
+ [1] configuration + hardness
+ [2] printing + surface roughness
+ [3] quality control

pss3_component: PSS
psp_pla_wire: PSp
+ printing
+ density pss1_compo pss2_compo temperature pss4_compo
nent: PSS nent: PSS nent: PSS
+ printing speed

pp_pla_wire: PP p_component: P

ps_configuration ps_manufacturing ps_quality_control

ps_modelling: PS
: PS : PS : PS

sr_plate_temperature: SR sr_nozzle_temperature: SR
m_machine1: M
+ temperature value + temperature value
+ timestamp + timestamp

s_plate_temperature: RS s_nozzle_temperature: RS

m_machine2: M ... m_machinen: M sr_env_temp: SR sr_env_hum: SR

+ temperature
+ humidity value
value
sf_shopfloor: SF + timestamp
+ timestamp

s_env_temp: RS s_env_hum: RS

Fig. 3. Exemplary MPD for use case 2. Abbreviations used: Process Flow (PF), Inter-Product Specification (IPS), Process Step Specification (PSS), Product
Specification (PSp), Process Step (PS), Machine (M), Shop Floor (SF), Product (P), Sensor Reading (SR), Real Sensor (S), Pre-Product (PP).

(ps_cutting, … , ps_sealing). Each step is detailed with process
step specification (pss1_burner, … , pss7_burner), including
the target parameters like the pincer pressure in the
pss1_burner, as well as welding current and welding speed in
the pss3_burner. We add up all instances of Process Step
Specification and link them to the process flow pf_burner.
Concerning the necessities of the pre-products, the instances
of Pre-Product are associated with the corresponding Process
Step Specification and then attached to the process flow
pf_burner along with its specification. For pss1_burner, the
pre-product molybdenum wire is included in
pp_molybdenum_wire, and its desired parameter density is
shown in psp_mplybdenum_wire.
In the following, we determine the machines that execute
the process steps and create the Machine objects m_bridging,
m_mounting, and m_pumping_pinching. The machines are all
located in sf_shopfloor. The sensors integrated into each
machine are described in s_pincer_pressure (a pressure sensor)
or s_optical_system1 (an optical measuring system on a
bridging machine). Afterward, we attach the sensor readings
(e.g., sr_pincer_pressure) to the corresponding process step.
Some sensor readings are necessary for quality control and
provide the value observed in the inter-product specification
(e.g., in ips1_burner).
3.2. Use case 2 in additive manufacturing industry
The manufacturer in the second use case offers prototyping
and small-scale production runs of the customer’s product. By
using additive manufacturing, arbitrary geometries can be
produced from plastics on the same machine and in one step.
This enables the economic production of “lot size one”
components. In contrast to the mass production in use case 1,
every part is individually tailored to the customers’ needs in
this use case. Due to the unity of the product specification,
predicting the product quality before the quality issues happen
is important for reduction of the post processing effort. Since
the production process is highly digital, chosen process
parameters significantly influence the obtained part quality.
Based on a large number of influential parameters, determining
the set of parameters to be used is still mostly based on expert
knowledge [16]. The derived data model is shown in Fig. 3.
In this model, we set the focus on the customized plastic
component. We generate the instance p_component. The
quality requirements can be grouped in mechanical properties
and optical properties, described as psp_component1 and
psp_component2 in Product Specification, which indicates two
different customers’ demand. This shows the product
customization even for the same product. The production
consists of four steps: component modeling, machine
configuration, manufacturing, and quality control (cmp.
ps_modeling, ps_configuration, ps_manufacturing, and
ps_quality_control), and they are associated with the process
flow pf_component. The thermoplastic material is melted and
processed using heat. To control the heating elements
accurately, temperature sensors are integrated into the relevant
components. As shown in Fig. 3, two temperature sensors
(cmp. s_nozzle_temperature and s_plate_temperature)
 Junjie Liang et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1251–1256 1255
Junjie Liang, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000 5

psp_wristband: PSp

+ elasticity pf_wristband: PF
+ printed pattern accuracy
+ [0] ps_warping
+ [1] ps_weaving
+ [2] ps_termofixation
psp_yarn: PSp + [3] ps_quality_control1 psp_RFID_chip: PSp

+ density ips3_wristband: IPS ips5_wristband: IPS + [4] ps_printing + readibility

+ [5] ps_quality_control2
+ elasticity + position printed pattern + [6] ps_cutting
pp_yarn: PP + [7] ps_sewing pp_RFID_chip: PP

pss1_wristband: PSS pss2_wristband: PSS pss3_wristband: PSS pss4_wristband pss5_wristband: PSS pss6_wristband pss7_wristband pss8_wristband
: PSS : PSS : PSS : PSS
+ tension + thread breakage + temperature + printing position
occurance

p_wristband: P

ps_warping ps_weaving ps_thermofixation ps_quality_control1 ps_printing ps_quality_control2 ps_cutting ps_sewing

