IElectronic compiled by
Machine Tool Engineering Foundation in December, 2018
II

ISBN978-4-909859-00-6© Machine Tool Engineering Foundation 2018
Photographs in title page are by courtesy of
ANGER Machining GmbHIII

Preface
The production activity is, in principle, a synergy of the design andmanufacture, and generally speaking, the manufacturing system ranges frommachining, through assembly, to the product inspection. Obviously, thefundamental issue is to generate a group of the parts (components) for a
product, of which the human society requires. Reportedly, there have beenvarious kinds and types in the machining system depending upon thetechnological, economic and social environments of each nation and region
across the whole world. In general, we can classify the machining system byboth the variety of part kinds possible to processing and the processing
volume of each part kind, as exemplified, for example, “Much Variation inPart Kinds and Less Volume Machining for Each Part”, i.e. in short “Much
Variation and Less Volume Machining”.
As reported elsewhere, the machining system ranges roughly from theproduction cell and transfer line to FMS (Flexible Machining System)
including agile type, and in the industrial nation, primary concerns are FMS
and its variants. Importantly, with the advance of CIM (Computer-Integrated
Manufacturing), and also the information and communication network, it isat present natural to regard the machining system as one of the core functions
within a concept of the “Flexible and Intelligent Factory”, exactly calling“FCIPS(Flexible
Computer-Integrated
Production
Structure)”.
Paraphrasing, FCIPS consists of CIM, information communication network,and also of FMS, where CIM can facilitate information processing for thedesign and manufacture of the product, production control and enterprisemanagement. In addition, FMS is modular-designed, where FMC (Flexible
Machining Cell) plays the role of the basic module. Importantly, FCIPS wasconceptualised in the 1990s; however, on that occasion FCIPS was far fromfruition, because CIM, and also the information and communication
technology were immature.

IVAlthough FCIPS and its variants are in the leading position at present,
geminately, a recent upheaval in the production activity is the smart factory,
which is one of the flagship projects within the “Industrie 4.0” Programme
initiated by the German Government in the beginning of 2010s. In fact, thesmart factory consists of “Cloud Computing”, “Information Communication
Network” and the “CPS (Cyber Physical Systems) Module”, and can becharacterised by its autonomous function, where the CPS module is called“Fog Computing or Edge” in certain cases. For ease of comparative
understanding, both FCIPS and the smart factory can be represented with the“Human-mimetic Model”, which consists of the “Brain (CIM and Cloud
Computing)”, “Nervous System (Information Communication Network)”and “Limbs and Tools (FMC and CPS Module)”.
As widely discoursed, the smart factory is now the utmost hot topic in the
production activity, and people in general concerns believe that the smart
factory is excellent and very innovative, and that we have never had such a
concept so far as exemplified in nearly all discourses, discussions andsuggestions being carried out in Japan. As a result, it is very difficult to findthe report, which discusses the technological inheritance between FCIPS andthe smart factory.
On the basis of our long-standing experiences, the production system has
been advanced, deployed and improved by positively applying its
technological and human resources so far accumulated to successors.
Obviously, it is very rare case that a new production system is to be in reality
without any relationships to those being in practice. We must be thus awareof the necessity and inevitability to conduct, at least, the comparative
investigation into FCIPS and the smart factory, extremely focusing on theconvertibility of FCIPS to the smart factory. In such a comparative
investigation, one of the primary concerns is the growing importance of the“Manufacturing Culture”, because some variants in FCIPS and the smart
factory aim at the “Virtual Concentration of Production Bases” across thewhole world, which is a “MUST” in the era of the localised globalisation. In
fact, a group of either FMCs or CPS modules should be distributed within aVwider region or across the whole world in the virtual concentration of the
production bases in full consideration of the culture- and mindset
environments in the objective realm. In short, the manufacturing culture is asynergy of the production technology and the industrial sociology.
In due course, this book describes first the fundamental knowledge about,and also present and future perspectives of FCIPS, and then discusses theconcept of the smart factory together with its case studies. In addition, forease of understanding FCIPS is detailed and visualised quickly by using the“Production Morphology”, i.e. life history of the product. The book
discusses furthermore the convertibility of FMC for “One-off Production” in
FCIPS into the CPS module in the smart factory, and suggests the researchand engineering subjects to be conducted here after.
In short, the book can thus contribute duly for people both in the academia
and in the industry to plan the valuable research and engineeringdevelopment to a large extent.

Bremen, Germany
Yokohama, Japan
1st December, 2018

VI

Klaus Ruth
Yoshimi Ito

Contents
Chapter 1 Fundamentals of Production Systems
1
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Overall View of FCIPS ........................................................................... 6
1.3 Production Morphology and Its Hierarchical Structure .......................... 9
1.4 Localised Globalisation, Virtual Concentration of Production Basesand Manufacturing Culture ................................................................... 12
1.5 Comparison of Concepts between FCIPS and Smart Factory .............. 15
References ................................................................................................... 19
Chapter 2 General Concerns in Manufacturing Systems of Discrete Type2
2.1 First-hand View of Manufacturing Systems ......................................... 20
2.2 Fundamentals for Machining Systems .................................................. 26
2.3 Classification of Machining Systems.................................................... 28
2.4 Resurrection of Design Principle of TL and Implicit Technological
Inheritance of Automatic Turret Lathe - “MQB (Platform Method)” ... 33
References ................................................................................................... 37
Chapter 3 Basic Knowledge about and Layout Design for Flexible
Machining Systems
3
3.1 Applicable Ranges of FMS and Its Variants When Considering
Production Patterns ............................................................................... 38
3.2 Definition of FMS ................................................................................. 44
3.3 Present Perspectives for Flexible Machining Systems ......................... 45
3.3.1 FMC and FMC-integrated FMS ........................................... 46VII3.3.2 FTL and FMC-integrated FTL .............................................. 56
3.4 Fundamentals in Layout Design ........................................................... 62
3.5 Future Perspectives for Flexible Machining Systems ........................... 70
References ................................................................................................... 78
Chapter 4 System and Cell Components for Flexible Machining
4
4.1 System and Cell Components for Machining ....................................... 80
4.1.1 Kinds of Machine Tools for Standardised FMC ................... 85
4.1.2 Kinds of Machine Tools for FTL .......................................... 89
4.1.3 Kinds of Machine Tools for Pre-machining and Specialpurpose Machining ............................................................... 94
4.2 System and Cell Components for Transportation ................................. 97
4.2.1 Robots ................................................................................. 100
4.2.2 AGV .................................................................................... 102
4.3 System and Cell Components for Storage .......................................... 104
References ................................................................................................. 108
Chapter 5 Case Studies on Smart Factory – To Verify Convertibility of FMC
for One-off Production into CPS Module in Smart Factory
5
5.1 First-hand View for Smart Factories in Practice ................................. 109
5.2 Case Studies Placing Stress on “Brain, Nervous Systems and CPS
Module” Type ..................................................................................... 113
5.2.1 Volkswagen’s “MQB” as a Strategic Approach towards
Mass Customised Car Manufacturing ................................ 113
5.2.2 Advanced Tyre Moulding Systems with AI (Artificial
Intelligence) Function ......................................................... 121
5.3 Case Studies Placing Stress on “Brain and Nervous Systems” Type.. 124
5.3.1 BMW Regensburg Plant ..................................................... 124
5.3.2 Bosch Rexroth Homburg Plant ........................................... 126
5.3.3 Application of Statistical Analysis Software to Cost

VIII

Reduction ............................................................................ 127
5.4 Case Studies Placing Stress on “Limbs and Tools” Type ................... 129
5.4.1 Real Time Visualisation of AGV States by Long-distant
Surveillance and Control .................................................... 133
5.4.2 CPS Module for Tapered Roller Bearing Production ......... 134
References ................................................................................................. 135
Chapter 6 Leading Subjects for Research and Engineering Development
66.1 First-hand View for Leading R & D Subjects ..................................... 138
6.2 Investigation into Smart Products and Their Production Systems in
Detail ................................................................................................... 141
6.3 Property Conversion in Design Information Processing .................... 144
6.4 Quantitative Evaluation of System Flexibility .................................... 149
6.4.1 Evaluation of Specified Flexibility ..................................... 151
6.4.2 Evaluation of Total Flexibility ............................................ 155
6.5 Cell Description – Its Applications to Similarity Evaluation andLayout Design ..................................................................................... 160
6.6 Process Integration and Disintegration in FTL Design ....................... 167
References ................................................................................................. 169
Chapter 7 Organisational Structure, Work Organisation and Human
Resources for FCIPS and Smart Factory
7
7.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 172
7.2 Organisational Structure, Corporate Culture and Business Model ..... 175
7.3 Cultivation of Human Resources ........................................................ 179
7.4 Cultivation of Shop Floor Skills for Smart Factory ............................ 184
References ................................................................................................. 186
Appendix – Modular Design for System Layout and Platform Concept
in Machine Tool Design ........................................................ 188

IX

Abstract Of quick notes, the “Flexible and Intelligent Factory System”,
exactly calling FCIPS (Flexible Computer-Integrated Production Structure),
and its variants are in the leading position of the production system ofwider scope at present, and can facilitate the production activities in theindustrial nation to a large extent. In contrast, a recent upheaval in the
production activity is the smart factory, which is one of the flagshipprojects within the “Industrie 4.0” Programme initiated by the German
Government; however, nearly all discourses, discussions and suggestions of
the smart factory have been carried out without any considerations of
FCIPS (refer to Preface for details).
This chapter describes first the definition of and fundamental knowledge
about FCIPS, and then its present and future perspectives, extremely
suggesting its wider availability for various production activities in thelocalised globalisation area, e.g. in the form of the “Virtual Concentrationof Production Bases”. In addition, for ease of understanding, FCIPS is
detailed and visualised quickly by using the “Production Morphology (LifeHistory of Product)”. Obviously, FCIPS can be facilitated considerably by
the manufacturing culture and we see the same story in the smart factory. It
is furthermore notable that the authors assert the similarity of both theconcepts in FCIPS and smart factory, and duly suggest the better
convertibility of FMC (Flexible Manufacturing Cell; Small-sized FMS) for
one-off production into the CPS (Cyber Physical Systems) module in thesmart factory.

1. 1 Introduction
Up to the late 1970s, it was enough to discuss the production activity withnarrower scope, i.e. a production system, which is a combination of thedesign office and manufacturing system of manual-intensive type within a
1

factory. For example, the machining system, one of the sub-systems of the
manufacturing system, consisted of a group of traditional machine tools
and its inputs were the part drawing, raw and semi-finished materials andmachining schedule. In addition, the worker played the role of materialtransportation and information delivery.
With the advent of the computer control for the production activity, themanufacturing system became employed DNC (Direct Numerical Control),which is a forerunning system of FMS (Flexible Manufacturing System) 1
and since the beginning of 1980s, FMS was prevailed in the factory floor,
where the automatised facilities played very important roles on behalf of
the worker. Furthermore, FMS has been closely integrated both thecomputing and information communication technologies. Thus, it is betterto understand and call the production activity with wider scope such as a“Flexible and Intelligent Factory System”, exactly naming an FCIPS(Flexible Computer-Integrated Production Structure, Ito 1991 and 1993).
By it, we may define definitely the production activity, and also avoid themisunderstanding of the corresponding terminologies in the year 2000 andbeyond.
Although some simplified variants of FCIPS are in leading position in theindustrial nations at present, we must use various production systems
depending upon the technological, economic and social environments ofeach nation. Of course, the nation being industrialised may benefit
considerably by the production system of manual-intensive type, and sucha system should be employed even in the industrial nation in certain cases.
This is because the human society requires of various products inaccordance with its environments. As a result, we must learn the overall
view of the production system as will be described in Chapter 2.
In short, FCIPS consists of CIM (Computer-integrated Manufacturing),
information communication network and FMS as shown in Fig. 1.1. More
1

To differentiate FMS for machining, i.e. “Flexible Machining System”, which is the leading topic
within this book, from FMS in general, the acronym of “Flexible Manufacturing System” is represented
by the italic like FMS to avoid unnecessary confusions and redundancy. Of note, FMS includes FMC(Flexible Machining Cell), FML (Flexible Machining Line), and FTL (Flexible Transfer Line) [refer to
Chapters 2 and 3].

2

specifically, CIM can mainly process the leading three information, i.e.
those related to “Engineering Design and Manufacture of Product”,“Production Control Management” and “Enterprise Management” 2, and innearly all cases, FMS is designed by the modular principle, in which thebasic module is, in general, FMC (Flexible Manufacturing Cell) possible to
distribute within a certain region, e.g. either within an industrial estate or
across the whole world (see Appendix). In fact, FCIPS may facilitate theproduction activity in the era of localised globalisation to a larger extent.

Fig. 1.1 Concept of FCIPS
For the ease of understanding FCIPS, it is convenient to model FCIPS by
the human being, i.e. CIM, information communication network and FMS
being likely “Brain”, “Nervous system” and “Limbs and Tools”, respec2 In fact, CIM consists mainly of CAD (Computer-Aided Design), CAPP (Computer-Aided Process
Planning), CAOP (Computer-Aided Operational Planning) or CAM (Computer-Aided Manufacturing),
MRP (Material Requirement Planning or Material Resources Planning), SCM (Supply Chain
Management) and so on.

3

tively. Importantly, FCIPS should be in healthy condition by fusing
satisfactorily these three as like as human being. More importantly, we
cannot create the product without having the “Limbs and Tools”, evenwhen the “Brain and Nervous system” can work very well.
In retrospect, FCIPS was conceptualised in 1990s on the basis of theachievement obtained from the predictive research into the “Production
Environments in the Year 2000 and beyond”. Such a predictive research
was carried out by the leading industrial nations as shown in Table 1.1, andup to 2010s, FCIPS in full version remains in the concept stage and is far
from the practical use. This is because both the computing and information
communication technologies have been immature up to today (Ito, 1993).

Table 1.1 Predictive researches into desirable production systems around2020 - conducted in 1990s
In this context, an interesting trial is an “Agent Platform” for the
production monitoring and control systems. Importantly, the agent
implements interfaces to different communication standards, because inindustrial applications, a product monitoring and control system has toconnect to new plants by providing modern protocols as well as historicallygrown plants supporting only rudimentary communication facilities. More4

importantly, Daimler-Chrysler Bremen has been said to run one of the firstpromising applications of the agent platform to the machining cell forcylinder heads and other engine parts in C-type car. In fact, C-type car
started its production at the beginning of 2007, and it has been reported toobtain excellent results concerning capacity utilisation and smoothed
production (Sauer and Sutschet, 2006).
More specifically, in the motorcar industry, there are many isolated
stand-alone information systems to various extents as follows. The agent
can connect efficiently and effectively these one another.
(1) Production monitoring and control, and supervisory and dataacquisition.
(2) Quality management and feedback of inspection results.
(3) Alarming, maintenance and repair according to facilities’ status.
(4) Order control, sequence setup, material control and provision.
(5) Worker information system.
(6) Body and object identification, localisation and tracking systems.
(7) Short-time simulation.
(8) Plan ring of new equipment “digital factory”, ramp-up until full
output.
As will be clear from the above, the immaturity in the information
communication network technology was one of the obstacles to be a whole
FCIPS in fruition.
With both the advent of cloud computing and the advance of information
communication technology, the concept of the “Smart Factory” has, as
widely known, proposed within the “Industrie 4.0” Programme ofGermany as one of the flagship projects, and in due course, we can observe
a considerable number of the smart factories in practice. Nearly all
discourses have asserted that the smart factory is innovative, and will
become the leading production facility.
It is however worth suggesting herein that the smart factory appears as tobe one of the variants of FCIPS, provided that the system reinforces
extremely its “Autonomous Function”, and also improves its applicability5to the “One-off Production (with Keen Manufacturing Cost)” as will be
discussed in detail later.
As can be readily seen, we must first understand the production activity ingeneral concerns, and then its wide sphere ranging from the enterprisemanagement to the grass-root like skills in the factory floor. It is thus
necessary and inevitable to understand the whole matters of the production
activity by using the hierarchical classification method. As will be clear
from the following, the production activity can be, for example inmachining, hierarchically represented in the order of “Factory location
planning - FCIPS - FMS - FMC - Machine tools - Machining space Attachment, cutting tools and raw materials”.

1.2 Overall View of FCIPSIn discussing FCIPS at present, we must first consider its surrounding
environments for the technological, economic and social aspects to a large
extent, and also the hidden core technology within it. Nevertheless, we pay
a little attention to its social aspects like the factory location planning,
culture- and mindset-issues of indigenous region, effects of localised
globalisation and so on as shown in Fig. 1.2. These can be interpreted as
the circumference conditions, and in short, some of such professional areas
are being established under the aegis of the “Manufacturing Culture”.
Obviously, these circumference issues are very important, because FCIPS
should generate the product necessary to the human society (Ito and Ruth,
2006).
In contrast, the hidden core technology is far beyond the knowledge about
the system layout and system component. More specifically, the systemlayout in machining depends to certain extent upon the process planningand tool layout design, in which the grass root-like knowledge plays thevery important role such as exemplified in Fig. 1.3. In Fig. 1.3, the reverseturn top (cylindrical turning) is closely related to whether we can use theone-chucking operation with the innovative tooling or not, i.e. cost
reduction by avoiding either hand-off or re-chucking operation.
6

Fig. 1.2 Outer environments of FCIPS

Fig. 1.3 Hierarchical structure within FCIPS- Necessary technologies in the lowest layer
As can be seen from Figs. 1.2 and 1.3, we must first understand the wider
realm of the production activity, necessities of interdisciplinary knowledge
ranging from the production technology and production control, through7

management of organisational structure, to the liberal arts engineering andindustrial sociology. Obviously, we face a very acute shortage of humanresources, who can manage all the activities mentioned above. In
consideration of the extreme importance of the “Limbs and Tools” in the
production activity, it is desirable, at least, to foster the mature productionengineer with the ability of the layout design of the system and also having
certain knowledge about the manufacturing culture.
Secondly, the major determinants in FCIPS are the “Material andInformation Flows” within it as will be delved into details in Chapter 3. In
the material flow, a leading issue is whether the material flow is discrete orcontinuous. In the former, the material to be processed is transferred fromthe processing to succeeding stations stepwise, i.e. “Point-to-Point”,
whereas in the latter the material is transferred between both the points
without any interruption, i.e. “Flow Type (Process Type)”.
We can observe the discrete type in nearly all manufacturing industries, andflow type, for example, in the food, petroleum refining and cosmetics
industries 3. Of course, we can observe the mixing type as exemplified bymanufacturing for the cutting tool insert. Furthermore, such material andinformation flows must extend to the sister companies, subsidiaries andsubcontractors, e.g. those related to the supply chain. Importantly, both thediscrete and flow types differ definitely each other in many respects, e.g.
design principle, system configuration, system components, characteristicfeatures and so on.
Finally, FCIPS is a synergy of hardware, software and information
communication network. Importantly, the hardware ranges from the system
configuration (layout), through system component and its attachment, tothe processing tools, whereas the software ranges from the supply chain
and enterprise management, through production control, to factory floor
control and surveillance.
Summarising, there are a considerable number of the variants in FCIPS de3

This book deals with only FCIPS of discrete type and its variants, because we need the very different
knowledge when describing, discoursing and discussing FCIPS of flow type.

8

pending upon the connecting pattern between CIM and FMS. As a typicalexample, a CIM controls a group of general purpose-oriented FMSs, which
can conduct machining, assembly and product inspection (central control
style). In contrast, several CIMs control a group of special purpose-oriented
FMSs (distributed control style), provided that each CIM has autonomous
functions. In addition, we must be aware that the characteristic feature ofCIM depends upon the system configuration of FMS to some extent, and
FMS can be characterised by a group of the basic modules, i.e. FMCs, andalso by their combinations possible.

1.3 Production Morphology and Its Hierarchical Structure
There are various models to represent the production activity, and in
addition to FCIPS, another simple and representative model is the“Production Morphology” as shown in Fig. 1.4 4 . This production
morphology is for the discrete type, and as can be readily seen, describes
the product life, which starts from either market survey or order placementof the client, and then terminates at the disposal of the product. In many
respects, FCIPS and the production morphology are very convenient todiscuss the production activity. It is thus worth discussing the correlation
between these two models. Although not guaranteeing the one-to-one
relation, in short, CIM and FMS correspond with the production
morphology across the whole, and the manufacturing and remanufacturing
procedures, respectively. Obviously, we may use either FCIPS or the
production morphology depending upon the facing issue. Importantly, eachprocedure within Fig. 1.4 can be detailed, and for example, Fig.1.5 shows
more detailed flow of the design procedure. Paraphrasing, it is better tounderstand the production morphology in consideration of its hierarchicalstructure. In fact, the “Production of Part Drawing” in the design procedurecan be further detailed as shown in Fig. 1.6. In Fig. 1.6, the “Data Base for4

Within this book, the “Production” is defined by the British way, i.e. Production = Design +Manufacture9

Fig. 1.4 Concept of production morphology

Fig. 1.5 Simplified design flow

10

Fig. 1.6 Production procedure of part drawing

Fig. 1.7 Classification of engineering design
Manufacturing Knowledge” involves the grass root-like machining
technology shown already in Fig. 1.3, and in addition, the part drawing is
one of input information for CAPP. CAPP is one of the leading functions
within the production control management within CIM. Of note, we can11classify the design by another viewpoint regarding what is the essential
work to be carried out, and Fig. 1.7 is one of such classifications ranging
from the design theory to the release and control of drawings.
As will be clear from the above, FCIPS can be characterised by the stressed
procedure within the production morphology, resulting in the differingsystem configuration and concerns. For example, FMS for machining
differs considerable from that for assembly.

1.4 Localised Globalisation, Virtual Concentration of
Production Bases and Manufacturing CultureWith the advance of the localised globalisation, the merger of thecorporations increases to reinforce the market competitiveness, and such anorganisation can facilitate the “Virtual Concentration of Production Bases”.
Actually, we can now point out three representative cases, i.e. DMG Mori,
Friendship and Starrag Groups within the machine tool industry. Of these,
Friendship Group and Starrag Group can be characterised by theirorganisational structure based on Asian and Europe regions, respectively.
For example, Starrag Group consists of Starrag, Berthiez, Heckert,
Scharmann, SIP and so on, and deploys the product on the basis of eachcompany’s characteristic features as shown in Fig. 1.8.
Obviously, such a merger must pay the special attention to the “Divisions ofWork in Product Deployment” and “Time Difference Overcoming
Production” to enhance the beneficial features. More specifically, we mustdelve into the desirable system configuration, even when employing FCIPS
with widely distributed FMCs across the whole world. Importantly, FCIPS
should be designed in full consideration of the differing culture andmindset aspect of each region including the qualification of the worker. In
this context, Tables 1.2 (a) and (b) summarise the additional engineering
design specifications for flexible manufacturing applicable to each region
within Asia, which was obtained from the on-the-spot investigation
conducted by one of the authors (Ito) so far. The system designer should

12consider these specifications in addition to the fundamental ones together
with the kind of the objective product.

Fig. 1.8 A representative conglomerate in machine tool manufacturing

13

Table 1.2 Differing design attributes for flexible manufacturing in Asianarea - in late 1990s: a In case of being industrialised nations. b
In case of nations recently industrialised

Table 1.3 Research and engineering development subjects in relation to
manufacturing culture
In many respects, we can benefit considerably from the manufacturing
culture in discussing and suggesting something definite in the production
activity for the localised globalisation era. For example, the “acatech(National Academy of Science and Engineering)” has suggested a flagship14

project entitled “Work Organisation and Work Design in Digital Industrial
Age”, in which primary concerns are as follows (acatech, April 2013) 5.
(1) The worker should manage open and virtual platform, and also
extensive human-machine and human-system interactions.
(2) “MUST” is an interdisciplinary approach expecting the holistic effects,
for example, by a group consisting of “Engineer + IT expert +Psychologist + Ergonomist + Social and occupational scientist + --”.
In short, the “acatech” suggests the individual research and engineeringdevelopment subjects as shown in Table 1.3, and from these, we mayunderstand the importance of the manufacturing culture.

1.5 Comparison of Concepts between FCIPS andSmart Factory
The “acatech” has suggested both the key terms and the sentences torepresent the concept of the smart factory as shown in Table 1.4 (acatech,
April 2013). In general senses, it is possible to draw the schematic view ofthe smart factory by combining these key terms and sentences (Ito, 1988);
however, the “acatech” has not shown any such concept drawings.
Against to this context, we may have a clue by comparing the concept of
FCIPS in detail with those in Table 1.4. In short, Fig. 1.9 is a comparative
illustration for the concept of FCIPS with that of the smart factory
including again the human-mimetic model. For ease of understanding, inthe right of Fig. 1.9, we display the hierarchical structure in the information
processing together with the computer system, and detail furthermore theinformation to be processed at each hierarchy within the smart factory and
FCIPS. In contrast, in the “Limbs and Tools”, the dire necessity is toconcert both the material and information flows, and in due course, a facing
issue is to what extent the cell controller should manage information
processing in consideration of the material flow (see Fig. 3.4).
5“acatech” is the organisational structure for promoting the “Industrie 4.0 Programme”.

15

Table 1.4 Representative key terms and sentences for smart factory within
Industrie 4.0 (based on publicised information by acatech)
As can be seen from Fig. 1.9, it is natural and reasonable to assert the good
agreement between both the concepts, and we may conclude that the smart
factory is one of the variants of FCIPS, apart from that FCIPS has, innature, certain difficulty in application to the one-off production.
More specifically, the smart factory is, in principle, designed to be only
applicable to the “One-off Production with Keen Processing Cost”, where
the keen cost is equivalent to or less than that obtainable from the “Less
Variation and Large Volume Production”. In contrast, FCIPS covers all the
production patterns and the one-off production within FCIPS does not careanything related to the reduction of the processing cost, but should finish
the product and component with the highest quality even when the batch
size is “One”. In this context, we must be furthermore aware that the smart
factory has been discoursed and discussed by placing main stress on cloudcomputing and information communication (Brains and Nervous systems),
but not on the factory floor (Limbs and Tools).
16

Fig. 1.9

Concepts of both FCIPS and smart factory Their human-mimetic models

Of special notes, Figs. 1.10 (a) and (b) show the concept of FCIPS in detail,and as can be seen, FCIPS can be characterised by (1) CIM withhuman-intelligence-based function, (2) a group of FMCs with autonomous
function, e.g. either “Auction” or “Task Broker” type, (3) FMCs of widelydistributed allocation type, and (4) simultaneous material and information
flows by the data tag (Ito, 1993).
To this end, it is worth suggesting that there are, as shown already in Fig.
1.9, differing terms in the smart factory from those in the production
technology, and such differing terms result in misunderstanding andconfusion of the smart factory to some extent. For example, the “Mass
Customization” is, dare to say, wrong term in the production technology,
but the one-off production is correct. Nevertheless, the smart factory inpractice can provide us with the valuable knowledge regarding cloudcomputing and information communication technology, and thus some casestudies will be described in Chapter 5. Obviously, such the knowledge is17

Fig. 1.10 Concept of FCIPS in detail: a System configuration- FMC either auction- or task broker-like type. b Cell controller andinformation processing
18

also very helpful to understand the essential features of CIM.

References
acatech (April 2013) Recommendations for implementing the strategic
initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0.
Ito Y (1988) Conceptualizing the Future Factory System. Manufacturing
Review, ASME; 1-4: 252-258.
Ito Y (1991) State of the Art of Advanced FMSs and FMCs Worldwide.
Transaction of Mechanical Eng. (IE Australia); ME16-2: 91-99.
Ito Y (1993) Chapter 1 What is Human-Intelligence-Based Manufacturing?
In: Ito Y (ed) Human-Intelligence-based Manufacturing. Springer-Verlag
London, p. 1~28.
Ito Y and Ruth K (2006) Theory and Practices of Manufacturing Culture –Synergy of Culture and Production Vol. 3. artefact Verlag Sottrum.
Sauer O and Sutschet G (2006) A Step towards Real Time. IET
Manufacturing Engineer; 85-3: 32-37.

19

Abstract A product is to be in reality by integrating a group of parts, andthus the kernel of FCIPS is, needles to say, the manufacturing system(Limbs and Tools). The manufacturing system consists, in principle, ofprocessing, assembly and inspection procedures. In discussing the
production activity, thus, it is extremely important to place the stress on theprocessing system. To suggest first the importance of understanding thehierarchical structure in the production system, Chapter 2 demonstrates (1)the differing aspects between the machining and assembly systems, andalso between FMCs for metal cutting and metalworking. In contrast, we
may suggest the configuration similarities between FMCs for machining
and assembly.
Although we can use various processing methods, the major is partmachining, and then to clarify the characteristic features of the machining
system, Chapter 2 describes (2) a classification of the machining system inconsideration of the production pattern (mode) like “Much Variation andSmall Volume Production”, (3) some representatives ranging from theproduction cell and transfer line to FMC and NC transfer line, and also (4)the input and output for both the material and information flows in themachining systems.

2.1 First-hand View of Manufacturing Systems
We need various products to maintain and advance our human society, andthe product is to be in reality in accordance with the requirements of thesociety. Obviously, the “Limbs and Tools” within FCIPS is very importantto generate the product, and when changing the viewpoint to the production
morphology, we must at first eye the manufacturing procedure. Actually,
we must launch out to the generation of a group of the parts (components)20and then assemble them into the product. While processing and assemblinga group of the parts, we must also inspect on demand the quality of the partand unit, and of course the product itself.
Apart from the remanufacturing procedures, let us now discuss the
manufacturing procedure shown already in Fig. 1.4. In this context, wemust mind that the primary concern in remanufacturing is the disintegrationof the product at its end of life or disposal, but not processing the part.
In principle, there are somewhat differing appearance and features among
the processing, assembly and product inspection systems; however, on thecontrary, these systems have similar configurations, although the core
processing function differs considerably one another. In addition, thesesystems are integrated into the large-sized system in part or as a whole. It isthus notable that the rudimental and further necessary knowledge can beobtained by investigating in detail the system for processing.

21

Fig. 2.1 FMCs for assembly and machining: a Assembly of hydraulicmotor with planetary gearing. b Robots for work loading andunloading (by courtesy of Fujikoshi, 2017)
For ease of understanding, Figs. 2.1 (a) and (b) show the typical FMCs for
assembly and machining, i.e. typical processing methods in manufacturing,
together with their core functions, which will be discussed later. In fact, wecannot observe the apparent differences in the cell layout or configuration,
apart from the machines for processing function. In FMC for machining,
the NC turning machine and articulated robot can facilitate the machining
and transportation functions, respectively. In contrast, the articulated robot
can facilitate the assembly function in FMC for assembly remaining otherfunctions as similar as those in machining. A crucial problem is thus tounderstand the differing roles of the robot between for the transportation
device and for the assembly machine.
Even when placing the stress on the processing procedure, we must
consider furthermore various methods being employed. Roughly saying,
the processing method can be classified into “Metal Removal Processing”,“Metal Non-removal Processing” and “Additive Processing” like 3D
printing. Importantly, the latter two supply often their products to metal
removal processing as raw or semi-finished materials.
Figures 2.2 (a) and (b) illustrate the overall views for metal removal
processing and non-removal processing by using the hierarchical classifica22

Fig. 2.2 Hierarchical classification for representative metal processing: a
For removal type. b For non-removal type23

tion, respectively. In many respects, such a classification method is very
convenient when carrying out the necessary discussion as already verified
elsewhere (Ito and Matsumura, 2017).

Fig. 2.3 FMC for sheet metal bending (by courtesy of Amada, 2010)
Figure 2.3 shows an FMC of robot type for metalworking in the 2000s.
More specifically, FMC for bending, i.e. one of the metal non-removal
processing methods, and the core machine is the press brake (bending
machine) of Amada-brand (Type ASTRO II -100NT). As can be seen from
Fig. 2.3, FMC has the functions of ATC (Automatic Tool Changer),
automatic gripper changer for bending robot and automatic hand changer
for L/UL (Load and Unload) robot. As a result, this FMC is applicable tothe batch production, although we believe so far that the metalworking isavailable for the “Less Variation and Large Volume Production”.
Importantly, the cell configuration and function are as similar as thoseshown already in Fig. 2.1 (b), apart from the machines for processing

24

function. In short, the machines are the NC turning machine for machining
and NC press brake for metalworking.
It is furthermore very interesting that in the sheet metal bending, theoperator must handle skillfully the raw sheet metal in accordance with thedeformation procedure called “Flower Patterns”, and the bending robot canreplace such human skills. In short, we can benefit within (1)high-precision and high-speed stable bending, (2) higher operability by
reducing set-up time and (3) user-friendly functions in operation from FMC
shown in Fig. 2.3.

Fig. 2.4 FMC for sheet metal processing (by courtesy of Amada, 2010)
For further convenience to the reader, Fig. 2.4 shows also FMC for sheet
metal processing for various kinds and large-fluctuation volume production,
the characteristic features of which are as follows.
(1) The turret punching press is capable of punching the small-sized holewith pre-determined shape, and also of laser cutting for the large-sizedhole with free curve. In addition, the machine can carry out forming

25

and tapping.
(2) Punching can be performed by the direct drive using the twin-servo
motor, resulting in the higher-speed movement of the punching head.
This technology has been already employed in the NC metal-cutting
machine tool more than 20 years ago.
To this end, it is again worth suggesting that FMC for machining isfundamental in the whole system layout including system components, andalso in functions to be facilitated across the whole production systemespecially related to material processing. Thus, we will discuss themachining system hereafter.

2.2 Fundamentals for Machining Systems
As will be clear from Section 2.3, there are a considerable number of thekinds and types in the machining system. It is however worth emphasisingthat the cell for machining is the utmost basic configuration, and at present
primary concern is FMC for machining. Paraphrasing, it is recommendable
to understand and discuss the fundamentals of the machining system byplacing the stress on FMC.
Figure 2.5 illustrates thus the layout and configuration of a machining cell,i.e. large-sized FMC, together with the necessary and inevitable
information, i.e. five basic functions, and also inputs to and outputs fromthe cell.
Importantly, FMC should consist of the leading five functions, i.e.
“Machining”, “Transportation”, “Storage”, “Maintenance and Daily
Inspection” and “Control and surveillance” functions, which are with either
the manual ways or automatisation. Of these, it is desirable that thetransportation is, in principle, of “One-direction Flow” type apart fromthat by the robot. In addition, the cell controller deals with the control,
surveillance and supervision function, which is the lowest hierarchy within
CIM.
We must also be aware of both the input and the output are in close tie withthe “Material and Information Flows” within the cell. More specifically, the26

raw material, part drawing and short-term production planning are input
and duly the finished part and production achievements are output. Actually,
CIM and cell controller deal with all the necessary information within thecell, and at issue is the “Division of Work in Information Processing”
between CIM and the cell controller.

Fig. 2.5 Five fundamental functions, inputs and outputs in machining cell
Having in mind these fundamentals, FMC should be designed in fullconsideration of the functional and performance specifications of theobjective product, parts of which should be machined at present and in thevery near future. With the enhancement of the product itself, the machining
method of its parts could be changed, and in due course, a kind of themachine tool disappears and a new kind could be in practical use. As aresult, the machining system could be varied to some extent. Against this27

context, the innovation in the machining system induces duly certainchanges in the product.
As widely known from the past, it is thus the vital rule that the machining
system should be designed in consideration of the close tie among the
product, its production pattern (mode), system configuration and system
control method including manual operation (see Section 6.6).

2.3 Classification of Machining Systems
In general, we can classify the machining system into the two leading
configurations, i.e. cell and system such as shown in Fig. 2.6, and of these,
FMC, FMS including the “Agile Machining System” and FTL (Flexible
Transfer Line) are in leading position nowadays.

Fig. 2.6 Classification of machining systems
It is however notable that the NC TL (NC Transfer Line), a successor of the
traditional TL (Transfer Line), is economically very effective in the “Less28

Variation (Large batch size) and Large Volume Production”. In short, we
can assert the much more economical superiority of the NC TL than FTLeven now on the basis of our long-standing experiences, although
restricting the machining flexibility to some extent.
Admitting that the flexible and agile machining systems including the cellare at present in leading position in the industrial nations, the traditional
machining cell and system also play important roles in the being
industrialised nation. More importantly, one of the utmost advanced
flexible machining cells, e.g. “Transfer Centre”, is originated from thetraditional cell and system. We must thus have certain knowledge about thetraditional machining cell and particularly about TL.
In the era of the traditional machine tool, i.e. in the year 1970 and before,
we used to install the machining cell, which is for the “Much Variation(small batch size) and Small Volume Production”, and which can beapparently classified into the “Job Shop”, “GT (Group Technology) Cell”
and “Production Cell”. In addition, these are compatible with themachining facility especially for SME (Small- and Medium-sizedEnterprises). These three appear however as to be very similar, and thus wehave not had the necessary and definite definitions for these three so far.
For example, Fig. 2.7 shows a job shop with rationalised material flow, andalso for the factory of SME (Torihara, 1966). Against this context, Fig. 2.8
shows a GT cell for SME, in which all the parts to be machined should beclassified into several part families by using GT (Group Technology), andthis GT cell aims at the rationalisation in machining and transportation(Merchant, 1976). Importantly, the part family should be determined on thebasis of the similarity of machining methods and sequence, i.e. GT for
process planning and tool layout planning. More importantly, GT cell aims
at the economic efficiency as same as that obtainable from the lessvariation and large volume production.
By comparing those shown in Figs. 2.7 and 2.8, we may understand the
difficulty in identifying the differing features within them. Dare to say, we
may differentiate these three as follows.
29

Fig. 2.7 Job shop-like machining cell with rationalised material flow
(by Torihara, 1966)

Fig. 2.8 GT cell in 1970s (proposed by Allen and introduced by Merchant)30

(1) Job shop consists of a group of various kinds of the machine tool,
which are chosen in consideration of the expectable order placement.
(2) GT cell consists of several groups of machine tools and each group can
be facilitated by a certain number of the same kinds. The grouping
principle is based on GT theory extremely placing the stress on themachining process planning.
(3) There are various definitions for the production cell. For example, avariant of the job shop is regarded as a production cell when thematerial flow within the job shop is rationalised. In addition, someone
asserts that GT cell itself is one of the production cells.
(4) With the advent of NC technology of first generation, we faced much
more difficulties to differentiate correctly the job shop, GT cell andproduction cell than ever before. This is because NC machine tool has
the flexibility in its machining function and capability to some extent.
For example, GT technology was not so effective as compared withthat in the era of traditional machine tool.
(5) In this context, Fig. 2.9 shows a large-sized factory for machining theaeroplane components, which is of a group of GT cells and of DNC
type. In fact, each cell consists of a considerable number of the samekinds, because of the larger production volume and longer machining
time of the part. Paraphrasing, each cell can be regarded as a machineas a whole in Fig. 2.8. Herein, DNC is one of the pre-concepts for
FMS.
Fig. 2.10 shows an advanced job shop being on work, and as can be readily
seen, there are no obvious differences between those in Figs. 2.7 and 2.10,
apart from the installation of MCs (Machining Centres) and NC machine
tools instead of the traditional machine tools 1.
Although there remains something to be seen, the machining cell is vitaland very important in designing and using the production system in general
as already exemplified in Fig. 2.5. Importantly, we sublimated themachining cell up to FMC by incorporating NC and computing technology,
1Figs. 2.9 and 2.10 are produced on the basis of on-the-spot investigation by one of authors (Ito).

31

and FMC is dominant in the production activity at present. Furthermore,

Fig. 2.9 A variant of GT cell - Aeroplane component machining system(simplified and modified system installed at MBB Augsburg plant)

Fig. 2.10 Production cell involving job shop - Installed by Eba Machineryat Nomura-Haiphong Industrial Zone around 200532

the large-sized system is often modular-designed by integrating a group of
FMCs as will be detailed in Chapter 3.

2.4 Resurrection of Design Principle of TL and Implicit
Technological Inheritance of Automatic Turret Lathe- “MQB (Platform Method)”
In discussing the machining system, we must pay the special attention to
the importance of the traditional machining cell as mentioned in thepreceding Section, and as similar as the machining cell, TL is also very
important, because its design principle has recently been resurrected in thedesign of the “Transfer Centre”. More specifically, FTL and the transfer
centre should be, in general, designed by the modular principle, which is
the utmost characteristic feature in the design of TL, and reported alreadyelsewhere, the transfer centre can be extremely characterised by the design
method of MQB (die Modularer QuerBaukasten; Platform), i.e. one of thevariants of the modular design (see Chapter 3).
In retrospect, TL was developed extremely for the less variation and large
volume production in the motorcar industry in the 1950s, so that we wereable to reduce considerably the renewal cost of the machining facilities,
when we conducted the model changes of the car 2. Obviously, one of theremedies to such requirements is to employ the modular design, which isextremely applicable to the user-oriented machining system. After then, TL
has been developed to FTL in accordance with the changing production
pattern, and FTL is one of the very conventional facilities nowadays (Ito,2008).
Admitting the importance of FTL, in the classification shown in Fig. 2.6,
one of enchant kinds is the transfer centre, which is the utmost advanced
FTL of compactly cubic type. It is thus necessary to understand thedeveloping history of FTL, and also the characteristic features of the2

The modular design was called “Building Block System” (in German, die Baukasten Systeme) up to
1970s.

33

transfer centre. Of special note, Fig. 2.11 shows the developing history of
FTL and identifies its variants, which are being in practical use even in theyear 2010 and beyond. Thus, Fig. 2.11 can be regarded as one of theclassification systems of FTL.

Fig. 2.11 Classification and development history of TL and FTL
Figure 2.12 shows an NC TL being on work together with comparing it to
the traditional TL. As can be readily seen, the line configuration is very
similar in both TL and NC TL; however, the machining station in NC TL is
replaced to NC special-purpose machine tool from the traditional one in TL,
i.e. traditional special-purpose machine tool. In short, there are three types
in the traditional TL, i.e. TL of line flow, TL of rotary indexing type (dialmachine) and TL of way type, and as will be discussed in Chapter 3, wehave resurrected the transfer centre from these traditional types.
At present, the transfer centre is applicable to the “Considerable Variation
and Variable Volume Production”, but not to “A Kind of Production” and“One-off Production”. It is thus desirable that we will establish the transfer
centre to be applicable to the one-off production together with facilitating
the “On-the-Spot Interchangeability of Modules” at the user’s factory.
34

Fig. 2.12 Traditional TL and modernised NC TL
Obviously, we can talk a similar story in the case of the machining cell, in
which the NC machine tool play the role of the core machining function incertain cases as shown in Fig. 2.10. In addition, the standardised FMC has
been prevailed instead of the machining cell even in SME as will be
discussed in Chapter 3, and the machining function in such FMCs consists,
in general, of MC and TC (Turning Centre).
We must thus eye the technological inheritance in MC and TC from thetraditional machine tool to deepen and to widen our understanding for themachining system. Fig. 2.13 illustrates a developing history of TC from thetraditional turning machine, and as can be seen, there are three noteworthy
technologies, which are now employed within MC and TC as follows (Ito,1994).
(1) Tool post of unit type, which is modular-designed, and can beinterpreted a forerunning trials of the “Platform”, i.e. formation ofuser-oriented machining space.
(2) Employment of turret head, which is a common structural component
in TC nowadays.

35

(3) “Turret-over-spindle” configuration in automatic turret lathe ofCleveland-brand (in case of Monforts-brand, “Turret-under-Spindle”).
The travelling turret bar of pentagon shape (with turret head) is placedat the right above position of the main spindle, so that we can solve the“Hot Spindle-Cold Turret Problem” in the conventional turret lathe. In
short, this remedy in the structural configuration results in the main
spindle with preferable thermal stability, and then sublimates to“Spindle-over-Spindle” configuration, i.e. twin-spindle configurationin MC later (see Fig. 3.18).

Fig. 2.13 Development to TC from traditional turning machines
More specifically, in Fig. 2.13 the “Machining System NC Lathe” of
VDF-brand (Type DP250) contributed to the advance of the modular
design in TC to a large extent, and in due course, the automatic turret latheof Cleveland type stimulated considerably the contrivance of TC oftwin-spindle type.

36

References
Ito Y (1994) Multifarious Perspectives and Dreams for Future Machine
Tools – Focussing on Trends of MC and TC. Jour. of JSME; 97-911:
829-835.
Ito Y (2008) Modular Design for Machine Tools. McGraw-Hill.
Ito Y and Matsumura T (2017) Theory and Practice in Machining Systems.
Springer Nature.
Merchant M E (1976) Long-range Trends in the Automation of Machine
Tools and Manufacturing. In: Proc. of 16th Inter. MTDR Conf., MacMillan,
p. 13.
Torihara (1966) Case studies on machine layouts and improvement of jigs.
Kikai Gijyutsu; 14-6: 47.

37

Abstract We must use various machining systems depending upon
technological, economic and social environments in the nation and region
across the whole world, and within the industrial nation, FMS (Flexible
Machining System) and its variants like FMC (Flexible Machining Cell)and FTL (Flexible Transfer Line) have been prevailed. Importantly, FMC
and both FMC-integrated FMS and FTL are growing their importancealmost daily, whereas we must modify the design guide for FMS andconcerns so far used in consideration of their present and near future
perspectives. In fact, the traditional design guide becomes obsolete with theadvance of FMC.
This chapter describes first the definition of FMS after classifying theapplicable area of FMS and its variants at present, and then shows some
representative FMCs especially placing the stress on the (defacto)
standardised FMC, and also FTLs in consideration of its importance within
the motorcar industry. In this context, it appears that FMC for one-off
production is available for the CPS module in the smart factory, provided
that the cell controller should be contrived something necessary.
In consideration that both FMC and FMS are modular-designed to be
facilitated the flexibility, expandability and redundancy, the basic
knowledge about the design for FMC is also stated. It is furthermore
important to enhance FMC by incorporating the function-integrated kinds
in the machine tool, and thus a quick note for such kinds is given, where
the transfer centre, i.e. a forerunning trial of such kinds, is discussed.

3.1 Applicable Ranges of FMS and Its Variants
When Considering Production Patterns
In the 1980s, FMS became the leading machining facility within the38

large-sized enterprise, and from the viewpoint of the total production
capability within a nation, SME (Small- and Medium Sized Enterprise) was
compelled to install FMS in order to leverage its machining capability withthat of the large-sized enterprise. As can be imagined, SME could notafford to fulfill such a requirement because of the poor investment capacity.
Importantly, we need such a leverage even now especially in the motorcar
industry, where a group of subsidiaries and subcontractors, i.e. those ingeneral of SMEs, can support the production activity of the parent
company to a large extent through the supply chain. More importantly, agroup of subsidiaries and subcontractors is of hierarchical structure, e.g.
ranging from 1st to 3rd tires, and thus there are considerable difficulties toinstall FMS within them much more than our thoughts.
In retrospect, to solve such an installation problem of FMS on that occasion,
FMC was developed (MITI, 1983). Paraphrasing, FMC is very handy withkeen purchasing price and running cost, and even SME can install it
without any difficulties. In due course, we can obtain the amazing
economical benefit as similar as that of FMS by installing FMC. As a result,
FMC has mushroomed and for the time being is dominant.
Since the 1980s, FMS has been duly deployed to various ways to respondproperly to the changing machining requirement of the society, i.e. FMC,
large-sized FMC, FTL, FML (Flexible Machining Line) and FMS.
Importantly, primary concerns are FMC for stand-alone operation, and also
FMC-integrated FMS and FTL at present 1. In short, we can now manage
nearly all the machining requirements by using FMC and FMC-integrated
system, apart from the one-off production.
To understand such trends, Fig. 3.1 illustrates the applicable range of eachvariant of FMS by indicating obviously the production pattern, i.e.
“One-off Production”, “A kind of Production”, “Much Variation (small
batch size) and Small Volume Production”, “Medium Variation and medium
Volume Production”, and “Less Variation and Large Volume Production”.
1

FML was proposed by Fritz Werner, and can be characterised by its flexibility and machining
capability, which are in mid-way between FTL and FMS.

39

In this context, it is worth suggesting that FMC is, in general, available forup to a kind of production, but not for the one-off production.
Importantly, Fig. 3.1 is a modification of the proposal by Klahorst around1980. He proposed the classification for the flexible manufacturing system
by using both the indexes, i.e. flexibility (manageable variation of partkinds) and batch size, as shown together in Fig. 3.1 by the green line andletter, which was on the strength of the classification proposed by Kearney& Trecker. More importantly, it is worth suggesting that his proposal isvery reliable as verified by many engineers and elsewhere 2, 3.

Fig. 3.1 Classification of flexible machining systems in 2010s
In due course, we have already established the design guide for FMS and2

If necessary, we can add furthermore the following production patterns, i.e. “Considerable Variation
and Variable Volume Production” and “Client’s Order Responding Production”.
3 Warnecke introduced the proposal of Klahorst on the occasion of KAIST Seminar held at March, 1982
(Seoul) within his topic entitled “Tendencies for Improvement of Productivity in Manufacturing Industry– A Survey”.

40

Fig. 3.2 Traditional system design flow for flexible machining

Table 3.1 System design attributes in general
concerns to large extent, and Fig. 3.2 reproduces a design flow startingfrom the part analyses including the processing schedule, through thedeterminations of system specifications, layout design and the preparationof operational software, to the system evaluation. In the system design, it is41

first important to specify the system design attributes in general as shownin Table 3.1. Actually, we must consider myriad attributes and superiority
order among attributes in accordance with the manufacturing requirements
including designer’s philosophy and preference, technologies available,
corporate culture, installation region of system, and so on.
Then, primary concern is the determination of the system configuration,
which is closely related to the five fundamental functions as exemplified inFig. 2.5 and system components facilitating the due function. Thus, Table
3.2 shows such functions together with the available system components
for each function and also the determinants of the system configuration.
Importantly, these system components should have furthermore thefollowing functionalities.

Table 3.2 Determinants of system configurations(1) Flexibility.
(2) Leverage of functionalities and performances to cost.
(3) Higher modularity for ease of integration to system and wider

42

procurability.
(4) Ease of renewal and better disposability.
(5) Higher operability.
(6) Ease of inspection and maintenance.

Fig. 3.3 System configuration of FMS to be installed at Vought Co.
- For machining aeroplane components
To deepen the understanding to such the design guide, Fig. 3.3 shows aplan of the basic layout for FMS, which was produced by Cincinnati
Milacron with price of 10 Mil. US$, to be installed in Dallas Plant ofVought Aerospace in 1984, and aimed at machining the aeroplanecomponents, i.e. aft components of B-1B bomber. From Fig. 3.3, we canassimilate concretely the roles of determinants shown in Table 3.2 in theconfiguration of the basic layout. Actually, at issue is the kind of core43

machine tools, and equally we must discuss the auxiliary facilities anddevices such as work preparation station, washing stand, work turn-overdevice and CMM (Coordinate Measuring Machine), which are necessary toform the system in accordance with the machining requirements. In general,such facilities like CMM and washing station are not provided to thesystem apart from the special case like FMS for ordnance manufacturing(FMS Magazine, 1983).
It is however notable that such a design flow and determinants for system
configuration render, at present, useless by the upheaval of the following
new waves, and thus we must investigate a new design guide as will be
discussed in the following Sections.
(1) We must revise the design flow following the “Determination of
System Design Specifications” in consideration that FMC and
FMC-integrated system have recently been in leading position. As aresult, for example, the procedure for “Integration and Disintegrationof Processes” is not so important nowadays.
(2) With growing importance of the “Highly Function-integrated Kinds” inthe machine tool, the “Re-design of Parts” procedure in the design flow
renders useless (see Section 3.4). This is because nearly all machining
requirements can be carried out, for example, by the mill-turn, which isone of the function-integrated kinds being prevailed.
To this end, it emphasises that the system evaluation extremely related to
the “Flexibility” is at burning issue.

3.2 Definition of FMS
When discussing this issue, it is very helpful to refer to the definition of
FMS proposed by Weck (1974). He eyed the utmost characteristic featureof FMS in the material and information flows, i.e. simultaneous supply ofboth the material and information necessary to process the material at any
stations within the system, to eliminate completely the idle time, e.g.
waiting time. This definition is very valuable and may be called “SameTime - Same Place Principle” as shown in Fig. 3.4.
44

Fig. 3.4 Definitions of FMS and AMS
As can be readily seen, such a characteristic feature can be accommodated
by using the computerised control, and in AMS (Agile Manufacturing
System), it may be asserted that the idle time in each flow can be reduced
as far as possible by maintaining the same time - same place principle asshown also in Fig. 3.4. Obviously, the definition of Weck is available not
only for FMS including FTL, but also for FMC including FMC-integrated
system.
Importantly, we may identify the material flow as a horizontal integration
through value networks (physical space), and also the information flow as avertical integration and networked manufacturing systems (cyber space) in
the smart factory concept. In short, FMC may be regarded as a CPS module,
provided that FMC is available for one-off production.

3.3 Present Perspectives for Flexible Machining Systems
As will be clear from the above, we must place the stress on FMC, and also45

on both FMC-integrated FMS and FTL in discussing the flexible machining
system at present. As will be discussed later, it is natural that both FMS and
FMC are designed by using the modular principle, and as literally shown,
FMC can facilitate the basic module in designing FMC-integrated system.

3.3.1 FMC and FMC-integrated FMS

On the occasion of the first stage of the development in the 1980s, there
were two types of FMC, i.e. FMCs of pallet pool and robot types,
depending upon their core machining functions. In short, the former
consisting of MC is for the box-like work, whereas the latter consisting ofNC turning machine or TC is for axial-symmetrical work.
Since then, these two have been widely employed as shown in Figs. 3.5 (a)and (b), and also Figs. 3.6 (a) and (b) in the form of time-series like
representation. For example, Fig. 3.6 (a) shows an FMC of robot type in
the 1980s, and its characteristic features are, as can be seen, to integratecompactly the work handling robot within a machine as a whole, and also
to employ the modular design so as to suit the customer’s specific needs
with expandability. With the advance of the cell component and related
technologies, FMC has had much more functionality and higher
performance than ever before; however, we can say that there are no
significant differences in the dimensional and performance specifications
between both FMCs shown in Figs. 3.6 (a) and (b).
Importantly, nowadays we can regard these as (defacto) standardised FMCs
for stand-alone operation or basic modules for FMC-integrated system, i.e.
large-sized FMC, FMS and FTL, and more importantly there are several
variants as shown in Fig. 3.7 depending upon the system component, bywhich each variant can be characterised. Of special note, it emphasises thatthe standardised FMC and its variant have been mushroomed within SME
as expected by its original idea.
Within the context of variants, it is very interesting that we have at present
multifarious specified types with continuously diversifying the machining
requirements of the human society as will be noted below.

46

Fig. 3.5 FMC of pallet pool type: a Expandable type of Makino-brand, late1980s. b Type μMMC (by courtesy of Makino Milling Machine, 2016)47

Fig. 3.6 FMC of robot type: a Front-located robot type - Type FMS 2510A,
Jones & Lamson-brand, in 1980s. b Front allocated travelling type(by courtesy of Fujikoshi, 2010)48

Fig. 3.7 Variants of standardised FMCs
Figure 3.8 shows a further variation in FMC of overhead travelling robot
type. This FMC has been on market since 2000, and can be characterised
by TC of twin-spindle and tandem turret head type, resulting in much more
flexibility in machining than our expectation as follows.
(1) Continuous machining by concerting first and second main spindles.
(2) Simultaneously different machining by each main spindle.
(3) High accuracy machining for the slender work by synchronous driving
for both main spindles. Such a driving method is for avoiding
unfavourable torsion in the work caused by the differing driving torquebetween both spindles as like as that in the car wheel lathe.
In general, it appears that FMC is of fully automatised system; however, weneed the direct control and surveillance by the mature operator in very
special machining. Fig. 3.9 shows an FMC enabling the better accessibilityof the operator to the cell by allocating the comfortable working space at
the front of the machine. Of special note, this FMC consists of the mill-turnwith grinding function, and as can be seen from the left of Fig. 3.9, themain spindle is of travelling and hanging type to achieve the higher
machining accuracy by one-chucking operation.

49

Fig. 3.8 A variant of FMC of robot type - Core machine: TC(Type MULTIPLEX620, by courtesy of Yamazaki Mazak, 2012)

Fig. 3.9 FMC of pallet pool type for higher accuracy machining witheasy accessibility for operator
50

Fig. 3.10 FMC for gear manufacturing(by courtesy of Waldrich Coburg, 2013)
In many respects, we can benefit by installing the standardised FMC and its
variants to a large extent; however, we need, in certain cases, special
purpose-oriented FMC in consideration of the complexity in theform-generating movement in the machining function. For example, Fig.
3.10 is of pallet pool type for cutting the large-sized internal gear, which isthe component of the window power generator, and being on work at
Siemens (Waldrich Coburg-brand). More specifically, this FMC is consistsof 2 units of MCs of portal type, in which the cross-rail is of hydrostatic
guideway to absorb the impact-like load caused by gear cutting, and canconduct turning, drilling, milling and hobbing (Waldrich Coburg, 2013).
As can be easily imagined, we may produce various FMC-integrated FMS,
provided that we can pre-determine a group of FMCs with standardised
type, its variants and special-purpose type, i.e. a group of basic modules
with wide variety. In short, Starrag Group displays its product deployment
ranging from FMS for one-off production to that for a less variation and51

large volume production, and these FMSs are modular-designed, in which
the basic module is either MC or FMC.
In addition, Yamazaki Mazak demonstrates FMC-integrated FMS in its
product deployment by extremely placing the stress on the economic
benefit and step-wise skill improvement of the operator. In short, this FMS
can be specified as follows.
(1) The basic module consists of one unit of machine, one unit of palletpool allowable to contain 6 pallets, one unit of load/unload station.
(2) FMS is of line flow type and consists of up to 16 units of machines, one
unit of stacker crane, one unit of pallet pool allowable to contain 240
pallets in maximum, and 8 units of load/unload stations.
In the meanwhile, the motorcar industry is the utmost leading user for
flexible machining, and thus FTL has been widely employed, where thebasic module is a machine as a whole like MC of line type, i.e. FTL ofconventional type. In fact, FMC-integrated FTL was once employed, but
after then not so prevailed as will be discussed below.
Against this context, it is notable and remarkable that FMC for one-off
production is recently in fruition by contriving a new cell controller, but not
the machining function. Could be, this is one of the remedies to reinforce
the marketability of FMC. As widely known, FMC is very handy and easy
for practical use immediately after installation without any teething trouble,
resulting in a lucrative product for the machine tool manufacturer.
Okuma has supplied a standardised FMC of robot type shown in Fig. 3.11
to Sandvik Coromant at 2016 to machine the boring bar with both the“On-demand Manufacturing” and also “One-off Production”. The
machining function is cored by the mill-turn (Type: MULTUS U3000),
which is a synergy of TC and MC, and furthermore reinforced by the quick
tool changing, flexibility in tool layout and interchangeability of the collet
chuck. Within this cell, the robot loads and unloads the work, changes thecollet chuck and centre, and also serves the lower turret head and external
ATC for expanding the allowable capacity of the cutting tool. Importantly,
Table 3.3 delineates the functionalities of the cell controller, and within52them, the utmost characteristic feature is a function related to production
planning, which is in-house made by Sandvik Coromant (Okuma, 2017).

Fig. 3.11 FMC for “One-off Production”(by courtesy of Sandvik Coromant and Okuma, 2017)

Table 3.3 Outlines of cell controller in FMC for “One-off Production”
installed at Sandvik Coromant

53

More specifically, production planning can especially facilitate thegeneration of the NC programme and robot control information fromthree-dimensional model of the work. We used to manage such a function
by CIM, and Fig. 3.12 summarises the functionalities for FMC ofstandardised type shown in Fig. 3.5 (b). In general, the cell controller forthe standardised FMC can manage, for example, the following.

Fig. 3.12 Example of functionalities in cell controller for
FMC of pallet pool type(1) Surveillance for healthy condition of cell and cell components.
(2) Display of production control data.
(3) Long-distant consultancy and services.
(4) Generation of NC programme and machining simulation based on partdrawing.
(5) In certain cases, interactive functions with worker by handy display,e.g. indication for work preparation and remedies indication in
general.

54

Fig. 3.13 Functionalities of FMS controller in general concerns(by Uhlmann, 2008)(6) If necessary, integration of CAD/CAM with CNC by virtual machine.
This aims at the optimisation of the machining processes and also therealisation of paperless machining.
In contrast, CIM deals with, in general, such process scheduling, work
planning and optimisation of machining processes. For the sake of further
understanding, Fig. 3.13 reproduces the functionalities of FMS controller ingeneral concerns 4 , and as will be clear again, we necessitate thesimplification of the functionalities depending upon the machining
objectives and also in consideration of the division of work between CIM
and the controller for either FMS or FMC.
To this end, we may assert that FMC for the one-off production may be
converted into a CPS module in the smart factory proposed by the“Industrie 4.0” Project in various aspects as will be clear from the above.
4

Apart from the photograph, Fig. 3.13 is based on the handouts publicised on web by Professor
Uhlmann of Technische Universität Berlin under the title of Flexible Fertigungssysteme in 2008.

55

3.3.2 FTL and FMC-integrated FTLAs already shown in Fig. 2.11, we can observe various machining lines inpractice. Although TL and NC transfer line were once employed by theelectric motor and lock sewing machine industries in the past, the majoruser of TL was the motorcar industry. With the changing production
patterns, i.e. those from the “Less variation and Large Volume Production”
to the medium variation and medium volume production, the old-fashioned
FTL became the major machining facilities in the motorcar industry. At
present, we have a new horizon, i.e. “Considerable Variation and Various
Volume Production” in the motorcar industry, and thus we have contrived
FTL of new fashion like FML of Fritz Werner-brand. Simultaneously, we
have modernised the old-fashioned FTL to the conventional FTL byenhancing its machining capability in consideration of the current
machining requirements.
As a result, both the conventional and new-fashioned FTLs are in practicein the motorcar industry, and importantly such FTLs are gradually going to
be replaced by the “Transfer Centre” to respond to the “Much Variationand Less Volume Production”.
For example, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has shipped an FTL for cylinder
block machining to the USA in the 2000s, which is for the considerable
variation and various volume production, to respond to the recent
machining requirements of the motorcar industry (Konishi and Sugano,2005). In fact, this FTL is a synergy of FTL for rough machining and NC
transfer line for finish machining, which was later replaced by FTL for
finish machining (Fujimura et al, 2006).
In this context, it is notable that FTL for rough machining appears to be
newly fashioned by contriving MC and transportation equipment asfollows.
(1) The high productivity-oriented MC (Type M-CM4A), which is suitable
for rough and conventional machining by the dimensional andperformance specifications shown in Table 3.4, was duly developed tomachine the power train parts made of aluminum alloy and cast iron.

56

(2) FTL can manage five different part families by dividing its line into aconsiderable number of the GT cell-like entities, in which a couple ofMCs with the same specifications are installed. As a result, FTL has
certain redundancy when an MC is down, and thus can continue its due
work, although the machining capacity reduces to some extent.
(3) In addition, the high-speed gantry loader of overhead type canrandomly transfer the work to each MC across a whole entity, in orderto reinforce the redundancy in machining. Of note, the work is in thesequential flow and cannot take over the preceding work in theold-fashioned FTL.

Table 3.4 Dimensional and performance specifications of MC of highproductivity-oriented typeIn retrospect, primary concern in the motorcar industry was FTL consistingof MC of line type and one-direction flow of the work, i.e. old
fashioned-FTL, although FMC-integrated FTL was employed in part, forexample, that of Diedesheim-brand and installed within Opel (Zeh andFrank, 1984, see Fig. 4.7).

57

Fig. 3.14 Old fashioned-FTL and modular design in MC of line type:a FTL for machining cylinder head, cylinder block, mission case and so on(by courtesy of Toyama, 1990s). b Modules in MC of line type(Type NF1-H 1990, by courtesy of Fujikoshi)
Figure 3.14 reproduces the typical old-fashioned FTL together with MC ofline type, both of which are modular-designed. More specifically, this FTL
is for machining the cylinder block, cylinder head and so on, and consistsof the head changer, MC of line type and NC unit with turret head. As
shown together in Fig. 3.14, MC of line type can vary its structuralconfiguration by changing the combination of the basic modules, i.e. turrethead or ATC, output power of main motor and types of the rotary table,
while maintaining the main body and table base in constant. In short, sucha structural design aims only at variations in the machining space, one ofthe variants in the fundamental modular design of hierarchical type, i.e.
“Platform Type (MQB)”, and is recently being prevailed (Ito, 2017, see
Appendix of this volume).
Figure 3.15 shows the conventional FTL of Komatsu NTC-brand, and for58

Fig. 3.15 FTL for cylinder block machining(by courtesy of Komatsu NTC, 2017)
machining the parts of the power train and driving mechanism. In addition,
Figs. 3.16 (a) and (b) show MC of line type in the past and at present, andthere are, of course, the improvement in the performance specifications, but
no essential differences in form-generating movement between these MCs.
More specifically, MC of line type has been prevailed, and can becharacterised by its form-generating movement, which is definitely
concentrated to the column branch within a main body structure, i.e. thatconventionally called MC of column travelling type, as can be seen from
Fig. 3.14.
Because of a wide variety in the machining requirements, FTL has been
apparently diversified as already shown in Fig. 2.11; however, we need todetail further such a diversification depending upon the kind of themachine tool. From Fig. 2.11, there are, at least, three different
configurations in FTL, i.e. those facilitating by (1) MC of line type, (2)conventional MC for economisation, and (3) higher-cutting speed MC ofbox-in-box structure like the “Type Specht 500 of Hüller-Hille-Brand”(Schnier, et al, 1998).

59

Fig. 3.16 MC of line type (by courtesy of Enshu): a Structural configuretion - Type HMC40-LS, 1993. b Appearance, dimensional andperformance specifications of machine - Type GE40H, 2017
Meanwhile, Fig. 3.17 illustrates the structural configuration of MC with
“Box-in-Box” structure and also travelling column. In this case, the moving
60

components like the quill and spindle head are made of light alloy, anddriven by the linear motor, so that MC can realise the higher-speed
movement with stable condition. In addition, the saddle is light-weighted
structure by using the monocoque configuration.

Fig. 3.17 MC with “Box-in-Box” structure - Type Linear M of
Toyoda Iron Work-brand, 1990s
Of special note for understanding the marketing strategy of the machine
tool manufacturer to the motorcar industry, it is worth introducing the
product deployment of Fritz Werner in the 1990s. In fact, Fritz Wernersupplied FML, FMS and FMC by integrating the basic modules, whichrange from MCs of three types, i.e. (1) MC of line type, (2) MC oftwin-spindle type and (3) single-spindle MC with multiple-axis headchanging function, to the special-purpose machine, roller conveyor,
rail-guided AGV and gantry robot. Fig. 3.18 shows an FMC of twin type, inwhich MC of vertically allocated twin-spindle (spindle-over-spindle) typeis employed to allow heavy duty machining.

61Fig. 3.18 FMC of twin-type consisting of MC of twin-spindle type(by courtesy of Hammer of Fritz Werner, 1993)
As will be clear from Fig. 3.1, in general, FMC is suitable for muchvariation and small volume production; however, this FMC is for “Less
Variation and Large Volume Production”, and concretely saying, formachining the rocker arm of four kinds with 400 thousands parts per year
(cycle time: 1.2 ~ 1.8 min). Importantly, even FMC may convert its
applicable area by replacing the core machine, and in certain cases, such a
conversion is in fruition by contriving the software for the cell controller.

3.4 Fundamentals in Layout Design
We need now to establish a new layout design guide on the basis of thoseshown already in Fig. 3.2, Tables 3.1 and 3.2, and also in consideration of
the present and near future perspectives of flexible machining. For example,
FMC and FMC-integrated system have been in the leading position, and in
this context, we must again confirm the following determinants in the62layout design beforehand (see also Fig. A.4 in Appendix).
(1) Close tie among three leading attributes, i.e. “Cell Configuration(layout and cell components)”, “Machining Objectives” and“Machining Pattern”, and if possible, including furthermore“Allowable Cost and Delivery Time”.
(2) Although FMC and FMC-integrated system are now dominant to
respond to the machining patterns related to the “One-off Production”,“A Kind of Production” and “Much Variation and Less Volume
Production”, in certain cases we must be aware that the cellconfiguration should be compatible with the “Medium Variation andMedium Volume Production” and “Less Variation and Large Volume
Production” (see Fig. 3.1).
(3) Five fundamental functions for cell, and cell components facilitatingeach function. In short, FMC and FMS consist of machining,transportation, storage, maintenance, and also surveillance and control
functions as already, for example, shown in Fig. 2.5. Of these, thecontrol function is software-oriented, the lower hierarchy within CIM,
and can be facilitated by the cell controller. In fact, the hardware aspectof the controller is the transducer for in-process measurement of system
operating conditions, whereas at burning issue in software aspect is toestablish the cell model, so that the “Autonomous Function” will be infruition.
(4) “Division of Work in Machining Function” in consideration of thecorresponding kind in the machine tool, which can determine the cellconfiguration to large extent. For example, the machining function can
be classified into pre-machining, main-machining and post-machining,or rough machining and finish machining, although such a classification
has become obsolete according to the advent of the “Highly
Function-integrated Kinds” like the mill-turn.
(5) Flow pattern of the material within FMC, i.e., “Inner Material Flow”,
and also between FMCs, i.e. “Outer Material Flow”. More specifically,
we must differentiate and concert the inner and outer material flows in63

designing the transportation and warehouse functions, especially in the
FMC-integrated system. In this context, we must pay special attention
to it that the kind and type in the system component are dominant informing the system configuration extremely including the flow patternof the materials within the system.
(6) All the flexible machining systems should be, in principle, designed by
the modular method, in which either system component or FMC plays
the role of the basic module. By employing the modular design, we canprovide the flexible machining system with “Flexibility”,“Expandability”
and“Redundancy”.
Asliterally
shown,
FMC-integrated system is of modular design, in which FMC is thebasic module.

Fig. 3.19 Three representative patterns in material flow
In consideration of the fundamentals in the layout design mentioned above,
we will discuss the system component and concerns in detail in the
succeeding chapter. In short, a root cause of difficulties lies in to what
extent we must standardise the design guide for the system layout, and as64

reported elsewhere, at least, we must be aware of the material flow pattern,
and also of the essential features in the modular design.
Figure 3.19 illustrates three representative patterns and their variants in thematerial flow. In general, there are no rules regarding which of the threepatterns should be employed; however, the line type is often employed by
FTL, because the tact time is dominant design factor.
In the design, one of the primary concerns is to guarantee the “Flexibility inTransportation”, e.g. ease of leap-flog transportation, and such a flexibility
can be automatically facilitated when the basic module is FMC, because
FMC has its own internal transportation function. Against this context, wemust provide the sub-flow (branched flow) line, when the basic module isthe machine tool as a whole without buffer like APC (Automatic Pallet
Changer) as will be discussed in Section 4.2.

Fig. 3.20 Large-sized FMC with expandability and redundancy(by Cincinnati Milacron, 1990s)
65

Figure 3.20 shows a typical example of the modular design in FMS, inwhich the basic module is FMC, and the core machine in FMC is MC.
FMC itself can thus conduct various machining methods to some extent(Flexibility). As can be furthermore seen from Fig. 3.20, with the increaseof the order placement, we can reinforce the productivity by furthermore
installing another FMC (Expandability), and after installing two FMCs, we
can run the system even when one FMC is down (Redundancy).
Obviously, an FMC will enhance its variation in the machining methodmuch more by replacing MC with, for example, the mill-turn than our
expectation (Much Flexibility). In addition, we can provide FMC with theredundancy by employing MC of twin-spindle type, which plays a similarrole as FMC of twin-core machine type (see Fig. 3.18).

Table 3.5 Software of modular type for cell controller(by KTM of UK, in 1980s)
Against this context, we must discuss the corresponding modular system in66

the software. In retrospect, KTM of UK produced and merchandised thesoftware for FMC of modular type in the middle of 1980s, and thus todeepen the further understanding, Table 3.5 reproduces to what extent themodular design was applied. More specifically, the software of modular
type is applicable to the cell and its variants ranging from the stand-alone
machine, through machine with multiple pallets, to FMCs.
Obviously, with the advance of CIM and information communication
network, and also the emergence of cloud computing, at issue is the“Division of Work” between the central computer and cell controller. In
short, such issues result in (1) the re-consideration of the software ofmodular type and also (2) the further investigation into the necessary andinevitable functionalities of the cell controller in very near future by taking
into consideration the segmental knowledge about the cell controller ingeneral (see Figs. 3.12 and 3.13) and those for one-off production” (seeTable 3.3).
The essential features of the cell controller are the unmanned
administration, diagnosis and reporting, and as widely known, the basic
necessity is to grasp correctly the healthy condition of and on-goingprocesses within the cell without the intervention of the worker. Thus, aroot cause of difficulties lies in the enhancement of the in-process
measurement including the signal transmission and processing.
Figure 3.21 illustrates nearly all physical and chemical properties in thesystem component and cell, and as can be seen, we must detect a huge
number of information regarding (1) shape, size and surface quality of thework being machined, (2) setting accuracies of the work, and also of
cutting and grinding tools, (3) wear and breakage condition of the cutting
and grinding tools, (4) temperature and vibration in machineattachment-tool-work system, (5) cutting and grinding forces and (6)healthy condition of cell and its components while machining the work 5.
5

The in-process measurement belongs one of the big professional realms in the production, and thus
please refer to some suitable books, when facing something necessary to know it in detail.

67

Fig. 3.21 Various objectives and sensors for in-process measurement whilemachining (machine photograph: by courtesy of Index)

Table 3. 6 Determinants for investment calculation in FMS(by Uhlmann, 2008) 6
To this end, it is worth suggesting that we must consider the economic
6

Table 3.6 is reproduced from the handouts publicised on web by Professor Uhlmann of Technische
Universität Berlin under the title of Flexible Fertigungssysteme in 2008.

68

aspects, e.g. installation and renewal costs of FMS, and economic benefits
in consideration of system flexibility, in the layout design to a large extent.
For example, Uhlmann suggested a qualitative guide for evaluating the
economic effects of FMS as shown in Table 3.6. In short, he asserted thatthe return of investment can be determined by the three leading factors, i.e.
(1) cost reduction derived from the rationalisation, (2) benefits obtainablefrom the increase of sales and production volumes, and (3) cost reduction
derived from the compatibility with new manufacturing requirements.
Admitting the importance of the economic evaluation of FMS and concerns,
we must recognise the poor activities in the academic research into andengineering development for the evaluation method applicable to practice.
In fact, we can find very few achievements in the economic evaluation of
the modular design for the machine tool and quantitative evaluation in thesystem flexibility, which give some clues, but are far from the completion(see Chapter 6). Of note, Kersten et al (2009) proposed an idea forevaluating the economic benefits of the modular design on the strength of“Costs-by-Cause” concept. In fact, they tried to estimate the direct costs forinventory and quality controls, and also indirect costs with special respect
to engineering, product variety, delivery time and so on. As can be readily
imagined, their proposal is far from completion, but very interesting.
Actually, against the common sense that the mill-turn with milling head issuperior to other types, Traub asserts the outstanding economisation of amill-turn without milling head, which is produced on the basis of theplatform, and facilitated with the multiple turret heads of the same
specifications for the machining space.
Importantly, Ito et al (1985) proposed an idea of the “Flexibility Evaluation
Vector”, which is a space vector and can represent the “System Flexibility”
and “Characteristic Feature of System Configuration” by the “Absolute
Value (Magnitude of Vector)” and “Directional Cosine”, respectively (seeChapter 6 of this volume).

693.5 Future Perspectives for Flexible Machining Systems
In consideration of the present perspective, there is two-pronged way in thedeveloping direction of FMC in very near future, i.e. standardised andspecial-purpose FMCs. Importantly, the machining function in thestandardised FMC should be much more enhanced by thefunction-integrated kinds than ever before, so that FMC is of compactly
cubic for the rationalisation of the cell layout and also for the ease ofhandling in operation. In due course, the large-sized FMC and
FMC-integrated system will accelerate the modular design concept byusing such FMCs. In addition, it is worth suggesting that FMC withfunction-integrated kinds in the machine tool may be suitable for the CPS
module in the smart factory, because of its “One-machine Shop”-like
configuration and functionality, by which we may expect a better
connectivity with the information communication network and cloudcomputing through fog computing, i.e. advanced cell controller.

Fig. 3.22 A classification of “Function-integrated Kinds” in 2010sFigure 3.22 summarises the present perspectives of the “Function-integrat70

ed Kinds”, which can be classified into two types, i.e. “Highly Machining
Function-integrated” and “System Function-integrated” types. Of these,
the former is at facing issue, and in retrospect, TC and MC is the first stageof the integration of the machining function. As widely known, themill-turn, which is a synergy of TC and MC, has gradually prevailed, andin addition, TC and MC reinforce their machining variation byincorporating the grinding, laser processing, ultrasonic machining, gear

Fig. 3.23 Machining spaces in mill-turn - Directing quickly
to “One-machine Shop” (R Series, by courtesy of Index, 2016)
cutting and additive processing, i.e. 3D printing. Fig. 3.23 shows TC oftwin-spindle type of Index-brand, which is with grinding and gear cutting
functions, resulting in high integration of the machining methods. In thiscontext, we must mind that the horizontal boring and milling machine
becomes obsolete, although it has the wider flexibility in machining by
nature.
From the viewpoint of the suitability for FMC in very near future, it isrecommendable to establish a kind, which is a synergy of the highly71machining function-integrated and system function-integrated types. As canbe seen from Fig. 3.22, however, the latter is far from completion apartfrom the “Transfer Centre” as will be discussed later.

Fig. 3.24 System-function integrated MC of twin-spindle type(Type AUTOMAX I, by courtesy of MPM Co.)Of course, we tried to develop such a system function-integrated type asshown in Fig. 3.24, which was produced by MPM (Marwin Precision
Machine) and installed within the Preston Factory of British Aerospace. As
can be seen, all the five fundamental functions for an FMC are facilitatedwithin a whole machine-like space, although MC is kernel of themachining function, and it is notable that the main spindle has a function of
the in-process measurement for the tool damage by integrating thepiezo-electric transducer at the spindle nose (Ito, 2008) 7. It is however
regrettable that such a machine was not accepted by the user since then,7

Tsugami merchandised the system function–integrated type (Type MA) in 1982.

72

because it is not so economised. Instead of the system function-integrated
type, TC of twin-spindle type is prevailing, because it can carry out thehand-off work.
Now let us discuss the present perspectives of the “Transfer Centre” inconsideration of its origin in TL as mentioned beforehand. In short, there
are the three types depending upon the original types in TL, i.e. thoseoriginating from (1) the head changer within TL of line flow, (2)special-purpose machine of wing type and (3) rotary indexing machine(dial machine). In certain cases, these transfer centres maintain their
original appearances, and importantly they are applicable to the “Much
Variation and Small Volume Production” being on progress in the motorcar
industry.

Fig. 3.25 Transfer centre and its machining space(by courtesy of ANGER)
Figure 3.25 shows the utmost representative transfer centre of
ANGER-brand, which can be characterised by its work spindle capable oftravelling within the 3-dimensional machining space, and which is of73system function-integrated type with limited integration of the machining
function. More specifically, the form-generating movement can be carriedout by the combination of the work spindle and a considerable number ofthe cutting tools with various kinds and types, i.e. those mounted on turret
head, tool cassette, single-spindle head and multiple-axis spindle head,
which are placed around the work spindle.
It is furthermore worth suggesting that the transfer centre of ANGER-brandhas machining capacity equivalent to that carried out by MCs of 2 ~ 5 units.
Actually, this transfer centre may replace, for example, FTL shown in Fig.
3.26, which was designed in full consideration of the compatibility with
Chinese market.

Fig. 3.26 FTL for machining parts of diesel engine(Burkhardt + Weber, around 2010)
In fact, this FTL consists of (1) 5 units of horizontal MCs of heavy duty
type (main spindle speed in maximum: 10,000 rev/min, main motor: 37
kW) and (2) one unit of MC with swivelling head type, and in due course,
is capable of machining the cylinder block and cylinder head equivalent to74

6,000 units of the diesel engine per year. For the sake of further
understanding, the machining scenery of the cylinder block is also shownin Fig. 3.26 (Burkhardt + Weber, 2011).

Fig. 3.27 FMC of head changer type for machining differential gear box(by Burkhard + Weber, 1970s)
Although the appearance of the transfer centre of ANGER-brand differsfrom the head changer, we may assert that this transfer centre is originatedfrom the head changer as shown in Fig. 3.27, and also MC of headindexing type (see Chapter 4). Admitting that the work is mounted on thetable in stationary condition and the head with cutting tool is transferred inaccordance with the machining requirement in the head changer shown in
Fig. 3.27, the transfer centre is designed by the similar principle used in thehead changer. In contrast, we must be aware that the head changer is not
cubic configuration, and applicable only to the less variation and large
volume production.
In retrospect, we used to design the cell configuration in flat type as
exemplified by the head changer shown in Fig. 3.27; however, to use thefactory floor more efficiently than ever before and to reduce the tax for
fixed assets, the cubic type becomes very popular now as exemplified by75

the transfer centre. Of note, in the flat and cubic types, all the systemcomponents are allocated on the two-dimensional space and within
three-dimensional space, respectively. Obviously, the flat type is obsolete
now and the cubic type is very common, although having not been stated in
the design guide of FMC.
Figure 3.28 shows the transfer centre of Precitrame Machines-brand(Commercial name: CNC Rotary Transfer Machine) together with therotary indexing machine in the 1960s. As can be seen, this transfer centre
has the very similar appearance in the past, whereas it has modernised thecapability of the machining function by the modular unit, e.g. those formilling, turning, drilling, tapping and grinding, and in certain cases,
capable of integrating the small-size assembly robot. This transfer centre isthus a synergy of the system function-integrated and processing (machining
and assembly) function-integrated types.

Fig. 3.28 Transfer centre based on traditional rotary indexing machine
In addition to these, Fig. 3.29 shows another special type, which isoriginated from the rotary indexing TL of wing type, and the system
function-integrated type with limited integration of the machining function.

76

In fact, this transfer centre has been merchandised by Icon (Commercial
name: Multiple-station MC, Type Icon 6-250), and more specifically,
appears to be compactly integrated MCs of 4 units. In addition, each MC
plays the role of each machining station, where simultaneous five-faceprocessing is capable. In addition it is very interesting that the machining
station is quick-changeable modular design and expandable up to eight
3-axis controlled machining units (Swiss Quality Production, 2011).

Fig. 3.29 Transfer centre based on traditional TL of wing type
To this end, Fig. 3.30 reproduces a valuable forerunning trial for thetransfer centre of Tönshoff-brand, which is a variant of TL of rotaryindexing type called “Trunnion Type”. As can be seen from Fig. 3.29, it
implies that FMC consisting of the trunnion type is one of the forebears ofthat of Icon-brand. More specifically, this FMC can facilitate two- or77three-direction machining by indexing the drum at every 4, 5 or 6 stations,and is capable of multiple-point cutting, multiple-axis machining, threading,grooving, facing, milling and so on.

Fig. 3.30 FMC based on “Trunnion Type” of Tönshoff-brand- A variant in TL of rotary indexing type, 1984

References
Burkhardt + Weber (2011) Projektreport - Flexible Fertigungssyteme.
FMS Magazine (1983) US Aerospace’s Factory of the Future; 1-5:
303-304.
Fujimura N et al (2006) Realization of the Ultra Flexible ManufacturingLine with the Finishing Machining Center for Cylinder Blocks. Technical
Reports of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries; 43-3: 48-53.
Ito Y Ohmi T Shima Y (1985) An Evaluation Method of Flexible
Manufacturing System - A Concept of Flexibility Evaluation Vector and Its
Application. In: Proc. of 25th Inter. MTDR Conf., p. 89-95, MacMillan.
Ito Y (2008) Modular Design for Machine Tools. McGraw-Hill, p. 88-101.
Ito Y (2017) Chapter 7 Concept of “Platform”, Its Application andModular Tooling System. In: Ito Y, Matsumura T (eds) Theory and Practicein Machining Systems. Springer Nature.
Kersten W, et al. (2009) Kostenorientierte Analyse der Modularisierung.
78

ZwF; 104-12: 1136-1141.
Konishi M Sugano T (2005) Flexible Manufacturing System for Agile
Production. Technical Reports of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries; 42-2: 68-71.
MITI of Japan, SME Promotion Cor. (1983) Introductory Guide for FMC.
Nikkan Kougyo Newspaper Publishing Co.
Okuma Europe GmbH (February 2017) Press Release.
Schnier M et al (1998) Magnesium HSC-processing. European Production
Engineering; 28: 14-17.
Swiss Quality Production (2011) Series production yes, but flexible please:12-13.
Waldrich Coburg (September 2013) Flexible manufacturing system forinternal gearing. News, p. 3.
Weck M (1974) Rechnerunterstützter Entwurf und Maßnahmen zur
Ausführung flexibler Fertigungssysteme. Industrie-Anzeiger; 96-74:
1683-1689.
Zeh K-P Frank H E (1984) Simulationsgestützte Planung einer flexiblen
Fertigungsanlage. tz für Metallbearbeitung; 78-5: 11-17.

79

Abstract In the system design, there are two ways, i.e. top-down andbottom-up methods. In general, we used to design the system by thebottom-up method, in which we can purchase widely the systemcomponents necessary from the market through the supply chain, and weare capable of integrating them into a system or cell in accordance with thedesign specifications. In the very rare case, we design the system in a
top-down manner, although we need to develop some new systemcomponents, if necessary.
Importantly, in both methods, primary concern is the modular design, andthus this chapter describes the system components generally available forflexible machining in consideration of the determinants for the system
configuration and layout. In this context, the chapter places the stress on
the system components for machining, transportation and storage, and forease of understanding delineates their classifications in the form offirst-hand view, and gives a quick note for each component. In addition, thesystem component for main machining is explicated in detail considering
its present and near future perspective, and it is notable that the chapter
clarifies to what extent FMC, FMS and FTL can be characterised by thesystem component for main machining together with pre- andpost-machining.

4.1 System and Cell Components for Machining
In the 1990s and before, the main machining procedure in FMCs and FMSs
was facilitated with CNC turning machine, TC, MC and their variants. In
contrast, the pre- and post-machining procedures were facilitated with suchmachines like traditional NC sawing machine and NC milling machine to80

process the raw material, and also with the special-purpose kinds like thetraditional NC fine boring machine and NC grinding machine, respectively.
Importantly, FTL has been positioned differently in part from FMC and
FMS, and often consist of MC of line type, head changer, special-purpose
NC unit and so on.
As reported elsewhere, NC machine tools have launched out to a newhorizon with the advent of the mill-turn, which is a synergy of TC and MC,in the 2000 and beyond. Fig. 4.1 shows a classification of machine tools ingeneral around 2010, and we can observe several interesting trends asfollows:

Fig. 4.1 Machine tool classification by structural configuration in 2010s(1) Following TC and MC, the grinding machine and gear production
machine families have directed into the integration to establish GC(Grinding Centre) and the “Gear Production Centre”.
(2) TC and MC have been reinforced their form-generating function by
further auxiliary processing functions such as grinding, ultrasonicmachining, gear cutting, laser processing and additive processing (see81Fig. 3.22).
(3) As exemplified by the mill-turn of advanced type shown in Fig. 3. 23,
we have accelerated the development of the “Function-integrated
Kind”, and raise duly a fruitful result in the transfer centre as alreadymentioned in Section 3.4.
Importantly, these innovation and contrivance result in the density
integration of various machining methods and system functions within akind as a whole, and render the division of work in machining procedures
useless, because a machine may behave like a town factory, i.e.
“One-machine Shop”. In due course, we must expect considerable changes
in the system and cell configuration in flexible machining. For example,
there are no necessities, at least, to consider the post-machining procedure,
because we may expect to incorporate it within the main machining
procedure hereafter.
As will be clear from the above, we must be always aware of the present
and near future perspectives in the machine tool technology and objective
requirements of flexible machining, which are often a trigger to contrive a
new kind. In this context, the motorcar and aeroplane industries are thegreatest users in the massive consumption and in the demand with thehighest machining accuracy, respectively.
It is thus necessary to conduct the predictive research into the future
perspective of the needs of the machine tool especially in both the motorcar
and the aeroplane industries. Actually, we can have an interesting report ofthe interview investigation conducted by JMTBA (Japan Machine Tool
Builders’ Association) in June 2005. The report described the following
future perspectives in the motorcar industry, especially placing the mainstress on the machine tool and manufacturing system.
(1) A remarkable changing trend is the shortening of the product life,
resulting in the reduction of production volume per each car type. For
example, the engine manufacturing line capable of machining 20,000 units
per year should be changed to that for 5,000 units per year.
(2) It is desirable that the manufacturing line can cope with the “Shorter

82

Installation Time”, “Higher Flexibility”, “Maintenance-free” and “Ease of
Operation (Higher operability)”.
(3) Major requirements for the machine tool are the ”Ease of swarf disposal”
and “Compact type”.
Table 4.1 shows furthermore a report publicised by MANTYS in 2003,
where the future perspective in general concern is stated together withclarifying the driving force 1.

Table 4.1 Prediction for changes in machine tools (by MANTYS, 2003)
In the following, thus, we will discuss the kind of machine tool, which is,in principle, available for the main machining procedure in the standardised
FMC, special-purpose FMC and FTL. In this context, we can choose someleading kinds from Fig. 4.1, which are suitable for flexible machining as
shown in Fig. 4.2. In due course, an extremely new horizon is to employ
1 MANTYS is the abbreviation of the Project Name, “Thematic Network on Manufacturing
Technologies”, which has been supported by the European Commission Growth Programme andlaunched out at September, 2001.

83

the “Function-integrated Kinds” such as “Transfer Centre” and mill-turn,which can be regarded as a “Dexterous Machine”. Paraphrasing, FMC canbe gradually facilitated by the function-integrated kinds, resulting in a“One-machine Shop” (see Section 3.4) 2.

Fig. 4.2 Kinds of machine tools facilitating machining function
in FMC and FTL
In addition, it is desirable to extend our discussion to the “Linkage
Diagramme within Machining Space” as suggested elsewhere, if possible,
not remaining within the territories of the core machine and cellconfiguration. This is because “the more versatile an integration ofmachining methods, the more difficult is its application”. Paraphrasing,with the further advance of the function-integrated kinds, we need toactively apply the grass root-like knowledge about the factory floor, and2

Regarding the future perspective, refer to Section 3.4. In this chapter, the fundamental knowledge will
be stated in details.

84one of the remedies is the linkage diagramme within machining space. Fig.
4.3 reproduces thus an example in the case of drilling (Ito and Matsumura,2017).

Fig. 4.3 Linkage diagramme ranging from machining method to structuralconfiguration entities - Drilling

4.1.1 Kinds of Machine Tools for Standardised FMC

In general, the machining function in the standardised FMC consists of NC
turning machine, TC, or MC as already mentioned in Chapter 3. With
increasing much more variety in the machining requirements than everbefore, advanced TC and MC, e.g. MCs with auxiliary function as shown at
the top-right in Fig. 3.22, become primary concern. In certain case, it isvery interesting that the standardised FMC consists of the mill-turn, which
is applicable to FMC for “One-off Production” as already mentioned in
Chapter 3. The mill-turn is a synergy of MC and TC, and thus very
convenient for the core machine of FMC, although it is expensive.

85

Fig. 4.4 Quinaxial-controlled MC with grinding function - Type RXP 500(by courtesy of Röders, 2013)

Table 4.2 Dimensional and performance specifications of MC(Type RXP 500DS of Röders-brand)
Figure 4.4 is an exemplification of the quinaxial-controlled MC withgrinding function, which is of Röders-brand (Type RXP 500) and capable86

of finishing, for example, the die for the artificial teeth as shown together
in Fig. 4.4. Table 4.2 shows its dimensional and performance specifications
to deepen the related knowledge.
As can be readily seen from Fig. 3.1, the quinaxial-controlled MC isapplicable to the core of FMC for the “A Kind of Production”. In short,
FMC with quinaxial-controlled MC is very attractive to the motorcar
industry to enhance the market competitiveness of its product, and also to
produce the component for the prototype in very near future. Importantly,
we have now two-pronged representative quinaxial-controlled MCs. One isof trunnion type, in which the work is mounted on the rotary tablesupported by the trunnion, and the other is of tilting head type, which cangive A- and C-axes movements by the main spindle. As can be easily
imagined, either the work or the main spindle can position much more var-

Fig. 4.5 A typical configuration of “Mill-Turn” - Type MULTUS B300
(by courtesy of Okuma, 2004)
ious postures than those in 3-axis controlled MC. We can thus handle thework with much more complex shape such as an aeroplane component ascompared with the motorcar component.
87

Figure 4.5 shows a mill-turn, and as will be clear from Fig. 4.4, thismill-turn can be characterised by the milling head of tilting type, although
there are various mill-turns without the milling head, but with aconsiderable number of the turret heads only.
Conceptually, the quinaxial-controlled MC may be converted into themill-turn by providing the table with continuous rotating function. For
example, MC can machine the work as like as the vertical turning machine
when the main spindle is in still stand and the table rotates continuously. Of
course, we can produce the mill-turn on the basis of TC without any
difficulties. In fact, TC may machine the work by using the milling cutter
when the turret contains the driving mechanism of the tool shank.

Fig. 4.6 Integration of milling function to vertical TC(Type TMC, around 2005, by courtesy of Toshiba Machine Mfg.)
In principle, we can have higher probability to produce the mill-turn on thebasis of TC than the quinaxial-controlled MC. A similar integration of themachining method is available for the vertical turning machine as shown in
Fig. 4.6, which is capable of milling by the driving mechanism integrated
88

within the ram. Of note, the vertical turning machine plays a core role in
FMC for machining the engine component of the aeroplane.
In very near future, we can expect the enhancement of FMC by employing
the highly function-integrated kinds, which are being in trial or in partly
practice as already shown in Fig. 3.22. In fact, we have now two kinds: one
aims at the integration of various machining methods within a machine tool
as a whole, and the other tries such an integration for the system functions.
The former and the latter can be called “Machining Function-integrated
Kind” and “System Function-integrated Kind”, respectively, and as
exemplified by the transfer centre, the latter becomes practical use in partin the motorcar industry.

4.1.2 Kinds of Machine Tools for FTLAs already shown in Figs. 2.11 and 2.12, the motorcar industry has
employed in part NC TL even in 2010 and beyond, and thus we must
consider the kinds of the machine tool ranging from NC special-purpose
machine tool, through MC of line type and standardised MC, to headchanger and transfer centre, when designing FTL.
Within FTL context, MC of line type has been and is the core of machining
as shown in Figs. 3. 14, 3.15 and 3.26, because of its less width along thetransfer line, resulting in the reduction of tact time. Obviously, we need to
install a few machining units or cells to conduct finish machining, i.e.
post-machining, like the fine boring machine as exemplified those of
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries-brand (see Chapter 3). To deepen theunderstanding, Fig.3.16 showed already the time series-like changes of MC
of line type together with the dimensional and performance specificationsat present.
Supposedly, FTL of line type has a shortage in the flexibility fortransportation when connecting MC of line type by using the conveyor,
because such a device cannot do leap-flog-like transportation. In the current
FTL, thus, we employ often the shuttle car, travelling robot and gantry
crane of overhead type to enhance the flexibility for transportation to some89extent.
Of special notes, FTL is the utmost leading manufacturing facility for the
motorcar industry at present, and thus we can estimate the production
capability of the enterprise when we will be able to obtain the details of
FTL. Obviously, the dimensional and performance specifications of FTL
are, in general, company’s confidentiality. For example, we cannot obtain
the details of those shown in Figs. 3.15 and 3.26; however, it appears thatthe head changer and MC of head indexing type render useless with theadvance of the MC of line type especially in the tool layout and tools
available. Could be, MC of line type is being provided with the toolcassette, which plays similar role as a head changer.
Within this context, we may expect a new horizon in FMC-integrated FTL
by replacing FMC with the transfer centre. Concretely saying, aninnovative FTL is to be in reality by connecting a group of the transfer
centres with the outer transportation line together with reinforcing theflexibility for machining.

Fig. 4.7 Basic module for FMC-integrated FTL (Diedesheim-brand, 1980s)
In retrospect, Opel once employed the FMC-integrated FTL of
Diedesheim-brand, which was with the branched transportation line, and in90

which FMC consisted of a variant of head changer and work stocker. As aresult, this FTL guarantees great flexibilities in machining, transportationand storage, and thus is highly esteemed, whereas it needs wider
installation space and is very costly. Fig. 4.7 reproduces the structuralconfiguration of FMC, i.e. basic module, and as can be seen, the core of
FMC is a synergy of head changer and head indexing unit, which is called“Variocenter” and can be characterised as follows.
(1) The turret head, i.e. tool cassette carrier, is of either hexagon or octagon,of quick changing type and should be mounted all the tools, which can,in principle, facilitate all the machining requirements for an objectivework.
(2) The tool cassette carrier and work are transported by the overhead
travelling crane and AGV travelling on the floor, respectively.
In short, “Variocenter” is of compact sub-module with versatile machining
functions and capabilities, and flexible accessibility to the outertransportation system, resulting in high compatibility with FMC-integrated
FMS.
Although reducing the necessity of the head changer and MC of headindexing type, in certain cases we need the head changer of advanced type
like the transfer centre. Fig. 4.8 (a) shows such an advanced head changer,
which is, in principle, of 4 indexing-turret head type, and also compactly
cubic type. As can be seen from Fig. 4.8 (a), this head changer can becharacterised by the following.
(1) The machining capacity is equal to that carried out by 3 ~ 4 units of
conventional MC, and can be reinforced by installing furthermore thehead magazine at the column top. In contrast, the versatility for themachining objective is limited within the narrower scope like thefamily of transmission.
(2) The “Swarf-to-Swarf” time is 4.5 sec., even though the spindle head ismade of Al alloy and 300 kg in maximum weight together with tooling.

91

92

Fig. 4.8 An advanced head changer and its variants: a Basic configurationof compactly cubic type. b FMC of T type-like machine allocation.
c Deployment to fine boring machine (by courtesy of Sakurai, 2017)(3) At the machining space, the spindle head can be connected to thepower unit with the simple rotational indexing and travelling
movements.
(4) Wide expandability to variants ranging from FMC to the fine boringmachine for post-machining.
For example, Fig. 4.8 (b) shows an FMC, in which three head changers areof T-like allocation around APC (Automatic Pallet Changer), and which has
the machining capacity equivalent to that carried out by 10 units of theconventional MC. Obviously, we can produce a compact FTL, where thisFMC is of basic module. In addition, Fig. 4.8 (c) shows a fine boringmachine for post-machining, and as will be clear, the machine can becharacterised by facilitating the sister head together with maintaining thehigher machining accuracy.
Importantly, Fig. 4.9 shows furthermore MC of gantry type, which is of
Nicolás Correa-brand (Type FOX), and which is with head changing
mechanism and temperature control function. The head changer is very
similar to that employed in the planomiller in the past. Although being not93

so popular, we need FMC cored by MC of gantry type for the large-sized,
heavy and unwieldy work to some extent.

Fig. 4.9 MC of gantry type with head changer (by Nicolás Correa, 2017)

4.1.3 Kinds of Machine
Special-purpose Machining

Tools

for

Pre-machining

andAdmitting that TC and MC may cover, in nearly all the cases, the necessary
post-machining procedure, we need still some kinds for pre-machining.
This is because the work should be pre-machined the reference and location
faces and concerns in order to its secure-handed fixing with allowablelocating accuracy. In addition, we must cut the raw material inconsideration of the material efficiency. In this context, we may use two
remedies: one is to convert second-handed MC into such machining, andthe other is to employ, for example, the utmost advanced milling machineand sawing machine.
Importantly, it is desirable to employ the utmost advanced kind even in
pre-machining with the increasing importance of flexible machining withthe higher accuracy and heavy-duty cutting. Obviously, such a performanceof flexible machining depends extremely upon the finishing quality of thereference and locating faces, which results in the higher positioning
accuracy and sure-handed clamping rigidity of the work. Of special note,94we must furthermore be aware of what is pre-processing for the raw
material of the work as well as pre-machining of the work.
In pre-machining, it is, more or less, preferable to carry out the heavy-duty
cutting in the cases of cast and forged raw materials, and in general, we
employ the milling machine of bed type such as shown in Fig. 4.10, which
is of Jiuh-Yeh Precision Machinery-brand, and can be characterised asfollows.

Fig. 4.10 Milling machine of bed type available for pre-machining to
produce references for work positioning and clamping(1) Main spindle of plural type, i.e. combination of vertical and horizontal
spindles.
(2) Main body structure and main spindle are made of Meehanite cast ironand Cr-Mo steel, respectively.
(3) Slideways are Turcite-coated.
(4) Ease of conversion from manual into CNC operation.

95

Fig. 4.11 Typical sawing machines (by courtesy of Amada Holdings, 2017)

Fig. 4.12 Rotary chamfering and deburring - Type ZEA, Hurth-brand, 1999
As can be seen from the above, the milling machine shown in Fig. 4.10

96

appears as to be over-performance from the traditional viewpoint for
pre-machining in FMS and concerns; however, it is nowadays mandatory toemploy such a machine.
In accordance with the same idea mentioned above, Fig. 4.11 shows theadvanced sawing machine, which can be classified into two types
depending upon the saw configuration, i.e. either circular saw or band saw.
Of course, we can benefit considerably by facilitating CNC resulting in theconsiderable improvement of the material efficiency.
To this end, Fig. 4.12 shows the gear chamfering and deburring machine. In
FMC for gear production, such a procedure is not involved in the cellconfiguration, and regarded, in general, as post-machining as well as gearlapping.

4.2 System and Cell Components for Transportation
Figure 4.13 is a classification of the transportation machines and devices,and these should be divided into those for short-range and long-range
transportation (see Figs. 3.5, 3.9, 3.14, 3.18 and 3.30). In this context, wemust be aware that the gantry robot (gantry loader) is often used for the
long-range transportation, and that AGV (Automated Guided Vehicle) of
floor travelling type is non-railed in certain cases.
Obviously, the long-range transportation is at issue in designing FMS and
FTL. As mentioned elsewhere, these systems are, in general, of modular
configuration by using FMC as a basic module, and thus each FMC should
be interconnected with others by using the facility for long-range
transportation, for example, the conveyor, gantry loader and AGV.
In this context, it is crucial to decide which facility shall be employed inconsideration of the “Flexibility in Transportation” without any
sub-transfer lines (see Fig. 4.7). Needles to say, the gantry loader issuperior to the roller conveyor, although the transportation flexibility inboth the facilities is limited, and thus Figs. 4.14 (a) and (b) show these two
facilities to ease further understanding.

97Fig. 4.13 Classification for transportation machines and devices

Fig. 4.14 Long-range transportation in FMS: a Roller conveyor type.
b Gantry loader type (by courtesy of Howa Machinery)
In due course, the more growing importance of FMC, the more necessity is
to contrive the facility for the short-range transportation, i.e. internaltransportation device within cell. As can be readily seen, the robot is a
representative for such a transportation machine since the first phasedevelopment of flexible manufacturing in the late 1970. After then, the98vertical articulated platform conveyor and elevating conveyor have become
popular with the growing importance of the compact and cubic-like FMC.
It is furthermore very interesting that the twin-spindle, main spindle oftravelling type and ATC can facilitate the internal transportation device
with the advance of the structural design of the core machine tools
especially in the case of TC (see Fig. 3.23). In TC of twin-spindle type, thesecond main spindle has a function of longitudinal travelling and thus iscapable of carrying out the “Hand-off Operation”. In fact, the work can be
first held by the first main spindle, and then grasped by the second main
spindle, if necessary, while machining the work.

Table 4.3 Comparison of characteristic features between gantry loader
and industrial robot (by Wollnack, 2008)
It is worth suggesting that we must arrange some valuable data to conduct
the rational decision in the transportation design. For example, Table 4.3
shows a comparison for characteristic features between the gantry loader

99and the industrial robot 3.
For the sake of further understanding, the robot and AGV will be quickly
noted in the following.

4.2.1 Robots

Figure 4.15 illustrates again a large-sized FMC, which consists of therobot-centred cell, TC with integrated handling robot (see Fig. 2.5),
long-range transportation system (roller conveyor and shuttle car) andbuffer station. In the robot-centred cell, the robot of polar co-ordinate type
is for the internal transportation among the buffer station and two NC
turning machines.

Fig. 4.15 Large-sized FMC and roles of robots
As will be clear from the above, there are various types of robots, e.g.
3

Table 4.3 is produced from the handouts publicised on web by Dr. Wollnack of Technische Universität
Hamburg-Harburg under the title of “ Flexible Fertigungssysteme ” in 2008.

100

Cartesian, cylindrical, polar and multiple-articulated types. In addition,these can be classified into the stationary, linear travelling, polar moving
and so on. Paraphrasing, the robots of linear travelling, integrated within
TC (see Fig. 3.6) and independent allocation types are very popular in
FMC. In the travelling type, for example, the robot is allocated on the floor
including the gantry type (see Fig. 3.18), and also on the overhead of themachine (see Figs. 2.1, 3.8 and 3.9). In the independent allocation type, therobot is allocated at the centre of the cell, front or rear of the machine (seeFigs. 3.5 and 3.6).
Having in mind the versatility for the robot application in FMS andconcerns, it is worth suggesting that the travelling robot is, in general, forthe short-range transportation. In contrast, Fig. 4.16 shows a travelling
robot for relatively long-range transportation, i.e. in fact that for FMS.

Fig. 4.16 Relatively long-range travelling robot for FMS(by courtesy of Howa Machinery)1014.2.2 AGV

With the narrower scope, AGV (Automated Guided Vehicle) is not ofrail-guided type, but of non-railed type in the most cases (see Figs. 3.3 and3.20), although we need often the guide path in AGV of non-railed type.
AGV can be classified on the basis of various attributes such as (1) guiding
principle, (2) steering system of wheel, and (3) transfer method of mounted
materials. As a result, we have a wide allowance in choosing AGV systemdepending upon the transportation specifications.
Figure 4.17 shows two classification systems based on the guiding
principle and transfer method of mounted materials. In addition, Fig. 4.18
reproduces an AGV in the past together with showing the automatic
messenger system with electric car for cutting tool transfer and L/UL
(Load/Unload) station as a temporary work stocker. As can be seen, AGV
itself has not changed so much as compared with those of today, which will
be shown later.

Fig. 4.17 Two examples of classification system for AGV: a Guiding
methods. b Material transfer equipment
In general, AGV consists of (1) travelling system, (2) onboard controller,102

(3) battery, (4) safety measures, (5) transfer equipment and (6) finepositioning function. Of these, the safety measures are very importantbecause AGV is used often with the intermediation of the system operator.
Within AGV context, at issue is the communication device with the AGV
traffic controller, and in general we use the optical, inductive radio andradio type. The information to be communicated are, at least, (1) therequirements for material transportation, (2) blocking control and (3)malfunction states.

Fig. 4.18 AGV travelling factory floor(by Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm, 1985)

Fig. 4.19 Two representative AGVs
(by courtesy of Murata Machinery, 2010)103

Figure 4.19 shows a basic structural unit of the representative AGV in the
2000s, and this is of magnetic guiding method, with 60 m/min in maximum
speed while travelling linear guide path, and can positioned within ±10 mm.
In addition, AGV can travel to forward, reverse and lateral directions, andalso spin-turn. As can be readily seen, we can produce various AGV by
mounting the different material transfer unit, such as robot, lifting androller conveyor types.

4.3 System and Cell Components for Storage
We can actualise the storage function in FMS and concerns by using
various equipment and devices, e.g. station and stand, and also warehouse,
and thus the unified classification of such facilities is not easy. Importantly,
in the case of the storage facilities, we must consider the system size, e.g.
either large-sized FMS or FMC, as similar to those for transportation
machine and device.

Fig. 4.20 A classification system of storage facilities
Figure 4.20 summarises some representative facilities for the storage. For
example, the automatic high-rise warehouse and buffer area are forlarge-sized FMS and compact FMC, respectively. In fact, the storage
function of FMC is, in the most cases, designed by using the buffer area,
L/UL station, small-sized pallet pool (pallet stocker) and APCs (Automatic
Pallet Changers), and in part the rack of carrousel type.

104

Figures 4.21 (a), (b) and (c) show various APCs and as will be clear, thepallet pool varies depending upon machining requirements of FMC.
Paraphrasing, various APCs are in practical use by combining the basic
configurations in the pallet pool and pallet changing mechanism as shownin Table 4.4.

Fig. 4.21 Various configurations in APC: a Turn table of shuttle type.
b Lifting turn table type. c Turn device of overhead travelling type for MC
105

Table 4.4 Various APCs obtainable by combining various configurations
in pallet pool and pallet changing mechanism
In the case of the large-sized FMC, FMS and FTL, the automatedwarehouse has been prevailed, and notwithstanding its variation in the type,e.g. high-rise, carrousel, and pallet pool types, the basic element is “Rack”,
and as can be imagined, nearly all storage facilities are modular-designed.
It is furthermore very interesting that the automated warehouse can beclassified into (1) cubic (building rack or unit rack), (2) rotating rack(vertical, horizontal carrousel or horizontal multiple-story carrousel) and(3) travelling rack types, resulting in the difficulties to establish theclassification system.
More specifically, in a representative automatic warehouse, e.g. thecommercial name being “Uni-shuttle HP” of Murata Machinery-brand, thein- and out-let capacity is 3,000 piece (package, bucket, cassette and so on)
per hour in maximum, the shuttle car can handle the transportation of thepiece, and the travelling speed of the shuttle is 400 m/min. In addition, thewarehouse has a considerable flexibility by providing the plural verticalconveyors and storage area for various usages. Fig. 4.22 shows the inside
view of an automatic warehouse, by which we can understand theimportant role of the shuttle car and vertical conveyor.
To this end, it is worth suggesting that the tool magazine within ATC plays
also the role of the storage function especially in the case of the stand-alone106

type, but not integrated within the main structure of TC and MC. In such acase, it is better to classify the tool magazine such as shown in Fig. 4.23.

Fig. 4.22 An example of automated warehouse(by courtesy of Murata Machinery, 2010)

Fig. 4.23 Classification of tool magazine configuration

107

References
Ito Y (2017) Section 2.4 Linkage Diagramme of Structural Configuration
Entities. In Ito Y, T Matsumura (eds) Theory and Practice in Machining
Systems. Springer Nature, p. 62-67.

108

Abstract We have certain symptoms, in which FMC for one-off production
is being established, and in due course, we can expect to apply such an
FMC to the CPS module in the smart factory. Paraphrasing, we may verify
the validity of our hypothesis to a large extent that FMC for one-off
production with keen machining cost may be converted into the CPS
module in the smart factory. For further verification, thus, this chapter
reviews the present perspectives of the smart factory together with
conducting the necessary discussion. In the review, the smart factories
being on work are classified into those of (1) “Brains, Nervous System and
CPS module”, (2) “Brains and Nervous system”, and (3) “ Limbs and Tools”
types (see Fig. 1.9). In due course, we can find a considerable number ofthe interesting smart factories, and, those of Volkswagen and Bridgestone
are very attractive. This is because both the factories are in fruition
according to the “Original Concept of Smart Factory as a Whole” proposedby “Industrie 4.0”, and importantly, the former pays the special attention to
the “Design Principle of Production Structure”, i.e. the closest linkages
among the objective product, available production structure and production
patterns, to a large extent. Of further special notes, primary concerns ofnearly all smart factories are for the establishment of the lucrative businessfor the time being by not designing them in accordance with the original
concept as a whole, i.e. simplified ones by placing the stress on either“Brains and Nervous System” or “Limbs and Tools” type.

5.1 First-hand View for Smart Factories in PracticeAs already discussed with respect to Fig. 2.6, we need various machining
systems and cells depending upon the technological, economic and social
109

environments across the whole world. In all the leading industrial nations,
FMS and concerns are dominant including the agile machining system.
It has been believed that we can cover all the machining requirements byusing FMS and concerns as already shown in Fig. 3.1. In general, FMC isfor a kind of production, and also for much variation and less volume
production, but not compatible with the “One-off Production” in general,
when investigating the applicability of FMC on the basis of ourlong-standing experiences.
It is however worth suggesting that FMC for one-off production becomes
gradually applicable to the practice by contriving mainly the cell controller
and employing the function-integrated kind in the machine tool as
exemplified by that of Sandvik Coromant (see Fig. 3.11 and Table 3.3).
Importantly, it appears that the CPS module in the smart factory may befacilitated by FMC for one-off production. We can thus expect that thesmart factory may enhance its dimensional and performance specifications
by integrating a further advanced FMC for “One-off Production with Keen
Machining Cost”, and to get a clue for this issue, the representative casestudies on the smart factory will be discussed in the following.
In this context, it is recommended to refer to a booklet published by
VDMA (Verband Deutscher Maschinen und Anlagenbau). This booklet hasreported about 50 case studies, although there are a very few smart
factories for machining. For example, Schaeffler applies the concept of thesmart machine to the mill-turn by integrating the preventive maintenancefunction for the main spindle (VDMA, 2016). Importantly, it is very rarecases to establish the original concept of the smart factory as a whole inpractice as will be discussed later, and it is notable that nearly all casestudies aim at the fruition of the lucrative business. As a result, there is a
two-pronged way in the case studies now: one places the stress on “Brain
and Nervous Systems” type, and the other is on “Limbs and Tools” type,and actually the former is not related to those for machining, but assemblyin general (see Fig. 1.9).
For the sake of further understanding, Figs. 5.1 (a) and (b) reproduce a con-110

Fig. 5.1 Hospital-Factory Complex:a Schematic view. b Information processing
111

cept of the “Hospital-Factory Complex”, one of the variants of FCIPS.
Accidentally, we may envision a trial of smart factory, which applies thewhole concept to the practice, from Fig. 5.1 to some extent. In fact, the“acatech” has proposed a “Smart Network for Health Control to Guarantee
Smart Health”, which is a fusion of differing professional spheres, but does
not include any production activities (2013). Against this context, the“Hospital-Factory Complex” is for the patient, who has a trouble in the
joint, and can facilitate the prosthetic device manufacturing (Ito et al.,1990). The complex can be characterised by the following.
(1) A synergy of prosthetic device production, surgery and patient’s care,computerised information control and heliport for the patienttransportation to other hospitals at the emergency.
(2) Total system flexibility as exemplified by the green area forrehabilitation.
(3) Network-connected complexes allocated within a certain area.
(4) Patient transfer function with helicopter together with patient’s medical
records.
Obviously, information processing in the complex should deal with thosefor examination and diagnosis, healthcare, surgery-related and prosthetic
device and its manufacturing. Importantly, the prosthetic device is one of
the “Individual Difference-oriented Products”, and thus should be
generated by the one-off production. More importantly, a crucial facing
problem is a conversion from diagnosis information to that for prosthetic
device manufacturing, because there are no methodologies, but
experience-relied remedies.
Of special note, the core of the factory in Fig. 5.1 (a) is the CNC tool
grinding machine of Schütte-brand, which is applicable to machining theprosthetic device and its surgical instrument simultaneously. In addition, it
is preferable to install 3D printer hereafter to produce the model for
surgical pre-simulation.
112

5.2 Case Studies Placing Stress on “Brain, Nervous
Systems and CPS Module” TypeAs already discussed in Section 5.1, we can find only a few representative
case studies, e.g. those of Volkswagen and Bridgestone, in which the smart
factory has been established in accordance with its original concept as awhole proposed by the “acatech”.
In the case of Volkswagen, we are interested in the proposal of “MQB
(Modularer Querbaukasten)”, which pays furthermore the special attention
to the design principle of the production structure, i.e. simultaneous
investigation into the objective product and its production facilities.

5.2.1 Volkswagen‘s “MQB” as a Strategic Approach towards
Mass Customised Car Manufacturing (Car Manufacturing of

Quasi-One-off Production Pattern with Keen Cost)
Probably the most wide-ranging conceptual strategy pursued by
Volkswagen recently is the so-called MQB, which is assumed to
revolutionise car manufacturing within the global Volkswagen Group.
Apparently, we have discussed MQB by placing the stress on the variation
deployment of the motorcar, and in short, MQB is one of the variants in themodular design for the product.
Importantly, the production structure should be, in principle, designed infull consideration of the mutual close linkage among the (1) product, (2)configuration of production structure (in narrower scope, objective
processing and system layout) and (3) production pattern. Of course, the“acatech” asserts also the same idea as shown in Fig. 5.2 (see Fig. 6.19;
Anderi et al., 2012) 1.
In discussion of MQB, we must recall that FTL is the leading
manufacturing facility in the motorcar industry, and as already stated in the
1 The “acatech” asserts the importance of mutual linkage among “die Produktenentwicklung”, “dieProduktplanung” and “die Produktionssytementwicklung”, and these German terms are translated into
corresponding English terms, although there are some differing sounds.

113

preceding chapters, FTL is modular-designed. In addition, it is now com-

Fig. 5.2 Linkage within leading three design attributes
for production structure (by Anderl et al., 2012)
mon senses that FTL is for the “Considerable Variation and Less Volume
Production”, and we may expect that one of successors of FTL, i.e. transfer
centre, will be available for the “One-off Production” by reinforcing theflexibility in machining and also by contriving something necessary to its
controller (see Figs. 3.25, 3.28 and 3.29) 2.
As will be clear from the above, MQB of Volkswagen is one of the typicalmaterialisation of the original concept of the smart factory as a whole withaegis of the design principle of the production structure. Thus, we will
discuss MQB in detail in the following.
When German adults talk about “Baukasten” in the first instance, they may
think of toys. In the kindergarten, a “Baukasten” is a collection ofstandardised low number of different pieces (e.g. a box of wooden bricks).
What is the reason why Volkswagen’s designers and managers talk about a“Modular Building Block System” (English-language approximation to2

As shown in Figs. 2.11 and 2.12, FTL was developed on the basis of TL, and as widely known, TL wasmainly installed in the motorcar industry, and in due course contributed considerably to the further
development of the modular design during 1950s ~1960s. On that occasion, we called the modular design“BBS (Building Block System)”. Of special note, we did not apply the modular principle to the car design
up to 2000s, although we used to design the manufacturing facility for the motorcar industry by themodular principle.

114

original term) as a new concept in the production of their cars? Presumably
it is not the intention to transform the production line into a kindergarten ora playground. Before clarifying the probable intentions, it helps totentatively clarify the used term.
In the first instance, the translation of the term “ Baukasten” into “Building
Block System” means “ Modular Design”. A first tentative definition of
MQB goes like this: It is a product design strategy that modularises not
only parts of the car body, but rather a high number of components(modules) across different model lines. Thus, Volkswagen sees an
evolution from the platform strategy over the module strategy towards
MQB, the Building Block Strategy. Importantly, Gleason Pfauter Hurth,
one of the leading machine tool manufacturers, initiated the concept of theplatform and applied it to the gear production machine in the beginning of
the 1990s, although there are certain differing features between those in theFig. 5.3 Differing Characteristic Features in Modular Designs
for Various Products
motorcar and machine tool industries (see Appendix). In retrospect, themodular design was first applied to the machine tool around 1930s, andthen has extended its application spheres to the engine, rolling stock and soon as shown in Fig. 5.3. In the motorcar, we have applied the modular
design to the sub-assembly like the door unit in the 2000s, but not the115whole car body. Importantly, the radial axes in Fig. 5.3 indicate the leading
characteristic and beneficial attributes, and thus we can understand (1) what
are the weighing design attributes of each product and also (2) to what
extent each product uses the beneficial feature of the modular design (Ito,2015).
As can be readily seen from the above, MQB of Volkswagen is an
outstanding trial, because the modular principle is simultaneously applied
to the product and its manufacturing system, and thus now let us scrutinise
it in the following (refer to HPs of Volkswagen listed in References, Waltl
et al., 2014).

Fig. 5.4 Total concept of MQB proposed by Volkswagen
As shown in Fig. 5.4, the expectable synergies occurring when different
strategies are followed. The “simple” platform strategy allows for synergies,
which are bound to one vehicle class, while the elementary module strategy(e.g. the car body) allows for synergies partially overarching one vehicle

116

class. The MQB strategy eventually is not tied to one, but rather completely
across many vehicle classes. In short, such a concept is well known as a
“Modular Design of Hierarchical System” in the machine tool sphere (seeAppendix).
What triggered Volkswagen‘s development of such a new production
concept? After numerous acquisitions during the last decades theVolkswagen Group includes 12 brands with approximately 280 models andcountless variants at more than 90 global production sites in 2013. Noquestions that these framework conditions created a great diversity. The
sheer diversity posed a major challenge to design and production. The
MQB approach standardises design and production within the Volkswagen
Group. The challenge to be overcome was to promote standardisation inorder to cut cost, simplify design and create synergies, but not to make all
the models look the same – in other words: to maintain the diversity. The
concept foresees that all the vehicles with transverse front engine use thesame core components independent of car size, type or brand.
Within the Volkswagen Group more than 30 series with a huge number ofengine-gearbox variants are affected by implementing the MQB concept.
The advantage of the MQB lies in a reduction of several hundreds ofengine-gearbox combinations down to 30-40. The advantage is even moreevident when looking at the so-called ‛transmission bells’: all the MQB
models use the same. The basic measure consists in establishing common
physical mounting points and dimensions of certain components. For
example, the engine (motor) is always tilted backwards by 12 degrees, andthe distance between the pedal box and the front-wheel centre is equal tothe millimetre. Together with a few other fixed dimensions in the engine
bay, a considerable number of the expensive parts can be standardised on
the one hand, on the other hand still other dimensions are freely selectable(see Fig. 5.5). When it comes to wheel sizes, track width, wheelbase,seating position, roof height, and so on, a realm of freedom opens up. In
conclusion, the fully implemented MQB system allows shorter
development times, a cost- and time-efficient manufacturing of variants

117and niche models in low quantities – and this is all hidden to the customers,
because the unified parts are non-visible.

Fig. 5.5 Beneficial feature of MQB by exemplifying “Cockpit Fixture”(based on publicised material by Volkswagen)Needless to say that the MQB strategy requires standardised module
families. At this point, it must be stated that besides MQB within theVolkswagen group further “Baukästen” have been developed, such as MLB(Modular Longitudinal Matrix) which stands for the modular building
block system with longitudinal front engine, and the MSB (der ModulareStandardantriebsbaukasten) as the third big modular building block system
for standard drives. All these systems build upon the definition of module
families. All the modular building block systems include module families
for drive units, electrical equipment/electronics, the chassis and the vehicle
body. Within each module family different standardised components can beused to produce individualised variants, e.g. in the drive unit module family,

118

and there is a choice between Diesel engines, Hybrid engines, Eco Fuelengines etc.

Fig. 5.6 Central control for development activities in globalisation era(by Volkswagen, 2013)
Concerning the cost savings potential and the flexibility in manufacturing
inherent to Volkswagen’s “Modular Building Block System”, it is difficult
to estimate the savings from an outsider’s perspective, but more importantis the rising flexibility in car manufacturing, which is a kind of paradox: themodularisation of products goes hand in hand with standardisation ofassembly processes, which are accompanied by modularised production
facilities (equipment). This leads to standardised factories and eventually aglobal manufacturing turntable that allows a location-flexible production ofdifferent models of the same modular building block system at different
production sites as shown in Fig. 5.6 and Table 5.1. Not to be neglected fora globalised car manufacturer is the advantage of faster follow-up
operations, i.e. experience gained during initial assembly start-up in one
country can be used for subsequent start-ups in other countries. In addition,
on one production line, different models of the same “Modular Building
Block System” can be produced with almost no modifications of the
production line.
119Table 5.1 Region-specified design attributes in motorcar(by Volkswagen, 2013)
As can be readily seen, this aspect of MQB is very similar to the design
specifications of flexible manufacturing shown in Table 1.2, and thus
implies the growing importance of the manufacturing culture.
The probably biggest challenges are faulty core components, which arebuilt in a variety of models and thus can cause much bigger problems. Thisrisk can only be countered by strict quality control.
In conclusion, what is the deeper meaning of what Volkswagen is doing
since a couple of years? It is transforming the world of car manufacturing
towards mass customisation, which must be seen as an essential objectiveof the “Industry 4.0”. Through strict modularisation and standardisation in
the form of a building block system, it is possible to maintain or evenincrease the variant diversity, which is a major requirement in the
production of consumer goods. Therefore, the concept of masscustomisation might be a viable approach to be followed by manufacturingsectors with a similar structure. But also for other industrial sectors theconcept underlying MQB might be feasible option.
As mentioned above, a concept similar to Volkswagen’s MQB system isknown in the machine tool sector as “Modular Design of Hierarchical
System”, therefore the experiences gained at Volkswagen could also be
relevant for machine tool building – even if the products are not in a strict
sense of a mass production type. And additionally, Volkswagen’s MQB
system requires appropriate “smart” equipment, which must be developed120

and provided by the machine tool sector. This will, of course, have an
impact on machine tool building as like as those of TL in the past, i.e. thoseon the type of machines, systems and control units.
Of special notes, MQB may be highly appreciated by the following two
characteristic features.
(1) Enhancement of the fundamental concept of the modular design withhierarchical structure to be applicable simultaneously to both the
product and its manufacturing facility.
(2) A trial in the modular design of wider scope to be available for the
localised globalisation era (Ito, 2011)

5.2.2 Advanced Tyre Moulding Systems with AI (Artificial
Intelligence) Function

Hikone Plant of Bridgestone has installed a smart factory to produce thetyre for the passenger car and pickup truck. It is worth suggesting that thissmart factory consists of a tyre moulding machine with AI function, i.e. a
CPS module, information communication network and cloud computing inaccordance with the original concept as a whole proposed by the “acatech”(HP of Bridgestone, 2017). Importantly, it is extremely notable that the“Division of Work in Information Processing” is obviously identified asshown in Fig. 5.7, where cloud computing is for moulding data analysis
and identification of factory floor states, and AI controller plays the role offog computing.
More specifically, we can observe furthermore the following characteristicfeatures.
(1) The tyre moulding machine has been newly developed and of
multiple-drum type. As a result, the productivity increases arounddouble as compared with that by the old machine, which is ofsingle-drum type.
(2) The tyre moulding machine can detect 480 attributes related to thequality data by a group of sensors, and control the tyre assembly
procedures with AI of real-time mode.

121

(3) The AI controller incorporates the skill of the mature technician
resulting in less fluctuation in the product quality caused by the humanintermediation.
(4) The technician has a handy device to recognise the current states of thefactory floor, to mange the trouble, to change the raw material and so
on without any time delays.

Fig. 5.7 Concept of smart factory for producing tyre (by Bridgestone)
Of special note, this smart factory is very interesting and a typical example
for understanding the property conversion of information while processing.
In general, we believe that the information has mono-property; however,the virtual factory shown within Fig. 5.7 should process information withvarious properties input from phases 1, 2 and 3 as follows.
(1) Phase 1: We must process mainly the information related to theengineering design; however, even in such information processing,
there are a considerable number of the procedures, where the122information changes its property (see Fig. 6.3). In this case, a root
cause of difficulties lies in information processing for uncertain
attributes, e.g. flair and inspiration of the mature technician, which is
too difficult to the quantification.
(2) Phase 2: There are market-related, enterprise management andproduction control information, and thus no conversions of information
properties.

Fig. 5.8 Hierarchical tree structure representing conversion procedure of
uncertain attribute-related information to engineering design
requirements in case of tyre
(3) Phase 3: We must process information with various properties ranging
from those related to the market, through enterprise management andproduction control, to manufacturing. Importantly, primary concern isthe conversion of customer’s requirements with uncertain attributes tothe quantified engineering design specifications of the product (seeFigs. 6.4 and 6.5).
Figure 5.8 reproduces the conversion procedure of the “Roominess” to the123qualitative specifications for engineering design of the tyre. As can bereadily seen, we can observe clearly the change of information property,
and at issue is to establish the conversion methodology (see Fig. 6.7)
Such a problem mentioned above has not been suggested anywhere so far,and in practice, we can manage it by case-by-case manner, whereas wemust conduct the corresponding academic research to clarify the essential
features in information processing (see Section 6.3).

5.3 Case Studies Placing Stress on “Brain and
Nervous Systems” Type
Apparently, we have now a considerable number of the smart factories inpractice; however, in nearly all cases, we can see that the concept of thesmart factory is not applied to the practice in its whole state as yet, but inpart. This is because the enterprise intends, in general, to grow the lucrative
business by utlising the present manufacturing facility with a lessinvestment. Of note, we can thus observe such applications as follows.
(1) Cloud computing places its main stress on something related to MES(Manufacturing Execution System) and ERP (Enterprise Resources
Planning), but does not deal with information processing for“Engineering Design of Product”. As already suggested, we must deal
with the human-intelligence-based knowledge and also propertychanges in the product-related information processing; however, such amethodology is far from completion.
(2) The hardware of the CPS module (Limbs and Tools) is given
beforehand, and has been suggested for the assembly together with thetransducer for collecting big data, but not for machining. In short, themachining space is of ill-defined environment for the transducer for
in-process measurement.

