Present and Future of Flexible Automation: Towards New Paradigms

F. Jovanel ( I ) , Y. Koren2( I ) , C.R. Boer' (1)

ITIA-CNR, Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation - National Research Council of ITALY
Viale Lombardia 20/A, 20131 Milano, Italy
ERC/RMS, College of Engineering - University of Michigan
2350 Hayward St., Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Abstract
Automation has been one of the key drivers of the modern Manufacturing Industry and it has been present in
various forms from the beginning of the industrial era until today passing through different evolutions
responding to human's needs. Therefore automation and the manufacturing industry have undergone several
paradigm changes in the last century. They were driven by the market conditions and society needs and were
realized by timely developed engineering enabling technologies that fitted the paradigm requirements. This
paper maps the different paradigms in terms of market and societal drivers and process technology enablers
in order to show a consistent model of paradigm development, a model that links the product, and the
process with the appropriate business model. The Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) have been
especially analysed as the major enabler to the mass customization paradigm. Summing up, a mapping
methodology, able to map all past, present and future production paradigms, is presented. An example on the
footwear sector has also been mapped and presented. The analysis is based on a survey conducted in
Europe and the USA mechanical industries during 2002. The analysis, carried out within the ClRP Working
Group on "Flexible Automation - Assessment and Future" has shown that new paradigms are emerging
beyond flexible automation, paradigms that require addressing new technological challenges. Developing
these new enabling technologies requires the establishment of new national RTD programmes. Therefore,
the role of past national RTD programmes in developing previous enabling technologies that eventually
elevated human wealth and life quality is also briefly mentioned. Foresight scenario building and
"roadmapping" activities -taking place in different relevant economic regions- are presented. They point to
new paradigms and technologies to be developed and call for new RTD programmes to be launched.

