PLM Standards Modelling for Enterprise Interoperability: A Manufacturing Case Study for ERP and MES Systems Integration Based on ISA-95
Today Enterprise Interoperability is considered as a key factor of successful collaboration. It was identified as a critical need that has to be taken into account all along the lifecycle of a manufactured product. To deal with this problem and to reduce complexity of the different systems of interest used when different companies have to collaborate together, Enterprise Architecture (EA) and Enterprise Modelling (EM) are considered as solutions to facilitate Enterprise Interoperability. Dealing with interoperability issues in the context of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), we have to mention the importance of product data and process standards implementation as interoperability enablers. In order to address the complexity of PLM standards, we propose to apply a model-driven methodology for modelling these standards and the related collaboration scenarios. This approach intends to make standards more comprehensive and to better manage standards evolutions, but also to instantiate and re-use these “generic” standards models to specify specific business collaboration scenarios. This proposal aims also to facilitate the exchange, testing and simulation of standards implementations. In this paper, the focus is on the ISA 95 standard for manufacturing-PLM integration, with an exchange scenario between Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Manufacturing Execution System (MES) based on ISA 95 standard.
KeywordsEnterprise architecture Enterprise interoperability Manufacturing PLM standards ERP/MES ISA-95
This research work has been carried out under the leadership of the Technological Research Institute SystemX, and therefore granted with public funds within the scope of the French Program “Investissements d’avenir”.
- 1.CIMDATA About PLM – CIMdata (2014). https://www.cimdata.com/en/resources/about-plm
- 2.Figay, N.: Interoperability of Technical Enterprise Application. Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (2009)Google Scholar
- 3.INTEROP European Commission: CORDIS (2007). http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/71148_en.html
- 4.ATHENA Interoperability Framework v2.0 - NEHTA. “Interoperability Framework. v2.0” (2007)Google Scholar
- 5.Morris, E., Levine, L., Meyers, C, et al.: System of Systems Interoperability (SOSI): final report (No. CMU/SEI-2004-TR-004). Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA (2004)Google Scholar
- 7.Moones, E., Figay, N., Vosgien, T., et al.: Towards an extended interoperability systemic approach for dynamic manufacturing networks: role and assessment of PLM standards. In: Boulanger, F., Krob, D., Morel, G., Roussel, J.-C. (eds.) Complex Systems Design and Management, pp. 59–72. Springer, Switzerland (2014)Google Scholar
- 8.Bourey, J.P., Grangel, R., Ducq, Y, et al.: Report on Model Driven Interoperability (2007)Google Scholar
- 14.TOGAF® Version 9.1. http://www.opengroup.org/togaf/. Accessed 11 Feburary 2015
- 15.Harjunkoski, I., Bauer, R.: Sharing data for production scheduling using the ISA-95 standard. 2:1–15 (2014). doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2014.00044
- 16.ISA95, Enterprise-Control System Integration - ISA. https://www.isa.org/isa95/. Accessed 11 Feburary 2015