5.3.1 BMW Regensburg Plant (Brambley, 2017)

This smart factory is for assembly line as shown in Table 5.2, and under theaegis of the software for production control of Ubisense-brand, which has
124been merchandised aiming at the smart factory. In addition, each assembly
station can be regarded as a CPS module, where the hardware and software
consist of the “Data Tag and Sensor”, and also the lower hierarchy in RTLS
(Real Time Location System), respectively.

Table 5.2 Specifications of assembly line
More specifically, RTLS can visualise the current states and actions of all
the manufacturing resources, e.g. product, worker and assembly tools,
within the virtual space system, so that the manager can control and adjust
the line flow.
As a result, BMW can benefit considerably by the rationalisation of theassembly line such as follows.
(a) Real time recognition of the assembly line.
(b) Agile and flexible work indication and quick decision making on thebasis of collected data.
(c) Reduction of re-work cost and minimisation of workflow loss.
(d) In customisation of the product, ease of optimisation and prevention of
miss-operation in hand work.
Although BMW asserts that the assembly line is one of the smart factories,
we can suggest some controversial points as follows.
(a) In accordance with the proposal of the “acatech”, the smart factory
consists of both the horizontal and vertical networks; however, BMW
system uses only the vertical network within a factory.
(b) Admitting that the objective process is only for assembly, the system is
not cell (CPS module) type as proposed by the “acatech” in the125flagship project entitled “Custom Manufacturing”, but line type.
Thus, Fig. 5.9 visualises such differences between the practical applicationand the original concept by the radar chart to ease of understanding to what
extent we can benefit, and by how to employ the concept of the smart
factory.

Fig. 5.9 Comparison of practical application by BMW withoriginal concept proposed by “acatech”

5.3.2 Bosch Rexroth Homburg Plant (Rexroth-Bosch, 2017)

This smart factory is for the assembly of the hydraulic valve for the truck
and forklift, and aims at (1) the improvement of the product quality, (2)saving the cost, and (3) shortening of the delivery time. More specifically,
the factory consists of nine assembly stations with cell configuration, andcan assemble six product families (number of variants: 250, total number ofcomponents: 2,000).
Importantly, the smart factory can be extremely characterised by its
human-centred CPS module with AI (Artificial Intelligence) function, i.e.
autonomous intelligent workstation, as summarised in Table 5.3, assembly126

of small batch size, and requirement of the mature worker for each family.
Bosch Rexroth has publicised the following valuable effects by trying its
one-year long (2014-2015) operation.
(1) Total cost reduction per year: 500,000 €.
(2) Reduction of work preparation time: From 450 to nill sec.
(3) Work-in-progress days: From 3 to 1.5 days.
(4) Reduction of cycle time: From 474 to 438 sec.

Table 5.3 Functional and performance specifications of autonomous
intelligent workstation

5.3.3 Application of Statistical Analysis Software to Cost
Reduction

IBM has merchandised a wider production control system compatible withthe smart factory, and one of the cores is the statistical analysis software(commercial name: SPSS). Fig. 5.10 shows an application of SPSS to the
X-ray inspection for the castings in the motorcar industry, which aims at
both the minimisation of the inspection objectives and the reduction of thenecessary number of the inspection devices.
More specifically, the data are collected at the melting process for themolten iron and also the inspection process of the castings. In due course,127the former data are processed by the predictive analysis method, i.e. SPSS,
and in certain cases, the X-ray inspection of the castings renders useless,provided that the predictive analysis results in the satisfactory evaluation
value. In contrast, the latter should detect the casting flaws, e.g. pinhole,shrinkage crack, and inclusion of micro-bubble.

Fig. 5.10 Product quality control system withstatistical analysis software (by IBM)As can be readily seen, the kernel of this smart factory is the comparative
procedure between the predictive analysis and the X-ray inspection, i.e.
real-time quality identification, and thus IBM suggested the importance of
the knowledge know-how in the comparison, although not stating thedetails because of company’s confidentiality.
In general, we must be aware the very difficulty in the estimation of thecasting flaw including the residual stress from the melting condition of themolten iron. Apart from such uncertainties, IBM reported the cost reduction
is 450 Mill. Yen/year (equals to 4.142 Mill. US $). Paraphrasing, we may
128benefit considerably by improving the procedure for the product quality
control rather than the concept of the smart factory.

5.4 Case Studies Placing Stress on “Limbs and Tools”
Type
It is said that the smart factory is SME (Small- and Medium-sizedEnterprise)-oriented, and importantly, FMC has been expected to besuitable for installing at SME since its development of first stage in the
1980s. More importantly, we can verify the much more applicability of
FMC to the manufacturing facility for SME by its amazingly increasing
number of the installations within SME so far than our expectation.
As already discussed, thus, authors assert the applicability of the cell
controller of FMC for one-off production to the controller of the CPS
module in the smart factory, i.e. fog computing (edge), provided that thecell controller has an autonomous function to some extent. Fortunately,
German Government has announced a success story of 3D-Schilling on the
web entitled “Effective Metallteilbearbeitung für Losgröße 1” (BWE und
BBF, 2017). In this case, the driving force is extremely the contrivance ofthe software in machining the prototype with 3-dimensional complex form
as follows, although not having the autonomous function.
(1) Identification of the work and tools by RFID (Radio Frequency
Identifier).
(2) Quality measurement of all the finished parts, digitization anddocumentation of measured results, and their effective use.
In addition, the Czech Technical University in Prague has developed a CPS
module for one-off machining of the large-sized work under the project,“Intelligent Machining Systems with Digital Twin”. In this project, thedigital twin means a couple for actual and virtual machines, where theactual core machine is of TOS-brand (Kolar et al., 2016). As can be literally
shown, this machining system can be characterised by the following.
(1) Intelligent fixture: the technician receives the indication for the“Positioning and Adjustment of Work” by the handy display, and also129can ask questions through it, resulting in the reduction of the idle time
up to 75%.
(2) Production of NC information from CAD/CAM data: We can reinforce
such a function by the “Virtual Machining Simulation Based on FEM(Finite Element Method) Model”, which can optimise the machining
sequence.
(3) Identification of machining errors by “Digital-Twin”.
Admitting that the authors’ assertion is acceptable with respect to theapplicability of FMC to the CPS module in the smart factory as mentioned
above, one of the determinants is the better connectivity of the CPS modulewith the information communication network, whereas FMC is, in general,
for stand-alone operation or of the basic module for FMC-integrated FMS
and FTL. This implies that FMC has not so strong tie with CIM through theinformation communication network, although each FMC must receive andsend some information from and to CIM with descending and ascendingflows.
In R & D (Research and Engineering Development) for “Limbs and Tools”,
thus, nearly all activities concentrate to develop the controller for the CPS
module. In fact, we conduct such activities without considering theapplicability of the current cell controller.
Reportedly, some German machine tool manufacturers have steadilymerchandised the advanced NC controller applicable to the CPS module.
For example, NC controller of Index-brand is capable of connecting themanagement organisation of the enterprise through the network, changing
its display to be the “Paperless Machining” in reality, and also of
accumulating machining knowledge and history of each user. In addition,
Siemens announces the marked features in its product (brand name:
SINUMERIK) as follows, although being not obtainable the detail.
(1) Integration of CAD/CAM with CNC by virtual machine for
optimisation.
(2) Display of user’s order specifications.
(3) Paperless production.

130

Fig. 5.11 Controller compatible with Industrie 4.0 - EMAG-brand, 2016
In contrast, the “Autonomous Function” is not established in both theadvanced NC controllers as yet, nevertheless it is mandatory for the CPS
module for the smart factory.
To deepen the understanding, Fig. 5.11 shows the function of the advanced
NC controller of EMAG-brand; however, we may face certain confusion
regarding what are differing characteristic features between the controllers
for the CPS module and FMC. Importantly, such confusion may beenlarged by the reinforcement of the marketability of the cell controller. In
general, primary concerns in the cell controller of FMC are (1) productionof NC information together with machining sequences, (2) tool control andtooling layout, (3) surveillance for operating conditions of cell itself andcell components, (4) quality control of finished part and report ofmachining achievements and so on (see Fig. 3.13).
We must however advance the differentiation of the function and131performance of the cell controller, and thus the facing crucial issue is the“Division of Work” in information processing between CIM and the cell
controller, resulting in the growing confusion as mentioned above.

Table 5.4 Comparison of controller for CPS module with cell controller
Table 5.4 shows a functionality comparison between the advanced NC
controller and the cell controller in general so as to solve easily from such
confusion. As can be readily seen, we can understand the differing featuresat glance, and in short, nearly all functions in both the controllers are
similar; however, we can see a typical differing feature in the division ofwork mentioned above. In the simplest case in the advanced NC controller,
the router only is attached to NC controller to communicate with theenterprise organisation especially reporting the machining achievement.
More specifically, the controller for the CPS module can process a part ofthe information belonging to the production control and enterprisemanagement such as work scheduling, tool layout planning and processsimulation, which are under the control of CIM in the traditional controllerof FMC. As exemplified by the controller of Index-brand, the controller132can switch from NC controller to the personal computer to connect directlywith ERP and MES, which are equivalent to CIM in the past.
To this end, it is extremely worth suggesting that we cannot find any
functions closely related to the autonomous choice of the corresponding
CPS module, when carrying out machining with the smart factory. In many
respects, this is one of the facing controversial points even when the CPS
module is of “One-Machine Shop-like” by using the density functionintegrated machine tool.

5.4.1 Real Time Visualisation of AGV States by Long-distant
Surveillance and Control

This system is closely related to “Fog Computing”, and can becharacterised by its stable and reliable wireless communication system with
920 MHz in frequency band. In short, the system was successfully installedin Tochigi Plant of Nissan Motor, which can finish the passenger car about
250, 000 units per year (HP of OKI, 2016).
More specifically, the system can control AGVs about 300 units without
any trouble, which are caused by various hindrances for telecommunication
within the factory floor. Fig. 5.12 illustrates the publicised concept in the
prototype of AGV control system, and can be characterised by thefollowing.
(1) The monitor is for on-line surveillance of the states in each AGV, e.g.
position, travelling speed, battery capacity, and trouble detection by
sensor.
(2) The monitor can control AGVs, if necessary.
(3) It is expected to achieve the effective operation of AGV by analysing
the accumulated data in the monitor, although AGV is not of special
type, but widely available at the market.
In contrast, it is worth suggesting that each AGV has not the autonomous
function, which is the utmost characteristic feature of the smart factory. In
addition, there are about 30 transportation routes of loop type for AGVs;
however, it is not clear regarding whether a group of AGVs is under theblock control system or not.
133

Fig. 5.12 Concept of AGV control (by Nissan Motor)

5.4.2 CPS Module for Tapered Roller Bearing Production

It is said that Kagawa Plant of JTEKT has successfully run the smart
factory to produce the tapered roller bearing for the motorcar in 2016.
Actually, JTEKT aims at the improvement of the assembly and inspection
processes to increase the operational efficiency in consideration that the
production volume is 5.5 million bearings per month. More specifically,
this factory applies IoT (Information of Things) to gather the information
related to the product quality, i.e. grinding burn in the inner race, and also
the state of manufacturing line, from CNC machine tools and PLC(Programmable Logic Controller).
Importantly, the raw material for the outer and inner rings is warm-forged
to render turning for rings useless, whereas we need the die with the higher
accuracy and press machine with higher performance.
As will be clear from the above, we can interpret that the visualisation of
the manufacturing line by the monitor is similar to that of Werk
Regensburg of BMW, and that the detection of the grinding burn is one of134the variants of the in-process measurement for grinding so far performed.
Although saying so, we can observe a considerable number of the so-called
smart factories, in which the core is facilitated by the in-process
measurement. This may be attributed to some key terms related to the CPS
module in the smart factory. In fact, the “acatech” suggests that the sensor
is the core of the hardware in the CPS module to collect the big data.

References
acatech – Deutsche Akademie der Technikwissenschaften e.V. (2013)
Umsetzungsempfehlungen für das Zukunftsprojekt Industrie 4.0.
Abschlussbericht des Arbeitskreises Industrie 4.0.
Anderl R et al. (April 2012) Smart Engineering – Interdisziplinäre
Produktenstehung. acatech Diskussion.
Brambley S (January 2017) BMW Werk Regensburg – Smart Factory
Approach of Ubisense. E & T News.
(https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2017/01/industry).
BWE (Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie) und BBF(Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung) (2017) PLATTFORM
INDUSTRIE 4.0.
HP of Bridgestone 2017.
http://autogramm.volkswagen.de/01-02_12/standorte/standorte_01.html,
last access: November 18, 2017
http://en.volkswagen.com/en/company/responsibility/locations/europe/kalu
ga.html, last access: November 18, 2017https://www.volkswagen.co.in/en/innovations/modular-transverse-matrix.ht
ml, last access: December 2, 2017https://www.topgear.com/car-news/insider/explained-vw-groups-mqb-platform
Ito Y, Nishiyama M, Shima Y (May, 1990) Some of Basic Layout Designs
Related to Future Production Systems. In: Inter. Conf. on Manufacturing
Systems and Environments - Looking Towards the 21st Century, JSME:
187-193.
Ito Y (2011) A Proposal of Modular Design for Localized Globalization

135Era. Jour. of Machine Engineering; 11-3: 21-35.
Ito Y (2015) Applicability of “Platform Concept” to machining
function-integrated machine tools - A new “ Raison d’être” for modular
design. Mechanical Engineering Reviews, Bulletin of the JSME; 2-1: 1-12.
Kolar P et al. (Dec. 2016) Virtual Simulation of Machine Tool Operation.
Handouts of 2nd Czech-German Workshop on Industrie 4.0.
OKI WWW server, 1st April 2016
Rexroth – Bosch Group (March 2017) Industry 4.0 in action. E & T
Magazine.
VDMA (2016) Industrie 4.0 Forum Industrie 4.0 in practice – Solutions forindustrial applications.
Waltl, Hubert, Wildemann, Horst (2014) Modularisierung der Produktion
in der Automobilindustrie, München, TCW Transfer-Centrum.

136Abstract As shown in some practical applications of the smart factory
within Chapter 5, we must be aware that the production activity should
create the wealth for the human society by conducting, in preferable cases,
the lucrative business. In fact, it is rare that the original concept as a wholeof the smart factory is in fruition, but the smart factory being on work has
been established by employing a part of the original concept especially
activating its beneficial features, which depends considerably upon thecustomer’s requirements.
In the full application of the original concept, a root cause of difficulties
lies in the preferable harmony and chemistry among various reciprocal
attributes, which can determine the system characteristics. Obviously, wemust establish a smart factory in accordance with the customer’s
requirements, and thus a further hindrance is certain uncertainties in suchrequirements. In addition, such leading attributes ranges from engineering,
through economics, to social attributes (see Fig. 1.9).
As a result, nearly all production engineers and researchers do not delve
into the essential features within a facing problem, but do solve such aproblem by the case-by-case way in both FCIPS and the smart factory tocertain extent. Obviously, the solution obtained by the case-by-case method
is very valuable together with high applicability.
In contrast, it is desirable that people in the academia should scrutinise indetail the essential features of each R & D (Research and Engineering
Development) subjects and could transfer the valuable achievement into
the practice after conducting an innovative research. Paraphrasing, we may
appraise often the well-intellectual backup method rather than theexperience-based remedies to solve the engineering problem.
137

In many respects, we must investigate leading R & D subjects in FCIPS
and the smart factory in consideration of their essential features, and thischapter will place the stress on the technological subjects. On the basis of
our long-standing experiences for FCIPS and investigation into the crucial
problems in the smart factory, we first analyse and suggest some leading R& D subjects in both FCIPS and the smart factory, and then some
representatives in such subjects will be detailed and discussed herein. Of
note, Chapter 7 will discuss the R & D subjects within manufacturing
culture and industrial sociology aspects.

6.1 First-hand View for Leading R & D Subjects
Tables 6.1 (a), (b) and (c) summarise some leading R & D subjects in the2010s after delving into three branches, i.e. (1) system layout issues ingeneral concerns, (2) CIM and cell controller, and (3) cloud and fog
computing.

138

Table 6.1 R & D subjects for system design in general, FCIPS and Smartfactory: a System layout issues in general concerns.
b CIM, information network and FMC.
c Cloud computing, information network and CPS module
Within R & D context, it is very interesting that we have three categories,
i.e. (1) subjects already suggested, but not investigated as yet, (2) subjects
once investigated, but not so active since then, and (3) subjects newly
arisen. Of course, the newcomer is related to CPS module and the divisionof work in information processing among cloud computing, fog computing
and CPS module.
For example, we recognise the importance of CIM with human-intelligence
incorporation, and thus there have been a considerable number of thedevelopments for CAPP (Computer-Aided Process Planning) with expert
system; however, its advanced type, i.e. CAPP of Flair Type, was once
139

investigated, but far from the practical use (Ihara and Ito, 1991). In theevaluation of the “Flexibility” of FMS, surely we have had a considerable
number of the studies; however, such studies are not considered thediffering characteristic features among FMC, FMS and FTL. In fact, wehave not had any proposals to evaluate quantitatively the flexibility of FMS
in consideration of the system configuration to a large extent, apart fromthat of Ito et al., (1985).

Fig. 6.1 Major research subjects for FCIPS around 2005
In principle, it is desirable to carry out the academic research into FCIPS
and the smart factory; however, the research subject itself is ill-defined bynature, when we consider all the conditions surrounding the researchsubject. In general, we may suggest the difficulty of modelling properly theobjective subject, and manage the facing problem with the case-by-casemethod in practice. It is furthermore worth suggesting that the R & D
subjects for FCIPS may be much more detailed by the advent of the smart
factory than ever before, because we must discuss the convertibility of
FMC for one-off production into the CPS module in the smart factory. Thus,
Fig. 6.1 reproduces the R & D subjects for FCIPS around 2005 to deepen140

the related knowledge.
In the following, we will discuss some leading R & D subjects to clarify
their present perspectives and also to suggest the facing problems to besolved.

6.2 Investigation into Smart Products andTheir Production Systems in DetailAs already shown in Table 1.4, the smart factory can facilitate thegeneration of the “Smart Product”; however, the smart product itself is not
obviously defined as yet, but is only said to be compatible with theindividual requirements.

Table 6.2 Products placing stress on culture- and mindset-harmonised
attributes around 2010
To discuss R & D subjects, we need thus to envision some concrete imagesof the smart product, and in due course a clue is to delve into the141“Manufacturing Culture-related Products”. In fact, the manufacturing
culture has proposed the “Culture- and Mindset-harmonised Product”,“Individual Difference-oriented Product”, “Sensitivity Compatible Product”
and “Aesthetic-like Product”, which appear as to be within a family of thesmart products (Ito and Ruth, 2006).
Table 6.2 shows some manufacturing culture-related products around 2010,
which was already merchandised or being in prototype. As can be seen, it
appears that we have already much more smart products than our
imagination. Importantly, these products should be designed by converting
the uncertain attributes into the engineering design specifications.
To deepen what are the facing problems in this R & D sphere, Fig. 6.2
shows a “Sari” for Indian ladies, which is one of the individual differenceand sensitivity-oriented products as exemplified already in Table 6.2. In
this context, Rajagobalan (2016) has established a “Digital Fashion”
system by using the digital mirror and a design-factory system located inboth Singapore and India.

Fig. 6.2 A pattern design of “Sari” for digital fashion
142

The “Sari” is made of monolithic cloth with various colours and patterns,
which results in the attractive appearance after dressing duly. Thus, thedressmaker in Singapore measures the posture of a lady by the digital
mirror together with quantifying the uncertain attributes like the preference
and sense of beauty through conversation while measuring. Then, the final
digital information is transferred to India to produce the corresponding“Sari”.
Reportedly, Adidas has publicised a concept of “Speed Factory” to produce
the order-made shoes in October, 2017, which can be also regarded as oneof the individual difference- and sensitivity-oriented products together withplacing the stress on the local needs. In fact, the first product was tailoredfor London and the next comer is that for Paris within the product series
AM4, which can be, of course, characterised by the compatibility with eachcustomer’s requirements.
More specifically, the “Speed Factory” is an integrated manufacturing anddesign concept developed by Adidas since 2015. The aim is to establish a
global automated manufacturing network that will allow the transfer of the
production to where the brand’s consumers are located 1. Ultimately, the“Speed factory” concept pursues the design of highly functional andcustomised products, first and foremost sports shoes, in a unique design
and within extremely shortened time span (of just a few hours) between
design and the delivery of the product in the store. This is being
implemented through a high level of automation based on robots, 3D
printers, laser and computerised knitting machines.
Most importantly, the concept of “Speed Factory” relocates manufacturing
to where the design originates and where the customers are. This enables
highly customised, individualised - and thus on-demand production, which
includes modular and hyper-flexible factories (mass personalisation).
Since recently a prototype of “Speed factory” operates in Ansbach, Germa1 Evidently, the “Speed factory” with its global automated manufacturing network bringing the
production to the customer bears the potential to reduce the transportation-related emission and cost.
Furthermore, Adidas has claimed clearly to reduce the use of adhesives through the use of advanced
technology.

143

ny, another one is being launched in Atlanta, USA. If this development
continues, the global production structure will change 2 . Still, mass
production will be concentrated on selected Asian countries, but
customised share of production will increase and become dispersed acrossthe globe.

6.3 Property Conversion in Design Information Processing
Figure 6.3 shows a simplified design flow of the product in general, and as
can be readily seen, there are several procedures, where the information
change their properties, e.g. those from “Uncertain Attributes” to“Functional Attributes” in concept design, and from “Functional Attributes
to Structural Attributes” in basic layout design.

Fig. 6.3 Simplified flow in engineering design for product andseveral processes with property change in information
Such an information change may be called “Property Conversion inInformation processing”, and as will be clear from Section 6.1, it is very2

For each consumer, a personalised product can be manufactured.
144

important in the design of the smart product. This is because the smart
product is individual requirement-oriented, and thus includes, more or less,the uncertain attributes within its engineering design specifications of firststage.

Fig. 6.4 Total evaluation index for steering feeling of motorcar andits composition ( By Nakano et al)
Figure 6.4 shows a concept for totally evaluating the steering feeling of the
motorcar by the steering torque. In short, the evaluation value becomes
high, when the steering torque is within a certain magnitude at nil in thesteering wheel angle as shown also in Fig. 6.4 (Nakano et al, 2009).
Importantly, the steering torque may however be determined by a handfulof factors as shown together in Fig. 6.4, and in this case, a root cause ofdifficulties lies in the determination of the evaluation expression inconsideration of the cross- and synergistic effects among the evaluationindexes.
More specifically, Fig. 6.5 reproduces a conversion procedure for the
shotgun, which necessitates the concert with the penchant of the user. The
uncertain attribute, i.e. “Penchant for Shotgun” can be converted into the“Qualitative Engineering Design Specifications” by using the tree structure145

of hierarchical type. In fact, there are three steps in the conversion, andsuch a conversion is carried out by the long-standing experience of themature engineering designer in practice. In short, the “Fitness in Folding
Action” is finally converted into the “Damping Capacity at Tight Fit
between Barrel and Frame”.

Fig. 6.5 Hierarchical tree structure representing conversion procedure ofculture- and mindset-oriented attributes to engineering design requirements- in case of shotgun
Importantly, in this case, the barrel with long-term stability in sightalignment can be guaranteed in full consideration of the powder burning
velocity. In fact, it is preferable to use the barrel of free-curve configuration
rather than cylinder barrel, and even in such a qualitative information
conversion, we must conduct it with the experienced engineeringknowledge about the product (Barthold, 1986).
In fact, an uncertain attribute consists of a considerable number of thedeterminants as shown already in Fig. 6.4, which should be considered in
the conversion as a decision index. Admitting the very difficulty in the146conversion of the uncertain attribute into the quantified specifications, weneed a conversion criterion, e.g. representative total index, in considerationof all the indexes; however, each index is, in general, not independent, but
in mutual relation with others having different affecting magnitudes.
Paraphrasing, a representative total index is given by an evaluation
function, which consists of individual indexes with weighing coefficient
together with considering the cross-effects among indexes, and synergistic
effects among indexes.
To deepen our knowledge, we discuss now the conversion in thedescending flow of the product design, i.e. that from the part drawing(Geometric Information) to process planning (Manufacturing-relatedInformation). When placing the stress on cylindrical component turning,

Fig. 6.6 Various turning methods to generate cylindrical component
process planning should be produced from the given part drawing as
already shown in Fig. 6.3. As can be readily seen, a component can be147

turned by various methods as shown in Fig. 6.6, and thus the single
geometrical information may be converted into a considerable number ofthe manufacturing-related information. In short, we cannot guarantee“One-to-One Relationship” between both the information, even when we
determine the constraints from machining accuracy, cost, delivery date andso on.

Fig. 6.7 Conversion method from culture- and mindset-harmonised
attributes to engineering specifications by QFD of hierarchical typeand radar chart (by Höft)
Obviously, such a conversion work is very time and cost expensive, andthus we must develop a methodology. In this context, Höft (1999) proposed
a conversion method by using QFD (Quality Function Deployment) of
hierarchical type as shown in Fig. 6.7, although it is far from the practicalapplication. As can be readily seen, the uncertain attributes within a148

product are first represented by a radar chart in consideration of thesuperiority order, e.g. relative weighing rate among attributes, and thenconverted into the quantified design characteristics by compensating thecross-receptance (mutual affecting rate) among the characteristics. Of
course, the conversion is carried out by the step-wise way. It is furthermore
regrettable that there are no succeeding research activities following that of
Höft.