: PS : PS : PS : PS : PS : PS : PS : PS

sr_thread_tension m_warping sr_thread_breakage m_weaving sr_temperature: SR m_thermofix m_printing sr_optical_system: SR m_cutting_

: SR :M : SR :M ation: M :M sewing: M
+ temperature + printed pattern
+ tension value + thread breakage value position
occurence + timestamp + timestamp
+ timestamp
+ timestamp

s_thread_tension s_thread_breakage s_optical_system

s_temparature: RS
: RS : RS : RS

sf_manufacturing_site: SF

Fig. 4. Exemplary MPD for use case 3. Abbreviations used: Process Flow (PF), Inter-Product Specification (IPS), Process Step Specification (PSS), Product
Specification (PSp), Process Step (PS), Machine (M), Shop Floor (SF), Product (P), Sensor Reading (SR), Real Sensor (S), Pre-Product (PP).

generate sensor readings (cmp. sr_nozzle_temperature and
sr_plate_temperature) for monitoring the manufacturing
process and providing closed-loop control of the heating
elements. In this use case, multiple machines are located on one
shop floor and execute the orders simultaneously. Therefore,
we create objects for various machines (m_machine1,
m_machine2, … , m_machinen) associated with sf_shopfloor.
The other machines are integrated with the same sensors as
m_machine; thus, the sensor and sensor reading classes are
omitted here for brevity. On the shop floor, temperature sensor
s_env_temp and humidity sensor s_env_hum is integrated to
monitor the environmental conditions, which influence part
quality.
3.3. Use case 3 in textile industry
The third use case is a textile wristband with integrated
RFID chips. Different patterns are printed on the wristbands
and the position of the printed pattern is one of the quality
requirements. To reduce non-conforming parts due to wrong
positioned pattern, Predictive Quality is an appropriate
solution. The manufacturer has an entire production line on one
shop floor, and the production processes are fully digitalized.
The generated data model for the wristband production is given
in Fig. 4.
In this model, we focus on the product wristband and acquire
the corresponding product specifications, including elasticity
and printed pattern accuracy, in the psp_wristband instance.
The Process Flow is generated from the process steps
(ps_warping, ps_weaving, … , ps_sewing), and their
specification (pss1_wristband, … , pss8_wristband) are
defined. For each process step, the necessary machines (e.g.,
warping machine) are identified, and corresponding instances
(e.g., m_warping, m_weaving …) are generated for
Machine located in sf_manufacturing_site. The pre-products
like yarn and RFID chips (pp_yarn and pp_RFID_chip) and
their specifications are then associated with the corresponding
process step and linked to the process flow pf_wristband. In the
following, sensors integrated into each machine are
determined. Accordingly, objects like s_thread_tension or
s_thread_breakage are added into the Real Sensor. The
corresponding sensor readings are associated with the process
steps. The sensor reading from the optical measuring system
sr_optical_system is used to determine the printed pattern
position from the last step ps_printing for the second quality
control ps_quality_control2. The identified inter-product
specifications (ips3_wristband and ips5_wristband) are also
associated with the corresponding process step specification
and added to the Product Specification.
4. Evaluation of the MMPD
We evaluate the performance of the MMPD in three use
cases based on three self-developed criteria: generality,
completeness, and extendibility. Explanations for the criteria
are detailed below:
• Generalizability. The MMPD does not only focus on
describing a specific form of production. Instead, it
1256 Junjie Liang et al. / Procedia CIRP 104 (2021) 1251–1256
6 Junjie Liang, et al. / Procedia CIRP 00 (2021) 000–000
enables the expression of various production forms
involving different products, different amounts of
production steps, diverse types of machines, or a wide
range of sensor readings.
• Completeness. The MMPD should completely indicate
the production data and provide a comprehensive
definition of the process itself as well as related
manufactured products, raw materials, machines, sensors,
and other manufacturing resources.
• Extendibility. The MMPD is not only restricted to a
specific scale of production. The model should be capable
of extending a larger production scale, especially for
production consisting of multiple process routines and
several production lines.
All application use cases indicate that the MMPD can meet
the requirements of generalizability, completeness, and
extendibility. However, to each criterion, the performances of
the MMPD in three use cases are slightly different from each
other. Considering the model’s generalizability, use case
1 and 3 include twice as many production steps as use case 2.
Three machines in use case 1 and five machines in use case 3
are assigned to corresponding steps, where use case 2 only
involves one machine. Hence, use case 1 and 3 indicate better
generalizability than use case 2 because the production
process’s complexity does not hinder the construction of the
