## 6 Discussion  
The development of DTs for mechatronic systems can be approached differently depending on the software used. AS and Unity each have unique strengths and challenges, which this article aims to compare in creating DTs for the same mechatronic system. In AS, the operating characteristics of pneumatic equipment, such as actuators, valves, and sensors, are mainly predefined. These predefined elements make it easier for students, engineers and developers to create realistic simulations of pneumatic systems, as they can directly use the built-in components and characteristics. AS is specifically designed for simulating, designing, and validating complex automation systems, streamlining the modelling process in a particular 2D environment. On the other hand, Unity is a general-purpose game engine and development platform, which means that it is not tailored for simulating pneumatic systems out of the box. In order to create a DT in Unity, developers need to implement various mathematical functions, physics simulations, and other techniques to accurately model the behaviour of pneumatic components. This inconvenience can be more challenging and time-consuming, as developers have to create these models from scratch. Despite the challenges, Unity's flexibility and extensibility can be advantageous in some situations. For instance, developers can create custom visualisations, integrate the DT with other systems, or even deploy the simulation to various platforms, including virtual and augmented reality environments. This level of versatility allows for more creative and innovative applications, although it may come at the cost of a steeper learning curve and increased development time. One potential approach to overcome these challenges is to leverage the knowledge gained from working with AS. By initially using AS, the persons involved can understand the underlying phenomena and the behaviour of pneumatic components. This knowledge can be transferred to the development process in Unity. Once the developers in Unity have a clear grasp of the requirements and the desired dynamic behaviour of the system, they can more effectively search for and implement various techniques and tricks to achieve realistic simulations. This sequential approach can help bridge the gap between the specialised knowledge of pneumatic systems and the flexible development environment offered by Unity. By leveraging the expertise from both domains, creating high realistic and accurate DTs is possible while benefiting from Unity's versatility and creative potential. The DT model's complexity affects the latency, so more intricate and detailed models necessitate more computational resources and processing time, increasing the latency. On the other hand, simpler models, although they might reduce the latency, may also compromise the accuracy of the DT's representation of the physical system. Experiments from this project with the implementation of DT in AS and Unity showed differences in latency. Specifically, the DT implemented in AS exhibited more delay than Unity. This observation can be attributed to the different computational demands of these two environments, emphasising the simulation environment's role in influencing latency. A relevant trade-off arises in this context: the balance between the fidelity of the model representation and real-time performance. Reducing the complexity of the model can decrease the latency, improving the real-time representation. However, this simplification can also reduce the accuracy of the digital twin. Therefore, it is important to consider this trade-off depending on the specific requirements and goals of the project. the impact of latency on the DT's performance reinforces the need for a balanced approach in DT development. Decisions regarding the model complexity, choice of simulation environment, and computational resources should consider both the desired accuracy and real-time performance of the DT.