An Onto-Based Interoperability Framework for the Connection of PLM and Production Capability Tools

  • Maxime Lafleur
  • Walter Terkaj
  • Farouk BelkadiEmail author
  • Marcello Urgo
  • Alain Bernard
  • Marcello Colledani
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 492)


This paper proposes a model-driven interoperability framework as a technical support of co-evolution strategy of product structure and production systems with a frugal innovation perspective. Based on the modularity concept, the role of this framework is to connect possible product modules managed in the Product Life cycle Management tool to all possible production capabilities managed on the Manufacturing Process Management tool, and able to realize each module. This will help designers to define the optimal product architecture based on technical features of modules regarding the functional requirements as well as the optimal production strategy.


Interoperability Co-evolution Modularity Production capabilities 



The presented results were conducted within the project “ProRegio” entitled “customer-driven design of product-services and production networks to adapt to regional market requirements”. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement no. 636966. The authors would like thank the industrial partners involved in this research.


  1. 1.
    Tolio, T., Ceglarek, D., ElMaraghy, H.A., Fischer, A., Hu, S.J., Laperrière, L., Newman, S.T., Váncza, J.: SPECIES - co-evolution of products, processes and production systems. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 59(2), 672–693 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sako, M.: Modularity and outsourcing: the nature of co-evolution of product architecture and organisation architecture in the global automotive industry. In: The Business of Systems Integration, pp. 229–253. Oxford University Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Belkadi, F., Buergin, J., Kumar Gupta, R., Zhang, Y., Bernard, A., Lanza, G., Colledani, M., Urgo, M.: Co-definition of product structure and production network for frugal innovation perspectives: towards a modular-based approach. In: 26th CIRP Design Conference, Stockholm Sweden, 15–17 June 2016Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Penciuc, D., Durupt, A., Belkadi, F., Eynard, B., Rowson, H.: Towards a PLM interoperability for a collaborative design support system. In: 8th International Conference on Digital Enterprise Technology, DET, Stuttgart, Germany, 25–28 March 2014Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kádár, B., Terkaj, W., Sacco, M.: Semantic virtual factory supporting interoperable modelling and evaluation of production systems. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 62(1), 443–446 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Audros Company.
  7. 7.
    Lee, K.I., Noh, S.D.: Virtual manufacturing system—a test-bed of engineering activities. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 46(1), 347–350 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhai, W., Fan, X., Yan, J., Zhu, P.: An integrated simulation method to support virtual factory engineering. Int. J. CAD/CAM 2(1), 39–44 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bloomfield, R., Mazhari, E., Hawkins, J., Son, Y.J.: Interoperability of manufacturing applications using the Core Manufacturing Simulation Data (CMSD) standard information model. Comput. Ind. Eng. 62(4), 1065–1079 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, D., Kjellberg, T., Euler, A.: Software tools for the digital factory – an evaluation and discussion. In: Huang, G.Q., Mak, K.L., Maropoulos, P.G. (eds.) 6th CIRP-Sponsored International Conference on Digital Enterprise Technology. AINSC, vol. 66, pp. 803–812. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Agyapong-Kodua, K., Lohse, N., Darlington, R., Ratchev, S.: Review of semantic modelling technologies in support of virtual factory design. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51(14), 4388–4404 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barbau, R., Krima, S., Rachuri, S., Narayanan, A., Fiorentini, X., Foufou, S., Sriram, R.D.: OntoSTEP: enriching product model data using ontologies. Comput.-Aided Des. 44(6), 575–590 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bruno, G., Villa, A.: The exploitation of an ontology-based model of PLM from a SME point of view. Manuf. Model. Manag. Control 7(1), 1447–1452 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Panetto, H., Dassisti, M., Tursi, A.: ONTO-PLM: product-driven ONTOlogy for product data management interoperability within manufacturing process environment. Adv. Eng. Inform. 26(2), 334–348 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Colledani, M., Pedrielli, G., Terkaj, W., Urgo, M.: Integrated virtual platform for manufacturing systems design. Procedia CIRP 7, 425–430 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Terkaj, W., Pedrielli, G., Sacco, M.: Virtual factory data model. In: Workshop on Ontology and Semantic Web for Manufacturing, OSEMA, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 886, pp. 29–43 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pellegrinelli, S., Terkaj, W., Urgo, M.A.: Concept for a pallet configuration approach using zero-point clamping systems. Procedia CIRP 41, 123–128 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liebich, T., Adachi, Y., Forester, J., Hyvarinen, J., Richter, S., Chipman, T., Weise, M., Wix, J.: Industry Foundation Classes IFC4 Official Release (2013).
  19. 19.
    Pauwels, P., Terkaj, W.: EXPRESS to OWL for construction industry: towards a recommendable and usable ifcOWL ontology. Autom. Constr. 63, 100–133 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    W3C. SPARQL Query Language for RDF. n.d.
  21. 21.
    Kollia, I., Glimm, B., Horrocks, I.: SPARQL query answering over OWL ontologies. In: Antoniou, G., Grobelnik, M., Simperl, E., Parsia, B., Plexousakis, D., Leenheer, P., Pan, J. (eds.) ESWC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6643, pp. 382–396. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-21034-1_26 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maxime Lafleur
    • 1
  • Walter Terkaj
    • 2
  • Farouk Belkadi
    • 3
    Email author
  • Marcello Urgo
    • 4
  • Alain Bernard
    • 3
  • Marcello Colledani
    • 4
  1. 1.AUDROS TechnologyLyonFrance
  2. 2.ITIA-CNR, Institute of Industrial Technologies and AutomationMilanItaly
  3. 3.Ecole Centrale de Nantes – IRCCyN – UMR CNRS 6597NantesFrance
  4. 4.Department of Mechanical EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations