Adamson 2015

This article was downloaded by: [Syracuse University Library]
On: 19 June 2015, At: 11:20

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Computer Integrated

Manufacturing
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcim20
Cloud manufacturing – a critical review of recent

development and future trends
a ab a c
Göran Adamson , Lihui Wang , Magnus Holm & Philip Moore
a
Virtual Systems Research Centre, University of Skövde, Skövde, Sweden
b
Department of Production Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm,
Sweden
c
Academy for Innovation & Research, Falmouth University, Cornwall, UK
Published online: 14 Apr 2015.
Click for updates
To cite this article: Göran Adamson, Lihui Wang, Magnus Holm & Philip Moore (2015): Cloud manufacturing – a critical
review of recent development and future trends, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, DOI:
10.1080/0951192X.2015.1031704
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2015.1031704
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2015.1031704
Cloud manufacturing – a critical review of recent development and future trends

a
Göran Adamson *, Lihui Wanga,b, Magnus Holma and Philip Moorec
a
Virtual Systems Research Centre, University of Skövde, Skövde, Sweden; bDepartment of Production Engineering, KTH Royal Institute
of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; cAcademy for Innovation & Research, Falmouth University, Cornwall, UK
(Received 8 July 2014; accepted 18 February 2015)
There is an ongoing paradigm shift in manufacturing, in which the modern manufacturing industry is changing towards
global manufacturing networks and supply chains. This will lead to the flexible usage of different globally distributed,
scalable and sustainable, service-oriented manufacturing systems and resources. Combining recently emerged technologies,
such as Internet of Things, Cloud Computing, Semantic Web, service-oriented technologies, virtualisation and advanced
high-performance computing technologies, with advanced manufacturing models and information technologies, Cloud
Downloaded by [Syracuse University Library] at 11:20 19 June 2015
Manufacturing is a new manufacturing paradigm built on resource sharing, supporting and driving this change.
It is envisioned that companies in all sectors of manufacturing will be able to package their resources and know-hows in
the Cloud, making them conveniently available for others through pay-as-you-go, which is also timely and economically
attractive. Resources, e.g. manufacturing software tools, applications, knowledge and fabrication capabilities and equip-
ment, will then be made accessible to presumptive consumers on a worldwide basis.
Cloud Manufacturing has been in focus for a great deal of research interest and suggested applications during recent
years, by both industrial and academic communities. After surveying a vast array of available publications, this paper
presents an up-to-date literature review together with identified outstanding research issues, and future trends and directions
within Cloud Manufacturing.
Keywords: cloud manufacturing; resource sharing; service-orientation
1. Introduction development. Cloud Computing (CC) is one of these

Surviving in an increasing globalisation, today’s manufac- core technologies, offering computing resources as ser-
turing companies are focusing on adopting more cost- vices in a convenient pay-as-you-go mode. The concept
effective manufacturing systems to remain competitive. of offering computer resources as services can be adopted
To be able to be competitive on a global marketplace, in manufacturing, with manufacturing resources being
meeting and satisfying dynamic customer demands, colla- offered as different services, i.e. Design-as-a-Service
boration within critical and complex manufacturing activ- (DaaS), Machining-as-a-Service (MCaaS), etc. Examples
ities such as design and manufacturing is of high interest of other contributing and enabling technologies are
for many companies. Sharing resources, knowledge Internet of Things (IoT), Semantic Web, embedded sys-
and information between geographically distributed man- tems and virtualisation technologies.
ufacturing entities can make them more agile and cost- Cloud Manufacturing (CM) is emerging as a new
effective, with higher resources’ utilisation, leading to a paradigm in the manufacturing community. The term
competitive edge, in a win-win scenario for all partici- and the complete concept were first introduced by Li
pants. The success of many international manufacturing et al. (2010), but the core ideas about Manufacturing-
enterprises relies on the distribution of their manufacturing as-a-Service (MaaS) were already presented in the early
capacities over the globe. With a worldwide integration of 1990s (Goldhar and Jelinek 1990). However, at that time
their distributed product development processes and man- the concept’s full potential was not possible to foresee, as
ufacturing operations, they are realising and taking advan- Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools
tage of the many benefits of resource coordination and and applications enabling distributed manufacturing col-
sharing (Valilai and Houshmand 2013). This approach for laboration, as networked Internet-enabled resource shar-
competitiveness has not been in reach for the majority of ing, was still to come. Being a highly complex
SMEs, mostly due to technological limitations. manufacturing approach for implementation, still requir-
Globalisation is therefore a major driver for collabora- ing extensive work and research in a variety of disci-
tive work, and there are several recently emerged informa- plines for realisation, it holds the key to the necessary
tion technologies, which combined enable seamless and basic task of resource sharing. The most prominent
collaboration activities, for all the phases of product and promising feature of CM is the seamless and
*Corresponding author. Email: goran.adamson@his.se
© 2015 Taylor & Francis

2 G. Adamson et al.
technologies with existing advanced manufacturing mod-

els and information technologies, this computing- and
service-oriented manufacturing model could be realised
(Tao, Zhang, Venkatesh et al. 2011).
The purpose of this paper is to present an up-to-date and
comprehensive review on CM as a concept and implemen-
tation and its related research issues and technologies, to
identify outstanding research issues and to point out some
future directions and trends. Many publications include
short descriptions of and backgrounds to CM, but survey
and state-of-the-art (SoA) publications are scarce, and no
such comprehensive publication exists. Wu et al. (2013b)
provide a thorough SoA, and Lin et al. (2013) provide a
literature survey of CM progress (in China). Some major
differences and contributions of this paper compared to
theirs are that it:
1 presents a vast array of implementation
structures such as architectures, platforms, models, frame-

Figure 1. Cloud manufacturing concept. works and applications, 2 identifies different critical out-
standing research issues and points out future directions and
trends and 3 presents some statistical material summaris-
convenient sharing of a variety of different kinds of ing CM research areas and publications.
distributed manufacturing resources, realising the idea The references included stem from journals, confer-
of MaaS. Its working principle is for providers to effec- ences, online sources, standards, etc. Some of the refer-
tively organise and encapsulate manufacturing resources ences are not directly focused on CM, but are included as
and capabilities and make them available as services to they describe relevant issues, such as core and enabling
consumers in an operator-run manufacturing Cloud, as technologies for the realisation of CM. A clear majority of
depicted in Figure 1. Following this concept, companies research work, activities and initiatives are performed in
could obtain various manufacturing services from the China, from which the majority of references in this article
Internet as conveniently as obtaining water and electricity originate. Many articles are published in Chinese, with
in daily life (Wu and Yang 2010). abstracts in English, making their contribution to CM
This means that completely heterogeneous manufac- beyond reach for many.
turing resources can be shared by different users, for The remainder of the paper is arranged as follows:
simple tasks as well as for complex worldwide collabora- Section 2 describes modern manufacturing challenges
tive manufacturing missions. The abilities of CM are and the background and incentives for the formation of
intended to support the servicelisation of the whole man- CM. Section 3 describes CM and various CM definitions
ufacturing product development life cycle, covering a and concepts. Section 4 comments on the research issues
wide spectrum of Cloud services, from analysis of mar- on some specific areas of interest of CM, as well as
ket and customer requirements, resource planning, pro- emerging core and supporting technologies, and concludes
duct design, simulation, supply-chain control, with some statistical representations of the reviewed
manufacturing and management and maintenance, all papers. In Section 5 some of the more complete CM
the way to services for product end-of-life activities (Li, research initiatives are presented. Outstanding research
Zhang, and Chai 2010). issues and future directions and trends are identified and
Since the concept of CM was first introduced a couple discussed in Section 6, while Section 7 presents the
of years ago, there has been a growing interest in the authors’ conclusions, followed by acknowledgements
academic and industrial communities, with a steady and references.
increasing number of research publications as well as
research initiatives. A large number of articles have been
2. Modern manufacturing challenges
published, many of which describe a wide spectrum of
useful and promising effects that the use of CM could To understand the possible effects and influences of CM,
realise and generate. However, there is not yet any stan- and how it will form modern manufacturing of tomorrow,
dardised definition of CM, or reports on completely devel- a historical perspective on the recent developments of
oped CM systems. Although the concept of CM is quite industrial manufacturing and its paradigms and challenges
new, the concepts of distributed, networked and virtual is relevant. Understanding the past and present of manu-
manufacturing have been around for a while (Xu 2012). In facturing and its limitations and shortcomings will facil-
adopting, combining and extending these newly emerged itate the understanding and foreseeing of what is to come.
International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 3
The prevailing manufacturing paradigm plays a key contrast to these concepts, CM also promises elasticity,
role for the national competitiveness of manufacturing flexibility and adaptability through the on-demand provi-
industries. To exceed the traditional mass-production para- sioning of manufacturing resources as services, enabling
digm, the last 40 years have shown a range of initiatives the fundamental and necessary features such as convenient
and implementations in advanced manufacturing, with scalability and pay-as-you-go of resources shared (Zhou
new paradigms such as mass customisation as well as et al. 2011).
intelligent, holonic, reconfigurable, lean, agile, networked, The following are some of the major challenges that
distributed, grid and sustainable manufacturing (Lee et al. emerged that many SME manufacturing companies are
2006; Nambiar 2010; Bi and Wang 2013). These initia- facing today (Tao, Zhang, and Nee 2011).
tives consider not only the technical aspects but also the
economic and social factors, and lately also environmental
issues play an increasing role. Research areas range from 2.1. Core technologies
modelling, analysing and designing manufacturing sys- Many SMEs are in the original equipment manufacturing
tems, to their effective operation and control. Important (OEM) branch, being labour intensive and in the low end
objectives are optimisations of productivity, quality, cost, of the value chain. Staff education levels are also often
service and environment. Lately, research covering the lower than those in big enterprises. Without expertise
collaboration and resource-sharing in all parts of the pro- knowledge and competence about, and access to, core
duct development life cycle has shown a growing interest. technologies such as design, product development, manu-
With new opportunities arising from improvements within facturing management, simulation, etc., their abilities for
modern ICT, service- and information-driven manufactur- making higher profits are severely hampered.
ing has become a focused research topic and already made
some progress.
There are many reasons and driving factors behind 2.2. Expensive and complex IT systems
the significant change in modern manufacturing. Besides With the digitalisation of manufacturing came a number of
the rapid development of advanced manufacturing, com- different software and information systems (ERP, PDM,
puter and information technologies, intense global com- SCM, CAD, MIS, CAPP, etc.), which companies need to
petition, as well as economic and resource globalisation use for being effective and competitive. These inflict high
are now a reality. Historically, the modern manufacturing costs, and problems concerning integration, maintenance,
focus has changed from enlarging production scale in the education and data sharing.
1960s to cost reduction in the 1970s, from product qual-
ity in the 1980s shifting to rapid market response in the
1990s, and lately focusing on service, information and 2.3. Complex product designs
knowledge. It is particularly the introduction of computer The process of designing new products has become much
and information technologies and the rapid development more complicated. Considering all phases of the product
of the Internet technologies that have sped up the devel- life cycle when developing a new product requires the use
opment of manufacturing. Looking into the future, man- and cooperation of a variety of highly complex and
ufacturing systems will be continuously developed advanced applications, software, services and knowledge
towards the directions of precision, green and service structures. In-house access to all these resources and cap-
(Li et al. 2010). abilities is not available for most companies.
CM is often related to, and compared with, other
advanced networked manufacturing concepts, e.g. net-
worked, Internet-based, distributed and grid manufactur- 2.4. Lack of follow-up service
ing (Zheng et al. 2010; Zheng, Chen, and Lu 2005; Parker The business scope does not encompass follow-up service,
2007; Tao, Hu, and Zhang 2010). There are, however, which is a crucial necessity catalysing increased trading
some major differences. These networked concepts focus opportunities and additional value creation. If problems
on a single manufacturing task and the integration of with sold products cannot be solved, this can decrease
distributed resources for undertaking the task. They do customer loyalty and harm the credit and reputation of
not have a centralised operation management of the ser- the company.
vices, choice of different operation modes and embedded
access to physical manufacturing equipment, applications
and capabilities, which are prerequisites for a seamless, 2.5. High subcontracting costs
stable and quality transaction of manufacturing resource The development of many SMEs is often hindered by high
services. Having little coordination between the resource subcontracting costs, which can constitute a significant
service provider and the resource service consumer, these part of the cost for the development of a new product.
concepts are significantly less effective (Xu 2012). In Subcontracting is becoming increasingly necessary for
4 G. Adamson et al.
many SMEs, as product development becomes more etc., manufacturing resources and abilities can be intelli-
advanced and complex. gently sensed and connected to the Internet, as well as
remotely controlled and managed. After being virtualised
and encapsulated into different Cloud services by the
2.6. Matching manufacturing orders with resources providers, they can be searched, accessed, invoked and
capability and capacity deployed by consumers, who can combine and aggregate
SMEs often have difficulties to accomplish manufacturing services from different providers and Clouds, creating a
orders due to the lack of advanced equipment with certain virtual manufacturing environment or solution for specific
required properties. On the contrary, companies that have manufacturing tasks or needs. The development of CM
this equipment lack manufacturing missions and orders. can be seen as a progression from the sole adoption of CC
This is a resource-matching problem between resource facilities and functions, to the overall adoption of all
providers and resource consumers. manufacturing resources as services, realising the manu-
facturing version of CC (Xu 2012; Zhou et al. 2011; Wu
et al. 2013b). As within CC, different delivery models of
2.7. Lack of resource- and capability-sharing mode CM can be developed, to support the integration of virtual,
Sharing of resources and capabilities is one of the key intangible and physical resources, i.e. CAD applications
virtues of CM. To be successful in all manufacturing and manufacturing capabilities and equipment, as services.
activities, the ability of sharing computing, data and infor- Infrastructure, platform and software applications can then
mation resources, applications and services, equipment be offered as a service in CM, all referring to a specific
and application systems is mandatory. A company-wide phase of the manufacturing life cycle, i.e. DaaS,
sharing approach for full connectivity, remote access and MaaS, etc.
interoperability for all resources is then required. It is evident that these Cloud services will be a major
These issues point out problems and difficulties for driver of productivity for the manufacturing industry in
companies to be competitive while solely relying on their the near future (Xu 2012). Especially small to mid-sized
in-house resources and capabilities. A manufacturing para- businesses will benefit from the ability to use applications
digm such as CM, supporting services for scalable and and solutions that used to be too complex or expensive, as
economical resource sharing and coordinated collabora- designed for use by larger enterprises. The pay-as-you-go
tion, would solve these bottlenecks, and give especially solutions, with low cost for usage and maintenance, elim-
SMEs a much more competitive edge. As mass production inate economic barriers such as extensive investments for
is often relocated to low-wage countries or regions, the IT-systems, and manufacturing equipment rapidly depre-
focus for many manufacturers from other regions is shift- ciating. By subscribing to a service, many of the costly on-
ing towards providing customised and high-value products premise-related expenses, like software, hardware and
to rapidly satisfy diverse customer demands, achieving a maintenance, can be reduced or even eliminated. Apart
unique competitive advantage. from the cost aspect, there are many other advantages, e.g.
rapid implementation and upgrades in the Cloud with new
features and functions, licensing scalability regarding
3. Cloud manufacturing number of users and scope of application functionality
A technological progress in ICT, CC has induced new and capability, enhanced ease of use and secure and stan-
opportunities for the manufacturing industry. It is strongly dardised integration to partners and service providers. The
believed that CM will realise a new and effective approach best match and mix of resources can be used, irrespective
for performing networked and distributed, collaborative of their physical localisation, leading to the realisation of
manufacturing businesses. In the Cloud, providers can concepts like DAMA (Design Anywhere, Manufacture
make available manufacturing resources, for consumers Anywhere) (Heinrichs 2005; Venkatesh et al. 2005;
to buy and use. (Providers may also act as consumers, Manenti 2011). Irrespective of size, companies may utilise
and vice versa.) Here, Cloud refers to Internet as a com- the advantages of economy-of-scale, making them much
munication network, for distributed storage and delivery more competitive. A group of smaller companies can
of services. The core concept of CM is the realisation and cooperate and virtually act as a big enterprise. On the
provisioning of all types of manufacturing resources as other hand, utilisation can be increased, as spare capacity
services, for all phases of the product development life- can be made available for others to buy and use.
cycle. This is possible through the implementation of CC
as well as service-oriented technologies, making possible
the flexible sharing and collaboration of distributed man- 3.1. CM drivers
ufacturing resources encapsulated into Cloud services. Driving the development of CM is a number of foreseen
Using IoT technologies, embedded systems, Radio positive effects of varying nature, many of them of extra
Frequency Identification (RFID), sensor networks, GPS, importance for SMEs, such as:
3.1.1. Economy sharing as typical properties of CM (Li et al. 2010; Tao,