Keywords:
Manufacturing, Flexible Automation, Technology Foresight

List of acronyms used: working group considered the exploration of new

NEST: Nature, Economy, Society, Technology paradigms and surveyed their industrial implementations,
M-l VC: Man-Industry Value Chain specifically focusing on Flexible Manufacturing Systems
TPs: Transformation Processes (FMS) and assessing the role of national and
ETs: Enabling Technologies supranational RTD programmes and initiatives.
hETs: human Enabling Technologies Manufacturing industry since its birth -two centuries ago-
aETs: artificial Enabling Technologies has undergone several revolutions, followed by
R-l VC: Research-Innovation Value Chain improvement periods, induced by various drivers, from
FMS: Flexible Manufacturing Systems economy (market) to society (environment), to technology
RMS. Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems (R&D based innovation).
RTD: Research, Technological Development
Throughout such a process, several industrial paradigms
have been developed to respond to Natural, Economical,
1 INTRODUCTION Social and Technological (NEST) context changes and,
Automation has been and still is the key driver of the consequently, demand changes, that can hence be
transformation of production, from its birth as a modern considered as the drivers of evolution.
industrial revolution to the present and the future. All In turn, these paradigms have contributed to change the
production activities, whatever they are in push or pull context, according to a mutual impact mechanism where
economical markets, are a careful balance between a fixed R&D programmes (both public and private) play a crucial
and a flexible automation. In order to assess the past, role for innovation.
present and future of flexible automation, it is necessary to
evaluate the production paradigms, the respective drivers Manufacturing covers the Man-Industry Value Chain (M-l
and enablers and how they interact with the human and VC), ranging from man's needs to industry response,
industrial life cycle. through products, processes and services provided by
enterprises. It plays a very important role concerning
These aims will be addressed in this paper, based on the wealth, creation of jobs (directly as well as through related
work carried out by the ClRP Working Group A/M/O on services) and quality of life. In Europe, for instance,
"Flexible Automation - Assessment and Future". This manufacturing accounts for 40 million jobs directly and 80
million through different services. Its turnover is 4000 This approach enables to represent from a single
Billion EURO. elementary Transformation Process (TP) to a very large
Driven by the NEST context changes, the M-l VC evolution number of interrelated TPs, as for the production of a car.
during the last 50 years has been based, among other
factors, on RTD innovation of industrial paradigms -from
Flexible Automation to the incoming Sustainable
Production- and related Transformation Processes (TPs)
and Enabling Technologies (ETs). Such an innovation -in
many cases- has been induced and supported by national
and supranational RTD programmes, initiatives and funds.
The NEST context is expected to undergo great changes
which will call for new RTD based innovation within the M-l
Value Chain. The NEST changes will span from man's
new needs, to new domains such as bio and
nanotechnologies, to new environmental requirements, to
the relocation and restructuring of the industrial "fabric"
within a growing globalization. Such NEST context
changes will impact Manufacturing and require new visions
and actions by RTD actors, i.e. institutions, universities,
research institutes and centres, companies.
Despite such a context, the overall attention of the
institutions towards the M-l VC manufacturing scenario has
been decreasing with time [I]. Nowadays institutions are
focusing on some specific new areas, without catching the
relevance of a holistic approach to promote and sustain
manufacturing RTD.
Provided such a vision, the aim of this paper is to:
Introduce a reference model for the analysis. It
represents the interaction, along the M-l VC, between Figure 1: Man Industry Value Chain (M-l VC)
NEST context changes and industry, which respond
through manufacturing paradigms. They are supported Any TP, during its Life Cycle (see Figure 2), provides
by RTD based evolution and education processes. This services to the entity, natural (man) or artificial (product), to
will be addressed in paragraph 2. be transformed by inducing a species, a space or a time
Analyse - using the model developed - the historical transformation [4]. A TP may be managed by an individual
and technological evolution of production paradigms, or a technological organization.
from rigid to flexible automation to the incoming
sustainable production, driven by NEST context M-I VC: from man's needs to man's focused services.
changes and supported by RTD Programmes and This section focuses on the upper part of Figure 1, linking
Initiatives. This will be addressed in paragraph 3. Man's needs to corresponding services provided by TPs.
Present new manufacturing paradigms, as emerging Man's main needs are, for instance, nutrition, health,
from foreseen scenarios, calling for new RTD education, comfort, mobility, entertainment and so forth.
investments and the role of the actors concerned. This Such a demand is responded by services provided by
will be addressed in paragraph 4. Transformation Processes (TPs). These may be classified
in four basic types, covering the entire range of possible
2 REFERENCE MODEL FOR THE ANALYSIS TPs.
In this section, a reference model [2], describing the M-l
VC, is presented. It represents the macro components
linking man's needs to the industrial "fabric" responding to
them, considering the drivers and the enablers for the
mechanism.
2.1 Man-Industry Value chain: role played by TPs
Man-Industry Value Chain (M-l VC) may be represented as
shown in Figure 1.
This shows that man's needs are fulfilled, throughout his
life, by services provided by Transformation Processes
(TPs). This represents the initial basic assumption in
building the model described below.
TPs require artificial Enabling Technologies (aETs), such
as products, and natural Enabling Technologies (hETs),
such as human competences. The aETs and hETs are
provided, respectively, by Manufacturing and Education.
Any TP can be represented, using the IDEF-0
representation [3] as shown in Figure 2, in terms of:
Input / output: materials, energy, information
Means
Controls Figure 2: IDEF-0 representation of a Transformation
Transformation Technologies Process (TP), within a given NEST context.
Referring to Figure 1, such Transformation Processes as Some Transformation Processes (TPs) -design,
T P I and TP2 are those based on human Transformation production, distribution- take place within "stage" n,
Technologies (hTTs), aided respectively by human ETs whereas the use process -with the related maintenance
(TPI) and artificial ETs (TP2). and dismissal- takes place within "stage" n + l . The life
TP3 and TP4 are those based on artificial Transformation cycle of TPs is also shown as a horizontal component
Technologies (aTTs), aided respectively by human ETs sustaining product (aET) life cycle.
(TP3) and artificial ETs (TP4). Figure 3 shows that demand, i.e. product (aETs) needs
The aETs come from the industry, while hETs come from from n + l TPs processes, and response, i.e. products
education. (aETs) coming from nTPs processes, are controlled by the
NEST context and "meet" along the M-l VC, marking the
Figure 2 provides the IDEF-0 [4] representation of a interaction between two stages. Any change in the NEST
Transformation Process (TP). This is composed by a context (demand) will require a change in response. In
Transformation Technology (TT), either artificial or human, turn, new responses may induce changes in the NEST
that is enabled by ETs (inputloutput, means or controls), context .
either artificial or human.
The above may take place at two levels:
Negotiation between man's needs (demand) and services
(response), provided by TPs (as above reported), is driven General/conceptual level, making up the conceptual
and controlled by the NEST context concerned. interaction between NEST context "demand paradigms"
and industrial "response paradigms".
In such a way, the link between man's needs and the
corresponding services provided by TPs can be modelled. Operational level, making up manufacturing activities,
within current NEST context "demand paradigms" and
M-I VC: from consumer to basic Industry industrial "response paradigms".
This section focuses on the lower part of Figure 1, Finally, the M-l VC may be seen as the "locus" of a long
describing a twofold sequence of "stages", covering from se q ue nce of de ma nd- res pons e "t rans actio ns " at a
the consumer to the basic industry supporting it, from the conceptual and at an operational level. The model
competences to the education process supporting them. described provides a thorough representation of this
Each "stage" provides, as demanded, products (aETs) to mechanism.
the downstream "stages" and requires competences Paradigms may be considered as macro-features
(hETs) and products (aETs), respectively, from the describing the M-I VC and its evolution. It is hence
education system and the upstream industrial stages. important to describe the historical and technological
Figure 3 shows the life cycle of a Product (aET), which is evolution of the paradigms.
needed by Transformation Processes of the next "stages", 2.2 Evolution of the Man-Industry Value Chain
such as stage n + l .
The evolution of the M-I VC has and is being driven by
man's needs evolution and NEST context changes, asking
for new responses from industry.
The "response paradigms" have evolved starting from
handicraft manufacture, moving to industrial manufacture
and to RTD based Industry nowadays. Experience,
discoveries, inventions and, then, RTD activities, were and
are the enablers for "response paradigms", their related
TPs and ETs, as well as their evolution.
Beginning in the 19th century and increasing during the
Second World War, R&D systematic activities were and
are among the major enablers (market pull) and, in some
cases, the drivers (technology push) of significant and
radical innovation of the industrial paradigms.
Changes within a current "demand paradigm", leading to a