6.4 Quantitative Evaluation of System Flexibility
Because of the very practical-oriented technology, once the manufacturingsystem raises certain benefits after its installation, even professional people
are gratified with such benefits and forget the dire necessity of carrying out
its rational evaluation. As a result, there have been no noteworthy
researches into and engineering developments for the system evaluation,
apart from that for the simulation tools of production and operational
controls. In addition, such a trend is accelerated by the difficulty indetermining the definition for and evaluating of the system flexibility evenin the 2000s.
In contrast, we must be aware of the utmost characteristic feature in thecorrelation of the “Design and Evaluation”, which can be represented with
“Two Sides of the Same Coin”.
Having in mind the amazing effects of FMS, from the past we have triedvarious evaluation methods, and Fig. 6.8 is a first-hand view of such trials
in the 1980s; however, these trials have not been established up to certain
technologies satisfactorily applicable to practical use even now. For
example, we have a considerable number of the software tools for the“System Simulation”; however, the most of the software has someshortcoming in its mathematical model.
Importantly, we must investigate now each subject shown in Fig. 6.8 inconsideration of the advances of the corresponding technologies after then.
For example, the cell description was one of the auxiliary design
methodologies of FMC to determine the (defacto) standardised type in the149past, whereas its primary concern is, at present, to facilitate the“Autonomous Function”, so that FMC will enable to convert to the CPS
module.

Fig. 6.8 A first-hand view for evaluation of FMS and concerns in 1980s
In fact, it appears that the enterprise uses its own evaluation method on thebasis of enterprise’s own experiences especially from the economic aspect.
As can be readily seen, the utmost simplified method is to evaluate thesystem flexibility by measuring the change-over-cost, which is necessary
for the re-configuration of the system when the objective product ischanged. Obviously, a less change-over-cost of the system, the more
flexible is the system configuration.
Now let us discuss the evaluation of “System Flexibility”. In fact, theflexibility is the utmost characteristic feature in FMS, and we haveendeavoured to establish the quantitative evaluation of the flexibility sincethe 1980s. Of special notes, we must furthermore be aware of another150

problem regarding what is the acceptable definition for the system
flexibility in the case of the manufacturing system for the aeroplane shown,for example, in Fig. 6.9. In the aeroplane industry, such a system
configuration, which involves the three sub-systems consisting of the
traditional machine tools, special-purpose machine tools and NC machine
tools, is very common. In short, there have been no acceptable evaluation
methods for the flexibility.

Fig. 6.9 Machining systems in Nusantara(Aeroplane manufacturer in Indonesia, 1993)

6.4.1 Evaluation of Specified Flexibility

In consideration of the complexity and to ease of evaluation, the system
flexibility has often been evaluated after specifying the characteristic factor,
i.e. “Specified Flexibility”. In retrospect, there were various proposals forevaluating the specified flexibility in the 1980s as shown in Table 6.3.
These were of limited help to advance the due technology, but also151remained in the merely qualitative evaluation without having any relation
to the system configuration. In addition, these are furthermore under the
hypothesis that all the factors are independent one another 3.

Table 6.3 Various proposals for specified flexibility in 1980s
Against this context, Yamashina suggested the importance of the mutual
correlation among the factors in practice. He proposed an idea to show
certain correlation with the system design specifications as shown in Fig.
6.10; however, there remained something to be seen. For example, thetransfer flexibility means the possibility for getting a new work ahead of
the forerunning work in the transfer line within the system. Thus, thisflexibility for FMS of line type differs considerably from FMC-integrated
FMS; however, it is critical that we may have apparently the same
qualitative value, which does not reflect actually the correct specified
flexibility in practice. In general, the linear type with sub-transfer line isvery suitable for the realisation of the transfer flexibility, although the3

For ease of reference, Table 6.3 was produced on the strength of the review paper of Nisanci and also
by adding other proposals so far publicised on the occasion of the lecture course of JSME by Ito.
Ito Y (1989) Present Perspectives of Evaluation Methods of FMS. In: Handouts for Evaluation Methods
for FMS and Its Case Studies, No. 890-8, p. 1 ~10, JSME.
Nisanci I (March 1985) Survey of FMS – Applications, Problems and Research Areas. SME TechnicalPaper MS85-146.

152

system redundancy increases.

Fig. 6.10 Definition of various specified flexibilities with relation to design
specifications (by Yamashina of Kyoto University, 1987)

Table 6.4 Various proposals for specified flexibility in 2010s
At present, such an evaluation method is still in leading position together
with trying the quantification as shown in Table 6.4, which summarises the
specified flexibility by the literature survey around 2010. Importantly, eachresearcher defines the specified flexibility differently under the same term,
153resulting in uncertain selfish evaluation, which may not be accepted
commonly.
For example, Rogalski and Ovtcharova (2009) have publicised a research
paper into the flexibility evaluation, in which the technique called“ecoFLEX” can facilitate for estimating the “Flexibilities of Volume, Mix
and Expansion”. They have referred to the forerunning researches
especially within the information and management technologies, and not in
the system design aspect in the 1980s. In addition, Metternich et al(2013) introduce the volume flexibility proposed by Parker and Wirth asfollows.

where, VF: Volume flexibility, F: Fixed costs, Cmax: Production system
capacity, a: Required amount of capacity units to produce one product unit,
b: Contribution margin of one product unit.
In this context, we must be aware that the specified flexibility cannot
evaluate the essential feature of FMS in practice, but actually its validity isverified by using the hypothetical operating data of the system. Morespecifically, in the research into the evaluation of the flexibility mentioned
above, the utmost fatal shortcomings lie in the problem setting, where themathematical model is too simplified and departs from the states of FMS
and concerns in practice as follows.
(1) As already shown in Fig. 3.1, we have various kinds and types of FMS
and each variant has its own characteristic features; however, theresearchers don’t pay any attentions to such important factors.
(2) In the system design of FMS, the flexibility is, as mentioned above, oneof the leading design attributes together with expandability andredundancy, which can be facilitated by the “Modular Design”. It isthus rational and preferable that we must evaluate to what extent the154

flexibility estimated in the design is being used while machining a partfamily.
Paraphrasing, some specified flexibilities should be re-investigated theirvalidities from the viewpoint of either including in the system design
specifications or in close tie with the system configuration. For example,
the expansion and routing flexibilities are closely related to the design
specifications and system configuration, respectively. In addition themachine flexibility renders useless when considering the amazing
development of the highly function-integrated kinds in the machine tool(see Chapters 3 and 4).
Having in mind that the specified flexibilities have certain restrictions
particularly from the complexity caused by their mutual correlations, wemust challenge its quantified evaluation, and if possible, by integrating agroup of the specified flexibilities, establish an evaluation method for the
total flexibility as will be discussed later.
On such an occasion, at crucial issues are what is the definition and how toquantify the specified flexibility, which are far from completion at present.

6.4.2 Evaluation of Total Flexibility

It is desirable to evaluate the system flexibility in full consideration of boththe system configuration and the operation mode. As can be easily
imagined, such an evaluation is very difficult, because we must consider ahuge number of the system attributes together with their cross-receptances.
As a result, we have tried to evaluate such a total flexibility indirectly byconsidering some proper indexes such as (1) “Change-Over-Cost” ofsystem to respond adequately the new manufacturing requirements, and (2)the reduction amount of the “Stock Volume” and “Work-in-Progress”. Of
note, MTU of Friedrichshafen defined the system flexibility by the “Ratio
of Enabling Number of Processes of System to Total Required Number ofProcesses of an Objective Part” in 1982 4.
Against to such the unfavourable state, Ito et al (1985) tried once to
4

Based on memorandum of Ito on the occasion of on-the-spot investigation to MTU.

155

evaluate the “Total System Flexibility” in consideration of the cell and sys-

Fig. 6.11 Concept of flexibility evaluation vector
tem configuration. In this trial, the system flexibility can be represented by“Flexibility Evaluation Vector”, which is a non-dimensional index and canevaluate, in principle, the rate of the effective use within the designed
capacities of all the system components while machining a part family.
Figure 6.11 shows a concept of the flexibility evaluation vector, whenplacing the stress on the processing function. In this evaluation, we use anindex represented by the space vector within the Cartesian Co-ordinate, inwhich the “Absolute Value (Magnitude of Vector)” and “Directional Cosine”
can represent the “Total System Flexibility” and “Characteristic Feature of
System Configuration”, respectively. As can be readily seen, it is possible
to add another attribute, e.g. machining cost, by extending thethree-dimensional vector to the four-dimensional one.
More specifically, the flexibility evaluation vector is given by the three156

attributes i.e. (1) fluctuation of machining volume for a part family (Γkm),(2) part kinds possible to machine (n*) and (3) operational efficiency ofstations (system components) within a system for each part within a partfamily (εkm). These three attributes can be given as follows.
By assuming now that we have a group of part families Pk (k = 1~i), andthe system J (J = 1~N) enables to process it, then, the operational efficiency
εki while machining the part i within the part family Pk is given by

where, ST is the total number of stations, e.g. machine tool, inspection
stand, washing station and buffer, by which the part is processed somethingnecessary, and Ski is the number of stations used for processing the part i.
By assuming furthermore, nk is the number of part kinds consisting of thepart family Pk, nkmax is the maximum value within nk, Pkim is the mean
production volume per one month of the part i within the part family Pk
during certain period (piece/month), and Pkimin and Pkimax are the minimum
and maximum production volumes per one month of the part i within thepart family Pk during certain period, respectively, then, we can express theflexibility of system J when machining the part family Pk by nk, εkm (meanvalue of εk) and Γkm (mean value of Γki), where, Γki is the fluctuation rangeof mean production volume per one month.
After converting into the non-dimensional values, these can be duly written
as

157

158

Fig. 6.12 A validity verification for flexibility evaluation vector:a Part family No. 1. b Part family No. 2. c FMC of centre-located robot
type for gear manufacturing
where,

To verify the validity for the flexibility evaluation vector, a case study was
carried out by taking an FMC as an example, and also by assuming the twopart families to be finished. Figs. 6.12 (a), (b) and (c) reproduce the cellconfiguration and machining requirements. In this case, the part family No.
1 needs not gear manufacturing, so that we may have the obvious result.
Figure 6.13 is the evaluation result, and as can be seen, the flexibility
evaluation vector can facilitate for the system evaluation to a large extent,
although having further problems to be solved as follows 5.
5 The idea of the flexibility evaluation vector was transferred to a certain number of the Japaneseenterprises, and duly they applied it to their systems. Because of companies’ confidentialities, there wereno publicised reports, but they reported informally the better availability of the flexibility evaluation
vector.

159

Fig. 6.13 Application of flexibility evaluation vector to conventional FMC(1) How to evaluate the quick response capability to market change andcustomer requirements.
(2) How to evaluate the quick response capability for changes of productspecifications and product design.
In fact, these are primarily concerned with the system flexibility in wider
scope, and thus another necessity is to define the system flexibility fromthe hierarchical point of view.

6.5 Cell Description - Its Applications to Similarity
Evaluation and Layout Design
The cell description is one of the fundamental issues for FMC in general
concerns, and there are a few methods to describe the cell configuration,e.g. “Directed Graph”, “MFG (Mark Flow Graph)” and “Petri Net
160

Diagramme”. Obviously, each description has its own advantages anddisadvantages, and for example, the directed graph can only represent an
aspect of FMC, i.e. cell configuration in still stand, whereas the Petri Net
diagramme can skillfully represent the dynamic states of the system,
although the representation is somewhat complex.
Figure 6.14 reproduces the Petri Net diagramme for the AGV active
patterns at the work loading area. As can be seen, each working state of
AGV can be visualised in accordance with the time lapse, and thus we canproduce effectively the simulation software of the manufacturing systems
by using the Petri Net representation. In due course, Eloundou et al (2016)
applied the Petri Net diagramme to evaluate the specified flexibility, i.e.
routing flexibility.

Fig. 6.14 An example of system description by Petri Net
In consideration of the complexity even in the description of FMC, we will
discuss the directed graph representation and its applications in thefollowing.
As will be clear from Fig. 3.4, FMC can be described by considering (1)161the cell components, and (2) material and information flows, and we mustchoose a proper description depending upon the application area. For
example, Hu and Ito (1987) aimed at the similarity evaluation of FMC todetermine the standardised type, and thus placed the stress on the material
flow.
Importantly, the material flow gets involved (1) the work, (2) end effectorof robot, and (3) carousel storage magazine in the case of FMC shown
together in Fig. 6.15 (see Fig. 3.6 (a)). More specifically, the robot canhandle the work and end effector, and the travelling gripper located at therear of the machine body can handle the cutting edge module in modular
tooling and also the in-process gauging probe for the work. In short, thematerial flow has certain hierarchy depending upon to what extent thetransferred objective should be considered as shown with the black, red andgreen colours in Fig. 6.15. Needles to say, the same story is available forthe information flow.

Fig. 6.15 A directed graph representation for FMC of
Jones & Lamson-brandIn the directed graph, the vertex and directed edge correspond with the cellcomponent and material flow including the transfer direction, respectively.
162

In addition, the vertex has its own property, e.g. kind of machine tool andtype of robot, and this is a differing feature from that of directed graph in
the graph theory. As a result, FMC can be evaluated from such three
aspects as follows.
(1) Focusing on the vertex, i.e. similarity evaluation for cell components.
(2) Focusing on the directed edge, i.e. similarity evaluation for materialflow.
(3) Cell configuration by simultaneous evaluation from both the vertex
and the directed edge.
As well known, the directed graph can be converted into the adjacency
matrix, and thus it is possible to calculate the rate of similarity for thematerial flow, when having the two cells to be compared. Actually, the rateof similarity for the material flow is given by the identity rate of (i, j)
components between both the matrixes. In contrast, the rate ofcommonness for the system component between both the cells, i.e.
similarity of system functions in the cell, can be given by the identity rateof the vertexes after describing the machine tool, transportation equipment
and warehouse with the functional description. In short, the functionaldescription for the machine tool is that for form-generating movement, andthe transportation equipment and warehouse may be described as per
similar methodology for that of machine tools (Ito, 2014). At burning issue
is thus to what extent the graph should be detailed in the determination of
the standardised FMC.
Having in mind that FMC for one-off production may be converted into the
CPS module in the smart factory, the cell description will get involved in
the design methodology for the smart factory by extending its applicationfrom the hardware to software, i.e. functionality design of the controller.
As a clue for such an idea, let us discuss a methodology to design thecompact and cubic-like FMC (system function-integrated MC) proposed by
Huang et al (1990). The proposed method is based on the spatial allocation
approach of the functional and structural blocks, which are in closer
relation to the six-fold system function, i.e. machining, transportation,163

buffer as a storage, surveillance including diagnosis and maintenance, cell
controller and linkage to other FMCs. Table 6.5 reproduces the functional
blocks and units, which are pre-determined as design entities for FMC in
consideration of preferable configurations. In due course, the functional
unit can be converted into the structural block, so that the cell configuration
can be obtained as a design output, although there remains something to be
seen in the “One-to-One Conversion” from the functional unit to thestructural block as same as that in CAPP (see Section 6.3).

Table 6.5 Representative functional blocks and units for FMC
Intuitively, the functional block should be interconnected on the basis of
the material and information flows within the cell. For example, the tool
and work flow between the machining and the tooling blocks, and between
the machining and the buffer blocks, respectively. It is thus reasonable toconsider such flows possible to connect between both the blocks, and tovisualise it by the directed graph. Fig. 6.16 shows a typical directed graph,
where the vertex and directed edge describe the functional unit and due
flows, respectively.

164

Fig. 6.16 Directed graph representation in functional unit level for FMC
Consequently, in consideration of all the flows possible within the cell,when the necessary functional units are pre-determined, i.e. “Generalised
Connecting Patterns”, we can produce all the cell configurations possibleon the basis of a basic connecting pattern. In short, the basic connecting
pattern can be chosen from the generalised connecting pattern by placing
the functional unit within 3-dimensional space as the “Cube” under somenecessary constraints. In fact, there are 1,100 cell configurations obtained
from 7 variant patterns, which is based on the generalised connecting
pattern for Table 6.5.
For example, Fig. 6.17 shows some variants obtained from a basic
connecting pattern, and Fig. 6.18 reproduces an example for FMC todeepen the necessary understanding in what is the correlation between the
cube representation of the functional unit and the cell configuration inpractice.

165

Fig. 6.17 Example of variants generated from a basic connecting patternFig. 6.18 FMC and spatial allocation of its functional units by cubes
As can be readily seen from Fig. 6.18, the design methodology mentioned
above appears to be applicable to the CPS module, because such an FMC

166

may be converted into a core of the CPS module by reinforcing themachining function much more than ever before (see Chapter 3). On thatoccasion, the functional block D in Table 6.5 is primary concern especiallyplacing the main stress on the connectivity with cloud and fog computing.

6.6 Process Integration and Disintegration in FTL Design
As already shown in Fig. 3.2, generally speaking, we need the re-design ofsome parts while carrying out the “Analyses of Processes and Required
Time of Each Process”, and a group of the part families can be determined
as one of the input specifications for the system design. Then, the concept
and layout designs are duly carried out. More specifically, the necessary
number of the machining stations, in certain cases islands and units, should
be determined from the information of the process analyses and inconsideration of the line balance specified by the tact time and load
distribution at each station, so that we can reduce the idle time as shorten as
possible.
As can be easily imagined, the determinant in this work is the allowable,
acceptable and preferable allocation of the tact time between both themachining stations, provided that each station is in full loading condition
while machining a part family. More specifically, such a determinant canfacilitate the load allocation at each station based on the processes
integration and disintegration, i.e. process adjustment.
With the advent of the function-integrated kinds in the machine tool, it
appears that such a process adjustment renders useless. In contrast, we need,in certain case of FTL design, such a process adjustment, and supposedly,
the very mature system designer can only manage such a work. Reportedly,
we have not any methodologies for FTL design applicable to the practiceeven now, and thus, for the sake of further research guide, a trial research
will be introduced in the following.
In principle, the design of FTL can be facilitated by the process integrationand disintegration to a larger extent as proven by our long-standing
experiences (Ito et al., 1993). Thus, Shinno et al (1996) conducted first the167interview research into decision making of the very mature designer toclarify the characteristic features in FTL design. In short, the findings are as
follows.
(1) Leading design factors are the machining process, kind of machine tooland functional configuration of the line.
(2) The factors mentioned above are in mutually tangled relation to one
another.
(3) The information flow in decision making for determining each design
factor results in a closed loop-like or chain reaction-like correlation, i.e.
ill-defined problem.

Fig. 6.19 Concept for design methodology of FTL
On the basis of such findings, a methodology was proposed as shown in
Fig. 6.19, in which the manufacturing knowledge is described at the layer 1
to support information processing to design FTL at the layer 2. Morespecifically, the manufacturing knowledge can be represented using the168logical notation, which is on the strength of the descriptions for themachining process, form-generating movement and machine tool. As canbe readily seen from Fig. 6.19, the input data with constraints can beconverted into the system configuration of FTL by information processing
at the layer 2.
Shinno et al applied the proposed methodology to a practical design of FTL,
which can machine the part families for the motorcar engine, i.e. those forcarrier case, cylinder block and cylinder head of the passenger car, in
corporation with Toyoda Iron Works. Through the computer simulation,
FTL of asynchronous type shows higher productivity than that ofsynchronous type, when the monthly machining volume is up to 6,000. It isfurthermore said that Mercedes-Benz applied the achievements of Shinno
et al to the design of its Untertürkheim Factory later, which is called“HMS-Holonic Manufacturing System” (On that occasion, Ito, one of thecolleagues of Shinno, received two-sheet of handouts from thecorrespondent within Mercedes-Benz).

References
Barthold W (1986) Jagdwaffenkunde. VEB Verlag Technik, Berlin.
Eloundou J Baudry D Bensrhair A (2016) Evaluation of the Routing
Flexibility of Flexible Manufacturing System.
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01260680.
Höft, K (March, 1999). Culture- and Mindset-Harmonised Manufacturing
in Sustainable Global Environments. Dissertation, Tokyo Institute ofTechnology.
Hu C-M Ito Y (1987) Evaluation of System Configuration of FMC for
Metal Cutting. Robotics and CIM; 3-3: 319-326.
Huang K-J Shinno H Ito Y (July 1990) Design Methodology for FMC ofCompact Type - Spatial Allocation Approach with Functional and
Structural Blocks. In: Proc. of 1st Inter. Conf. on Automation Technology,
Taipei, National Chiao Tung University, p. 165 – 173.
Ihara T and Ito Y (1991) A New Concept of CAPP Based on Flair of169

Experienced Engineers - Analyses of Decision-Making Processes ofExperienced Process Engineers. Annals of the CIRP; 40-1: 437-440.
Ito Y (2014) Chapter 10 Similarity Evaluation for Flexible Manufacturing
Cell: An Interesting Application of Graph Theory to Manufacture. In: Ito(ed.) Thought-Evoking Approaches in Engineering Problems. p. 213-230,
Springer.
Ito Y Ohmi T Shima Y (1985) An Evaluation Method of Flexible
Manufacturing System - A Concept of Flexibility Evaluation Vector and Its
Application. In: Proc. of 25th Inter. MTDR Conf., p. 89-95, MacMillan.
Ito Y Shinno H Sacaguti A (September, 1993) Grouping andDecomposition Methodology for Machining Process to Assist the Design of
Flexible Transfer Line. In: Proc. of 26th ISATA – Dedicated Conf. on Lean
Manufacturing in the Automotive Industries. Aachen, p. 375-382.
Ito Y, Ruth K (2006) Theory and Practices of Manufacturing Culture Synergy of Culture and Production Vol. 3. Artefact Verlag.
Metternich J et al (2013) Volume and Mix Flexibility Evaluation of Lean
Production Systems. Procedia CIRP 9: 79-84.
Nakano S et al (2009) Modeling for physical characteristics in steering
performance and consideration for component design in transmission train(1st Report). JTEKT Engineering Journal, No. 1007: 15-22.
Rajagobalan R (Dec. 2016) Virtual Prodcut, Process and Service Platform
to Enhance Manufacturing Productivity. Design Workshop 2016. IIITDM-J,
India.
Rogalski S Ovtcharova J (2009) Flexibilitätsbewertung vonProduktionssytemen. ZwF; 104 – 1~2: 64-70.
Shinno H et al (September, 1996) Design Methodology for Flexible
Transfer Line of Asynchronous Pallet Transporting Type. In: Proc. of
M2VIP’96. Guimaråes Portugal, p. 2-123~2-127.

170

Abstract So far we have been demonstrated the potentials of flexible
manufacturing technology that is currently available or in the process ofdevelopment for convertibility towards CPS Module in the smart factory. We
have seen that an important factor of the ‘Industrie 4.0’ strategy is thepreservation and continuous further use (and improvement, i.e. the“elevation” of technological potentials) of already existing smart production
technology and to include these technologies in the emerging structures ofthe smart factory. Obviously this requires migration strategies towards thesmart factory. But since the existing technological components are notsufficient to implement the concept of ‘Industry 4.0’, the pathway to this end
is thus both, evolutionary and also radical innovation. And it is very likelythat also the work organisation and qualification structures of the smart
factory can not only be thought of as an evolutionary continuation of today's
structures, but also require radical re-thinking.
This chapter will address the so far unexplained relationship between thetechnology of the smart factory and the organisational and qualification
aspects of production under the conditions of ‘Industrie 4.0’. In popular
debate, this often reads as follows: Will the smart factory revolutionise theworld of work? Or: Will ‘Industrie 4.0’ demand completely new
qualifications of the work force? These and other questions will be taken up
and answered tentatively. The focus will be on requirements for workorganisation and qualification in the areas of design (construction) andmanufacture. This means that on the one hand engineers are targeted and on
the other technicians and personnel at shop-floor level. The former seethemselves as developers of smart production systems, the others as
implementers and maintenance personnel exposed to the newly arisingchallenges.

1717.1 Introduction
Although not showing explicitly all the leading subjects related to theorganisational structure, work organisation and human resources in Table 6.1,
these subjects are very important in the discussion of both FCIPS and thesmart factory, and as can be readily seen, these are in close tie with theindustrial sociology and manufacturing culture. Within the manufacturing
culture context, some quick notes were already suggested in Section 1.4, andfrom Table 1.3, we may envision roughly what are facing R & D subjects. In
addition, some case studies on the smart factory exemplify the workorgnisation suitable for CPS module (see Table 5.3).
In this context, we must remember that the leading prerequisite of the
manufacturing culture is that an engineering technology consists of the“Common Technological Entities”, which are available across the wholeworld, the “Region-specified Technological Entities”, and industrial culturespecific entities, of which the last-mentioned are only available at the
specified local region. As will be clear from the concept, definition andprerequisite of the manufacturing culture, there are furthermore four driving
factors, which can facilitate the production structure in very near future
including the smart factory, as follows.
(1) Prevalence of localised globalisation with highly information-intensive
and aging society.
(2) Necessity and inevitability of “Trans-disciplinary Knowledge” rather
than “Mono- and Multiple-disciplinary Knowledge”.
(3) Product concepts deploying from “Customer Satisfaction” to “Customer
Delight” and(4) Industrial culture-specific production concepts that consider certain
peculiarities such as a prevailing qualification structure of the work force.
With the growing importance of the smart factory, we need duly to detail theaims and scope in each subject shown within Tables 1.3 and 6.1, although
we may face much more difficulties caused by the complexity involving
within each subject than our estimation. Such difficulties may be caused by172the mutually-tangled reciprocal relationships among various attributes
ranging from the production technology, through the manufacturing culture,to economics, sociology, labour science, geopolitics and so on. Obviously,
we must specify the characteristic features within each subject inconsideration of the concept of the smart factory, and also relative weight
among a group of attributes.
As can be readily seen from the above, in fact, it is at present very difficult
to sublimate each subject shown in Tables 1.3 and 6.1 into a neatly definedproblem. In contrast, we can provide further supporting information to detaileach subject as will be suggested in the following.