To increase utilisation of manufacturing resources and Zhang, Venkatesh et al. 2011; Zhou et al. 2011; Li, Zhang
capabilities through outsourcing. et al. 2011; Tao, Zhang, Guo et al. 2011; Zhang et al.
2010b). Many describe cooperation and collaboration by
network-based resource and capability sharing in the form
3.1.2. Agility of services between different Cloud users (consumers,
Adaptive and rapid response to changing customer providers, operators), as the main idea/concept.
demands through the ability to invoke different combina- Examples of CM definitions:
tions of manufacturing and product design services.
A model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-
demand network access to a shared pool of configurable
manufacturing resources (e.g. manufacturing software
3.1.3. Scalability tools, manufacturing equipment, and manufacturing cap-
As demand for throughput and utilisation vary, up- and abilities) that can be rapidly provisioned and released
downscaling of the required manufacturing tasks is easily with minimal management effort or service provider
interaction. (Xu 2012)
achievable through the addition, removal or modification
of necessary manufacturing resources. Cloud manufacturing is an integrated supporting environ-
ment both for the share and integration of resources in

enterprise. It provides virtual manufacturing resources
pools, which shields the heterogeneousness and the regio-
3.1.4. Resource sharing nal distribution of resources by the way of virtualization.
Convenient resource sharing in a flexible pay-as-you-go Cloud manufacturing provides a cooperative work environ-
mode ensures the exchange of services between manufac- ment for manufacturing enterprises and individuals and
enables the cooperation of enterprise. (Wu and Yang 2010)
turing service providers and consumers.
A new model of manufacturing services, infrastructure
and technology that allows users access to a catalog of
standardized services and meet the needs of your business,
3.1.5. Information sharing in a flexible and adaptive form, in case of unforeseen
There is a vast, increasing amount of data for the manu- demand or peak workloads, paying only for consumption
facturing activities, in different formats and information made. (Macia-Perez et al. 2012a)
systems. It is envisioned that CM could facilitate the Cloud-Based Design and Manufacturing refers to a product
management and sharing of this information within and realization model that enables collective open innovation
between the systems of CM users. and rapid product development with minimum costs
through a social networking and negotiation platform
In Liu, Zhang, and Tao (2013) the evolution of CM is between service providers and consumers. It is a type of
described by enterprises willingness to participate, mea- parallel and distributed system consisting of a collection of
sured in relation to: degree of manufacturing task satura- inter-connected physical and virtualized service pools of
tion, cost of joining and initial condition (number of design and manufacturing resources (e.g. parts, assemblies,
enterprises offering resources). It is found that the propor- CAD/CAM tools) as well as intelligent search capabilities
for design and manufacturing solutions. (Wu et al. 2012)
tion of participants relies closely on these three conditions,
with task saturation having the biggest influence. Cloud manufacturing is an integrated cyber-physical sys-
tem that can provide on-demand manufacturing services,
digitally and physically, at the best utilisation of manufac-
turing resources. (Wang et al. 2014)
3.2. CM definitions
Although there is no international standard for its defini- Summarising a number of different suggestions, descrip-
tion yet, researchers and members of the manufacturing tions and definitions, it is obvious that the interest, accep-
community have a quite clear view of what CM would tance and activities within CM are widespread and highly
comprehend and facilitate. The needs and requirements active, and that there is a need for an international stan-
driving its development and implementation, the services dardised definition of CM, making possible its realisation
and solutions it would make available and perform, and as a worldwide manufacturing implementation. Such a
the concepts and technologies it could build upon are definition would also work as guidance for further neces-
reaching a much higher degree of consensus and agree- sary research initiatives concerning enabling technologies
ment. Thus far, a variety of descriptions and definitions of and concepts. The problems with the absence of an inter-
CM exist, evolved and created from different perspectives national standard have been seen in the fast emerging CC
and backgrounds, from both academic and industry com- market. Over the last few years, this resulted in a variety
munities, national and international. The first definitions of heterogeneous and less interoperable Cloud infrastruc-
date from year 2010, and many are showing great simila- tures, causing problems for Cloud users in selecting their
rities in emphasising manufacturing services and resource best-fitting Cloud provider(s) (Jrad, Tao, and Streit 2012;
6 G. Adamson et al.
Wu and Buyya 2010). To support the ongoing research technologies required to run the system. Responsible for
and development of the CM concept the authors propose finding, combining, controlling and coordinating the
the following definition: required services for fulfilling consumer requirements.
May charge both consumers and providers for this service.
Cloud Manufacturing is a networked manufacturing In the centre of Figure 1, Knowledge refers to required
model in which locally and globally distributed manu- knowledge support necessary for crucial CM activities,
facturing resources for the complete product life-cycle such as perception, connection, virtualisation and encap-
are made available by providers for satisfying consumer
demands, and are centrally organised and controlled as sulation of manufacturing resources and capabilities,
manufacturing Cloud services. The model supports uni- Cloud service description, matching, searching, aggrega-
fied interaction between service providers and consu- tion, and composition, optimal allocation and scheduling
mers, for trading and usage of configurable resources/ of activities and services, etc.
services, as well as dynamic and flexible cooperation
and collaboration in multi-partner manufacturing mis-
sions. Distinct characteristics for the use of services
are that they are scalable, sold on demand, and fully
3.4. CM resources and services
managed by the provider. CM being service-oriented rather than production-
oriented, a manufacturing activity is regarded as a service,
A CM definition should be solution and implementation being requested or provided. A service is the providing of
neutral, not defining or explaining core or enabling tech- one or a combination of many resources, and different
nologies, as these or their designations may change. manufacturing resources support manufacturing activities
Claims of possible effects on productivity, utilisation, through the whole product life cycle. Some different
agility, economy, environment, etc. have also been omitted resource classifications with minor differences exist, but
as none of these seem relevant in a definition. most agree to that there are two different types of manu-
facturing resources that can be provisioned and consumed
3.3. CM participants in CM: physical manufacturing resources and manufactur-
ing capabilities (sometimes also referred to as ‘abilities’)
There are mainly three types of participants or users in a (Zhang et al. 2012a; Wang and Xu 2013a). Physical
CM system: someone with a manufacturing demand, resources can be either hard (such as manufacturing equip-
someone with resources to satisfy this demand, or ment, computers, networks, servers, materials, facilities
parts of it, and someone in between, orchestrating the for transportation and storage, etc.) or soft (e.g. applica-
organisation of demands and available resources, for a tions, product design and simulation software, analysis
successful match between demands and resources. tools, models, data, standards, human resources such as
These participants have been given different names in personnel of different professions and their knowledge,
some of the proposals, but the following are the most skill and experience, etc.). Manufacturing capabilities are
commonly used (Figure 1): intangible and dynamic recourses that represent an orga-
nisation’s capability of undertaking a specific task or
3.3.1. Consumer operation with competence, using physical resources
Purchases and consumes available manufacturing services in (e.g. performing product designs, simulations, manufactur-
the Cloud from providers, after supplying engineering ing, management, maintenance, communication, etc.). It is
requirements to the Cloud operator. Pays for service utilisa- the manufacturing capabilities that determine whether the
tion based on either usage time rates or subscription fees. requirements can be achieved by the manufacturing
resources during product development. Both manufactur-
ing resources and capabilities are virtualised and encapsu-
3.3.2. Provider lated as manufacturing Cloud services, which are on-
Provides and sells manufacturing resources and capabil- demand, configurable and self-contained services, to fulfil
ities as services, for consumers’ product development. a consumer’s needs. Manufacturing software, applications
Services supporting the whole life cycle of the manufac- and infrastructures can thus be realised as services in CM,
turing process can be provided. Processes the consumer in a similar manner as computing resources are being
requests based on manufacturing information from the provisioned in different structures in CC.
operator and/or consumer.
3.5. CM architectures
3.3.3. Operator Many attempts are also made to define more or less
Responsible for the operation and management of the CM complete CM systems, describing typical concepts, char-
system. Delivers required support and functions to provi- acteristics, architectures and enabling technologies. Some
ders and consumers and maintains the services and more comprehensive and complete proposals are available
in (Valilai and Houshmand 2013; Li et al. 2010; Li, network, and processing the related information
Zhang, and Chai 2010; Xu 2012; Tao, Zhang, Venkatesh and data.
et al. 2011; Zhou et al. 2011; Li, Zhang et al. 2011; Tao, ● Virtualisation layer: For virtualisation of manufac-
Zhang, Guo et al. 2011; Macia-Perez et al. 2012a; Wu turing resources and capabilities, and encapsulation
et al. 2012; Zhang et al. 2012a; Xiaofei et al. 2012; Zhou, into Cloud services.
Liu, and Xu 2011; Huang et al. 2013; Beisheng 2012; ● Cloud service layer (Core middleware): Handles
Ning et al. 2011; Zhang and Zhong 2012; Zhang and Xue management of system, services, resources,
2012; Macia-Perez et al. 2012b). (Some of these are tasks, etc. Activities for services such as access,
described in Section 5). invocation, description, publication, registry,
Some proposed architectures have four layers, more matching, composition, monitoring, scheduling,
detailed ones have up to 12 layers. The naming and charging, etc.
content of the different layers also differ between the ● Application layer: Depending on the participating
proposed architectures. Summarising the proposed CM providers and their offered manufacturing Cloud ser-
concept architectures, a quite typical one is presented in vices, dedicated manufacturing application systems
Figure 2. It consists of the following layers (Huang can be aggregated, i.e. Manufacturing, Collaborative
et al. 2013): supply chain, Collaborative design, Simulation, ERP,
etc. Consumers can browse and access these different

application systems for manual/automatic service con-
● Resource layer: Different manufacturing resources
and capabilities, for the complete manufacturing life figurations. A manufacturing resource provider can let
cycle, supplied by different providers. consumers select from different possible part proper-
ties and predetermined manufacturing constraints
● Perception layer: Responsible for sensing the phy-
sical manufacturing resources and capabilities, (sizes, materials, tolerances, etc.).
enabling them to be interfaced into the wider ● Interface layer: Provides consumers with an inter-
face for browsing available services and publishing
their requirements and requests. Manual selection
and combination of available resources/services, or
automatic Cloud-generated suggested solutions.
● Supporting layers:
Knowledge – Provides knowledge needed in the
different layers, i.e. for virtualisation and encapsula-
tion of resources, manufacturing domain knowl-
edge, process knowledge, etc.
Security – Provides strategies, mechanisms, func-
tions and architecture for CM system security.
Communication – Provides the communication
environment for users, operations, resources, ser-
vices, etc. in the CM system.
Finally, it is important to understand that CM is not a

replacement of preceding advanced manufacturing
paradigms, but rather a combination and evolution of
those. The inclusion and usage of CC and service-oriented
technologies make CM an effective paradigm for future
manufacturing activities in a worldwide distributed,
resource-sharing, customer-centred, green and dynamic
manufacturing environment.
4. Research areas and technologies

The future development of CM will face many challenges
in key enabling technologies and concepts. Besides the
integration technologies of CC, IoT, Semantic Web, high-
Figure 2. Cloud manufacturing concept architecture (based on performance computing and embedded systems, several
JorickHIT, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en). important technical issues must be solved such as
8 G. Adamson et al.
knowledge-based resource Clouding, Cloud management most common services are (Li et al. 2010; Mell and
engines, collaboration between CM applications, and Grance 2011; Marston et al. 2011; Khan et al. 2012):
visualisation and user interface in Cloud environments
(Li, Zhang, and Chai 2010). These would make possible ● Software-as-a-Service (SaaS):
to offer a personalised manufacturing service through Also known as ‘software on demand’. The applica-
several processes, e.g. order decomposition into tasks, tion or software is offered as a service, in which the
the selection of one or several providers to perform application runs in the Cloud, and the need to install
them, the scheduling of the whole manufacturing process, and run the application on the client computer is
etc. In the following, technologies and research content for eliminated. The user interacts with the provided
realising CM are presented. There is a wide scope of software product and hardware infrastructure
technologies required, and some of these can be seen as through a front-end portal. Accessibility from any
core technologies, while others are of a more general location, bundled maintenance and rapid scalability
nature as enabling and supporting technologies. The are strong benefits, but security concerns may be an
focus here is on the core technologies, critical for the issue for users who require high security and con-
development of CM, but some of the other most common trol, as the provider is in charge of that domain.
and characteristic enabling technologies are also Examples range from personal applications such as
described. web-based email, Facebook and Twitter, to enter-

prise-level applications such as database processing,
inventory control, Google Apps and Netsuite
(Marston et al. 2011).
4.1. CC and service orientation
The inclusion of CC as a core enabling technology is one of ● Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS):
the major differences between CM and other advanced net-
The platform is provided as a service, which can
worked manufacturing paradigms, as it makes possible to
enable the development and deployment of applica-
provide manufacturing activities as services in a distributed
tions without the complexity and cost of buying and
environment. The aim of CC is to provide convenient, scal-
managing the required hardware and software
able access to IT services and computing resources. It offers layers. While traditional application development
on-demand and strategic outsourcing, providing IT resources
requires the necessary hardware, operating system,
as a standard commodity, delivering real-time access to soft-
database, middleware, web servers, etc., working
ware, application development and infrastructure. Since the
with PaaS, only the knowledge of how to integrate
appearance of the concept of CC, a variety of different
them is required. Microsoft’s Azure Services
descriptions and definitions have been put forward. The
Platform, Google App Engine and Amazon’s
NIST (Mell and Grance 2011) definition states:
Relational Database Services are all examples of
PaaS.
Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous,
convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool
of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, ser-
● Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS):
vers, storage, applications, and services) that can be The storage and computing capabilities are pro-
rapidly provisioned and released with minimal manage- vided as a service. This includes servers, data-centre
ment effort or service provider interaction…. space, software and network equipment.
Organisations with in-house IT expertise can require
Within CC, IT resources are provided as different services the necessary infrastructure from IaaS providers.
for users, as Cloud services. This means that companies One popular usage is for hosting websites. Other
can outsource their IT applications and infrastructures on a examples are Rackspace Cloud Servers, Amazon’s
practical and economical basis (Vaquero et al. 2008; S3 storage service and Elastic Compute Cloud
Buyya, Yeo, and Venugopal 2008; Armbrust et al. 2010; (EC2) computing platform.
Venters and Whitley 2012). Taking this concept all the
way, complete IT departments could be outsourced, with (There is overlap between SaaS, PaaS and IaaS, and
IT personnel instead becoming Cloud adopters. A Cloud depending on the perspective (manager, system adminis-
service is differentiated from traditional hosting by three trator, developer) the same service can be categorised into
distinct characteristics: it is sold on demand (typically by any of these three.)
usage time or subscription); it is elastic (a user can at any In addition to these services for IT resources, service
given time decide how much of a service he wants); and orientation has the capability to industrialise IT,
the provider is fully managing the service (the user only enabling the exploitation by enterprises in much the
needs a computer and access to the Internet). The three same way that industrial manufacturing technology has
been exploited (Padmanabhan and Kamath 2012). All 4.2.1. Resource, capability and service description,
manufacturing resources and capabilities for the entire publication, discovery and access
product development life cycle can be realised and A model for describing manufacturing equipment
offered in the Cloud as Infrastructure, Platform or resources (MERs) is provided in Zhao et al. (2013).
Software services (XaaS: Everything-as-a-Service), e.g. They describe manufacturing capability (MC) of
MaaS, DaaS, Simulation and Experimentation-as-a- machinery equipment from two aspects: static functional
Service (SEaaS), Management-as-a-Service (MMaaS), capability and dynamic production capability, using an
etc. For computer-aided product development, CC is ontology methodology to model this. Both these aspects
already being adopted by the manufacturing society, as are of great importance to CM users. Functional cap-
companies are replacing their in-house Computer-Aided abilities are inherent and stationary, and describe what
Design (CAD) software licenses with CAD software as kind of work a machine can perform, whereas produc-
a Cloud service (Schaefer 2011). Companies like tion capability reflects, during a given time, the perfor-
Autodesk offer virtually infinite computing power, mance of that machine. Functional capability tells if a
access anytime and anywhere, shared insight into data request can be performed, whereas dynamic production
and more flexible, controllable and predictable costs capability tells when it can be performed. The use of
when using their CAD-as-a-Service Cloud application predefined MSD templates for customised products
(AutoDesk 2013). Examples of other possible applica- development in a MaaS environment is proposed in
tions in a CM system building on computer-aided soft- Rauschecker et al. (2011). The MSDs contain product
ware (CAX) resources, such as parametric virtual information, its manufacturing service and its customi-
design, virtual processing and virtual exhibition are sation limitations and are developed by a Manufacturing
described in Wang and Diao (2013). The CC technology Service Description Language (MSDL). Based on the
offers on-demand access to the distributed resources, main MSD requirements, the MSDL has been devel-
and caters for a dynamic provisioning of virtual hard- oped to be able to create a formal semantic description
ware and scalable applications to better match usage, of both product-related and manufacturing technology
being cost-effective by using a transparent easy pay-as- aspects. In Yip et al. (2011) this concept is taken one
you-go pricing model (Li et al. 2010; Li, Zhang, and step further, introducing a front-end system for integra-
Chai 2010; Zhang et al. 2010b; Tao, Cheng et al. 2011; tion to the MaaS environment, facilitating configuration
Mezgár 2011). But compared to CC, which mainly and specification of customised products. The front-end
deals with IT infrastructures and software, implementing components are displayed as part of an integrated web-
and realising CM is a much more demanding and wider based portal to support collaborative development, and
task as it, in addition to manufacturing product devel- can be accessed by both service consumers and provi-
opment-related software, also includes an array of phy- ders. For consumers there is a Customised Product
sical manufacturing equipment and devices that need to Advisory System (CPAS) that is used for browsing of
be deployed in the Cloud. available products and configuration of specific needs. It
also supports the definition of new product designs. For
providers there is an Infrastructure Management that is
4.2. Resource and service issues used to define specific manufacturing services and con-
To be able to provision manufacturing resources as ser- figure dynamic virtual production lines. In Yip et al.
vices in the Cloud, they need to be virtualised and encap- (2013) this concept is realised in a case study with a
sulated (Guo et al. 2010). For capturing the necessary product configurator for the customisation of a solar and
information of manufacturing resources and capabilities lighting façade module. Two scenarios are demon-
and for enhancing the performance of discovery and strated: one where a customised façade module specifi-
resource sharing, the investigation of effective virtualisa- cation is automatically generated from the combination
tion methods is therefore of great importance. Critical of different services and the other where the system’s
issues in this are manufacturing resource modelling and ability to automatically respond to dynamically updated
manufacturing service description (MSD). There also MSDs is shown. Since semantic heterogeneity is a
needs to be effective methods for finding, accessing, com- major problem for business processes’ integration, man-
bining, scheduling and managing these resources. For ufacturing service capabilities are represented in an
effective and optimal resource usage and consumer unambiguous, computer-understandable form based on
demand fulfilment, resource scalability and interoperabil- ontologies (Zeng 2012). By utilising powerful represen-
ity are also of major concern. tation and reasoning abilities of Semantic Web technol-
Thus far, resources and their appearances and use as ogy, successful matching between request descriptions,
services seem to be the major research areas within CM, extracted from the manufacturing activity, and service
and include the following issues: capabilities’ descriptions of existing manufacturing
10 G. Adamson et al.
services, is possible. In order to create an intelligent investigated (Li, Zhao et al. 2011). An architecture for
matching process between supply and demand in a the reasoning of process behaviours is constructed, and
CM environment, an ontology method to realise unified process actions are carried out according to the mini-
modelling and semantic description of manufacturing mum-machining-cost and the shortest-processing-time
requirements and resources is presented in Tai et al. principles. The developed approach will act as a proces-
(2013). In a four-step process, the manufacturing sing actions service for supporting process engineers. A
resources and demand attributes and characteristics are concept for realising the formal description of MC,
analysed, using a proposed ontology semantic similarity using a multi-dimensional information model of MC
algorithm. After a comprehensive evaluation of match- based on knowledge, is described in Luo et al. (2012).
ing results, the output of the process is a sorted list of A model describing this is also provided. In Xiang and
best matches between demand and supply. To realise a Hu (2012), a resource-access architecture based on IoT
mapping from manufacturing requirement, manufactur- is described. Several key issues, such as classification of
ing service to manufacturing resource dynamically and resource information accesses and access processes, are
hierarchically, Gao et al. (2013) introduced the Cloud also discussed. A device-aware system focusing on
Workflow into CM, proposing a conceptual model of MERs and their static and dynamic properties is pro-
multi-agent business collaboration. Including manufac- posed in Yan, Guo, and Shi (2012). Identification of
turing service demander, provider and operator, the MERs, required operation data and its classification into
model defines three critical stages: collaborative busi- static and dynamic properties, real-time information col-
ness process modelling and verification of Cloud work- lection, transmission and processing is described, stres-
flow, model instantiation with modelling and clustering sing that the key technology of CM systems is to
of manufacturing services, and model execution with accurately get access to, and control, real-time devices.
the optimal matching of manufacturing service supplies
and requirements. To facilitate more flexible, accurate
and automated resource discovery, for distributed man- 4.2.2. Resource and capability virtualisation and
ufacturing collaboration across ubiquitous virtual enter- encapsulation
prises, Cai et al. (2010) present a prototype intelligent In the process of virtualising manufacturing resources into
system. It includes a Semantic Web multidisciplinary services, mapping plays a critical role. Generally, three
manufacturing ontology, to convert resources into mapping relationships between resources and services
machine-understandable knowledge. In combination exist (Ren et al. 2014; Tao et al. 2014; Xu 2012): One-to-
with a multi-level knowledge retrieval model, the dis- One when the functionality or capability of a resource
covery of manufacturing resources is facilitated by cap- matches one manufacturing requirement, One-to-Many for
abilities such as graph search, semantic search, fuzzy a resource with multiple functions or capabilities which
search and automated reasoning. A prototype Semantic each matches different manufacturing requirements inde-
Web system (ManuHub) for the administration and pendently, and Many-to-One when multiple resources are
automatic retrieval of required distributed manufacturing required to match a manufacturing requirement. In Song,
services is developed (Cai, Zhang, and Zhang 2011). In Song, and Zheng (2012), the application of virtualisation
this approach, the use of ontology- and constraint-based technology in CM is discussed in general terms. A method
modelling supports semantic matchmaking of manufac- for virtualisation of both hardware and software resources is
turing service capabilities. In Wang and Liu (2012) a presented in Li, Hu, and Wang et al. (2011). It builds on the
resource discovery mechanism is put forward. It com- use of a property document describing all relevant informa-
bines Semantic Web services with OWL-S (an ontology tion of resources. A four-layer resource virtualisation model
for describing Semantic Web services) techniques and is discussed in Wu et al. (2011). Through virtualisation, an
gives manufacturing resources classification and charac- insulation layer is established between manufacturing
teristics. In Zhang et al. (2010b), a meta-model for resources and applications, to eliminate application-
describing MC is reported, which can support efficient resource dependencies. A resource encapsulation method
and intelligent running of CM systems. Multi-granular for CM is described (Li, Hu et al. 2011), in Electronic
access control, considered to be an important foundation Device Description Language (EDDL). A flow chart is
that guarantees the safety, validity and availability of a presented for the encapsulation process and the resources
CM system, is discussed in Li, Shang et al. (2011). A can be visited by web service based on Open Virtualisation
Multi-Granularity Access Control (MGAC) is estab- Format (OVF, an open standard for packaging and distri-
lished, based on the Attribute-Based Access Control buting virtual appliances) encapsulation of resource attri-
(ABAC). The concept is verified and performance ana- bute. A two-phase method is described in Liu, Li, and Wang
lysed, showing a high level of efficiency. For the inte- (2011) for transforming manufacturing resources into
gration of machining manufacturing resources, the Cloud services. Manufacturing resource features are first
modelling and realisation of processing actions are comprehensively analysed, and a virtual specification is
established for describing heterogeneous manufacturing capability or functionality, which in CM is provided by

resources in an isomorphic manner. By extracting charac- different physical manufacturing resources and manufac-
teristics of resources, an algorithm is proposed for resources turing capabilities. The elastic nature of cloud services
partitioning according to manufacturing capabilities. The conceals the individual supporting resources amount,
classification and modelling of virtual resources are made magnitude and restrictions, and facilitates the dynamic
in Hu et al. (2012). Factors affecting the classification are resource scaling for varying consumer demands. There
analysed, and a conceptual classification is given. Factors are two possible scenarios to provide scaled service func-
that influence the result of task assignment, i.e. logistics, tionality: through changing the number and/or combina-
granularity, human activity, etc., are also studied and tion of resources invoked, or when a single resource may
demonstrated. Based on this, a modelling process and a be scaled by increasing or decreasing its performance or
rough model of a virtual resource are built. In Mokhtar output. For dynamic and rapid scalability, formal repre-
and Houshmand (2010), an approach is presented for how sentations of both resources and services are required
design and manufacturing resources can be encapsulated (Section 4.2.1). A comprehensive description of the con-
and how a Global Service Layer may be developed. For cept of scalability and its different perspectives within
effective virtualisation of manufacturing resources and cap- manufacturing systems is presented by Putnik et al.
abilities, a multi-granularity manufacturing resource model (2013), and within CC by Venters and Whitley (2012).
that manages manufacturing resources based on manufac- The determinants for adopting CC for realising attractive
turing capabilities is described in Liu and Li (2012a). As properties such as scalability, agility, etc. in manufacturing
manufacturing resources are changeable during the process are assessed and discussed in Oliveira, Thomas, and
of collaborative manufacturing, while manufacturing cap- Espadanal (2014).
abilities are relatively continual, this decoupling of manu- Much of the research related to interoperability
facturing resources from manufacturing Cloud services within CM is focused on the development of an inte-
would support a scalable and flexible Cloud service. This grating manufacturing resources’ environment with a
approach would also make possible locating manufacturing proper method for the description of manufacturing
resources based on multi-granularity manufacturing cap- services (Section 4.2.1), and solving incompatibility
abilities and related constraints, as such supporting auto- issues within the heterogeneous data environment of
matic and dynamic Cloud services for discovery and the multi-provider CAx chain (Newman and Nassehi
composition. In Hu, Xu et al. (2013) the effect of granular- 2007; Nassehi et al. 2008; Brecher, Lohse, and Vitr
ity factor on manufacturing resource virtualisation is 2009; Mokhtar and Houshmand 2010; Wang and Xu
described. Manufacturing resource providers need to 2012;). In CC, web service technology is used to sup-
describe in detail their resources’ functionality in different port interoperability of soft resources, but the descrip-
granularity levels, and resource consumers need to choose a tion of manufacturing tasks is more complex as they
proper task decomposition level (granularity level) to often comprise more diversity and semantic meanings.
obtain maximum benefits in relation to their manufacturing Interoperability is closely related to standardisation, as a
missions. Before the virtualisation of resources, the granu- standardised framework or ontology is required for
larity levels, the resource categories in each granularity defining an agreed reference model, encompassing
level and the virtual models of each kind of resource need resources, services, business processes and enterprise
to be well defined for a specific CM platform. A complete architectures. This is necessary for unified information
description of this is also presented. Requirements, and an exchange and seamless cooperation between unique ser-
architecture for virtualising manufacturing capabilities in vices, making platform or cloud origin independent, as
the Cloud, are discussed in Wang and Xu (2013c). The well as for scalability and the aggregation of function-
relationships between resources, capabilities and services ality for more complex manufacturing tasks through
are described, and an approach for capability virtualisation, service compositions. To overcome interoperability of
from distributed resources to robust services, is proposed. A application dashboards, a Cloud-based web platform to
three-layer (Application, Virtual Service, Manufacturing support dashboard integrating communicational services
Capability) CM architecture with a Smart Cloud Manager is proposed (Ferreira et al. 2014). It builds on the
controlling mechanism is also presented. architecture of enriched existing Cloud services (cloud-
lets), as instances of different manufacturing resources.
Effective service composition, or Many-to-One map-
4.2.3. Resource service scalability, interoperability, ping, will be of the greatest importance for service con-
composition and integration sumers, as this will enable them to focus on their core
Scalability is one of the characteristics of CC, and a key business and outsource other activities in the Cloud. The
focus in CM, with the cooperation among a variety of task is demanding and complex, finding and combining a
heterogeneous manufacturing resources. It is often mix of services, which may be heterogeneous and deliv-
described as the flexible increase or decrease of capacity, ered by different providers. The use of MSDs for flexible
integration of production facilities is described in manufacturing process are described by abundant seman-
Rauschecker and Stohr (2012), for realising the applica- tics. Using a uniform representation of heterogeneous
tion of MaaS. The work aims at the development of a information, the heterogeneity of manufacturing resources
system that coordinates the manufacturing of complex can be systematically shielded.
configurable products across various production facilities The issue for Cloud services consumers of finding the
and locations, and also enables to make the limitations and best-fitting Cloud provider or service has been prominent
capabilities of the production network explicitly available in the fast-growing CC market, which contains a mixed set
during the complete product specification process. In Guo of heterogeneous and not always interoperable Cloud plat-
et al. (2010) and Zhang et al. (2010a), the definition and forms/infrastructures. The absence of common Cloud stan-
classification of flexibility in resource service composition dards has hampered the interoperability between different
(RSC) are described and a flexible management architec- providers, often resulting in ‘vendor lock-in’ problems.
ture for RSC (CMfg-FMARSC) is introduced. The pur- This has opened up the market for intermediate broker
pose is to be able to handle dynamic changes that occurred services (Petty and van der Mulen 2012), specialised in
during RSC, as well as optimal selection of RSC based on finding the best user-provider matching, given a set of
flexibility. The life cycle of RSC is classified into four governing prerequisites and conditions, as in service-
phases: Designing, Deploying, Executing and Post-proces- level agreements (SLAs) (Jrad, Tao, and Streit 2012).
sing, and flexibility is considered for Task, Flow, Resource (SLA is a formal contract between service providers and
service, Quality of Service (QoS) and Correlation. Major service consumers that should guarantee the achievement
uncertain dynamic changing factors are described and of the consumers’ service quality expectations [Wu and
optimal selection of RSC based on QoS and flexibility is Buyya 2010]). This matching often includes the selection
compared. Adaptive RSC, through quantitative evalua- and combination of service providers as well as the defini-
tions by the use of the measurement method of flexibility, tion of their collaboration and integration into providing a
is also suggested. A CM integrating service mode based unified service to the user. This task would be too complex
on Cloud agent, in order to control and coordinate CM for the consumer to successfully perform by himself.
terminal node efficiently, is presented in Jiang et al.
(2012). By analysing the type and composition of manu-
facturing resources, combined with agent technology, the 4.2.4. Resource and service scheduling
concept could enable the exploitation of all kinds of A scheduling methodology for production services is pre-
potential manufacturing resources and capabilities fully. sented in Lartigau et al. (2012b). Order decomposition
Four decision algorithms for judging composable correla- into tasks, the selection of one or several service providers
tions (CoC) between Cloud services are evaluated in Guo to perform them and the scheduling of the whole manu-
et al. (2011). The formalised description for CoC is pre- facturing process are considered. In Li et al. (2012), a
sented as well as the judging activity based on a bipartite resource scheduling framework is proposed. On the basis
graph. The efficiency of these algorithms is demonstrated of stochastic advanced Petri net, a queue balancing cut-
in a case study. Considering existing correlations among over (QBC) strategy is put forward as a solution to the
Cloud services, a framework for correlation relationship issue of request dispatching. The scheduling of collabora-
mining for Cloud service composition is demonstrated in tive design tasks is described in Laili, Zhang, and Tao
Guo, Zhang, and Tao (2011). The key issues are discussed (2011), presenting a new immune genetic algorithm.
and four function modules for mining these correlations Improved searching diversity based on immune strategy,
are analysed. To support decision making on when to but also adaptive adjustment for probabilities of crossover
outsource product manufacture and to what extent and and mutation with low time complexity, is achieved with
mix, a multi-objective optimisation formulation is pro- this concept.
posed, for computing an operational ratio (Zheng, Gao,
and Wang et al. 2012). This enables the determination of
which products to make and which to outsource. The 4.3. Platform management
approach is verified in a test case. Sharing of software After analysing the characteristics and design principles of
resources in CM is described in Xilong, Zhongxiao, and the management and control platform facing the CM ser-
Linfeng (2011). A platform supporting software publish- vices, the required system design function is proposed
ing and software using is presented, with a supply agent (Yang and Li 2011). Aspects of system cost, convenience
service for software providers and an online using service of service usage, system security and service are consid-
for software users. The approach builds on the virtualisa- ered and the approach is verified in a case study. A model
tion technology of CC. Different aspects of collaborative for optimal allocation of computing resources for manu-
resource sharing and integration are discussed in Ding, Yu, facturing tasks in CM is described in Laili et al. (2011), in
and Sun (2012), and an approach is proposed in which which computing resources are allocated to different tasks
resources, information and knowledge for the according to various demands of manufacturing tasks. The
issue of resource service transactions is discussed in innovation and publishing of knowledge are also included.
Cheng et al. (2010) where revenue, time and reliability After studying the dependencies of knowledge in CM, a
are considered for resource service provider, resource ser- four-layer knowledge life-cycle management system fra-
vice consumer and resource service agent. With the char- mework is presented (Hu, Zhang et al. 2013). In a knowl-
acteristics of different Cloud services, considering the edge storage layer, knowledge is stored in the perspectives
multiple layers of logistics, information flow and capital of domain, reasoning, task and description. A logical rea-
flow, the transactions on hardware class, software class, soning layer with a semantic reasoning engine can interface
product class and capability class are, respectively, ana- the stored knowledge when searching for problem solu-
lysed in Cheng et al. (2012). The detailed transaction flow tions. An application interface layer provides two types of
among provider, operator and consumer is also provided. interfaces for users and system: a Knowledge Operation
For the management of product information in CM, a interface for basic knowledge operations and a Knowledge
system with a six-layer architecture is proposed (Ai et al. Application interface for knowledge reasoning for sub-
2013). The feasibility and validity of the approach have mitted tasks. A man–machine interaction layer is also
been verified in a prototype system, including modules for included for operating the knowledge base, and submitting
user management, system management and product infor- and monitoring tasks. To deal with distributed knowledge
mation management. For the effective support and utilisa- and heterogeneity, delimiting the sharing of knowledge
tion of available resources, pragmatic management in a CM environment, a service-oriented knowledge

applications and instruments are required. A cloudlet fusion architecture supporting design activities is pre-
architecture dashboard is presented (Ferreira et al. 2013), sented in Liu and Li (2012b). An ontology-based design
as a communicational instrument to support human-to- knowledge organisation model for extracting, describing
human and human–computer interaction (HCI) and to and indexing of distributed resources into the CM plat-
enable technological integration requirements. The archi- form is proposed. For the fusion of knowledge, a con-
tecture builds on the Model-View-Control (MVC) pattern ceptual model including Service analysis, Knowledge
and the interface follows the Rich Internet Application matching, Knowledge integration and Ontology-based
(RIA) Presentation Design Pattern. As a dashboard, it fusion is used. In the European research project Virtual
facilitates and strengthens the human interaction and the Factory Framework (VFF), aiming at developing an
adoption of CC and ICT. The practical implementation of integrated environment to enable the interoperability
management support and human interaction through between software tools supporting the factory processes
Cloud service-oriented dashboards, for different enterprise along all the phases of its life cycle, a Virtual Factory
levels, is described (Cheng et al. 2013). Real-time infor- Data Model (VFDM) was proposed (Terkaj, Pedrielli,
mation and traceability for decision-making are provided and Sacco 2012). It provides a common definition of the
by RFID technology in this approach. shared data among the software applications connected
to the framework, using a shared meta-language. The
VFDM has been developed using Semantic Web tech-
4.4. Knowledge and data management nologies, because of their ability in representing formal
All information, descriptions, algorithms, rules, strategies semantics, and efficiently modelling and managing dis-
and data that support CM can be considered as knowledge, tributed data.
and knowledge engineering and management are crucial for
making CM able to solve problems intelligently.
Fundamental activities that need knowledge support are
virtualisation, encapsulation and descriptions of resources, 4.5. CM concepts
capabilities and services, intelligent task decomposition Many of the published articles about CM present archi-
with searching and optimal composition of required ser- tectures, platforms, models, frameworks or applications
vices, and planning and scheduling for the coordinated for CM concepts. Some describe more complete CM
execution of sub-tasks and manufacturing equipment. In systems while others present discrete CM technologies
Zhang and Jin (2012) a comprehensive approach for knowl- or parts. For the ease of overview and presentation,
edge management, for group enterprise CM, is presented. A these are presented in Table 1. It does not seem to be a
model framework of knowledge management, based on clear and stringent distinguishing and use of the con-
Knowledge-as-a-Service (KaaS), is described, for imple- cepts of architecture, platform, framework or model.
menting both tactic and explicit knowledge sharing and Therefore, the presentation of different CM concepts
reuse within a group of enterprises. A six-level architecture follows the authors’ naming conventions. Short
of a knowledge management system for CM has been descriptions of presented concepts are also included
developed, embodying all the required activities from in Table 1. (Among these concepts, the proposals
retrieving source knowledge to publishing knowledge as a representing more complete CM systems are further
service. Methods for acquisition, storage, retrieval, described in Section 5.)
Table 1. Cloud manufacturing architectures, platforms, frameworks, models and applications.
Classification Description/Specification Reference(s)
Architecture Four layers (Manufacturing Resource, Virtual Service, Global Service and Xu (2012)
Application layers).
10 layers (Resource, Perception, Resource virtualisation, Cloud service, Application, Tao, Cheng et al. (2011)
Portal, Enterprise cooperation, Knowledge, Cloud security and Wider Internet
layers).
Five layers (Physical, Virtualised resource, Service (Core Middleware), Application Li, Zhang, and Chai (2010) and
and User layers). Li, Hu et al. (2011)
Five layers (Resource, Perception, Service, Middleware and Application layers). Zhang et al. (2012a)
SME-CMfgSP. SME-oriented 12-layer service platform, with ‘optional’ and Huang et al. (2013)
‘required’ layers.
Cloud service broker architecture. Jrad, Tao, and Streit (2012)
Six layers, describing Resource Access (Physical, Perception, Communication Sub, Xiang and Hu (2012)
Access and virtualisation middleware, Communication and Application layers).
Flexible management of resource service composition, with modules for function, Zhang et al. (2010a)
monitoring and coordination.
Software resource-sharing. Platform (web interface) and Application software Xilong, Zhongxiao, and Linfeng
server layers. (2011)
Detailed four layers (Physical, Connection, Virtual and Service application layers). Beisheng (2012)
Six layers (Physical, Resource-oriented interface, Virtual resource, Core services, Ning et al. (2011)
Service-oriented interface and Application layers).
Using semantic descriptions and peer-to-peer network for advertisement, discovery Zhang and Zhong (2012)
and composition of Cloud services.
Three layers (Interaction, Functional and Data layers). Liu and Jiang (2012)
Product Design Knowledge Integration. Four layers, including Knowledge-as-a- Bohlouli, Holland, and Fathi
Service (KaaS). (2011)
Five-layer cooperation-oriented CMfg system (Manufacturing resource, Resource Tai and Xu (2012)
management and implementation, Cooperation platform, CMfg Portal and
Supported cooperation pattern layers).
Describing the use of Manufacturing Service Descriptions (MSDs) in a Rauschecker et al. (2011)
Manufacturing-as-a-Service Environment.
Manufacturing-as-a-Service front-end for consumers/providers to specify Yip et al. (2011)
manufacturing demands and services.
Cloud Integration Architecture, based on Cloud computing and SOA. Zhang and Xue (2012)
Six-layer architecture focusing on product information sharing (Application, Ai et al. (2013)
Interface, Service, Management, Virtualisation and Resource layers) and Cloud
security module.
Business architecture of CM, including eight platforms: Data Management, Whole Jin (2013)
life-cycle BOM, Manufacturing resource and capacity management,
Manufacturing execution, e-procurement, sales, after-sales service and quality
management.
Four-layer (Core service, System service, Business service and CM sub-system) Jin (2013)
SaaS solution of CM in automotive industry.
Six-layer (knowledge source, acquisition, storage, retrieval, innovation and Zhang and Jin (2012)
publishing) knowledge management system.
Four layers (manufacturing resource, system virtualisation, service and application Jeong and Hong (2013)
layers), applied to factory automation.
Interoperable Cloud-based Manufacturing System (ICMS), three layers (User Cloud/ Wang and Xu (2013a) and Wang
Application Layer, Smart Cloud Manager/Virtual Service Layer, and and Xu (2013b)
Manufacturing Cloud/Manufacturing Capability Layer).
Knowledge Fusion Architecture supporting knowledge availability in collaborative Liu and Li (2012a)
design activities. (Building on the architecture proposed by [5].)
Cloudlet architecture for dashboard in Cloud and Ubiquitous Manufacturing, Ferreira et al. (2013)
supporting human interaction if effective system management.
Five-layer architecture for intelligent perception and access of CM resources based Tao et al. (2014)
on IoT.
Platform XMLAYMOD, supporting distributed manufacturing collaboration and data Valilai and Houshmand (2013)
integration based on ISO 10303 (STEP). (Incl. structures and procedures. Case
study provided.)
Distributed Interoperable Manufacturing Platform (DIMP). Integrative CAX Xu (2012)
environment. Integrates software suites based on the requests and tasks from
users.
Multi-user oriented, service-based, commercial-available CMfg (CM) platform. Zhang et al. (2012a)
Integrated service platform based on CAgent. Jiang et al. (2012)
Collaborative manufacturing resource-sharing, based on Cloud services. Ding, Yu, and Sun (2012)
(continued )
Table 1. (Continued).
Classification Description/Specification Reference(s)
System function of CM services management and control. Yang and Li (2011)