MMPD. Regarding to the criterion completeness, use case 1
and 3 have broader coverage of the generated data in the
production than use case 2 since more sensor types are
integrated into the production process. In context to
extendibility, the data model scale in use case 2 is more
expandable than the other two because multiple different
Product Specifications can be linked to the same Process Step.
This indicates that expanding the data model scale is not
restricted by a variety of product types. According to specific
requirements, multiple Tool instances can be generated
associated with the Machine; for example, multiple nozzles
mounted on the additive manufacturing machines.
Additionally, multiple machines executing different tasks can
be integrated into the Shop Floor without limitation.
5. Conclusion and Outlook
We present three application use cases of the MMPD and
generated three use case specific MPD in different production
domains. The exemplary application shows promising results
regarding the three criteria generalizability, completeness, and
extendibility. The main contribution of the MMPD is to provide
a systematic and comprehensive modeling framework for
production data. It enables data integration in a standardized
form, which is proven with its application in three use cases.
This model is capable of describing the layout where the
production data are generated and serves as the foundation for
further data analytics in the Predictive Quality application.
The future work is to focus on the establishment of the data
analysis pipeline based on the presented MMPD. A user
interface for further practical application in the industry is to be
developed to transform data from production site into a
common understandable framework. Further, the software
enabling the automatic database generating based on the data
analysis pipeline is to be developed. The comparison between
the proposed MMPD and other existing data modeling
methodologies for production is possible and desirable.
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research
Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy—EXC-
2023 Internet of Production—390621612.
The IGF-promotion plan 20814 N (oraKel) of the Research
Community for Quality (FQS), August-Schanz-Straße 21A,
60433 Frankfurt/Main has been funded by the AiF within the
program for sponsorship by Industrial Joint Research (IGF) of
the German Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy
based on an enactment of the German Parliament.
References
[1] Pennekamp, J., Glebke, R., Henze, M., Meisen, T. et al., 2019. Towards an
Infrastructure Enabling the Internet of Production, in 2019 IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Cyber Physical Systems (ICPS),
IEEE, p. 31.
[2] Bughin, J., Chui, M., Manyika, J., 2010. Clouds, big data, and smart assets:
Ten tech-enabled business trends to watch 56, p. 75.
[3] Kirmse, A., Kuschicke, F., Hoffmann, M., 2019. Industrial Big Data: From
Data to Information to Actions, in Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference on Internet of Things, Big Data and Security, SCITEPRESS -
Science and Technology Publications, p. 137.
[4] van der Aalst, W., 2018. Spreadsheets for business process management
24, p. 105.
[5] Lindemann, M., Nuy, L., Briele, K., Schmitt, R., 2019. Methodical Data-
Driven Integration of Perceived Quality Into The Product Development
Process 84, p. 406.
[6] Brecher, C., Klocke, F., Schmitt, R., Schuh, G., Editors, 2017. Internet of
Production für agile Unternehmen: AWK Aachener Werkzeugmaschinen-
Kolloquium 2017, 18. bis 19. Mai, 1st edn. Apprimus Verlag.
[7] Groggert, S., Wenking, M., Schmitt, R.H., Friedli, T., 2017. Status quo and
future potential of manufacturing data analytics: An empirical study, in
2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering &
Engineering Management: IEEE IEEM2017 10-13 Dec, Singapore, IEEE,
Piscataway, NJ, p. 779.
[8] Wang, L., 2017. Heterogeneous Data and Big Data Analytics 3, p. 8.
[9] Bauer, A., Günzel, H., 2013. Data-Warehouse-Systeme: Architektur,
Entwicklung, Anwendung. dpunkt.verlag, Heidelberg.
[10] Yoon, S., Um, J., Suh, S.-H., Stroud, I. et al., 2019. Smart Factory
Information Service Bus (SIBUS) for manufacturing application:
requirement, architecture and implementation 30, p. 363.
[11] Bauernhansl, T., Krüger, J., Reinhart, G., Schuh, G., 2016. WGP-
Standpunkt Industrie 4.0.
[12] Schuh, G., Kelzenberg, C., Wiese, J., Ochel, T., 2019. Data Structure of
the Digital Shadow for Systematic Knowledge Management Systems in
Single and Small Batch Production 84, p. 1094.
[13] Cramer, S., Hoffmann, M., Schlegel, P., Kemmerling, M. et al., 2020.
Towards a flexible process-independent meta-model for production data, in
14th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing
Engineering (ICME).
[14] Brügge, B., Dutoit, A.H., 2010. Object-oriented software engineering:
Using UML, patterns, and Java, 3rd edn. Pearson, Boston.
[15] Exemplary Application of the MMPD. https://github.com/predictive-
quality/mmpd-example.
[16] Dey, A., Yodo, N., 2019. A Systematic Survey of FDM Process
Parameter Optimization and Their Influence on Part Characteristics 3,
p. 64.