new one, may be seen as drivers for the development of a
new "response paradigm" and its related TPs and ETs,
which may occur either through progressive improvements
of a current paradigm or through radical major evolutions
to a new paradigm. Several paradigms can of course
coexist at the same time and/or in different places
according to the evolution of the society and its NEST.
As a new "response", at any "stage" along the M-l VC, may
be based on RTD, it is necessary to connect the M-l VC to
the Research-Innovation Value Chain (R-l VC), which
operates to generate new paradigms and related TPs and
ETs
The R-l VC, which is described in Figure 4 with its macro
components, represents the mechanism supporting the
evolution process. In particular, by supporting the
technological progress through paradigms adequately
responding to the evolving NEST context, the R-I VC
represents the instrument promoting the evolution of the
M-I VC described in Figure 1. It directly impacts each of
Figure 3: Typical nthindustrial "stage" along the Man- the highlighted "stages" and their supporting education
Industry Value Chain (M-l VC). process, enabling them to provide the new responses
better fitting the context changes.
As shown in Figure 4, the R-l VC supports the evolution 3 FLEXIBLE AUTOMATION: FROM PAST TO
process of new technologies all along their lifecycle, made PRESENT
up of different stages of development, from Science to The model previously presented and the macro
Industrial Innovation. Such a development process is by no components and links highlighted in it may now be used to:
means linear.
Assess "response" production paradigms against
The actors involved in the R-l VC range from Institutions NEST context demand Paradigms (paragraph 3.1).
(setting up RTD policies and conceiving and launching
Programmes and Initiatives), to public and private actors Show their evolution and study a specific application
such as Universities, Research Institutes and Centres and (paragraph 3.2).
Companies carrying out RTD as well as education and Show the contribution of supranational and national
advising foresight activities. RTD programmes to paradigms evolution (paragraph
The foresight process represents the strategic activity 3.3).
producing "scenarios" for the actors involved. Foresight
3.1 Assessment of production paradigms
may be seen as a systematic, participatory, future
intelligence gathering and medium-to-long-term vision- A technological paradigm may be assessed as an
building process aimed at present-day decisions and integrated and finalized set of enablers to respond to a set
mobilizing joint actions. This may be done by developing of context needs. A new paradigm may develop through
R&D "Roadmaps" that define paths to the future experience and/or RTD activities. It starts in a specific time
determined by the expected evolution of the NEST context. and context, and may coexist with past and new
paradigms, in different technological and geographical
"locations" [ 5 ] .
In this paper we will consider the main production
paradigms, from Fixed Automation onwards, showing:
when they were born;
how they relate to context drivers;
which enablers they are "made" of;
In order to map the production paradigms that emerged
during the years, the basic common necessities driving
their beginning must be highlighted. The final goal is to
come up with considerations concerning past and present
trends, eventually aiming at foreseeing future necessities.
According to the proposed model, the context can be
considered as the driver for the evolution, as it changes
during the years, defining new necessities and hence TPs
(providing the necessary services) composed of new TTs
and ETs. This means that the time can be a first suitable
category to map the production paradigms.
As specified in the model, the context is made up of such
elements as existing technologies, society and market. As
widely agreed, the most relevant tendency that occurred
during the years moved from the request for high volumes
Figure 4: R-l VC, Research-Innovation Value Chain of undistinguished products to be sold at widely affordable
prices, to the current request for customized, continuously
changing products. In parallel, in the society the request
The described actors, from Universities to Institutes and for environmentally friendly products became more and
Research Centres, may be considered on one hand as more important, also pushing for continuous modification
experts and advisers for governmental RTD Institutions, of environmental laws and, hence, of products. Four main
and on the other hand as the performers of RTD activities. requirements, hence, emerged, during the years, driven by
Besides describing the working mechanism which is the market competition and society:
basis of the R-l VC, Figure 4 also reports the different time need for lower prices;
horizons of the actors involved in it, both for the performers
need for customization;
(lower part) and for the Institutions (upper part)
Such a highly complex Research-Innovation process need for innovation;
should lead to new Paradigms and related TPs and ETs need for environment consciousness
responding to NEST context needs as they emerge from Such requirements impacted production inducing three
the scenarios obtained through the foresight main common necessities, which were faced by different
"roadmapping" process. production paradigms:
In this context RTD governmental Programmes and productivity;
Initiatives may be considered as promoters and sustainers
of the development of industrial "response paradigms" and customization;
related TPs and ETs, as will be further described in agility;
paragraph 3.3. The production paradigms that emerged during the years
The model presented so far will now be used for analysing can be grouped according to these basic common
the past-current (paragraph 3) and the future (paragraph 4) necessities. As previously highlighted in paragraph 2.2, the
of the flexible automation and of the "entities" related to it. mechanism connecting "demand paradigms" (defined by
the NEST context and highlighted by foresight and road
mapping activities) to "response paradigms" (implemented
by the industry through education and R&D programs) can
be approached at two levels, conceptual and operational, design-make-sell-assemble dominates this paradigm. The
as described below. components of the products are still produced following
the Mass Production paradigm but they are assembled
Conceptual level assessment only after the client has decided some optional.
At this level of approach, production paradigms can be Mass Custornization and Personalization means to
assessed as production strategies adopted to cope with produce a variety of almost-customized products at mass-
context needs. production prices. It is a society-driven paradigm, as
In modern times, four production paradigms can be customers are asking for a larger variety in consumer
identified in the consumer goods manufacturing: Craft products. They can get what they want because the
Production, Mass Production, Flexible Production and market condition has changed since the 1990's from
Mass Customization. Below we briefly elaborate on these demand exceeding the supply, to the supply exceeding the
paradigms. demand. This Mass Customization and Personalization
Craft Production Craft production means to make exactly paradigm is driven by globalization, intended as the
the product that the customer asks for, usually one product creation of a single, worldwide market. Globalization
at a time. The customer first pays for the product (at least creates a huge excess global production capacity of high
a partial payment), then the product is designed for the quality products that can be produced in many countries.
customer, and only then it is made. That means that the (For example, in 2002 the worldwide capacity of
craft producer is using a pull-type business model: Sell, automobile production was 80 million vehicles, while only
Design, Make, Assemble. The craft producer utilizes high about 50 million vehicles were sold) These circumstances
skill workers and simple, but flexible machines to produce created a situation in which consumers have more power
the products. not only in choosing exactly the product that fits their
needs and taste, but also in ordering it and getting it in a
Mass Production Mass production means to produce
reasonable time.
extremely high quantities of identical products, and selling
them to customers that will always be there to buy them. Dell Computers is an example that proves how IT and
Because of the large quantities, products can be produced Internet assist in making the business in this paradigm.
at a low cost, which, in turn, increases the number of Computers, however, are simple products compared to
people who can afford to buy the product. Therefore, Mass cars, for example. The automotive industry must cope with
Production implements a push-type business model: large fluctuations in product demand caused by the current
Design, Make, Assemble, Sell. This business model can global excess production capacity. The technological tools
flourish as long as demand will exceed the supply. that enable industry to compete in this environment are a
new type of systems, i.e. Reconfigurable Manufacturing
The invention of the moving assembly line by Henry Ford
System (RMS), that have a production capacity that can be
in 1913 marks the beginning of this paradigm, which
rapidly adapted to market demand.
flourished during most part of the 20th Century requiring
machinery to substitute human skills in such production This current paradigm is based on a pull-type business
systems as Dedicated Machining Lines (DMLs). model: Sell, Design, Make, Assemble. Dell Computers, for
example, first sells the computer, then designs its
Flexible Production was introduced in the 1970s in order
architecture, and only then assembles it and delivers the
to respond to a change in the market, that started to be
customized computer. Utilizing the advanced Information
saturated by mass produced goods, and a request for
Technology and the Internet, which became a commercial
more diversified products. The lot size decreased as the
tool at the turn of the 20th Century, enables this paradigm.
products were introduced more and more frequently on the
market trying to adapt themselves to the taste of the
customer. The mixed type business model Push-Pull:

Table 1: Evolution of production paradigms.

 Market
Product

W'

Society Needs
Figure 5: Paradigms and manufacturing systems related to market and society.

As we see, each manufacturing paradigm has a different a rapid response to customer needs. The rapid
driver that originates either from society needs or from the response comprehends also the capability to introduce
market conditions at the paradigm period. We have also new products within short windows of opportunity,
seen that each paradigm has a technology enabler of very which can be done by building virtual enterprises that
different type, and a different manufacturing system (which can be formed and dissolved according to
is the process enabler) that fits the paradigm principles. opportunities.
Furthermore, each paradigm has its business model that By considering also these factors, Figure 5 shows a
fits the paradigm in addressing society needs and market comprehensive model illustrating the relationships in four
conditions. All these factors are summarized in Table 1. paradigms between input drivers - market and society
In the table, the new emerging paradigm of Sustainable needs - process enablers (i.e., the type of manufacturing
Production is also reported, which is based on society systems), the product architecture, and a simplified
needs for a better environment and therefore "clean business model. This model shows how production
products". paradigms shift with time.
The new emerging technologies of nano, bio and material It is necessary to notice that the time periods in Figure 5 fit
technology alone or combined will provide the possibility to the Western World, in which the current paradigm of mass
attain this requirements, and the process enabler of customization and personalization started around the year
Increasing Manufacturing (based on adding atom to atom) 2000, and it is coupled with the market fluctuations
will become the breakthrough strategy to realize the goals occurring with globalization. However, it is necessary to
of society in 2020 and on. consider that, for example, the internal Chinese market is
just entering now the mass-production era. That means
Figure 5 shows how paradigms and their corresponding
that Chinese manufacturing companies need to possess a
manufacturing systems are developed with the changing
wide-range portfolio consisting of DMLs, FMSs, and RMSs
society needs and market requirements.
to respond to internal needs simultaneously with exporting
Globalization means not only that large companies are consumer goods to the global market.
becoming global in terms of their production facilities and The Sustainable Production paradigm will still shift the loop
sales, but also that those companies:
in a direction difficult to predict yet.
Must produce a variety of innovative products to supply
customers' taste and preferences in different countries Operational level assessment
or regional segments with a variety of personal A parallel mapping can be conducted at an operational
preferences within each region. This trend towards level, where the enablers developed to cope with the
personalized production can be met only if products production concepts previously described, must be
become more modular, and even reconfigurable to assessed. In this case, hence, the specific technologies
some degree. and practices developed to implement the production
Must cope with large fluctuations in product demand paradigms previously described can be analyzed.
caused by the current global excess production According to the proposed model, this refers to mapping
capacity; this could be done by utilizing reconfigurable the TPs, ETs, developed through the R-l VC.
manufacturing systems that have a production capacity Considering the three main described categories of
adaptable to market demand. necessities driven by market competition and social trends,
Should develop new business models that take three main corresponding areas of research can be
advantage of the opportunities provided by the Internet highlighted: Automation, Mass Customization and Agile
to move towards pure pull-type business models that Production. Each of them corresponds to specific
enhance sales and customer relationships and enable production paradigms that have emerged during the years,
and that can consequently be mapped according to the well as product life cycle considerations in the goal of
proposed scheme summarized in Table 2 economic effectiveness. Agile Production encompasses
such a philosophy in its wider meaning, aiming at enabling
companies to catch the opportunities arising in dynamic
Research Enabling operational markets [I31 [I41 [I51 [I61 [I71 [18].
Ai rn To complete the mapping, the level of approach
area paradigrn
Fixed automation characterizing each production paradigm has also to be
Productivity Automation considered, as different paradigms address the TPs at
Programmable automation different levels. The approach proposed concerning
Flexible Automation Changeability [I91 [20] provides a suitable example in
Mass
stating the link between the level of approach and the
Customization Lean Production phases of the lifecycle addressed by different paradigms,
Customization
CIM as summarized in Figure 6.
Virtual Enterprise Besides the drivers pushing for the creation of new
paradigms, to complete the mapping of the "response"
Holonic Manufacturing paradigms, an analysis of the ETs for each of them must
Agile
Agility Reconfigurable be carried out.
Production
Manufacturing
To this end, the described reference model provides a
Service Manufacturing useful instrument. According to it, in fact, the enablers for
each paradigm can be specified in terms of the phase of
Table 2: General aims, research areas and corresponding the life cycle they address and, inside each phase, in
enabling operational paradigms. terms of the kind of input (material, information, energy),
means and control methods they address. As a
Such traditional paradigms as Fixed and Programmable consequence, the mapping at an operational level can be
Automation aimed at coping with the first common further described as shown in Figure 7.
necessity, productivity. In general terms, automated
transfer lines were the instruments to increase quality and
production rates to reduce the final cost per part and
hence enable high volumes productions [6].
Flexible automation, Lean production (through the JIT,
mixed model and six sigma philosophies), CIM, and Mass
Customization cope with the second necessity. These
paradigms share the aim of reducing the set up time to
shift between different variants, enlarging the mix of parts
to be supplied to the market in an economical manner.
Customization can hence be considered as the basic
common objective pursued by these paradigms, and Mass
Customization [7] [8] [9] [ l o ] [ I l l [I21 implements it at the
highest degree.

Figure 7: Mapping drivers and enablers of, respectively,

NEST context demand Paradigms and Industrial
Response Paradigms, at an operational level (TPs, ETs).