Describing relations between Manufacturing, Business and Resource Clouds. Wang, Zhou, and Jing (2012)
A Cloud-based web platform to support dashboard integrating communicational Ferreira et al. (2014)
services, to enhance applications’ interoperability.
A service-oriented manufacturing platform for the recycle, reuse and remanufacture Wang et al. (2014)
of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) products. A QR code-
based product tracking mechanism is used to support information control.
Framework Six layers, supported by Service Platform and Standard, Security and Management Zhou, Liu, and Xu (2011)
functions.
For discovering matching manufacturing resources, using OWL-S and UDDI. Wang and Liu (2012)
For correlation relationship mining of Cloud services. Guo, Zhang, and Tao (2011)
Describes a process route for scheduling tasks. Lartigau et al. (2012b)
CM Resource Scheduling (CMRS). Task decomposition, matching static properties Li et al. (2012)
of resources with requirements of tasks.
Process framework of OACR (Optimal Allocation of Computing Resources). Laili et al. (2011)
Wise-ShopFloor, sensor-driven intuitive environment for distributed process Wang (2008)

planning, dynamic scheduling, real-time monitoring and remote control of
resources.
Three-layer CM virtualisation framework (man. resource layer, virtual description Liu and Li (2012a)
layer and service encapsulation layer)
Manufacturing collaboration framework with service- and Web-oriented Lu, Liu, and Ju (2012)
architectures with SaaS for combining internal operations with supply chain
cooperation, also realising collaboration with customers.
Four-layer Life-cycle Knowledge Management System (knowledge storage layer, Hu, Zhang et al. (2013)
logical reasoning layer, application interface layer and man–machine interaction
layer)
A Semantic Web system for managing distributed manufacturing services, with Cai, Zhang, and Zhang (2011)
modules for modelling, acquisition and retrieval of services.
Frameworks for perception and access of hard, computational and intelligent Tao et al. (2014)
manufacturing resources.
Model Application model describing how user requests are processed for generating a Li, Zhang, and Chai (2010)
solution.
Application model of Cloud Manufacturing Xiaofei et al. (2012)
Manufacturing resource-sharing. Zhou, Liu, and Xu (2011)
Cloud-based Design and Manufacturing (CBDM). Reference model with Cloud Wu et al. (2012)
consumer, provider, broker and carrier. Model of example services available to
Cloud consumer.
CM running model with seven phases (Task description and definition, Modelling Tao, Cheng et al. (2011)
and analysis, Service search and match, Service evaluation, Service selection and
composition, Implementation and process control, System and user evaluation).
Multi-dimensional information model of manufacturing capability. Luo et al. (2012)
Four-layer resource virtualisation model (Manufacturing resources, Concrete web Wu et al. (2011)
service, Logical service and Application layers).
Modelling process and model of virtual resource. Hu et al. (2012)
Integration and sharing of manufacturing resources. Ding, Yu, and Sun (2012)
Principal model of CM. Lartigau et al. (2012b)
Multi-view model combining Resource, Function, Information and Process views. Beisheng (2012)
Function view and Running view for CM system. Luo et al. (2011)
Cloud design service, 5-level 8-view model (Service interaction, Service state, Liu and Jiang (2012)
Service management, Service attribute and Service description levels. User
appraisal, Service state, Access control, Permission management, QoS,
Functional, Basic and Service resource views).
Cost constitution view on CM service platform. Cheng et al. (2011)
DICIS (Distributed Infrastructure with Centralised Interfacing System), describing Schaefer et al. (2012)
how the CBDM concept can be realised. Human, Communication and
Manufacturing Process assets (both virtual and physical resources) in the DI are
interconnected with users and management through the CIS.
Application Networked modelling & simulation platform, COSIM-CSP. Service scheduling, Zhou, Liu, and Xu (2011)
Resource-sharing and Collaboration simulation, Collaborative design of virtual
products, etc.
BISTOP (Build Ideal Solution With IT). Application prototype for validating Huang et al. (2013)
SME-CMfgSP.
MaaS infrastructure with service description structure in a case for manufacturing Rauschecker and Stohr (2012)
of façade elements (ManuCloud).
Cloud services monitoring system for heat treatment furnace. Yang and Li (2011)
4.6. Connotations and characteristics characteristics is introduced in Tai and Xu (2012). The
To analyse the connotation and characteristics of CM, a detailed patterns and mechanisms of resource-oriented
multi-view approach is described, with perspectives from cooperation, service-oriented cooperation and innova-
network, function and running process (Luo et al. 2011). tion-oriented cooperation are studied and a five-layer
This also makes it easier to compare differences and of a cooperation-oriented CM system is presented. To
ascendancies to other advanced manufacturing concepts, support collaborative work, business process interoper-
such as agile manufacturing, networked manufacturing ability is studied in Lartigau et al. (2012a). A new
and grid manufacturing. Business Process Model is presented, defining the busi-
ness communication, transactions and execution pro-
cesses occurring in a CM environment, among the
Cloud platform, consumers and providers. Data and
4.7. Collaborative work
constraints involved in order processing decomposition
Distributed manufacturing has been a paradigm since are also identified and formulated. A platform
the necessity and advantages of collaboration in manu- (XMLAYMOD) enabling distributed manufacturing
facturing activities was realised, mainly to fulfil the agents collaboration in a CM environment is presented
product development chain requirements. In this chain, in Valilai and Houshmand (2013). In this service-
the customer demands push the design, the design oriented approach, distributed collaboration of CAX
drives the manufacturing and the manufacturing systems is possible, maintaining manufacturing data
further pushes the final shipment (Valilai and integration based on the ISO 10303 (STEP) standard,
Houshmand 2013). utilising the capabilities of the standard to support XML
data structures. The functionality of the platform is
demonstrated in a case study for distributed product
4.7.1. CM collaboration development. Different CAX software packages colla-
A Cloud-based framework for manufacturing collabora- borate in a setup with product design, process planning
tion, which combines existing in-house systems and and computer numerical control (CNC) machining,
Cloud applications, is described in Lu, Liu, and Ju where manufacturing agents are diverse and geographi-
(2012). It enables all manufacturers in a value chain to cally distributed.
work together and collaborate with their demanding
customers. Combining existing systems and Cloud tech-
nologies enables the manufacturers to connect in-house 4.7.2. Collaborative design
systems with customer applications, and to integrate A semantic-based modelling method of the Cloud
internal manufacturing functions with trading partners design service together with a five-level and eight-
within the supply chain, via the Cloud. A CM solution view conceptual model is proposed in Liu and Jiang
for national collaboration in the Chinese automotive (2012). Through the analysis of the needs and features
industry is proposed in Jin (2013). A business architec- of the Cloud design service, modelling this service
ture for CM is introduced, focusing on ‘unified’ for combining method with dynamic generation of a work-
reflecting a group’s strength through collaboration. The flow model is introduced to improve the dynamics and
architecture holds platforms for data management, life- flexibility. Knowledge integration of collaborative pro-
cycle BOM, manufacturing resource and capacity man- duct design in CM is presented in Bohlouli, Holland,
agement, manufacturing execution, e-procurement, sales and Fathi (2011). Supporting a sustainable and innova-
and after-sales services, and quality management. A tive product design and development, a Cloud architec-
solution for selecting virtual enterprise collaboration ture with four layers is presented, in which KaaS is
partners is provided in Zhang et al. (2012b). As large- included. Distributed manufacturing agents’ collabora-
scale partner selection in CM will become a serious tion and manufacturing data integrity play a major role
obstacle for realising dynamic virtual enterprises, in global manufacturing enterprises’ success. There are
mainly due to the large number of participating enter- a number of works conducted to enable the distributed
prises that the low-threshold and free-access mode will manufacturing agents to collaborate with each other. To
generate, a model with a three-phase partner selection achieve the manufacturing data integrity through a vari-
strategy is put forward. Using hard (time, cost, quality) ety of different manufacturing processes, avoiding pos-
and soft (compatibility, agility, coordination) evaluation sible interoperability problems within the CAX chain,
indicators, the three phases apply different screening numbers of solutions have been proposed, among which
methods for arriving at a solution with optimal combi- one of the successful solutions is using the ISO 10303
nation of partners for different tasks. Cooperation within (STEP) standard (Valilai and Houshmand 2013;
CMs based on supply and demand networks (SDN) of Venkatesh et al. 2005; Guo et al. 2010; Newman and
enterprises with multifunction and opening Nassehi 2007; Nassehi et al. 2008). This would cater for
a seamless cooperation and integration of systems with providers and the CM service platform. With respect
different native languages/standards. to the service cost constituted, a multi-view model of
cost is proposed. For effectively assessing different
aspects of CM, a fuzzy group programming decision-
4.8. Security making method has been developed in Jia et al. (2012).
Corporate information often contains sensitive data of The approach uses an analytical evidential reasoning
customers, consumers and employees, business know- algorithm to solve problems caused by fuzzy linguistic
how and intellectual properties (Mokhtar and expressions, defected/incomplete information and con-
Houshmand 2010; Ryan 2011). Securing sensitive data flicts among CM providers. Multiple constraints and
and the ubiquitous availability of requested applications multiple objective optimisation models have been con-
in the Cloud are of major concerns for potential users of structed for minimisation of manufacturing cost, max-
Cloud services. Manifestations of these concerns regularly imisation of consumer satisfaction degree and
appear in many existing CC services, as a profound manufacturing service implementation difficulty. After
unwillingness and anxiety of letting sensitive and impor- the aggregation of group fuzzy information from the
tant data escape outside the boundaries of the physical CM provider, an agreement result of collaborative
company premises (Venters and Whitley 2012; Popovic´ decision can be derived.
and Hocenski 2010). The service models (SaaS, PaaS and

IaaS) require different levels of security in a Cloud envir-
onment. IaaS is the base of all CC services, with PaaS
built upon it and SaaS in turn built upon PaaS. Just as 4.11. Service-oriented process planning and equipment
capabilities are inherited, so are the information security control
issues and risks (Xu 2012). The distributed collaboration and resource sharing also
However, today most SaaS business and manufactur- require services for remote planning and control of
ing applications that vendors offer are hosted in ISO27001 physical equipment. This is a vital necessity in a pro-
and SAS 70 Type II certified data-centres with SLAs duct manufacturing scenario where different providers’
offered for most applications of 99% and above resources are involved. An integrated approach for
(Adiseshan 2012). Data-centres that provide these services collaborative manufacturing, including distributed pro-
are highly specialised in the fields of security, backup and cess planning, dynamic scheduling, real-time monitor-
recovery and have extensive IT resources to be able to ing and remote control, is described in Wang (2008). It
offer and fulfil such high service level commitments. Not allows users to remotely plan and control distant shop-
many SMEs, with relatively small IT resources, are able to floor operations based on runtime information from the
equal and maintain this level of security. (Many of the shop floor. Remote real-time monitoring and control of
proposed concepts in Table 1 also include security manufacturing equipment is also presented in Holm
functionalities.) et al. (2012) and Givehchi et al. (2011), in which a
sensor-driven approach for web-based control of an
industrial robot is used. The concept is verified in a
4.9. Simulation test case, in which the robot is monitored and con-
A Cloud simulation technology based on a platform of trolled over the Internet in several long-distance sce-
COSIM-CSP (COSIM Cloud Simulation Platform) was narios, without any noticeable delay (about 30 ms). A
developed in Li, Zhang, and Chai (2010) and Zhou, Liu, detailed description of a Cloud process planning sys-
and Xu (2011). It has primarily been applied in the design tem for job-shop machining operations and execution
of a multi-disciplinary virtual prototype of a flight vehicle. monitoring is demonstrated in Wang, Ma, and Feng
It can also be used for simulation of resource sharing, (2011). A two-layer distributed system architecture
migration of multi-granularity resources, fault tolerance, for distributed decision-making caters for adaptive
etc. A prototype of Cloud service platform for complex handling of unpredictable changes. This is realised
product design and simulation was also developed in from using a combination of machining features and
Zhang et al. (2010b). event-driven function blocks. The approach is demon-
strated in a case where a five-axis CNC milling
machine is controlled to machine a component with
4.10. Cost and price management 14 machining features. A four-layer architecture for
The most typical characteristic of CM is the scalable CM is presented in Jeong and Hong (2013), including
usage of on-demand resources and services with a pay- a device control manager in the manufacturing
as-you-go approach. In Cheng et al. (2011), the cost of resource layer. The control manager is suggested to
services is studied from three different cost aspects: control the device drivers of physical equipment such
Cloud service life cycle, manufacturing service as robots, CNC machines, electrical motors, etc.,
but no details of its realisation or implementation are standard based on the Extensible Markup Language
given. (XML), which supports machine-to-machine communica-
tions and promotes interoperability between existing tech-
nologies, has been developed (MTConnect 2013). Many
4.12. Enabling, supporting and application different approaches of using STEP-NC as a communica-
technologies tion language between applications in the CAX chain and
4.12.1. IoT between equipment and systems for planning and schedul-
ing have been described (Valilai and Houshmand 2013;
It integrates and connects physical objects (things) into
Venkatesh et al. 2005; Wang and Xu 2013a; Newman and
an information network, making it possible to
Nassehi 2007; Nassehi et al. 2008; Xu, Wang, and
exchange information about themselves and their
Newman 2011). A service-oriented implementation in a
environments. It can be used to make manufacturing
distributed manufacturing system is presented in Valilai
resources universally available and accessible (Xiang
and Houshmand (2013). The OPC Foundation creates and
and Hu 2012; Bandyopadhyay and Sen 2011). IoT is
maintains standards for open connectivity of industrial
quickly growing in line with RFID (Xu 2012) and
automation devices and systems (OPC Foundation 2013).
sensor technologies, and will promote interconnection
The standards specify the communication of industrial
between things (Li, Zhang, and Chai 2010).
process data between sensors, controllers, software sys-

tems, etc.
4.12.2. Embedded system technology
The rapid development of embedded system technology
enables, together with IoT, smart and convenient access of 4.13. Research within CM
manufacturing resources, e.g. physical terminal devices, The interest of the CM concept and its potential effects is
for status retrieval and control (Li, Zhang, and Chai 2010; rapidly increasing, and there is a steady increase in the
Heath 2003). number of CM-related publications, from the first few that
appeared in 2010. The following figures summarise the
identified CM research areas and reviewed publications.
4.12.3. Semantic Web (Research within enabling, supporting and application
This technology facilitates knowledge-based intelligent technologies is not included.) In Figure 3, ongoing
computation and enables users to search and share data research areas within CM are presented. The graph repre-
and information more easily by allowing the data from sents the main topics of the reviewed sources, as many
different sources to be processed directly by machines also describe generic concepts and parts of CM. The figure
(Wu et al. 2012; Martin et al. 2007; Berners-Lee 1998). presents a picture of the present focus of research and also
As the amount and complexity of product design and points out areas that need more attention.
manufacturing data are increasing, methods and tools to Figure 4 shows the reviewed references’ country of
represent this in a CM environment are required (Tai and origin. A clear majority of the references come from
Xu 2012; Eck and Schaefer 2011; Zha and Sriram 2006; China.
W3C Semantic Web Activity 2011). Semantic Web pro- The type of source for all references is depicted in
vides a common framework that allows data to be repre- Figure 5, and in Figure 6, journal publications are shown.
sented and reused across applications, enterprises and
community boundaries, which promotes the use of differ-
ent common formats for data exchange. It is a collabora- Identified Research Areas within CM
40
tive effort led by World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
35
with participation from a large number of researchers and 30
industrial partners (W3C Semantic Web Activity 2011). 25
20
15
4.12.4. Communication standardisation 10

5
Communication with and between shop-floor equipment, 0
making computers and machines ‘talk’ to each other, is a
well-known problem, as many use their own proprietary
language. As the core idea of CM is the sharing of
resources and collaborative manufacturing, the need for
communication standards should have a high priority. An
open and royalty free (non-proprietary) communication Figure 3. CM research areas.
Origins of Publications 5. CM research initiatives