Table 7.1 Suggestions for importance of manufacturing culture between
late 1990s and middle of 2000s
Table 7.1 summarises some evidences, suggestions and proposals indicating
the importance of the manufacturing culture, and from it, we can understandwhat is under way in factory planning, work organisation and cultivation ofhuman resources. Importantly, we must determine the work organisation by
the “Case-by-Case” way, because the work organisation depends upon, in173general, the objective product, system configuration, industrial cultural
peculiarities and operational pattern to a large extent, resulting in the
difficulty in the establishment of its generalised methodology.
For further understanding, we discuss some details of MANTYS in Table 7.1
herein. MANTYS is the acronym for “Manufacturing Technologies”, whichaims at the promotion of the innovation in manufacturing by focusing on themachinery technology and its interface with the manufacturing process likemachine tools, assembly systems, handling systems and so on (Decubber,2001). In the product and process innovation for the evolution of the market,
we must first know the needs of customers at present and in future, and thus
pay duly the influence of the cultural variety to the product specifications. In
addition, we must also establish the right partnerships among enterprises
worldwide by considering a new business model (Gausemeier, 2005).
To this end, we must eye the uncountable contribution of the manufacturing
culture to the smart factory, and all the activities related to the manufacturing
culture should be based on the comparative research into the objective
problem. Obviously, it is better to visualise the research result by using the“Cylindrical Model”, which consists of a group of the phase plane layers
ordering in accordance with the time axis as shown in Fig. 7.1. Morespecifically, a technological system can be visualised in detail by positioning
its core entities accordingly on a phase plane, i.e. radar chart (mind map)
representation, so that the entity position can represent its characteristicfeature correctly. Importantly, the origin of the radar chart can be regarded
as a total evaluation index, and the changing phenomena of a technologicalsystem can be scrutinised by connecting the changing position of each entity
as shown in Fig. 7.1. More importantly, the cylinder shape distorts inaccordance with the shift of the centre of the radar chart, and from such a
distortion pattern, we may understand the technological inheritance in theobjective (Moritz, 1994).

174

Fig. 7.1 Cylindrical model for visualising developing history (by Moritz)

In both, FCIPS and the smart factory, we must consider that theorganisational structure is in closer relation to the corporate culture(organisational culture) and business model. More specifically, one of theleading issues in the business model is the product deployment in the market
worldwide. To disseminate the product, we must discuss the production
method and organisation, i.e. those related to “Production Morphology
Culture” and “Organisational Culture such as the Corporation, Industrial,
Regional or National Culture”.
Obviously, there have been a considerable number of the research reports sofar; however, even now we need to conduct further research into, for example,
the following subjects.
(1) Establishment of business models for enterprises in localised
globalisation era, which is applicable to the computer simulation.
(2) Desirable model for “Division of Work” in information processing

175between CIM and the cell controller, and also between the cloud andfog computing.
(3) Comparative research into the work organisation in multinational
corporations.
(4) Allocation of work/tasks in the smart factory: which competences areincorporated in the CPS module, the software and the data
infrastructure, and which competences remain with the engineers,technicians and shop-floor personnel?
In retrospect, we proposed already a forerunning concept of the smart factory,
which is called the “Distributed Cell-integrated FMS Using Communication
Network”, in the middle of 1980s (Ito, 1987). Importantly, this concept andconcerns were proposed in Norway, Japan, Germany and USA on thatoccasion, and suggested the following characteristic features.
(1) Use of FMC as a basic module of FMS.
(2) Distribution of a group of FMCs at several locations within a certain
region, e.g. industrial estate and nation, and across the whole world. For
example, SME-community with various industrial sectors has been
established within a local industrial estate and verified its beneficial
features as reported elsewhere.
(3) Integration of FMCs by positively using an information network, e.g.
LAN, telecommunication and satellite.
Figure 7.2 reproduces one of the variants of such a concept, i.e. FMS ofinternational co-operative or divisional type. In this type, it is preferable that
FMCs for assembly and product inspection are allocated near the market ofthe objective product. In addition, such an international co-operative typemay play the role for solving some political problems within the international
technical co-operation and also trade friction.
Obviously, the concept shown in Fig. 7.2 may be converted into that of smart
factory, provided that FMC is for one-off production with the better
connectivity with the information communication network, and that thecentral computer can mange the human-intelligence-related function. In
contrast, we must investigate (1) a remedy for realising the “Same Place –176

Same Time” principle especially from the viewpoint of material flow, and(2) the cell (factory) location problem with wider scopes, i.e. from theviewpoints of technology, economics and sociology. For example, a groupof FMCs for machining should be allocated at the region, where we can get
a considerable number of the mature town factories, and in contrast FMC for
final assembly should be allocated closer at the airport and harbour for
shipment.

Fig. 7.2 Concept of FMS of international co-operative typein middle of 1980s
Equally, we can imagine that FMS of international co-operative type is very
similar to the “Virtual Concentration of Production Bases” as already shownin Fig. 1.8. Together with considering the product deployment, we must eye
a remarkable organisational innovation in the machine tool manufacturer. In
fact, we have so far believed that SME is suitable for machine tool
manufacturing, and thus we must investigate a vital problem regarding towhat extent the large-sized enterprise is suitable for manufacturing themachine tool as compared with SME. Paraphrasing, we must clarify theallowable size of the enterprise in the machine tool manufacture.
177

Of special note, each conglomerate has its characteristic features in both thelocational aspect and the segregation for product kinds by deploying thedesign office, factory, service bases, and so on across the whole world. Thismay be interpreted one of the “Virtual Industrial Agglomeration”, which will
benefit something definite, and thus is worth investigating its potential
features and also the availability for the smart factory.
For the sake of further understanding, Figs. 7.3 (a) and (b) reproduce
furthermore another two virtual concentrations, and a newly arisen problem
is the mobility in the enterprise merger. For example, Hüller Hille Group
once belonged to DMG, but now is under the umbrella of Fair Friend Group(Taiwan).

178

Fig. 7.3 Another two conglomerates in machine tool manufacturing:a DMG Mori. b Fair Friend Group

7.3 Cultivation of Human Resources
To establish the smart factory together with its objective product, we need touse the interdisciplinary approaches and to foster human resources withmultiple-talent, e.g. product engineer with certain abilities for the
information technology, psychology, ergonomics, social and occupational
science and so on. More specifically, the engineering designer should create
the smart product as exemplified in Table 6.1 (c), and we can observe suchproducts on the market nowadays as already shown, for example, in Table
6.2. In short, we need now the engineering designer, who can understand the“Product Culture”, which is compatible with the era of the smart product.
Importantly, in Table 6.2 the region-specified type should be designed as per
the safety law of USA, the aesthetic-like type has been tried much more thanever before, and it is furthermore interesting that another challenging trial isa synergy of two different types, i.e. amalgamation of individual differenceand sensitivity-oriented types. For example, the underwear must have large
sweat absorbing and quick-drying capabilities as well as the comfortable
wearing with cool touch.
179

Although not calling the smart product, from Table 6.2 we can intuitively
understand the necessity of fostering the engineering designer with multipletalent, which is based on the knowledge of trans-disciplinary. Of note, Fig.
7.4 visualises the qualification requirement of the engineering designer forthe product, which involves to some extent the culture- and mindset-related
attributes. Such attributes are uncertain and difficult to quantify as
exemplified by the industrial design for the total enclosure in the machine
tool, where at issue is “Penchant and Preference of User”. Apparently, theengineering designer should pay the special attention to the “Folklore”.

Fig. 7.4 Three leading attribute groups in culture- andmindset-harmonised productIn due course, a facing engineering problem is to conduct the preferable
synergy of all the attributes within these three groups concerned. In addition,
Table 7.2 summarises the leading beneficial features of the regionharmonised machine tool, and from it we may guess also the necessity offostering the machine tool designer with multiple-talent.
Having in mind the importance for fostering human resources with multipletalent, we must also be aware that the design procedure applicable to the180practice is far from completion, because we cannot solve the fatal problems
as follows.

Table 7.2 Some beneficial features of region-harmonised machine tools(1)

The three leading attribute groups are mutually in reciprocate relation
to one another, and even within a group, we can observe such thereciprocate relationship among a considerable number of the attributes.
(2) Apart from the product design specifications, other attributes include
uncertainties to various and larger extents. Obviously, such attributes
are not quantified and induce certain difficulties in the product design.
(3) Even within a leading attribute group, e.g. product design
specifications in general, there are various attributes with different
information properties. For example, the part drawing gives us thegeometrical information, and duly it should be converted into the
manufacturing-related information to be the part in reality (see Section
6.2).
These fatal problems imply simultaneously further hindrance in thecultivation of human resources.
Within the cultivation of human resources, another leading-edge topic is tofoster the region-specified engineer. As can be readily seen from the leading
prerequisite of the manufacturing culture shown in Fig. 7.5, we need now thehuman resources, who have satisfactory qualification applicable to thespecified professional sphere across the whole world and simultaneously the
deep region-specified technological, economic and social knowledge.

181

Fig. 7.5 Educational system of production engineer and technology transfer
in consideration of manufacturing culture
Obviously, the same story is applicable to the technology transfer and we caninterpret that the product deployment means one variation in the technology
transfer of wider scope. More specifically, such a technology transfer ranges
from the same product with the same production method, through the same
product with differing production method, to the differing production
organisation for the same product with the same production method in
accordance with various environments of each region.
In short, the technology transfer should be limited within the common
technological entities as shown already in Fig. 7.5, and in turn the technology
transferee (receiver) must conduct the self-development for the regionspecified technological entities and integrating it with the common
technological entities to accomplish a technology creation. As can be easily
imagined, it emphasises that the methodology for the technology creation isfar from establishment, although suggesting its very importance more than
20 years ago.
Within the context of the cultivation of human resources, an interesting trial
is CDIO, i.e. an Initialism for Conceive-Design-Implement-Operation,founded by MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) of USA in the late182

1990s to foster the engineer of next generation. CDIO has conducted aninternational engineering education in the aerospace, mechanical, electricaland applied physics spheres by the collaboration of 50 institutions in over 25
countries worldwide. The education ranges, for example, from the complex
value-added engineering systems (level 1) to the hands-on experience and acycle of conceive-design-implement-operate (level 4) (CDIO, 2007).
Importantly, CDIO has incorporated two subjects in the educational
programme, i.e. external and societal context, and also enterprise andbusiness context. The former consist of “The Impact of Engineering onSociety” and “The Historical and Cultural Context”. The latter is concernedwith the appreciating different enterprise cultures. In tis context, Saini (2012)suggested also the importance of the synergy of the social science andtechnology when discussing the ethics of the engineer.
Reportedly, CDIO is surely a very interesting trial; however, we must alsodelve into the educational organisation, and for such a discussion, a goodcase study is that of the University of Cambridge, when considering thepreferable pattern in the technology transfer.
Although not discussing the aspect of the manufacturing culture, theUniversity of Cambridge has established a new educational system byincorporating the “Departmental System” in the traditional college system.
In accordance with the private information from Professor Keith Foster of
EPSRC in February 2004, the departmental system aims at the education likethe experiment and practice for the relatively large group of the student. As
well known, the college system can be characterised by the “Mentor System”,
which is for the education of the small group of the students.
It may thus be suggested that the region-specified engineer will be educatedeffectively by providing the student the region-specified engineeringknowledge from the mentor. In contrast, the departmental system may
facilitate the education of the common engineering knowledge.

183

7.4 Cultivation of Shop Floor Skills for Smart FactoryThis section focuses on the design of the smart factory as a socio-technicalsystem and the interaction between humans and their surrounding
environment, including the machines and systems. Therefore, we must havea look at other, non-technical disciplines and their concepts of ‘Industrie 4.0’.
The main focus of relevant scientific disciplines (and sub-disciplines) suchas industrial sociology, work sciences etc. undoubtedly is on workorganisation, qualification, lifelong learning and career models, knowledge
management, team building and health management.
Even if a socio-technical design approach is conceptually linked to ‘Industry
4.0’, or smart factory programme, which is intended to integrate technicalwith work organisation and qualification aspects, there are fears that thedesign of work systems will only be tackled once the technical artifacts,
networks or systems have already been developed and implemented. Thereis little doubt that such a procedure restricts the creative freedom of workorganisation and qualification on shop floor level.
From a sociological perspective, the qualification of the work force inparticular is placed at the centre of the assessment of changes in the world ofwork induced by ‘Industry 4.0’. Together with vocational training research,
industrial sociology tries to assess the qualification requirements of the smart
factory. Acatech's high-flying vision of realising extended decision-making
and participation scope as well as possibilities for the working load
regulation on the shop floors of the smart factory is doubted. At leastsociological researchers do not see a direct predetermined pathway towards
more self-responsible autonomy and greater decision-making scope forworkshop personnel. From their point of view, certain precautions must be
taken to make shop-floor workers fit for work in the smart factory and toensure the highest possible level of the “decent work”. The most suitablemeans of implementing and securing this are in-company qualification or
further training measures. One way to go is selecting those occupations in
the metal and electrical industry that will have to work in the smart factory

184and to compare their competences with the competence requirements of thesmart factory. By determining the differences, it can be estimated whether
and to what extent a need for requalification exists; however, the concrete
contents are only roughly outlined and cannot (yet) be specified down to thesmallest detail. For the case of Germany, Spöttl and Windelband (2016) havemade an attempt to assess the compatibility of occupations like industrial
mechanic, mechatronics and electronics technicians for automation
technology, and the cover ratio of their competence portfolios with theassumed requirements of production under the regime of ‘Industrie 4.0’. In
short, they found that there is a considerable match of the mentioned
qualifications with the assumed and expectable new requirements. The
anticipated competences for the work area ‘system integration’ of electronics
technicians for automation technology might be the following.
(1) Analysing functional relationships and ‘Industrie 4.0’ process flows.
(2) Install, configure and parameterise the ‘Industrie 4.0’ components,
systems and networks as part of the Reference Architecture Model
Industrie 4.0 Layer.
(3) Connecting components to complex automation devices and integratethem into the functional Industrie 4.0 layers;(4) Monitoring, testing, maintaining and repairing Industrie 4.0 systems.
(IG Metall et al. 2017, p. 28 – translation by the authors).
It is easy to see that there is a high degree of overlap between thesecompetences (likely to be required by Industrie 4.0) and those alreadyavailable. The only difference is that new technical objects must be added
and new standards (such as RAMI4.0) must be taken into account. Therefore
there is no need to define completely new occupational profiles, but rather
to augment the existing outline of competences. This is where in-company
qualification becomes a crucial success factor for dealing with the challenges
posed by the smart factory. But they also say, that there are other occupations
and jobs in the metal and electrical industry, which need more efforts todevelop their skills and competence profiles towards the emerging
requirements of the smart factory, in some cases it could require a re-design185

of job profiles (Spöttl, Windelband 2016). They expand their argument bystating that the alignment of competences towards the requirements of‘Industrie 4.0’ demands concise analyses of the work processes and activity
fields, which are the cooperative effort among engineers, sociologists, work
science with the work scientists, industrial psychologists and the like.
If the production concepts described in chapter 5, such as Adidas' speed
factory becomes reality, it is also increasingly important that this kind of
production can be operated under different qualification conditions
worldwide. Thus, the technology must be highly resilient or the workforces’
qualifications must be more ‘mouldable’. In both cases, design approaches
that are committed to the concepts of manufacturing culture or industrial
culture, are inevitable.
It is also very important to consider the influences of the global networking
structures linked to ‘Industry 4.0’ on skill formation. Globalised networks
can thus become a limiting factor for autonomous, self-directed action of theworkforce. Let's construct an example that goes beyond the existing supplierstructures: By using “Cloud Computing”, it becomes possible to send thesensor/actuator data relevant for preventive maintenance of a company toexternal service providers almost in real time and have them evaluated. This
links work organisation and process control between two or more companies
on a global scale. There is a danger that autonomy of action is limited andself-control is replaced by external control. By integrating further
operational functional areas into these Cloud Computing-base networked
structures, highly complex couplings are created whose effects on internal
company organisation structures and work processes – and thus also on skill
formation – are not yet foreseeable.

References
Decubber C (13th Sep., 2001) What is MANTYS ? MANTYS Seminar, EMO
Hannover.
Gausemeier J (19th Sep. 2005) New Business Models for the European

186

Machine Tool Industry. In: MANTYS Public Conference, EMO Hannover.
http://www.cdio.org/2007
IG Metall, Gesamtmetall, ZVEI, VDMA (March 2017): Ausbildung und
Qualifizierung für Industrie 4.0 – Den Wandel erfolgreich gestalten.
Handlungsempfehlungen der Sozialpartner.
Ito Y (1987) Possible features of next generation FMS and system design.
Advanced Robotics; 2-2: 103-120.
Moritz E F (1994) Der Einfluß umfeldabhängiger Größen auf den
Innovationsprozeß. In: Dissertation “Ein Vergleich von Strategien undVorgehensweisen in der Produktinnovation in Japan und Deutschland am
Beispiel des Werkzeugmaschinenbaus”. Tokyo Institute of Technology, S
51-59.
Saini A (20th Feb. 2012) Social Engineering. E & T Magazine (IET).
Spöttl G, Windelband L (2016) Industrie 4.0 - Neugestaltung industrieller
Prozesse mit erheblichen Konsequenzen für die Berufsausbildung!. In: Die
berufsbildende Schule; Vol. 68/9: 295-301.

187

As reported and suggested elsewhere, primary concerns in flexible
machining are FMC of stand-alone type, large-sized FMC, FMS and FTL.
Importantly, nearly all flexible machining systems are, at present, modulardesigned, where the basic modules are FMC and a machine as a whole, e.g.
mill-turn and MC of line type. In fact, FMC-integrated FMS and FTL haverecently prevailed. In contrast, we need also the conventional FMS and FTL,
where the system components are such as a machine tool, transportation
devices, warehouse and so on as a whole.

Fig. A. 1 First-hand view of modular design in flexible machining
and convertibility into CPS module

188

In the machine tool sphere, the modular design of hierarchical type wasalready established, and its upper layer is, in principle, applicable to FMS
and concerns, so that the system can be facilitated the “Flexibility”,“Expandability” and “Redundancy” (Ito, 2008). Obviously, we employ
similar modular principle to other cell and system components.
Figure A.1 shows a first-hand view of the modular design in FMS andconcerns at present, and importantly, FMC for one-off production with keencost and “One-machine Shop”-like FMC may convert to the CPS module inthe smart factory by contriving properly the cell controller. Within such
FMCs context, we must, furthermore, be aware that the core kind in machine
tools for FMC is of “Function-integrated Kinds” and should be design on thebasis of the “Platform Concept”.
In the following, thus, some quick notes will be given to the leading issues.

FMC

At present, FMC and large-sized FMC are on leading position, and as alreadydescribed, the (defacto) standardised FMCs, i.e. FMCs of pallet pool androbot types, play the role of the basic module in flexible machining to a large
extent. Besides, both the FMCs and their variants become very popular andappear as to be one of the conventional machining facilities within SME (seeChapters 3 and 4).
In general, FMC is designed by the modular principle, in which each cellcomponent related to five fundamental functions, i.e. machining,transportation, storage, maintenance, and also control and surveillance (cellcontroller), is of basic module, and as will be clear from the above, the “CellDescription” is very helpful as one of the design methodology (see Section
6.5).
Importantly, the standardised FMC can be, in general, characterised by thecore machining function, and reportedly MC and TC can facilitate it atpresent to some extent; however, with growing importance in the flexibility
reinforcement, the machining function can be facilitated, for example, by
quinaxial-controlled MC, MC convertible into the simplified or special-189purpose type and mill-turn. In certain cases, the mill-turn becomes much
more dexterous by integrating the quinaxial-controlled MC and TC of twinspindle type than ever before, resulting in the core of an advanced FMC. In
fact, we can expect highly such an advanced FMC; however, we must
furthermore consider that the more flexible the FMC, the more difficult is its
availability because of its higher purchasing and running cost.
Following such an interesting trend, as can be seen from Fig. A.1, FMC has
been deployed into the “One-machine Shop”, i.e. FMC facilitating by“Function-integrated Kinds” in machining function. In fact, the functionintegrated kind is two-pronged: one is of “Machining Function-integrated
Kind” and the other is of “System Function-integrated Kind” like the transfer
centre as already shown in Fig. 3. 25. For the function-integrated kind, themodular design of hierarchical method is available (Ito, 2008).
In this context, at facing issue is the flexibility evaluation of such advanced
kind like mill-turn itself; however, there are no ways, and thus the authors
assert to define the flexibility of the function-integrated kind in fullconsideration of the following factors.
(1) Compact integration of various core system functions.
(2) Integration of multifarious processing methods.
(3) Tooling versatility for machining.
(4) Accessibility to machining space.
(5) Function promptly facilitating special-purpose machining.
(6) Connectivity with fog computing and also better division of work in
information processing.

Large-sized FMC and FMC-integrated FMS

Although FMC and large-sized FMC are dominant, if necessary we must
install FMS. In general, FMS is of FMC-integrated, which can be establishedby integrating, at least, the standardised FMC and special-purpose FMC. In
certain cases, FMS is modular-designed by determining the basic modules
consisting of the machine tool, transportation facility, warehouse and so on
as a whole.

190

FTL and FMC-integrated FTL
An FMC-integrated FTL is already shown in Fig. 4.7; however, it is notcommon at present to employ FMC-integrated FTL, whereas theconventional FTL is dominant as shown already in Figs. 3.14, 3.15, 4.14 and
4.16. As widely known, the conventional FTL consists mainly of MC of line
type (see Fig. 4.2), and is modular-designed by also determining the basic
modules consisting of the machine tool, transportation facility, warehouseand so on as a whole (see Fig. 3.14).

Platform Concept in Machine Tool Design
It is worth suggesting that the “Function-integrated Kinds” in the machine
tool should be designed in accordance with the “Platform Concept”, which
is one of the variants of the modular design of hierarchical type. In short, the“Platform” is of large-sized structural module of monolithic type, which
consists of a group of the structural body components, i.e. structural units,
allocated far from the machining space. Importantly, in the “Platform
Concept”, we can provide the machine tool with much more various
machining methods than other modular design methods by changing only
the structural units surrounding the machining space like the turret head,main spindle nose, and barrel of the tailstock. We call it “Variant Type inModular Design”, and obviously we can benefit considerably.
Figure A.2 clarifies a typical differing feature between the conventional
modular design and the platform concept. Of special interest, the platformsystem is machining space-oriented and user-oriented, and also may
reinforce its capability of primary form-generating movement when somestructural units is able to interchange “In-suit” at the user’s factory (Ito,2017). It is extremely worth suggesting that with the advance of both themodular attachment and modular tooling, the platform system becomesmuch more effective than ever before. This is because such the attachment
191

Fig. A.2 “Platform Concept” and its application to MC

Fig. A.3 Modular tooling and quick-changing cutting edge around 2015

192

and cutting tool can enhance the capability of secondary form-generating
movement. Figure A.3 shows the cutting tools of modular type and also ofquick-changing type, i.e. one of the variants of modular tooling. In both thetypes, the cutting edge is quickly changeable to respond with the machining
requirement without any time delay, and it is notable that the buttress thread
can joint the cutting edge with either tool shank or adapter to prevent
unfavourable loosing.
As will be clear from the above, another facing issue is to establish a design
methodology for FMC when inputting a group of the part drawings to bemachined. Importantly, we must be aware that the core of machining
function can be, at present, facilitated by the mill-turn and its variants in
responding nearly all machining requirements. Paraphrasing, we must
discuss the design flow of FMC, provided that the primary form-generating
movement is the same for nearly all machining requirements. Thus, atburning issue is the secondary form-generating movement, which can befacilitated by the attachment and tool mounted on machine bodies closely
allocated to the machining space.
Figure A.4 shows a proposal for the design flow of FMC and processplanning in consideration of FMCs applicable. Obviously, a key issimultaneous processing of the compatibility evaluation of FMC with themachining requirements and generation of process plan when employing
FMC already evaluated.
From the practical point of view, such a design flow appears not to beeffective, because the experience-based know-how is crucial in the design ofFMC. In contrast, such a design flow is very effective to explore and unveil
the research subjects in the academia. In fact, we can suggest someinteresting research subjects along with the design flow as follows.
(1) Determination of a group of the basic functional modules, provided thatthe primary machining function remains the same in the most cases, andthat the secondary machining function may be determinants for anotherfour cell functions.

193

Fig. A.4 A proposal for design flow of FMC: a Compatibility evaluationand choice of process plan. b Re-generation procedure of FMC

194

(2) “One-to-One” conversion methodology of “Basic Functional Module”
into “ Basic Structural Module”.
(3) Process analyses in consideration of secondary form generating
movements carried out by attachment and tools. Paraphrasing, newhorizons in process planning when employing innovative attachments
and tools.
(4) Modernisation of GT (Group Technology) theory in consideration ofhighly function-integrated machine tools, and growing importance of
secondary form-generating movements by attachments and tools.
(5) Process planning for highly machining method-integrated kind like
“Mill-Turn of Twin-spindle Type” with innovative modular andcombination tooling system. The “Hand-off” action between both themain spindles may contribute considerably to establish an innovative
process planning, by which process planning at present could become
obsolete. For example, we can first machine the cylindrical work withthe stepped shape by reverse feed cutting without re-chucking, and thencut-off it after the hand-off to the second main spindle.
(6) Simulation of machining methods and their sequences by using“Digital-Twin”, i.e. development of “Digital-Twin” for CAPP
(Computer-Aided Process Planning) and CAOP (Computer-Aided
Operational Planning).
(7) Determination of preferable “Cell Model” for compatibility evaluation
with machining requirements.

References
Ito Y (2008) Modular Design for Machine Tools. McGraw-Hill.
Ito Y (2017) Chapter 7 Concept of “Platform”, Its Application and Modular
Tooling System. In: Ito Y, Matsumura T (eds) Theory and Practice in
Machining Systems. Springer Nature.

195