The term Automation was introduced [6] by Harder in 1946

to describe the production practices developed, as
previously described, to respond to a context oriented
towards productivity and repeatable quality. Though
introduced in the middle of the 20th century, it is still
adopted in several sectors embodied by such production
paradigms as Fixed and Programmable Automation [6]
~2~1~221~231~241~251.
The enablers developed for them mostly impact the TP
design (machines, line, control) and use (specialization,
use of dedicated stations) phases, mostly addressing
Figure 6: Phases of the lifecycle, paradigms and level of means (machines, PLCs) and controls (programmes). The
approach. level of approach mostly refers to the single station and the
connection between groups of machi nes.
Agile Production, Virtual Enterprise/Networked Flexible Automation [6] [I71 [26] [27] [28] [29], which
Organizations, Holonic Manufacturing, Reconfigurable developed at the beginning of the '70s as a research topic
Manufacturing and Service Manufacturing, though and has been adopted as a real application since the ' ~ O S ,
maintaining the previous one as a necessity, mostly cope pushes for set up times reduction to enable wide mixes of
with the third basic common necessity. The emphasis is on components, exploiting such enablers as robots and
disturbances and frequent changes rather than the mere machining centres. The main impact, hence, refers to
spectrum of parts, consequently involving the system, as design (parallel layout, machining centres, FMS) and the
method adopted in the use phase (unmanned, centralized Summing up, after a conceptual level assessment, a
control). model has been the basis for consistently assessing the
The paradigm of CIM [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] consists of an development of several paradigms in terms of market and
"extensive use of computer systems to design the societal drivers as well as of technological enablers. This
products, plan the production, control the operations and has been mapped according to the methodology
accomplish many of the business-related functions in a represented in Figure 7. Consequently, an example on a
manufacturing firm" [6]. It started during the ' ~ O S , when vertical sector (footwear) has also been mapped, as is
computer systems became reality, and were heavily presented below.
involving the management of information inside the firm. 3.2 Application to the shoe production
On the other hand, Lean Production [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] It is clear that the various paradigms described in the
can be considered as a collection of techniques (mostly previous paragraph are rarely applied individually in the
referred to production management) aimed at using "less various manufacturing sectors and, actually, few of them
of everything compared with Mass Production, less of the coexist according to the drivers applicable to the sector at
human in the factory, less manufacturing space, less of the a specific moment in time and location. Location is also an
investment in tools, less in engineering hours to develop a important factor because the same paradigm could be
new product in less time. Also, it requires keeping far less applied in a certain region of the globe but not in another.
the needed inventory on site, results in many fewer
defects, and produces a greater and ever growing variety The shoe product and the footwear industry will be taken
of products" [39]. as an example of the above described concepts. In
particular, we will describe the evolution of the drivers and
The paradigms concerned with Agile Production mostly the enablers that sustained the appropriate applicable
appeared as research topics during the '90s. production paradigm.
The Virtual Enterprise/Networked Organization paradigm The shoe industry has gone through more or less the
[40] [41] [42] [43] [44] is based on the idea of cooperating same market requirements as other products: from a craft
among industries sharing knowledge and competencies to (artefact) manufacturing all hand-made to machine-aided
catch market opportunities. The management of the entire and mass production in the '60s. Because the shoe
life cycle of the cooperation plays a crucial role for the manufacturing still requires a high degree of hand work
success (which is typical, as previously stated, of the particularly in the final assembly, the mass production
agility oriented paradigms), from the design to the paradigm, required up to the ' ~ O S ,pushed a de-localization
implementation, the use and the dismissal (after several of the manufacturing in low-wages countries (driver
possible reconfigurations) of the relationship. The focus is "price"). In order to protect their investments and their
on the knowledge-share, hence mostly impacting the world market position, the European companies pushed
information as an input for each phase, but also involving towards more automation and innovation particularly in the
the means to implement the cooperation as well as the product design and machine automation.
cooperation control.
The Holonic Manufacturing paradigm [45] [46] [47] [48] [49]
[50] mostly focuses on the control level and, more
specifically, on the concept of autonomous cooperating
agents (holons) operating in the shop floor. Both the
design, the implementation, the use and the
reconfiguration of the control are involved in the paradigm.
Reconfigurable Manufacturing [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56]
[57] impacts the single machine (RMT) as well as the
control (distributed controls) and the whole system (RMS),
involving the whole TP lifecycle.
Service Manufacturing [8] [58] [59] [60] focuses on the way
responsibilities are allocated inside the value creation
process, aimed at improving the OEMs agility through
suitable contracts signed with Manufacturing Service
Providers (e.g. pay per part, pay per use, pay per
availability, and other mechanisms as proposed by Seliger
[61], Urbani [62] [63] and others [64] [65]). The impact is
mostly on means, addressing all the phases of the LC at Figure 8: Flexible automated pilot plant for mass
manufacturing level. customized shoes: Italian National Program for Innovative
Production Systems ( PNR-SP 16).
In parallel with the three main drivers considered so far
(price, customization, innovation), the environmental
consciousness previously mentioned has also played a The requirements of drivers like "price" and "innovation"
crucial role in the last decades. Two main effects derive generated research projects in this direction such as the
from such a social driver: National Research Programme for Innovative Production
the necessity to frequently update the products; Systems (PNR-SPI) in Italy, that was translated in the
footwear sector by the SPI 6 [74] that provided, as a result,
the necessity to stress the importance of dismissal and the pilot plant shown in Figure 8.
recycling inside the life cycle management;
The results of this project (terminated in the middle of the
The first one has already been considered as an ' ~ O S ,see Figure 9) were a set of innovative machines with
innovation aspect, mostly addressed by the production increased flexibility (lot size near 1 but with not such a
paradigms oriented to Agile Production described so far. great variability) and increased knowledge tools for product
The second is mostly addressed in the paradigm of design (CAD) and manufacturability (CAM). The system
Sustainable Production [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73], approach also pushed towards integration and control
focusing, for the future manufacturing, on new materials, innovation.
as well as dismissal and recycling techniques and design
for disassembling methodologies.
 paradigm evolution, the last RTD programmes will be
briefly analysed with respect to different regions.
In the past 40 years advanced countries - i.e. USA, Japan,
single European Countries and more recently European
Union - have launched RTD Programmes leading to the
development of:
"milestones" of the last Industrial Revolution, such as:
N/C, CAD, CAE, CIM, FMS;
new Paradigms and relevant TPs and ETs: from
flexible automation to the incoming sustainable
production (see paragraph 3.1);
In the last ten years -in the advanced countries-
Government investments in research and in particular
manufacturing RTD has been decreasing, while moving
toward medium-long term. In the same period, Industry
investment in Manufacturing RTD has been increasing and
getting closer to market. New emerging countries have
Figure 9: Mapping of the evolution of the production started investing in manufacturing RTD.
paradigms in the shoe industry: flexibility oriented (SPI 6, Relevant examples - concerning advanced (Japan US,
light grey), customization oriented (EUROShoE project, EU) and new emerging countries (China) - are reported in
dark grey). the following paragraphs. They cover from the late '70s up
to now, and supported the development of the paradigms
The following driver taking importance in the '90s is dealt with in paragraph 3.1.
"customization". The consumer became the centre of all Manufacturing RTD Programmes in Japan
the activities and for the shoe in particular the ability to
design the shoe for the individual consumer needs became Japan, in 1977, launched the largest RTD initiative to
the centre of the research activities in the footwear sector. promote the paradigm of Flexible Automation and related
Technology enablers in the data capture, data TPs and ETs. It was named "The Flexible Manufacturing
transformation, knowledge based and highly flexible but System Complex provided with laser". Some other
also reconfigurable machines and production systems Programmes followed since those days [78]. Table 3
were developed in projects like EUROShoE [75] [76], shows some of their features.
CICLOP, etc (see Figure 9). However, the whole value
chain had to be reassessed and also the production
control, logistics, production networks (extended MAIN GOAL FOCUS
Name of RTD
enterprise), standardization had to be innovated and highly Programme
integrated. Actors
Finally today we are looking at the "environment" as the Flexible Manufacturing
future driver. Society requires 100% environmental free System Complex
products and related processes maintaining the degree of 1 provided with Laser X
comfort and customization acquired in the present. A FYI 977-1983
proposal for a new R&D project called CEC-made-shoe l3BYen
(Comfortable Environmental Customized shoe made) has
been presented for funding at the European Commission Advanced Material
by a large consortium of over 50 partners. The project will Processing and
look at a set of completely new technologies and 2 Machining Technology X
innovation ("breakthrough") for the footwear sector aiming FY 1986-1993
at new materials, new embedded ICT, new sensors, new 15BYen