80 Even though research within CM has only been ongoing
for a couple of years, ideas are getting more detailed, and
70 implementations of parts of the concept are now getting
realised and evaluated. A number of research initiatives
60 are active, with both academic and industrial participants
in local, national and international projects of varying
50 sizes and scopes. The bigger research initiatives focus on
the CM concept as a whole, looking at the higher-level
40 concepts, architectures, implementations and realisation
issues, whereas other initiatives focus on critical, indivi-
dual issues, necessary for the implementation of different
30
parts of CM. A variety of names and abbreviations for
describing the CM concept and its components exists, as
20
many research initiatives establish their own CM designa-
tions. Numerous publications describe much of the
10 ongoing research, and many of these are covered in this

paper.
0 Some of the proposed concepts in Table 1 describe a
China Europe USA New Other
more complete solution for implementing CM. These ori-
Zealand
ginate from some of the research initiatives which seem to
Figure 4. Distribution of publication origin. be the most active and comprehensive within CM. Their
contributed research is far too extensive to be described in
detail, but a summary of the characteristics and unique
Publication Source Type properties of their work is presented below, introduced
with their CM designation:
60
50 5.1. CMfg
National Chinese research initiative (Beihang University,
Beijing) is often referred to as the first source and
40 inventor of the CM naming 2010 (Li et al. 2010; Li,
Zhang, and Chai 2010; Zhang et al. 2012a). CMfg pre-
sents an application model of CM, describing CM plat-
30 form activities in the propagation from user request to
the return of a solution. Also proposed is a five-layer
CM architecture with the following: Physical layer for
20 provider resources and capabilities, Virtualised resource
layer for virtualising resources and encapsulate them as
services, Service layer for CM core functions such as
10 service management deployment, registration, searching,
matching, composition, scheduling, monitoring, cost and
pricing, billing, etc., Application layer for requests
0
within specific manufacturing applications, and User
Journal Conference Book Other
layer with interfaces for both consumers requests and
Figure 5. Publication sources. provider input/registration of resources. To demonstrate
the feasibility of the CMfg concept, a Cloud-based
application – Cloud simulation – based on the COSIM-
As could be expected (as the core concept of CM is resource CSP (Cloud Simulation Platform) has been demon-
sharing), the focus of most research initiatives are related to strated, in which the collaborative work in the multi-
manufacturing resources: how they can be virtualised and disciplinary design of a virtual flight vehicle prototype is
encapsulated into services in the Cloud platform, how they simulated. (Further detailed in [Tao, Zhang, Venkatesh
can be searched and combined for fulfilling customer tasks, et al. 2011] and in SME-CMfgSP: Small Manufacturing
how to find optimal solutions, etc. Enterprise-oriented Cloud Manufacturing Service
Cloud Manufacturing in Journals

Information and Management
J. of Information Computational Science
Advanced Science Letters
IJ. of Advancements in Computing Technology
IJ. of Engineering Innovation and Management
Enterprise Information Systems
The IJ. of Advanced Manufacturing Technology
Information Technology J.
IJ. of Computer Integrated Manufacturing
CIRP
Robotics and Computer‐Integrated Manufacturing

Advanced Materials Research

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Figure 6. Journal publications.
Platform, with a 12-layer architecture [Huang et al. model (CBDM) for their interpretation of CM (Schaefer
2013], and in MfgCloud [Ren et al. 2013]). et al. 2012). It builds on the concepts of CC, with manu-
facturing resources being available as different services.
For the implementation of CBDM they have proposed a
5.2. Cmanufacturing Distributed Infrastructure with the Centralized Interfacing
A research group at University of Auckland, New Zealand, System (DICIS) model. The Distributed Infrastructure is
has presented a public Cloud infrastructure, the ICMS composed of three asset groups (Human: consumers, pro-
(Interoperable Cloud-based Manufacturing System) ducers, managers; Communication: communication net-
(Wang and Xu 2013a, 2013b). It is a three-layer architec- work (Internet), network security and two interfaces for
ture, with service methodologies for supporting two types communicating with the human and manufacturing pro-
of users: customer user (CU) and enterprise user (EU). cesses’ asset groups; and Manufacturing process: HW and
Standardised data models for Cloud services and relevant SW resources.) The Centralized Interface System enables
features are also developed and described. The architecture the system to function as a whole. Workflow for distrib-
consists of a Smart Cloud Manager for assisting and super- uted and collaborative design and manufacturing in a local
vising the interaction between consumers and providers, a and distant user scenario is described, where engineers are
User Cloud for the consumers and their requests and a able to simultaneously cooperate using a CAD software,
Manufacturing Cloud for providers and their resources, in a SaaS mode.
capabilities and services. A distinction is made between
CUs and EUs; CUs are defined as customers/organisations
requesting a self-contained production task, while EUs are 5.4. Cloud-based MaaS environment
organisations/enterprises seeking additional capabilities ManuCloud, a European project funded by the European
and support to fulfil bigger and more demanding production Commission, has eight consortium members from acad-
tasks in collaboration with temporary partners and their emy and industry, from four different EU member states
services. The concept is evaluated in some case studies, (Austria, Germany, Hungary and the United Kingdom)
one where consumers’ requests are optimally mapped to (Meier, Seidelmann, and Mezgár 2010; ManuCloud
combinations of services from different providers, one 2012). The objective of the ManuCloud project is the
showing how detailed conditions in consumer requests development of a service-oriented IT environment to sup-
can be matched to providers’ services based on capabilities. port the transition from mass production to personalised,
customer-oriented and eco-efficient manufacturing. A con-
ceptual architecture with a front-end system and MaaS
5.3. Cloud-based design and manufacturing (CBDM) Infrastructure to support Cloud-based manufacturing of
A research group at Georgia Institute of Technology, customised products has been proposed. The front-end is
Georgia, USA, has presented a conceptual reference deployed as part of an integrated web-based portal to
support collaborative development, and consists of a competing with each other. The first manufacturing
Customised Product Advisory System (CPAS) and inter- Clouds will probably be realised based on national
faces for Infrastructure Management. An MSDL provides research initiatives and local enterprise interests. This
a formal description of both production and product- may later lead to inter-Cloud interoperability problems,
related information, and is used for the integration of the and sub-optimised manufacturing solutions within sepa-
front-end and the MaaS environment. Using MSDs, the rate Clouds, in the perspective of using the most suitable
concept has been proved in some business cases, one with resources available on a worldwide basis. These problems
distributed production and customer specification of could be due to the usage of different procedures (i.e. user
small-series, high-value products. agreements, billing routines), techniques (i.e. knowledge
and service management) and standards (i.e. for commu-
nication, distributed control, data representation). Vendor
5.5. GetCM lock-in, due to proprietary technologies, inefficient pro-
In a National Chinese research initiative (Northwestern cesses or contract constraints, is then a risk, and if provi-
Polytechnical University, Xi’an, Beijing Institute of ders are present in different CM platforms, coordination
Technology, Beijing) (Wang, Zhou, and Jing 2012) the and scheduling of their resources may also be problematic.
GetCM Paradigm is presented. It includes five parts: This is not optimal and interoperability issues between
Resource Cloud with manufacturing resources expressed different manufacturing Clouds may hinder the explora-
in the form of Cloud services, Business Cloud with busi- tion of the CM concept’s full potential.
ness-oriented Cloud services, enabling business process The CM evolution will be a step-by-step progression
sharing, Manufacturing Cloud with manufacturing pro- from systems using some of the proposed services and
cesses encapsulated into manufacturing Cloud services, technologies, to more complete implementations. It is
which performs a manufacturing process by invoking the realistic that there will first be created a variety of in-
relative resources and business services, Cloud house, enterprise-dedicated, Private Clouds (6.2.1).
Manufacturing Infrastructure and Public Platform, which Being realised within an enterprise, the implementation
holds the basic physical and organisational structures and will not be as complex as for a Public Cloud (6.2.1), as
services for CM. They also propose a seven-layer frame- the enterprise does not need to cooperate with other enter-
work for realising their paradigm, where one layer pro- prises or ‘unknown’ services and can use in-house stan-
vides a semantic reference basis for semantic description dards and procedures. Community Clouds (6.2.1),
of resources, capabilities and services, so that their con- managed and used by a group of enterprises with similar
tents can be clearly understood in different computer unique requirements, will come next. Drawing on the
programs. knowledge and experiences made from Private and
Community Clouds, third-party-run Public and Hybrid
Clouds (6.2.1) will follow later, as the requirements for
6. Discussions and future trends these are much more complex and encompassing. To be
When a new manufacturing paradigm is on the rise, there able to initially attract resource providers and consumers
will inevitably be some research areas, concepts and tech- to these Clouds, Cloud Operators must be able to offer
nologies that are less well represented than others. Even attractive incentives, mainly regarding ease of operation,
though research within CM has been ongoing for some cost and security.
years, and is rapidly increasing, there are still a number of An international definition and standard for CM would
studies required before the CM concept can be realised to facilitate its development and implementation and gener-
its full extent. The research areas are widespread and ate better manufacturing solutions. It is also of importance
numerous, with different perspectives and issues for con- in an environmental perspective, as CM is the most effec-
sumers, providers and operators. Some research initiatives tive approach for worldwide sustainable manufacturing,
also choose to focus on, and describe, CM in relation to enabling the most effective use and combination of
their own research interests and backgrounds, sometimes resources for fulfilling customer demands.
resulting in somewhat biased descriptions of CM. Solving
issues of both soft and hard nature remains, even though
many of the hard issues, like core and enabling technolo- 6.1. Outstanding research issues
gies, have reached a rather high degree of maturity, as The ongoing development of CM is facing many chal-
used in CC. The concept of CM promises many advan- lenges, as concepts, technologies and standards need to be
tages compared to existing manufacturing paradigms, and defined and decided upon. Besides the core and enabling
its evolution and implementations are driven by strong technologies, several crucial technical issues remain to be
arguments. The most probable scenario is the upcoming solved, such as how to bring a diverse base of resources
of a variety of CM platforms, many of which will be and capabilities to the Cloud as services (knowledge-based
providing similar, or the same, resources and thus resource Clouding), how the overall control and
management of Clouds should be realised, including the equipment, monitoring systems based on wireless,
central task of service composition (Cloud management smart sensor networks will be necessary to keep track
engines), collaboration between CM applications, open of manufacturing real-time information. The effective-
communication standards, distributed control and coordi- ness of CM systems will, to a large extent, be defined
nation of manufacturing equipment, and user interfaces in by the properties and abilities of these control systems,
Cloud environments. One of the major challenges is the which should be able to handle optimal service compo-
implementation description of physical equipment, sition, planning, scheduling and execution of equipment
Hardware-as-a-Service (HaaS). A standard or technique in a distributed Cloud environment. They will also need
for consistently describing equipment and its functionality, to handle long-distance communication regarding time,
behaviour, structure, etc., is required. Implementation of security and data volume constraints, as well as inter-
applications and knowledge is better provided for using connectivity between a huge variety of technologically
established CC techniques, such as SaaS, PaaS and IaaS. disparate and globally dispersed manufacturing
Summarising the CM research reviewed in this paper, resources. From high-level collaborative manufacturing
numerous research initiatives are under way, and many tasks down to shop-floor control, from automatic selec-
of these are dealing with the above-mentioned issues. tion and composition of services, down to automatic
Some critical research issues that are missing or not fully run-time generation of control code for unique compu-
explored in the literature have been identified. They are ter-controlled manufacturing equipment, automation in
described next, without consideration of their relevance these systems needs to be combined with integrated
regarding possible impact or importance. intelligence to generate optimal solutions. This will be
a necessity for handling volatile and dynamic manufac-
turing scenarios, unpredicted changes and new products,
6.1.1. International definition of CM and to minimise the need for human intervention. As
An international definition is necessary for a unified view such, the distributed control systems in a CM environ-
and progression of the successful development and implement need to be intelligent, agile and flexible:
mentation of CM. As described in Table 1, a huge variety
of different architectures, platforms, models, frameworks ● Intelligent: To be able to automatically generate the
and applications for implementation of CM have been optimal service compositions and equipment control
proposed. These concepts have differences as well as instructions required for completing any task.
similarities, and vary in respect of detail, complexity and ● Agile: To quickly respond and adapt to changes in
scope. Together with a CM definition, an implementation the CM environment and customer demands.
description for a CM environment is required for realisa- ● Flexible: To be able to select alternative control
tion, and demonstration, of its potential. solutions, and service configurations and combina-
tions from different providers, for realising tasks
and demands.
6.1.2. Standardisation
Closely related to a definition of CM, and supporting its A major problem within control of manufacturing
realisation, is the standardisation of core and enabling equipment is portability and interoperability, as the shop
technologies, as well as procedures and methods for the floors are populated with manufacturing equipment con-
complete operation of CM systems. This is of extra impor- trolled by proprietary control systems. The inability of
tance in the perspective of interoperability issues for col- interfacing native controllers hampers distributed control
laborative tasks among different Clouds. Open standards solutions and enforces the continuous use of equipment-
and communication protocols, supporting ‘plug and play’ specific programming codes, like native robot languages
scenarios for machine-to-machine communication in for industrial robots, and G and M codes for CNC
worldwide manufacturing networks, should be a priori- machines.
tised research area.
6.1.4. Knowledge and information management and

6.1.3. Intelligent, globally and locally distributed, sharing
monitoring and control systems With resource sharing also come the encompassing task
As CM will support dynamic cooperation and collabora- of information, data and knowledge sharing. For effec-
tion in manufacturing tasks within and between geogra- tive sharing and reuse of knowledge, a strategy for
phically distributed users, the need for control systems knowledge management is necessary, enabling the iden-
that can perform and coordinate these tasks is an utter- tification, creation, representation, distribution and
most prerequisite. To be able to optimally schedule and adoption of experiences and insights in an organisation
allocate manufacturing resources such as physical (Zhang and Jin 2012; Alavi and Leidner 2001). These
sources of knowledge might either be embodied in 6.1.7. Distributed manufacturing simulation

individuals or be embedded in organisational processes To be able to validate the performance of different
or practice. Decentralised IT systems, with isolated possible temporary manufacturing scenarios, for finding
island applications, mean that knowledge is often hard optimal service combinations, will be a key driver for
to find and to organise. Knowledge support is necessary moving to CM. Estimating critical performance metrics,
for intelligently performing many crucial CM activities, such as cycle times, throughput, equipment utilisation,
such as perception, connection, virtualisation and encap- etc., according to customer requirements, will be a key
sulation of manufacturing resources and capabilities, issue.
Cloud service description, matching, searching, aggre-
gation and composition, optimal allocation, scheduling
and control of activities and services, etc. Technologies
such as data mining for intelligently processing large 6.1.8. Populating the Cloud
amounts of data, and Semantic Web, which promotes To attract companies to CM, there are mainly three major
common data formats, allowing data to be shared and concerns that will significantly influence their willingness
reused between different services, applications, and for Cloud participation: Security, Cost and Cloud
enterprises, will need to be used for effective data Adoption issues. These issues are crucial for CM realisa-
management. tion and success, and if not satisfactorily solved, the

evolution and progress of CM will be slow.
6.1.5. Business models ● Security:

CM will require the development of new business mod- Even though there are many technological measures
els, supporting the collaborative nature of this approach, for handling and securing data and privacy con-
with networked partners cooperating in distributed value cerns, many companies hesitate to move to the
chains. Traditionally hierarchical business models will Cloud. Since Cloud services have been growing
not be able to stay competitive, as Internet-enabled rapidly in the last few years, many of the legal
mass collaboration with access to worldwide manufactur- issues are yet to be resolved. Today, many Cloud
ing resources and competence will dramatically improve operators use predetermined and standardised user
agility and innovativity, generating an enhanced ability agreements, as well as subcontractors, when estab-
for rapidly satisfying customer demands (Wu et al. lishing legal contracts and bindings with their cus-
2013a; Fuchs 2008). These models need to support tomers. National laws may also be in conflict with
value creation and sharing in collaborative value chains, these agreements, and Cloud operators may be
enabling and appealing to the participation in dynami- forced to disclose information that may be sensitive
cally configured and temporary existing manufacturing for their customers. Experiences of security issues
entities. The determination of the value-adding of each within CC imply that further research is required
part, when a combination of resources from different before presumptive Cloud customers can be fully
providers collaboratively manufactures a customer pro- confident to join.
duct, will need to be defined in these new business
models.
● Cost:
The scalable usage of on-demand resources and
services in CM, with a pay-as-you-go approach,
6.1.6. Intellectual property is very attractive for most companies.
Intellectual property (IP) rights and ownership of informa- Nevertheless, quantitative and robust cost mea-
tion and data is another big issue, as the once quite clear surements models and methods for the estimation
boundaries between who produced and who uses data will of cost savings are required, for justifying a
somewhat diminish in the sharing of applications, services move to CM. As a company’s Cloud adoption
and resources in a CM environment. In the interactions in initially will be a rather time- and resource-con-
a volatile and collaborative value chain, between three suming project, economic incentives and oppor-
different parts, consumer, operator and provider, may all tunities must be both appealing and possible to
be claiming property rights (Parker 2007). Both back- determine.
ground rights, which a company brings to a collaboration Product cost determination at the design phase is of
task, and foreground rights, resulted from the collaborative extra interest, as the major product development
task, need proper frameworks for negotiations and agree- costs are determined here, and research in colla-
ments concerning their future ownership, usage and borative economics for CM product development
protection. is missing.
● Cloud Adoption: and allocation of manufacturing resources and cap-

One important area of research relates to the skills abilities for the complete manufacturing life cycle
necessary to manage Cloud adoption within a com- of product development. The available services are
pany. Before starting to move services outside the owned by and distributed in different companies
company, it is absolutely necessary for the company and organisations, and the work of different deman-
to have a well-defined Cloud strategy. Otherwise, ders may be mixed when being processed by pro-
the anticipated Cloud benefits may well be ham- vided service infrastructures in the Cloud. Providers
pered by the mess created inside the company. benefit from selling idle manufacturing resources
What kinds of architectural skill sets are required and capabilities, demanders from being able to
to link internal processes with the Cloud, and what buy only what is temporarily required, and the
sort of contract management skills are necessary to operator from charging a service fee from both
maximise the efficiency of Cloud contracts? For the providers and demanders. Mostly used by SME
success of CM, companies should have a good companies.
foundation on internal integration of information
and processes. Therefore, there is a relatively high ● Hybrid
entrance standard to implement CM for the majority A combination of a private and a public platform.
of manufacturing companies. Many of the support- Business-critical services and sensitive data are
ing technologies have reached a sufficient level of kept unpublished, while services that are not criti-
maturity, but there are still numerous issues regard- cal are published for others to share and use.
ing organisation and implementation to be Complexity of determining how to combine and
addressed. Confidence, through guaranteed perfor- allocate tasks and services may initially lead to
mance, will be a crucial cornerstone for widespread unconditional, simpler applications, not requiring
acceptance and usage of CM systems, but the fear synchronisation.
of vendor lock-in may also make companies hesi-
tate about Cloud adoption.
6.2.2. Competitiveness through innovative
manufacturing
6.2. Future directions and trends With the introduction of CM an environment will be
realised where manufacturing companies have access to
6.2.1. CM platforms
the same manufacturing resources, no matter the size or
It is envisioned that depending on safety, security and location of the company. Customers can reach manufac-
utilisation perspectives, there will be different CM plat- turers across the planet and select the best offerings.
forms coexisting, such as Public, Private, Community and Then, being the biggest, or internationally distributed,
Hybrid platforms (Huang et al. 2013): company would no longer give the most competitive
edge, but rather being the most agile to innovatively
● Private use all these resources for successfully meeting world-
Similar to the public platform but managed within a wide customer demands. The manufacturing industry of
company or organisation for the cost-effective coordi- today is traditionally supported by hierarchical supply
nated utilisation and sharing of in-house resources, e. chains for completing specific manufacturing demands.
g. reducing the need for duplicate equipment, expen- These supply chains often encompass many different
sive software or services. Provides better security and layers of suppliers, and are rigid by nature, and tied to
control over data, services and resources, which might specific delivery patterns by long-term contracts. As
be distributed in different departments, branch com- such they are limitations for successfully satisfying
panies, etc. locally and/or globally. rapidly changing consumer demands. In CM, supply
chains will be volatile, temporarily configured and exist-
● Community ing for unique and dynamic manufacturing tasks and, as
Managed and used by a group of companies or such, highly flexible by nature. Based on consumers’
organisations, sharing specific requirements (e.g. specific key objectives, i.e. cost, time or quality, supply
extra high security or manufacturing requirements) chains are realised through the dynamic composition of
or a common high-level manufacturing task or mis- the available Cloud services, which, as a combination,
sion (e.g. aerospace industry). will best fulfil these objectives. To innovatively use
available resources, capabilities and collaboration net-
● Public works in an agile approach to best meet rapidly chan-
Provided for any service provider or consumer by a ging customer and market demands will be a strong
third-party operator for facilitating optimal sharing driver for manufacturing competitiveness.
6.2.3. New scenarios for cooperation and collaboration services and resources, almost as with any other commod-
6.2.3.1. Customer–manufacturer cooperation. As custo- ity. Consumers could negotiate with providers about cer-
mer/end users’ demands will be more dynamically avail- tain amounts of future resource availability and usage, and
able for manufacturing companies, it will be possible to if redundant at a later time, sell these rights to other
incorporate them more in the design process of products. consumers, or back to the original provider. This trading
Customised products for customer individualisation will could also be purely speculative, as an innovative concept
then be realised in co-design activities. to earn a profit from varying prices on resources and their
usage, following access and demand. This trading would
mainly deal with access to resources of a finite supply, as
6.2.3.2. Manufacturing collaboration. In CM, supply
physical manufacturing equipment and human labour.
chains will be volatile, temporarily configured and existing
for unique and dynamic manufacturing tasks, and as such,
highly flexible by nature. Based on consumers’ specific key 6.2.6. Real-world connectivity
objectives, i.e. cost, time or quality, supply chains will be
There has been a lot of focus on the need for, and propo-
realised through the dynamic composition of the available
sals of, collaboratively performed and shared product
Cloud services, which, as a combination, will best fulfil these
development activities. Embedded systems, smart sensors
objectives. This will lead to new manufacturing scenarios
and automation controllers now populate industrial appli-

with different mixes of collaborating parties.
cations, but are often used in local and isolated environ-
ments, within the boundaries of single manufacturing
facilities. IoT will help push the trend to global, secure,
6.2.4. Cloud service brokers
seamless and bidirectional interaction with real-world
Many new business opportunities will follow the introduction objects and systems in a variety of applications, not only
of CM. The issue for Cloud services customers to find the within the scope of manufacturing.
best-fitting Cloud provider or combination of services will The product manufacturing processes (machining,
open up the market for intermediate broker services, specia- assembly, etc.) will see new applications where hard-
lised in finding the best user–provider matching, given a set of ware-in-the-loop manufacturing equipment, by the use of
governing prerequisites and conditions, as in SLAs (Jrad, Tao, sensor feedback and remote monitoring, will make possi-
and Streit 2012; Wu and Buyya 2010). Services brokers and ble a variety of collaborative and distant manufacturing
their services can appear in different contexts. They can be activities. By this ability to share hardware resources,
delivered through technology as software, applications, plat- manufacturers will finally be able to fully realise the
forms or suites of technologies that enhance the base services capabilities of CNC machines, robots, servomotors and
available through the Cloud. They can appear at the service other computer-controlled flexible devices. Since the
provider’s location, making available supporting functions to introduction of CNC, equipment for machining, assem-
the user beyond the original service, or at the user’s location, bling, material handling, etc. has had the ability to change
facilitating issues like administration of service levels or local their behaviour on the fly. The variable setting the pace
management (Tao, Zhang, Guo et al. 2011). They can also has always been process control, and ultimately, the
exist as a true, in the Cloud, brokerage service business, demands of the consumer. In CM, this valuable informa-
independent of providers and users, providing a service with tion will be instantly available to manufacturers for
a higher value to the user, by making it more specific, i.e. by immediate product development and manufacturing pro-
combining and aggregating multiple services into one or more cesses, through the unprecedented speed of digital con-
new services or enhancing the security. This way, a brokerage nections between providers and consumers in a networked
service can make it easier, less costly, more secure and more environment.
productive for companies/users to find, integrate and consume Future directions of CM will include innovative and
Cloud services, particularly when these services are originally adaptive process planning services, knowledge-based and
delivered by different services providers. In some companies, on-demand quick operation simulation services, resource
there may be the scenario that when the IT department loses utilisation and availability monitoring services, setup plan-
software and systems to manage, the natural evolution for its ning and optimisation services, dynamic and real-time
role may be to become a service broker for the company’s use scheduling services, and energy and resource usage esti-
and integration of Cloud services instead. mation services. New services, such as Process-Planning-
as-a-Service (PPaaS), Assembly-Planning-as-a-Service
(APaaS), Maintenance-as-a-Service (MtaaS) and
6.2.5. Trading with production capacity Equipment-Control-as-a-Service (ECaaS), will be possible
As many companies would like to secure their future (Wang 2008; Wang, Ma, and Feng 2011; LaSelle 2011).
supply of production capacity on a longer-term basis, The hardware providers will still be responsible for
there could be a scenario with trading of manufacturing executing the manufacturing tasks and ensuring the
quality, but external control and execution as a service will

Distributed
be possible. If a manufacturing equipment provider does Process
not possess the best or enough competence or information Planning
for generating the required planning and control, for opti-

mally fulfilling a collaborative manufacturing task or mis-
sion, these services can be available in the Cloud. A C lo u d M an u fa ct urin g
machine can then be available as either a hard resource Cloud

requiring external services for control or a ‘self-controlled’ Management Knowledge
MC by the machine provider. Pool of

Manufacturing Manufacturing Services Remote
Equipment Manufacturing
Availability Control/
Monitoring Execution
6.2.7. Cloud closed-loop manufacturing
One of the major research issues for realising the CM Providing Consuming
resources resources
environment is how to access and control physical manu-
facturing equipment. High-level manufacturing tasks need
Enterprise Factory Shop Floor
to be divided and distributed as sub-tasks to the shop
floors of different collaborating manufacturing companies, Collaborative Manufacturing

Intelligent, Agile and Flexible
where they should be coordinated and executed based on
real-time information. A common standardised approach Figure 7. Cloud closed-loop manufacturing concept.
is required, which supports distributed control based on
both global and local parameters and conditions.
An approach for this has been presented in Wang functionality can be instantiated at run-time in accordance
(2008) and Wang, Ma, and Feng (2011), describing with dynamic global and/or local parameters, which cater
research towards implementing CM. The concept for dis- for a dynamic and adaptive manufacturing control. This
tributed process planning, dynamic scheduling, real-time means that the required equipment control code can be
monitoring and remote control in a shared Cloud environ- generated on the fly, according to the real-time conditions
ment is described in Figure 7. Cloud Closed-Loop and customer requirements, instead of sending predeter-
Manufacturing (CCLM) is the focal point of adaptive mined control instructions, which is the traditional
decision making based on distributed real-time monitoring procedure.
information and available resources from dynamic Cloud
scheduling. Manufacturing features (MFs), IEC 61499
6.2.7.3. Manufacturing feature function blocks. The con-
function blocks (FBs) and the combination of these are
cept of combining MFs with IEC 61499 FBs, into
crucial concepts adopted in this approach.
Manufacturing Feature Function Blocks (MF-FBs),
enables an intelligent, agile and flexible solution for per-
6.2.7.1. Manufacturing features. Manufacturing features
forming collaborative and distributed manufacturing tasks.
represent basic, low-level manufacturing operations that a
Each MF-FB holds the necessary information to perform a
complete high-level manufacturing task is made up of. For
basic manufacturing operation, and the automatic equip-
an assembly operation these could be insertion, placing,
ment programming effort is more or less reduced to select-
screwing, press fitting, etc. and for a machining operation,
ing and combining the correct predefined MF-FBs into a
pocket, face, hole, chamfer, etc. Through proper selection,
network of MF-FBs, for performing a higher-level manu-
grouping and sequencing of a set of MFs, the functionality
facturing task.
for performing a higher-level manufacturing task can be
This construct yields an agile manufacturing beha-
created. (MFs can be created and stored in MF libraries,
viour, with the following advantages:
for reuse in different solutions).
6.2.7.2. IEC 61499 event-driven function blocks. The ● Since the FBs are event-driven they can dynami-
IEC 61499 standard defines event-driven FBs that can cally handle uncertainties during equipment
encapsulate and distribute functionality in a networked operations.
environment. The functionality is wrapped into algo- ● The algorithms embedded in the FBs enable run-
rithms, and the behaviour of the FB is determined by the time decision-making. For a specified machine
execution of these algorithms. They create an adaptive (CNC, robot, etc.), these algorithms can make deci-
behaviour since they are able to dynamically react to sions on machining path, robotic path generation,
changes, through input events and real-time data. The motion control and other machining, robotic, etc.
required executional parameters for realising the conditions at runtime.
Figure 8. Two-layer planning hierarchy.
● The function blocks are machine/resource indepen- when a change occurs. The extent of code regenera-
dent, and can be dispatched to more than one tion then depends on the effects and influences of
machine for collaborative manufacturing. the change.
The concept of using agile event-driven MF-FBs, for

It is thus the actual conditions in the manufacturing sys-
controlling manufacturing resources, generating the
tem, fed back to the FB control system through a monitor-
required control code on the fly, facilitates the low-
ing system of sensors, which dynamically dictate how the
level shop-floor implementation of CM. It has been
manufacturing equipment will perform the different
verified in some test cases where control code is adap-
operations.
tively and automatically generated for different types
The concept is supported by a two-layer planning
of manufacturing equipment (Holm, Adamson, and
hierarchy (Figure 8), which separates generic data from
Wang 2013; Adamson et al. 2012; Adamson, Holm,
machine-specific ones. An incoming manufacturing plan
and Wang 2012).
triggers the global Supervisory Planning (SP) to create a
generic process plan, by grouping MF-FBs into a group of
networked FBs, which is downloaded to the local
Operation Planning (OP). Decision making is supported 6.2.8. Sustainability
by networked knowledge- and databases (KB/DB), The sharing of resources will lead not only to lower costs
whereas the latest monitoring information is made avail- and higher productivity and utilisation for individual com-
able to the OP, for instantiating the FBs with real-time panies, but also to a more effective use of resources in a
parameters and conditions, and performing execution con- global perspective. Issues such as sustainability, energy
trol. This means that the process plans can be dynamically consumption, waste reduction and other environmental
modified according to the dynamics of the actual manu- factors will therefore find a better and more effective
facturing process. representation within CM, especially due to its collabora-
Compared to traditional programming of manufactur- tive nature. Consumers will be able to select and combine
ing equipment, online or offline, this approach holds more different objectives or key performance indicators (KPI),
advantages: i.e. cost, time, quality, sustainability, etc.
● Traditional programming requires skilled and

experienced programmers, and is often time- 7. Conclusions
consuming. The interest of CM is steadily increasing. The results
● With traditional programming, the created control from a survey from Microsoft (2011) concerning the use
code is predefined for specific machines, tasks and of CC in discrete manufacturing showed that lowered
products, and has to be modified or totally redefined costs for IT infrastructure, efficient collaboration across
geographies and quick responses to market demands Disclosure statement

were seen as big benefits. Proactive companies search- No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
ing methods to continuously improve the quality of
their manufacturing solutions and looking for Cloud-
based technologies for accelerating their performances Funding
will as early CM adopters have a significant advantage The research was supported by the Swedish Knowledge
over competitors, thanks to the increases in productivity Foundation [grant number 20130303].
and lower costs. Productivity gains will then be driven
by distributed resource-sharing and better utilisation of ORCID
information technology.
Göran Adamson http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1265-8451
The concept of CM also seriously challenges tradi-
tional hierarchical business models, as the ability of
globalised mass collaboration offers a much higher References
level of creativity and agility as expertise support in Adamson, G., M. Holm, and L. Wang. 2012. “Event-driven
all phases of product development can be shared and Adaptability Using IEC 61499 in Manufacturing Systems.”
accessed. This by far outweighs the impact of a com- In Proceedings of the 5th Swedish Production Symposium
pany’s in-house expertise for being successful, and will 2012 (SPS12), 453–460. Linköping: The Swedish
Production Academy. ISBN 978-91-7519-752-4.
set new standards levels for manufacturing competitive- Adamson, G., M. Holm, L. Wang, and P. Moore. 2012.
ness. Large, global enterprises have already started out “Adaptive Assembly Feature Based Function Block
on the track of CM, by applying resource sharing. Control of Robotic Assembly.” In Proceedings of the 13th
Particularly for SMEs, CM will be able to revolutionise Mechatronics Forum International Conference, edited by
their way of working, as they will benefit from the R. Scheidl and B. Jakoby, Vol. 1, 8–13. Linz: TRAUNER
Verlag. ISBN 978-3-99033-042-5.
ability to use resources that used to be too complex, Adiseshan, B. 2012. “Manufacturing in the Cloud: Improved
difficult or expensive, as designed for use by larger Productivity and Cost-Savings are on the Horizon.” Accessed
enterprises. This will make them more effective and October 10. http://www.automation.com/pdf_articles/inkumo/
competitive as it allows them to focus and specialise inkumo_white_paper_manufacturing_in_the_cloud.pdf
on their core manufacturing activities, while retrieving Ai, Q., K. Mo, Y. Wang, and L. Zhao. 2013. “Research of
Product Information Sharing System Based on Cloud
necessary supporting resources from the Cloud. Being Manufacturing.” In Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol.
small will no longer hamper them in handling bigger 248, edited by X. Zhou and H. Tan, 533–538. doi:10.4028/
projects, as groups of companies can team up in the www.scientific.net/AMM.248.533.
Cloud to form bigger virtual enterprises, in which each Alavi, M., and D. E. Leidner. 2001. “Review: Knowledge
of them performs individual specialised tasks and activ- Management and Knowledge Management Systems:
Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.” M/S
ities, in new collaborative product development chains Quarterly 25 (1): 107–136.
and opportunities. Small and fast networked SMEs will Armbrust, M., I. Stoica, M. Zaharia, A. D. Fox, R. Griffith, A.
be able to dramatically increase their competitiveness in Joseph, R. Katz, A. Konwinski, G. Lee, D. Patterson, and A.
relation to slow and big single enterprises. Rabkin. 2010. “A View of Cloud Computing.”
CM introduces a new era of technology that will Communications of the ACM 53 (4): 50–58. doi:10.1145/
1721654.1721672.
totally change the life of the manufacturing industry. It AutoDesk. 2013. Accessed January 10. http://usa.autodesk.com/
moves away from using on-the-premise IT infrastruc- adsk/servlet/pc/index?siteID=123112&id=20741453
tures, knowledge structures and long-term dedicated Bandyopadhyay, D., and J. Sen. 2011. “Internet of Things:
physical resources to support high-level manufacturing Applications and Challenges in Technology and
applications, into the Cloud where lower-cost, tailor- Standardization.” Springer International Journal of
Wireless Personal Communications 58 (1): 49–69.
made resources are available in a pay-as-you-go con- doi:10.1007/s11277-011-0288-5.
cept. The concept seems to include all the necessary Beisheng, L. V. 2012. “A Multi-View Model Study for the
prerequisites for a comprehensive and dramatic change Architecture of Cloud Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of
in the way manufacturing activities are performed. the Third IEEE International Conference on Digital
Covering all the different phases of the product manu- Manufacturing and Automation, 93–97. doi:10.1109/
ICDMA.2012.22.
facturing development life cycle, from analyses of Berners-Lee, T. 1998. “Semantic Web Road Map.” Design
demands and requirements of markets and customers, Issues, Design Issues for the World Wide Web, W3C.
over product design and manufacture, to product end-of- Accessed October 14, 2013. http://www.w3.org/
life activities, its potential promises many benefits and DesignIssues/Semantic.html
improvements. As such, it holds the promise of the new, Bi, Z. M., and L. Wang. 2013. “Manufacturing Paradigm Shift
Towards Better Sustainability.” In Cloud Manufacturing:
modern collaborative and resource-sharing manufactur- Distributed Computing Technologies for Global and
ing paradigm, for effective and sustainable worldwide Sustainable Manufacturing, edited by W. D. Li and J.
manufacturing. Mehnen, 99–118. London: Springer.
Bohlouli, M., A. Holland, and M. Fathi. 2011. “Knowledge Ferreira, L., G. Putnik, M. Cunha, Z. Putnik, H. Castro, C. Alves, V.
Integration of Collaborative Product Design Using Cloud Shah, and M. L. R. Varela. 2013. “Cloudlet Architecture for
Computing Infrastructure.” In Proceedings of the IEEE Dashboard in Cloud and Ubiquitous Manufacturing.” Procedia
International Conference on Electro/Information CIRP 12: 366–371. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2013.09.063.
Technology, 1–8. Mankato, MN: IEEE Society Press. Fuchs, C. 2008. “Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes
Brecher, C., W. Lohse, and M. Vitr. 2009. “Module-Based Everything – by Don Tapscott & Anthony D. Williams.”
Platform for Seamless Interoperable CAD-CAM-CNC Journal of Communication 58: 402–403. doi:10.1111/
Planning.” In Advanced Design and Manufacturing Based j.1460-2466.2008.00391_5.x.
on STEP, edited by X. W. Xu and A. Y. C. Nee, 439–462. Gao, X., M. Yang, Y. Liu, and X. Hou. 2013. “Conceptual Model
London: Springer. of Multi-Agent Business Collaboration Based on Cloud
Buyya, R., C. S. Yeo, and S. Venugopal. 2008. “Market-Oriented Workflow.” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information
Cloud Computing: Vision, Hype, and Reality for Delivering Technology 48 (1): 108–112.
IT Services as Computing Utilities.” Proceedings of the 10th Givehchi, M., M. Holm, G. Adamson, and L. Wang. 2011.
IEEE International Conference on High Performance “Web-Based Real-time Monitoring and Control of a
Computing and Communications, 5–13. Dalian: IEEE Robot.” In Proceedings of the 4th Swedish Production
Society Press. doi:10.1109/HPCC.2008.172. Symposium 2011 (SPS11) Conference, 548–553. Lund: The
Cai, M., W. Y. Zhang, G. Chen, K. Zhang, and S. Li. 2010. Swedish Production Academy.
“SWMRD: A Semantic Web-Based Manufacturing Resource Goldhar, J. D., and M. Jelinek. 1990. “Manufacturing as a
Discovery System for Cross-Enterprise Collaboration.” Service Business: CIM in the 21st Century.” Computers in
International Journal of Production Research 48 (12): Industry 14 (1–3): 225–245. doi:10.1016/0166-3615(90)

3445–3460. doi:10.1080/00207540902814330. 90126-A.
Cai, M., W. Y. Zhang, and K. Zhang. 2011. “Manuhub: A Guo, H., L. Zhang, and F. Tao. 2011. “A Framework for
Semantic Web System for Ontology-Based Service Correlation Mining of Cloud Service in Cloud
Management in Distributed Manufacturing Environments.” Manufacturing System.” In Advanced Materials Research,
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics – Part Vol. 314–316, edited by J. Gao, 2259–2262. doi:10.4028/
A: Systems and Humans 41 (3): 574–582. doi:10.1109/ www.scientific.net/AMR.314-316.2259.
TSMCA.2010.2076395. Guo, H., L. Zhang, F. Tao, L. Ren, and Y. L. Luo. 2010.
Cheng, Y., F. Tao, L. Zhang, X. Zhang, G. H. Xi, and D. Zhao. “Research on the Measurement Method of Flexibility of
2010. “Study on the Utility Model and Utility Equilibrium of Resource Service Composition in Cloud Manufacturing.”
Resource Service Transaction in Cloud Manufacturing.” In In Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 139–141, edited by
Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on International L. Zhang et al., 1451–1454. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/
Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, AMR.139-141.1451.
2298–2302. Macao: IEEE Society Press. Guo, H., L. Zhang, T. Tao, Z. Ren, and Y. Luo. 2011.
Cheng, Y., Y. Zhang, L. Lv, J. Liu, F. Tao, and L. Zhang. 2012. “Composable Correlation Mining of Cloud Service in
“Analysis of Cloud Service Transaction in Cloud Cloud Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of the IEEE
Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and
International Conference on Industrial Informatics, 320– Engineering Management, 1907–1911. Singapore: IEEE
325. Beijing: IEEE Society Press. Society Press.
Cheng, Y., D. Zhao, A. R. Hu, Y. R. Luo, F. Tao, and L. Zhang. Heath, S. 2003. Embedded Systems Design. 2nd ed. Oxford:
2011. “Multi-View Models for Cost Constitution of Cloud Butterworth-Heinemann.
Service in Cloud Manufacturing System.” In Advances in Heinrichs, W. 2005. “Do It Anywhere.” Electronics Systems and
Computer Science and Education Applications, Software 3 (4): 30–33. doi:10.1049/ess:20050405.
Communications in Computer and Information Science, Holm, M., G. Adamson, and L. Wang. 2013. “Enhancing
Vol. 202, 225–233. Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3- Adaptive Production Using IEC 61499 Event-Driven
642-22456-0_33. Functions Blocks.” Proceedings of the 41st Annual North
Cheng, M., R. Y. Zhong, Y. Li, H. Luo, S. Lan, and G. Q. American Manufacturing Research Conference (NAMRC
Huang. 2013. “Cloud Service-Oriented Dashboard for 41), Madison, WI, June 10–14. ISBN 0-87263-874-X.
Work Cell Management in RFID-enabled Ubiquitous Holm, M., M. Givehchi, A. Mohammed, and L. Wang. 2012.
Manufacturing.” In 10th IEEE International Conference on “Web Based Monitoring and Control of Distant Robotic
Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC), 379–382. IEEE. Operations.” Proceedings of the ASME 2012 International
doi:10.1109/ICNSC.2013.6548767. Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference
Ding, B., X.-Y. Yu, and L.-J. Sun. 2012. “A Cloud-Based (MSEC2012), Paper Number MSEC2012-7296, Notre
Collaborative Manufacturing Resource Sharing Services.” Dame, ID, June 4–8.
Information Technology Journal 11 (9): 1258–1264. Hu, A., L. Zhang, F. Tao, and X. Hu. 2013. “Life-cycle
doi:10.3923/itj.2012.1258.1264. Management of Knowledge in a Cloud Manufacturing
Eck, O., and D. Schaefer. 2011. “A Semantic File System for System.” Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International
Integrated Product Data Management.” Advanced Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference
Engineering Informatics 25 (2): 177–184. doi:10.1016/j. (MSEC2013), Paper Number MSEC2013-1133, Madison,
aei.2010.08.005. WI, June 10–14.
Ferreira, L., G. Putnik, M. M. Cruz-Cunha, Z. Putnik, H. Castro, Hu, C., C. Xu, X. Cao, and J. Fu. 2012. “Study of Classification
C. Alves, and V. Shah. 2014. “Dashboard Services for and Modeling of Virtual Resources in Cloud
Pragmatics-Based Interoperability in Cloud and Ubiquitous Manufacturing.” In Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol.
Manufacturing.” International Journal of Web Portals 6 (1): 121–126, edited by D. Sun et al., 2274–2280. doi:10.4028/
35–49. doi:10.4018/ijwp.2014010103. www.scientific.net/AMM.121-126.2274.
Hu, C., C. Xu, X. Cao, and P. Zhang. 2013. “Study on the Multi- assemblymag.com/articles/87223-assemblyautomation-manu
Granularity Virtualization of Manufacturing Resources.” facturing-in-the-Cloud
Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International Lee, W. G. K., T. Baines, B. Tjahjono, and R. Greenough. 2006.
Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference “Towards a Conceptual Framework of Manufacturing
(MSEC2013), Paper Number MSEC2013-1174, Madison, Paradigms.” SIMTech Technical Reports 7 (3): 169–177.
WI, June 10–14. Li, B. H., L. Zhang, and X. Chai. 2010. “Introduction to Cloud
Huang, B., C. Li, C. Yin, and X. Zhao. 2013. “Cloud Manufacturing.” Accessed October 12, 2012. http://wwwen.
Manufacturing Service Platform for Small- and Medium- zte.com.cn/endata/magazine/ztecommunications/2010Year/
Sized Enterprises.” The International Journal of Advanced no4/articles/201012/t20101219_196752.html
Manufacturing Technology 65 (9–12): 1261–1272. Li, B. H., L. Zhang, L. Ren, X. D. Chai, F. Tao, Y. L. Luo, Y. Z.
doi:10.1007/s00170-012-4255-4. Wang, C. Yin, G. Huang, and X. P. Zhao. 2011. “Further
Jeong, H. W., and B. H. Hong. 2013. “The Cloud Discussion on Cloud Manufacturing.” Jisuanji Jicheng
Manufacturing System in Factory Automation.” In Applied Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated Manufacturing
Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 271–272, edited by W. P. Systems, 17 (3): 449–457. (in Chinese).
Sung and R. Chen, 528–532. doi:10.4028/www.scientific. Li, B. H., L. Zhang, S. L. Wang, F. Tao, J. W. Cao, X. D. Jiang,
net/AMM.271-272.528. X. Song, and X. D. Chai. 2010. “Cloud Manufacturing: A
Jia, W., Y. Feng, J. Tan, and X. An. 2012. “Fuzzy Group New Service-Oriented Networked Manufacturing Model.”
Programming Decision-making for Manufacturing Cloud Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, CIMS, 16
and Its Application on Air Separation Equipment.” In (1): 1–7. (in Chinese).
Li, C., Y. Shang, C. Hu, and P. Zhu. 2011. “Research on Cloud
Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 16th International

Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Manufacturing Multi-Granular Resource Access Control
Design, 757–762. Wuhan: IEEE Society Press. Based on Capacity Constraint.” International Journal on
Jiang, W., J. Ma, X. Zhang, and H. Xie. 2012. “Research on Advances in Information Sciences and Service Sciences 3
Cloud Manufacturing Resource Integrating Service (5): 79–86. doi:10.4156/aiss.vol3.issue5.10.
Modeling Based on Cloud-Agent.” In Proceedings of the Li, C., P. Yang, Y. Shang, C. Hu, and P. Zhu. 2012. “Research on
IEEE 3rd International Conference on Software Cloud Manufacturing Resource Scheduling and Performance
Engineering and Service Science, 395–398. Beijing: IEEE Analysis.” Advanced Science Letters 12 (1): 240–243.
Society Press. doi:10.1166/asl.2012.2780.
Jin, Z. 2013. “Research on Solutions of Cloud Manufacturing in Li, C. Q., C. Y. Hu, and Y. W. Wang. 2011. “Research of
Automotive Industry.” In Proceedings of the FISITA 2012 Resource Virtualization Technology Based on Cloud
World Automotive Congress, Lecture Notes in Electrical Manufacturing.” In Advanced Materials Research, Vol.
Engineering, Vol. 10, edited by SAE-China and FISITA, 201–203, edited by D. Yang et al., 681–684. doi:10.4028/
225–234. Berlin: Springer. www.scientific.net/AMR.201-203.681.
Jrad, T., J. Tao, and A. Streit. 2012. “SLA Based Service Li, C. Q., C. Y. Hu, Y. W. Wang, and P. F. Zhu. 2011. “Research
Brokering in Intercloud Environments.” In Proceedings of of Cloud Manufacturing and Resource Encapsulation
the International Conference on Cloud Computing and Technology.” In Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol.
Services Science, Porto, April, 76–81, CLOSER 2012. 58–60, edited by Q. Luo, 562–566. doi:10.4028/www.scien-
Khan, Q. T. A., S. Naseem, F. Ahmad, and M. S. Khan. 2012. tific.net/AMM.58-60.562.
“Usage & Issues of Cloud Computing Techniques in Small Li, L., G. Zhao, H. Gu, and Y. Zhao. 2011. “Research on
& Medium Business Organizations.” International Journal Modeling and Realization of Processing Actions for Cloud
of Scientific & Engineering Research 3 (59): 1–7. Manufacturing Mode.” In Key Engineering Materials, Vol.
Laili, Y., F. Tao, L. Zhang, and L. Ren. 2011. “The Optimal 486, edited by D. Su et al., 111–114. doi:10.4028/www.
Allocation Model of Computing Resources in Cloud scientific.net/KEM.486.111.
Manufacturing System.” In Proceedings of the Seventh Lin, Q., K. Xia, L. Wang, and L. Gao. 2013. “Research Progress
International Conference on Natural Computation, Vol. 4, of Cloud Manufacturing in China: A Literature Survey.”
2322–2326. Shanghai: IEEE Society Press. Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International
Laili, Y., L. Zhang, and F. Tao. 2011. “Energy Adaptive Immune Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference
Genetic Algorithm for Collaborative Design Task (MSEC2013), Paper Number MSEC2013-1168, Madison,
Scheduling in Cloud Manufacturing System.” In WI, June 10–14. doi:10.1115/MSEC2013-1168.
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Liu, I., and H. Jiang. 2012. “Research on Key Technologies for
Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Design Services Collaboration in Cloud Manufacturing.” In
1912–1916. Singapore: IEEE Society Press. Proceedings of the IEEE 16th International Conference on
Lartigau, J., L. Nie, X. Xu, D. Zhan, and T. Mou. 2012b. Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 824–829.
“Scheduling Methodology for Production Services in Cloud Wuhan, China: IEEE Society Press.
Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of the International Joint Liu, J., and B. Li. 2012b. “An Ontology-based Architecture for
Conference on Service Sciences, Service Innovation in Service-Oriented Design Knowledge Fusion in Group
Emerging Economy: Cross-Disciplinary and Cross-Cultural Corporation Cloud Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of the
Perspective, Article No. 6227791, 34–39. Shanghai: IEEE 2012 IEEE 16th International Conference on Computer
Society Press. Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 811–816. Wuhan,
Lartigau, J., L. Nie, D. Zhan, X. Xu, and T. Mou. 2012a. China: IEEE Society Press.
“Business Process Interoperability to Support Order Liu, N., and X. Li. 2012a. “A Resource Virtualization
Processing in a Cloud Manufacturing Environment.” In Mechanism for Cloud Manufacturing Systems.” In Lecture
Enterprise Interoperability V, 367–377. London: Springer. Notes in Business Information Processing – Enterprise
LaSelle, R. 2011. “Assembly Automation: Manufacturing in Interoperability, Vol. 122, 46–59. Berlin, Germany:
the Cloud.” Accessed September 11, 2012. http://www. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33068-1_6.
Liu, N., X. Li, and Q. Wang. 2011. “A Resource & Capability Mokhtar, A., and M. Houshmand. 2010. “Introducing a
Virtualization Method for Cloud Manufacturing Systems.” In Roadmap to Implement the Universal Manufacturing
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Platform Using Axiomatic Design Theory.” International
Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1003–1008. Anchorage, Journal of Manufacturing Research 5: 252–269.
AK: IEEE Society Press. doi:10.1504/IJMR.2010.031634.
Liu, Y., L. Zhang, and F. Tao. 2013. “Development and MTConnect. 2013. Accessed April 20. http://www.mtconnect.
Implementation of Cloud Manufacturing: An evolutionary org/media/39437/gettingstartedwithmtconnectshopfloormo
Perspective.” Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International nitoringwhatsinitforyourevapril4th-2013.pdf
Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference Nambiar, A. N. 2010. “Modern Manufacturing Paradigms – A
(MSEC2013), MSEC2013-1172, Madison, WI, June 10–14. Comparison.” In Proceedings of the International
doi:10.1115/MSEC2013-1172. MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists,
Lu, Y. K., Y. C. Liu, and C. B. Ju. 2012. “Cloud Manufacturing Vol. 3, Hong Kong, March 17–19, 1662–1667.
Collaboration: An Initial Exploration.” In Proceedings of the Nassehi, A., S. T. Newman, X. W. Xu, and R. S. U. Rosso. 2008.
Third World Congress on Software Engineering (WCSE), “Toward Interoperable CNC Manufacturing.” International
163–166. Wuhan, China: IEEE Society Press. Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 21 (2): 222–
Luo, Y., L. Zhang, K. Zhang, and F. Tao. 2012. “Research on the 230. doi:10.1080/09511920701607899.
Knowledge-Based Multi-Dimensional Information Model of Newman, S. T., and A. Nassehi. 2007. “Universal Manufacturing
Manufacturing Capability in CMfg.” In Advanced Materials Platform for CNC Machining.” CIRP Annals –
Research, Vol. 472–475, edited by W. Chen et al., 2592– Manufacturing Technology 56 (1): 459–462. doi:10.1016/j.
2595. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.472-475.2592. cirp.2007.05.110.

Luo, Y. L., L. Zhang, D. J. He, L. Ren, and F. Tao. 2011. “Study Ning, F., W. Zhou, F. Zhang, Q. Yin, and X. Ni 2011. “The
on Multi-View Model for Cloud Manufacturing.” In Architecture of Cloud Manufacturing and its Key
Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 201–203, edited by D. Technologies Research.” In Proceedings of IEEE
Yang et al., 685–688. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/ International Conference on Cloud Computing and
AMR.201-203.685. Intelligence Systems, 259–263. Beijing: IEEE.
Macia-Perez, F., J. V. Berna-Martinez, D. Marcos-Jorquera, I. Oliveira, T., M. Thomas, and M. Espadanal. 2014. “Assessing
Lorenzo-Fonseca, and A. Ferrandiz-Colmeiro. 2012a. “A the Determinants of Cloud Computing Adoption: An
New Paradigm: Cloud Agile Manufacturing.” International Analysis of the Manufacturing and Services Sectors.”
Journal of Advanced Science and Technology 45: 47–54. Information & Management 51 (5): 497–510. doi:10.1016/
Macia-Perez, F., J. V. Berna-Martinez, D. Marcos-Jorquera, I. j.im.2014.03.006.
Lorenzo-Fonseca, and A. Ferrandiz-Colmeiro. 2012b. OPC Foundation. 2013. Accessed April 10. http://www.opcfoun
“Cloud Agile Manufacturing.” IOSR Journal of dation.org/
Engineering 2 (5): 1045–1048. doi:10.9790/3021- Padmanabhan, H., and M. Kamath. 2012. “Applicability of
020510451048. Industrial Manufacturing Innovations and Concepts for
Manenti, P. 2011. “Building the Global Cars of the Future.” the Industrialization of IT.” In Proceedings of Service
Managing Automation 26 (1): 8–14. Research and Innovation Institute Global Conference,
ManuCloud. 2012. Accessed November 11. http://www. 793–802. San Jose, CA: IEEE Society Press.
manuCloud-project.eu/index.php?id=233 doi:10.1109/SRII.2012.90.
Marston, S., Z. Li, S. Bandyopadhyay, J. Zhang, and A. Parker, N. 2007. “Intellectual Property Issues in Joint Ventures
Ghalsasi. 2011. “Cloud Computing – The Business and Collaborations.” Journal of Intellectual Property Law &
Perspective.” Decision Support Systems 51 (1): 176–189. Practice 2 (11): 729–741. doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpm167.
doi:10.1016/j.dss.2010.12.006. Petty, C., and R. van der Mulen. 2012. “Gartner Says Cloud
Martin, D., M. Burstein, D. McDermott, S. McIlraith, M. Consumers Need Brokerages to Unlock the Potential of
Paolucci, K. Sycara, D. L. McGuinness, E. Sirin, and N. Cloud Services.” Accessed October 5. http://www.gartner.
Srinivasan. 2007. “Bringing Semantics to Web Services with com/it/page.jsp?id=1064712
Owl-S.” World Wide Web 10 (3): 243–277. doi:10.1007/ Popovic´, K., and Z. Hocenski. 2010. “Cloud Computing
s11280-007-0033-x. Security Issues and Challenges.” In Proceedings of the
Meier, M., J. Seidelmann, and I. Mezgár. 2010. “ManuCloud: MIPRO 2010—33rd International Convention on
The Next-Generation Manufacturing as a Service Information and Communication Technology, Electronics
Environment.” European Research Consortium for and Microelectronics, Art. No. 5533317, 344–349. Opatia,
Informatics and Mathematics (ERCIM) News 83: 33–34. Croatia: IEEE Society Press.
Mell, P., and T. Grance. 2011. “The NIST Definition of Putnik, G., A. Sluga, H. ElMaraghy, R. Teti, Y. Koren, T. Tolio,
Cloud Computing.” NIST Special Publication, 800-145, and B. Hon. 2013. “Scalability in Manufacturing Systems
U.S. Department of Commerce. Accessed October 14, Design and Operation: State-of-the-Art and Future
2012. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/ Developments Roadmap.” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing
SP800-145.pdf Technology 62 (2): 751–774. doi:10.1016/j.cirp.2013.05.002.
Mezgár, I. 2011. “Cloud Computing Technology for Networked Rauschecker, U., M. Meier, R. Muckenhirn, A. Yip, A.
Enterprises.” Proceedings of the 18th IFAC World Congress, Jagadeesan, and J. Corney. 2011. “Cloud-Based
Milano, Italy, 18 (1): 11949–11954. doi:10.3182/ Manufacturing-as-a-Service Environment for Customized
20110828-6-IT-1002.00702. Products.” In Echallenges E-2011 Conference Proceedings,
Microsoft. 2011. “Discrete Manufacturing Cloud Computing edited by P. Cunningham and M. Cunningham, 1–8.
Survey.” Accessed October 12, 2012. http://download.micro- Florence: IIMC International Information Management
soft.com/download/7/F/6/7F64FC9E-3AAD-424F-A778-8FEB Corporation.
4F6A5EC7/2011%2030%20Mar%20HMI%20MS%20Discrete Rauschecker, U., and M. Stohr. 2012. “Using Manufacturing
%20Manufac%20Cloud%20Survey%20Results%202011.pdf Service Descriptions for Flexible Integration of Production
Facilities to Manufacturing Clouds.” In Proceedings of Transactions on Industrial Informatics 10 (2): 1547–1557.