II Ixl
production technologies all human centred but considering Digital Meister
the whole life cycle of the human being from babyhood to FY2001-2003
old age. 6BYen
It is important to notice also that the new drivers of society Table 3: Japan special RTD Manufacturing Programmes
and market require a shift in research paradigm from small launched by MITI, Minister of International Trade and
projects with limited innovation potential ("price" reduction Industry of Japan.
by increased "automation) to larger projects with larger
innovation potential (from "mass production" to "mass
customization" by increased "flexibility and Research Results ETs Processes concerned TPs
reconfigurability" and "knowledge based system"). The
next step is focused on even larger scale research projects
- programmes - with innovation potential to solve huge
societal needs like "environment" and the whole life cycle
of the human being.
3.3 The promoting and sustaining role of
Manufacturing RTD Table 4: Japan: special RTD Manufacturing Programmes,
The evolution of Man-Industry Value Chain - and, hence, TPs and ETs concerned (legenda: TT: Transformation
of manufacturing "response paradigms" - described in Technology; C: Controls; M&S: Machinery & Systems;
paragraph 2.2 relies on RTD based Innovation [77], E/O: Enterprise/Organization).
integrated by continuous improvement as modelled by the
R-l VC. To stress this mechanism supporting the described The related TPs and ETs are schematically summarized in
Table 4.
The technological enabling operational paradigms In 1984 the first Framework Programme - structuring and
concerned ranged from flexible automation to holonic finalizing specific programmes and Initiatives - were
systems. Special funds were available for Universities and launched, as shown in Table 5. The sixth Framework
Research Institutes. Programme was launched in 2002 to last until 2006.
The various Framework Programmes have promoted and
Manufacturing RTD Funds and Programmes in USA financially sustained RTD activities oriented to the
Several federal programs have supported manufacturing development of new paradigms and related TPs and ETs,
RTD. at various levels, from machines to extended enterprises,
as summarized by Table 6.
The Manufacturing Extension Partnership programmes
(MEP) assisted small and medium-sized manufacturers in
areas involving technological change [79]. The Advanced
Technology Program (ATP) supporting emerging and
I Research Results ETs I Processes concerned TPs I
enabling technologies for improved products and industrial
processes.
The Next-Generation Manufacturing (NGM) project was
initiated in 1995. As a bottom up, industry-led effort,
supported by DOE (Dept. of Energy), DOD (Dept. of
Defence), NIST (Inst. Of Standard and Technology), NSF
(National Science Foundation), it intended to [80]:
develop a broadly accepted model of future
manufacturing enterprises;
recom mend actions that manufacturers, working Table 6: EU RTD Manufacturing Programmes, TPs and
individually and in partnership with government, ETs concerned (legenda: TT: Transformation Technology;
industry, and the academic community, can use to C: Controls; M&S: Machinery & Systems; E/O:
attain world-class status; Enterprise/Organization)
Following the Next-Generation Manufacturing Project,
ended in 1997, the integrated Manufacturing Technology
Roadmapping (IMTR) Initiative -supported by NIST, DOE, European National Programmes
NSF and DARPA- was launched in 1998 to develop a R&D Most of the European Countries, since the beginning of the
agenda that [81]: '80s up to now, launched RTD funds addressing the
defines key technologies goals that cross all manufacturing field. Some countries launched national
manufacturing sectors; programmes, such as Germany and Italy
provides focus for concentrated effort to achieve goals;
promotes collaborative R&D to deliver solutions to Name of RTD
Proa
MAIN GOAL FOCUS
"ramme
critical requirements.
RTD
Industry Society Act
Manufacturing RTD Programmes in Europe ors
In this case, three levels must be considered: European Research for the Production
of Tomorrow, 1999-2003
Union, National States, and Regions. The first two will be
Production 2000,
considered. 1995-1999 0 0
European Union Framework Programmes Quality Management,
1992-1996 0 0
The European Commission has promoted and sustained
six RTD programmes since 1982 [82]. Manufacturing Technology,
1988-1992 0 0
Manufacturing Technology, 0
MAIN GOALS FOCUS 1984-1987
Framework
Manufacturing Technology,
Programmes
Actors 1980-1983 0 0
Table 7: German RTD Manufacturing Programmes
1984-1987
( 0 ,0 , D: focus ranking).

Table 5: EU Framework Programmes Table 8: German RTD Manufacturing Programmes, ETs

(0, 0, D: focus ranking). concerned (legenda: see Table 6).
The German Government has launched, starting in 1983, The EUREKA Initiative
Programmes addressing from manufacturing technologies
to quality management [83]. The EUREKA initiative [86] has already launched about
2400 market oriented projects, "clusters projects" (such as
The goal focus of such programmes is shown in Table 7. MEDEA, DNA) and "umbrella projects", such as FAMOS,
The research results concerning ETs, classified following This aimed at developing pilot systems/plants.
the reference model shown in Figure 2, are reported in The total investment up to now is about 20 BEuro.
Table 8 (concerning ETs), while the concerned TPs are
shown in Table 9. EUREKA currently has 34 full member countries.
The EUREKA projects are market oriented. They are
proposed (bottom up approach) by consortia composed of
technology suppliers, end users, research institutions.
EUREKA FAMOS [87] launched 36 projects of which 29
aiming at flexible automated pilot systems/plants and 7
aiming at specific ETs. The estimated cost was
GOOMEURO, with 184 partners, from 18 countries,
covering 17 industrial sectors.

Manufacturing RTD Programmes in China

The First Chinese government programme (the "National
Programme for Key S&T Projects") started in 1982 as a
critical component of the five-year plans for the national
economic and social development. The objective of the
programme is to find solutions to the scientific and
Table 9: German RTD Manufacturing Programmes, TPs technological bottlenecks in the national economic and
concerned. social development.
The programme is funded by both the central and local
governments, and supplemented by financial inputs from
Starting in 1983, in Italy the National Research Council has
different industrial sectors and institutions. The
launched such research programmes as:
government investment on the programme during the
the "Targeted Research Programmes on Mechanical Eighth Five-year Plan period (1991-1995) was about 4
Technology" (PFTM-CNR), mostly addressing the FMS billion Euro.
development and implementation [84];
The National High Technology R&D Programme Launched
the "Targeted Research Programmes on Robotic in 1986 was designed to pool the best technological
Systems" (PFR-CNR), focusing on new robotic systems resources in China for the purpose of keeping up with the
and applications [85]; world's high technology advances in certain fields, aiming
Starting from 1995 the Italian Ministry of Education, at closing the gap between China and other countries in
University and Research (MIUR) launched the National several critical areas
Research Programmes on Innovative Production Systems The National Programme for Key Basic Research Projects
(PNR-SPI) [2]. was initiated in 1991. The programme is designed to
Special funds for industrial RTD and university research conduct high quality research on major scientific issues
were made available since 1982. that have an important bearing on the nation's science and
technology, as well as economic and social development,
aiming at bringing great contributions to the national and
world's scientific advances and social progress.
Global Initiatives: the IMS programme
More than 10 years ago the IMS programme [88] started
based on an idea of Prof. Yoshikawa. It provides an
example of a supranational program aimed at analyzing
the existing NEST context and trends to asses future
scenarios and corresponding enablers to be developed in
targeted research projects that are consequently
supported. It hence represents a valuable further example
to complete the overview on existing research programs
and the role they play in the R-l VC.
Seven different regions (Australia, Canada, the European
Union and Norway, Japan, Korea, Switzerland, USA)
participate in the programme, with a total value of
endorsed projects of about 250 MEuro.
In the years 2000 and 2003 a vision assessment was
performed. A summary with some interesting evaluations
are given as follows.
The boom goes on and on (in the year 2000).
scenario appears to project current trends (Is the
boom confined to certain sectors and types of firm?
Table 11: Italian special RTD Manufacturing (legenda: TT: How to make other sectors and SMEs become
Transformation Technology; C: Controls; M&S: Machinery knowledge-based?);
& Systems; E/O: Enterprise/Organization). ~ Al redefined as knowledge based decision logic tools
which could help to sustain the boom;
 Hard times are here again (in the year 2003) 4. FLEXIBLE AUTOMATION: TOWARDS NEW
- stock market collapse will have disproportionate PARADIGMS
effect on technology utilization; In the excursus for the study of the present and future of
- risk to financial system through hacker attack needs Flexible Automation, we have first described the macro
to be met by ongoing development of security & components of the model, pulled by the NEST context and
encryption technologies; its variations, that generate "demand paradigms"
(paragraph 2). Then, we have shown that industry,
- threat to distributed manufacturing; supported by education, as well as the R&D process (R-l
We all got too warm (future) VC), copes with them through "response paradigms".
- planet friendly technologies available now but socio- After that, we have assessed the historical evolution of the
political barriers, reluctance to abandon sunk costs; highlighted demand-response mechanism (paragraph 3),
- need political framework, e.g. for cross-border describing the paradigms that rose during the years and
recycling; the evolution that lead to the paradigm of Flexible
Production. This is now evolving towards such new
- easier to comply if manufacturers retain ownership of
concepts as Mass Customization and Sustainable
hardware through whole life and provide as Service;
Production. Besides the general conceptual level, the
- importance of IT/sensors to monitor. analysis has been conducted at an operational level,
Such assessments resulted in RTD projects supported in where different "responses" rose under the impulse of
different areas, referring to different TPs and addressing Flexible Automation.
relevant ETs according to the above vision. This is We can now focus the analysis on the possible future
summarized in Table 12, mapping 9 of the 12 projects evolutions and needs, both at a conceptual and at an
completed since 1992, while 19 additional projects have operational level.
been endorsed and 8 more are endorsement pending.
To this aim, a survey concerning the present and future of
Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) is presented,
approaching such an issue at an operational level.
I I
Then, future general scenarios will be assessed through
the analysis of foresight activities conducted in different
MISSION J, EU, USA Design relevant areas (USA, EU), providing higher-level
indications.
It will be possible, then, to draw some conclusions about
I I I I I the future of Flexible Automation.
I
I
I
I
J' EU'CDN' CH I
I
Design,
Production I
I
I
I
4.1 FMS Survey Results
II GLOBEMEN I AUS, EU, J, CH I
I I
Distribution I
I
M&S II At an operational level, several field studies about FMS
II INTELLIWOOD~ EU, USA, AUS I Uselmaint. I M&S II performances have been carried out in the last decade. To