18th International ICE Conference on Engineering, doi:10.1109/TII.2014.2306397.
Technology and Innovation (ICE), 1–10. Munich: IEEE Terkaj, W., G. Pedrielli, and M. Sacco. 2012. “Virtual Factory
Society Press. Data Model.” In Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontology
Ren, L., L. Zhang, L. Wang, F. Tao, and X. Chai. 2014. “Cloud and Semantic Web for Manufacturing (OSEMA 2012), Graz,
Manufacturing: Key Characteristics and Applications.” July 24–27, 29–43.
International Journal of Computer Integrated Valilai, O. F., and M. Houshmand. 2013. “A Collaborative and
Manufacturing: 1–15. doi:10.1080/0951192X.2014.902105. Integrated Platform to Support Distributed Manufacturing
Ren, L., L. Zhang, C. Zhao, and X. Chai. 2013. “Cloud System Using a Service-Oriented Approach Based on
Manufacturing Platform: Operating Paradigm, Functional Cloud Computing Paradigm.” Robotics and Computer-
Requirements, and Architecture Design.” Proceedings of Integrated Manufacturing 29: 110–127. doi:10.1016/j.
the ASME 2013 International Manufacturing Science and rcim.2012.07.009.
Engineering Conference (MSEC2013), Paper Number Vaquero, L. M., L. R. Merino, J. Caceres, and M. Lindner. 2008.
MSEC2013-1185, Madison, WI, June 10–14. “A Break in the Clouds: Towards a Cloud Definition.” ACM
Ryan, M. D. 2011. “Viewpoint Cloud Computing Privacy SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 39 (1): 50–
Concerns on Our Doorstep.” Communications of the ACM 55. doi:10.1145/1496091.1496100.
54 (1): 36–38. doi:10.1145/1866739.1866751. Venkatesh, S., D. Odendahl, X. Xu, J. Michaloski, F. Proctor,
Schaefer, D. 2011. “Take E-CAD to the Cloud?” Control Design, and T. Kramer. 2005. “Validating Portability of STEP-NC
Nov: 44–45. ISSN 1094-3366. Tool Center Programming.” In Proceedings of the ASME
Schaefer, D., J. L. Thames, R. Wellman, D. Wu, S. Yim, and International Design Engineering Technical Conferences
D. W. Rosen. 2012. “Distributed Collaborative Design and and Computers and Information in Engineering
Manufacture in the Cloud – Motivation, Infrastructure, Conference, DECT2005, 285–290. doi:10.1115/
and Education.” ASEE Annual Conference, paper AC DETC2005-84870.
2012-3017, San Antonio, TX, June 12. Venters, W., and E. A. Whitley. 2012. “A Critical Review of
Song, Y. F., C. G. Song, and C. Zheng. 2012. “Study on the Key Cloud Computing: Researching Desires and Realities.”
Technologies for Clouding Manufacturing Based on Journal of Information Technology 27: 179–197.
Virtualization Technology.” In Advanced Materials doi:10.1057/jit.2012.17.
Research, Vol. 503–504, edited by W. P. Sung et al., 86– W3C Semantic Web Activity. 2011. “Semantic Web.” Accessed
89. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.503-504.86. September 19, 2012. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/
Tai, D., and F. Xu. 2012. “Cloud Manufacturing Based on Wang, L. 2008. “Wise-ShopFloor: An Integrated Approach for
Cooperative Concept of SDN.” In Advanced Materials Web-Based Collaborative Manufacturing.” Proceedings of
Research, Vol. 482–484, edited by W. Chen et al., the IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics –
2424–2429. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.482-48 Part C: Applications and Reviews, 38 (4): 562–573.
4.2424. doi:10.1109/TSMCC.2008.923868.
Tai, L., R. Hu, C. Chen, and T. Huang. 2013. “Manufacturing Wang, L., J. Ma, and H. Y. Feng. 2011. “Web-DPP: Towards
Resources and Demand Intelligent Matching in Cloud Job-Shop Machining Process Planning and Monitoring.”
Manufacturing Environment.” In Advanced Materials International Journal of Manufacturing Research 6 (4):
Research, Vol. 616–618, edited by Y. Zhang et al., 2101– 337–353. doi:10.1504/IJMR.2011.043235.
2104. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.616-618.2101. Wang, L., X. V. Wang, L. Gao, and J. Váncza. 2014. “A Cloud-
Tao, F., Y. Cheng, L. Zhang, Y. L. Luo, and L. Ren. 2011. Based Approach for WEEE Remanufacturing.” CIRP Annals
“Cloud Manufacturing.” In Advanced Materials Research, – Manufacturing Technology 63 (1): 409–412. doi:10.1016/j.
Vol. 201–203, edited by D. Yang et al., 672–676. cirp.2014.03.114.
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.201-203.672. Wang, M., J. Zhou, and S. Jing. 2012. “Cloud Manufacturing:
Tao, F., Y. F. Hu, and L. Zhang. 2010. Theory and Practice: Needs, Concept and Architecture.” In Proceedings of the
Optimal Resource Service Allocation in Manufacturing Grid. IEEE 16th International Conference on Computer
Beijing: Machine Press. Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 321–327. Wuhan:
Tao, F., L. Zhang, H. Guo, Y. L. Luo, and L. Ren. 2011. “Typical IEEE Society Press.
Characteristics of Cloud Manufacturing and Several Key Wang, P., and X. Diao. 2013. “Network Manufacturing
Issues of Cloud Service Composition.” Jisuanji Jicheng Technology based on Cloud Computing.” In Advanced
Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated Manufacturing Materials Research, Vol. 601, edited by S. Lu, 390–393.
Systems, 17 (3): 477–486. (in Chinese). doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.601.390.
Tao, F., L. Zhang, and A. Y. C. Nee. 2011. “A Review of the Wang, W., and F. Liu. 2012. “The Research of Cloud
Application of Grid Technology in Manufacturing.” Manufacturing Resource Discovery Mechanism.” In
International Journal of Production Research 49 (13): Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
4119–4155. doi:10.1080/00207541003801234. Computer Science & Education, 188–191. Melbourne,
Tao, F., L. Zhang, V. C. Venkatesh, Y. Luo, and Y. Cheng. 2011. VIC: IEEE Society Press.
“Cloud Manufacturing: A Computing and Service-Oriented Wang, X. V., and X. W. Xu. 2012. “DIMP: An Interoperable
Manufacturing Model.” Proceedings of the Institution of Solution for Software Integration and Product Data
Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Exchange.” Enterprise Information Systems 6 (3): 291–314.
Manufacture 225 (10): 1969–1976. doi:10.1177/ doi:10.1080/17517575.2011.587544.
0954405411405575. Wang, X. V., and X. W. Xu. 2013a. “An Interoperable Solution
Tao, F., Y. Zuo, L. D. Xu, and L. Zhang. 2014. “IoT-Based for Cloud Manufacturing.” Robotics and Computer-
Intelligent Perception and Access of Manufacturing Integrated Manufacturing 29 (4): 232–247. doi:10.1016/j.
Resource Toward Cloud Manufacturing.” IEEE rcim.2013.01.005.
Wang, X. V., and X. W. Xu. 2013b. “ICMS: A Cloud-Based Computer Science & Service System, Nanjing, August 11–
Manufacturing System.” In Cloud Manufacturing: 13, 1993–1996. IEEE.
Distributed Computing Technologies for Global and Yang, X. Y., and W. J. Li. 2011. “Research and Application of
Sustainable Manufacturing, edited by W. D. Li and J. the Management and Control Platform Oriented the Cloud
Mehnen, 1–22. London: Springer. Manufacturing Services.” In Proceedings of the
Wang, X. V., and X. W. Xu. 2013c. “Virtualize Manufacturing International Conference on System Science, Engineering
Capabilities in the Cloud: Requirements and Architecture.” Design and Manufacturing Informatization, Vol. 1. 286–
Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International 289. Guiyang: IEEE Society Press.
Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference Yip, A. L. K., A. P. Jagadeesan, J. R. Corney, and Y. Qin. 2013.
(MSEC2013), Paper Number MSEC2013-1046, Madison, “A Product Configurator for Cloud Manufacturing.”
WI, June 10–14. Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International
Wu, D., M. J. Greer, D. W. Rosen, and D. Schaefer. 2013a. Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference
“Cloud Manufacturing: Drivers, Current Status, and Future (MSEC2013), Paper Number MSEC2013-1250, Madison,
Trends.” Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International WI, June 10–14.
Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference Yip, A. L. K., A. P. Jagadeesan, J. R. Corney, Y. Qin, and U.
(MSEC2013), Paper Number MSEC2013-1106, Madison, Rauschecker. 2011. “A Front-End System to Support Cloud-
WI, June 10–14. Based Manufacturing of Customized Products.” In
Wu, D., M. J. Greer, D. W. Rosen, and D. Schaefer. 2013b. Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Manufacturing
“Cloud Manufacturing: Strategic Vision and State-of-the- Research, 193–198. Glasgow: Glasgow Caledonian
Art.” Journal of Manufacturing Systems 32 (4): 564–579. University.

doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2013.04.008. Zeng, Y. 2012. “Semantic Business Process Integration in Cloud
Wu, D., L. J. Thames, D. W. Rosen, and D. Schaefer. 2012. Manufacturing Paradigm.” In Applied Mechanics and
“Towards a Cloud-Based Design and Manufacturing Materials, Vol. 235, edited by Y. Zhong, 379–383.
Paradigm: Looking Backward, Looking Forward.” In doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.235.379.
Proceedings of the ASME International Design Zha, X. F., and R. D. Sriram. 2006. “Platform-Based Product
Engineering Technical Conference & Computers and Design and Development: A Knowledge-Intensive Support
Information in Engineering Conference, DETC Approach.” Knowledge-Based Systems 19 (7): 524–543.
2012-70780, 315–328. doi:10.1115/DETC2012-70780. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2006.04.004.
Wu, L. 2011. “Resource Virtualization Model in Cloud Zhang, F., and H. F. Xue. 2012. “Cloud Manufacturing-based
Manufacturing.” In Advanced Materials Research, Vol. Enterprise Platform Architecture and Implementation.” In
143–144, edited by H. Wan et al., 1250–1253. doi:10.4028/ Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 190–191, edited by
www.scientific.net/AMR.143-144.1250. Y. Tan, 60–63. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.190-
Wu, L., and R. Buyya. 2010. “Service Level Agreement (SLA) 191.60.
in Utility Computing Systems.” Technical Report CLOUDS- Zhang, L., H. Guo, F. Tao, Y. L. Luo, and N. Si. 2010a. “Flexible
TR-2010-5, Cloud Computing and Distributed Systems Management of Resource Service Composition in Cloud
Laboratory. Australia: University of Melbourne. Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of the IEEE International
Wu, L., and C. Yang. 2010. “A Solution of Manufacturing Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Resources Sharing in Cloud Computing Environment.” In Management, 2278–2282. Macao: IEEE Society Press.
Cooperative Design, Visualization, and Engineering, edited Zhang, L., Y. Luo, F. Tao, B. H. Li, L. Ren, X. Zhang, H.
by Y. Luo, 247–252. Berlin: Springer. Guo, Y. Cheng, A. Hu, and Y. Liu. 2012a. “Cloud
Xiang, F., and Y. Hu. 2012. “Cloud Manufacturing Resource Manufacturing: A New Manufacturing Paradigm.”
Access System Based on Internet of Things.” In Applied Enterprise Information Systems 1–21. doi:10.1080/
Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 121–126, edited by D. Sun 17517575.2012.683812.
et al., 2421–2425. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/ Zhang, L., Y. L. Luo, F. Tao, L. Ren, and H. Guo. 2010b. “Key
AMM.121-126.2421. Technologies for the Construction of Manufacturing Cloud.”
Xiaofei, X., N. Lanshun, Z. Dechen, and J. Lartigau 2012. Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated
“Services for Cloud Manufacturing.” In Enterprise Manufacturing Systems, 16 (11): 2510–2520. (in Chinese).
Interoperability: I-ESA’12 Proceedings, 39–45. Wiley Zhang, Y., Z. Ni, Y. Jin, and H. Li. 2012b. “Large-scale Partner
Online Library. Selection of Virtual Enterprise on the Cloud Manufacturing
Xilong, Q., H. Zhongxiao, and B. Linfeng. 2011. “Research of Service Platform.” Journal of Information Computational
Distributed Software Resource Sharing in Cloud Science 9 (14): 3995–4006.
Manufacturing System.” International Journal of Zhang, Y. W., and Y. Jin. 2012. “Research on Knowledge
Advancements in Computing Technology 3 (10): 99–106. Management for Group Enterprise in Cloud
doi:10.4156/ijact.vol3.issue10.13. Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of the International
Xu, X. 2012. “From Cloud Computing to Cloud Manufacturing.” Conference on Computer Science and Service System,
Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 28: 75– 1946–1950. Nanjing: IEEE Society Press.
86. doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2011.07.002. Zhang, Z. N., and P. S. Zhong. 2012. “Key Issues for Cloud
Xu, X., L. Wang, and S. T. Newman. 2011. “Computer-Aided Manufacturing Platform.” In Advanced Materials Research,
Process Planning – A Critical Review of Recent Vol. 472–475, edited by W. Chen et al., 2621–2625.
Developments and Future Trends.” International Journal of doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.472-475.2621.
Computer Integrated Manufacturing 24 (1): 1–31. Zhao, Z., Q. Liu, W. Xu, and L. Gao. 2013. “Modeling of Resources
doi:10.1080/0951192X.2010.518632. Capability for Manufacturing Equipments in Cloud
Yan, J. M., Z. P. Guo, and R. B. Shi. 2012. “Perception of Manufacturing.” In Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol.
Manufacturing Resources in Cloud-Manufacturing System.” 271–272, edited by W. P. Sung and R. Chen, 447–451.
In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference of doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.271-272.447.
Zheng, B., Y. Gao, and Y. Wang. 2012. “The Product-Mix the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported
Optimization with Outside Processing Based on Theory of Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), Coventry, May
Constraints Oriented Cloud Manufacturing.” In Applied 24–26, 345–349.
Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 121–126, edited by D. Zhou, J. T., H. C. Yang, M. W. Wang, S. K. Jing, and R. Mo.
Sun et al., 1306–1310. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/ 2011. “GetCM: A Vision of Cloud Manufacturing.”
AMM.121-126.1306. In Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 213, edited by
Zheng, L., P. Jiang, L. Qiao, and L. Xi. 2010. “Challenges and Y. Zhang, 388–392. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/
Frontiers of Manufacturing Systems.” Jixie Gongcheng AMR.213.388.
Xuebao/Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 46 (21): 124– Zhou, Z., Q. Liu, and W. Xu. 2011. “From Digital
136. (in Chinese). doi:10.3901/JME.2010.21.124. Manufacturing to Cloud Manufacturing.” International
Zheng, X. L., D. R. Chen, and L. Lu 2005. “Research of Journal of Engineering Innovation and Management
Architecture for Grid Manufacturing.” In Proceedings of 1 (1): 1–14.

Adamson 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adamson 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adamson 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Syracuse University Library]

On: 19 June 2015, At: 11:20

International Journal of Computer Integrated

Cloud manufacturing – a critical review of recent

Click for updates

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2015.1031704

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Cloud manufacturing – a critical review of recent development and future trends

1. Introduction development. Cloud Computing (CC) is one of these

*Corresponding author. Email: goran.adamson@his.se

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

technologies with existing advanced manufacturing mod-

structures such as architectures, platforms, models, frame-

3.1.1. Economy sharing as typical properties of CM (Li et al. 2010; Tao,

ment both for the share and integration of resources in

etc. Consumers can browse and access these different

Finally, it is important to understand that CM is not a

4. Research areas and technologies

described. web-based email, Facebook and Twitter, to enter-

established for describing heterogeneous manufacturing capability or functionality, which in CM is provided by

tion of available resources, pragmatic management in a CM environment, a service-oriented knowledge

Table 1. Cloud manufacturing architectures, platforms, frameworks, models and applications.

Classiﬁcation Description/Speciﬁcation Reference(s)

Classiﬁcation Description/Speciﬁcation Reference(s)

System function of CM services management and control. Yang and Li (2011)

Wise-ShopFloor, sensor-driven intuitive environment for distributed process Wang (2008)

and Hocenski 2010). The service models (SaaS, PaaS and

process data between sensors, controllers, software sys-

4.12.4. Communication standardisation 10

Origins of Publications 5. CM research initiatives

10 ongoing research, and many of these are covered in this

Cloud Manufacturing in Journals

J. of Information Computational Science

Advanced Science Letters

IJ. of Advancements in Computing Technology

IJ. of Engineering Innovation and Management

Enterprise Information Systems

The IJ. of Advanced Manufacturing Technology

IJ. of Computer Integrated Manufacturing

Robotics and Computer‐Integrated Manufacturing

Advanced Materials Research

Figure 6. Journal publications.

6.1.4. Knowledge and information management and

sources of knowledge might either be embodied in 6.1.7. Distributed manufacturing simulation

management. tion and success, and if not satisfactorily solved, the

6.1.5. Business models ● Security:

● Cloud Adoption: and allocation of manufacturing resources and cap-

and automation controllers now populate industrial appli-

quality, but external control and execution as a service will

for generating the required planning and control, for opti-

machine can then be available as either a hard resource Cloud

MC by the machine provider. Pool of

ﬂoors of different collaborating manufacturing companies, Collaborative Manufacturing

Figure 8. Two-layer planning hierarchy.

The concept of using agile event-driven MF-FBs, for

● Traditional programming requires skilled and

geographies and quick responses to market demands Disclosure statement

International Journal of Production Research 48 (12): Industry 14 (1–3): 225–245. doi:10.1016/0166-3615(90)

Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 16th International

2595. doi:10.4028/www.scientiﬁc.net/AMR.472-475.2592. cirp.2007.05.110.