I CfkE$iNI I deepen and update the analysis, within the ClRP Working
I I I

3DS
I
I
EU, USA, J

USA,EU,J
I
I
Production

Design
II
I
M&S
M&S
I Group A/M/O on "Flexible Automation - Assessment and
Future" a new survey [89] was conducted by Koren and
Boer to analyse some experiences concerning the current
use of Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) and the
Table 12: Examples of projects supported by the inter- degree of satisfaction currently achieved, aiming at stating
regional IMS Programme, specified in terms of TPs and relevant directions for future evolutions.
ETs (legenda: TT: Transformation Technology; C:
Controls; M&S: Machinery & Systems; E/O: Several companies where asked to provide information
Enterprise/Organization) about:
the type of flexible system they installed;
their experience with the system;
Some conclusions
the most relevant future directions of development.;
The previous analysis showed the support that
Governments provided to RTD manufacturing programmes The most relevant findings can be summarised in the
and Initiatives. This support concerned: following points:
different paradigms -among those studied in paragraph Respondents were equally divided whether FMSs were
3.1- from Flexible Automation to the incoming being operated close to their potential performance
Sustainable Production; (41% YES; 41% NO) and whether FMS's performance
had met their expectations (35% YES; 25% NO). 20%
different Transformation Processes (TPs) and Enabling of FMSs failed and are not currently utilised.
Technologies (ETs), covering from Transformation
Technologies to machineries, systems and controls, The industry is very dissatisfied with the initial capital
from components to the extended factory level. investment in FMSs, and is not pleased with the cost of
maintenance.
With the help of such programmes, manufacturing has
reached a technological capability never achieved before Industry is purchasing more capacity and functionality
in human history. than initially needed. This extra capacity was never
utilised in 20% of the cases, and the extra functionality
Now new challenges (driven by man's needs and NEST was never utilised in 30% of the cases.
context changes) call for a new global effort, to be
promoted by Governments as well as industry, to support Although industry is interested in adding more capacity
the development of new paradigms and related TPs/ETs and functionality into the exiting system, they consider
by investing in RTD for advanced knowledge based FMSs to be an expensive solution.
manufacturing. Provided these findings, the respondents indicated such
major areas that require research as Reconfigurable
Systems, maintenance, operating systems with multiple
products and workforce training. Some other areas that
require research were indicated: system throughput, Machine modularity is a high priority expected outreach
reduction in ramp-up time, flexible fixtures, open- in the design phase.
controllers, high-speed machining. Concerning the implementation phase it is possible to
Based on the obtained results, conclusions were drawn deduct two main points:
inside the working group concerning the most relevant There is a wide variety in the type of configuration
topics to be addressed in the future. In particular, such installed. The Agile/FMS configuration is the most
major research topics were indicated as system cost (as popular configuration being used.
this resulted to be by far the most important factor in future
success of large manufacturing systems) and system The time to install the system is considered critical
reconfiguration capabilities (as this was the second ranked Post-installation indications
important issue, including machine modularity and ease of
Concerning the use phase it is possible to deduct:
upgrading system capacity or to new technologies).
Consequently, future research should be focused on: In most cases the system is used for the activities it
was purchased for, indicating coherence between
reduction of system cost;
design and use.
Design of system for reconfiguration;
As an average, high satisfaction with the FMS in the
It is important to notice that the emphasis on cost and their sample is related to the increase in product variety, the
occurring in system reconfigurations shifts the attention on reduction of changeover times and, partially, for the
the management of the entire lifecycle of manufacturing quality improvement.
systems, which is the direction selected by the model
Those who believe the system is operated to its full
presented in paragraph 2 (see Figure 3).
potential balance those who think their systems are not
To better highlight the indication for the future, hence, the operated at their full potential.
structure of the questionnaire can be integrated into the
Eventually, concerning the reconfiguration phase it is
proposed reference model described in Figure 1, and more
possible to deduct that:
specifically in the demand-response mechanism shown in
Figure 3. The response, in fact, that a system can give to The number of people who expect to purchase new
the request coming from an upper "stage" is just a part of FMS in addition to existing ones slightly exceeds the
its lifecycle, as it is also made of phases (such as design number of those who plan to expand the capacity of the
and implementation) occurring before the actual existing systems, and these two options dominate the
installation of the system, but deeply impacting the others.
effectiveness of the response, as well. Thus the model System reconfiguration capabilities as well as machine
can be used to thoroughly address the survey and hence and control reconfiguration capabilities are ranked as
obtain reliable indication about the future. The selected higher priority features.
approach is summarized in Table 13. In summary, these indications can contribute to frame a
picture of the current situation concerning Flexible
Manufacturing Systems under lifecycle considerations.
TOTAL NUMBER OF QUESTIONS I 45 Both the specified findings and conclusions stress the
I
PRE-INSTALLAT I 0N II Design I
Ill
I I
necessity for a holistic approach covering the entire
I Implementation I 2 system life cycle, from design (design of systems for
reconfigurations, system cost) to installation (system ramp
POST-INSTALLATION I Use I24
up), from use (maintenance) to reconfiguration
I8
I

Reconfiguration (Reconfigurable Systems).

The analysis of surveyed FMS performances and data as
Table 13: Framework of the survey according to the compared to Flexible Automation paradigms shows that
developed reference model. there is a need to couple the drivers with the enablers very
well in order to successfully implement innovative
As a consequence, the results of the survey can be manufacturing technologies. The FMS survey shows that
critically analysed as follows. the users who were more careful in this analysis of drivers-
enablers were also the mostt satisfied with the FMS
Pre-installation indications
implementations.
Concerning the design phase (that is considered more in
What is more, the survey highlights the necessity to focus
general, in this case, as system planning) it is possible to on lifecycle efficiency, thus highlighting the ability to
deduct the following main points: efficiently reconfigure the system due to changes in the
The systems in the sample are both installed to realize context (which is the main feature of Reconfigurable
existing products and to produce new products (the first Manufacturing Systems) as a major objective for the
case may represent a reconfiguration of existing future.
productlprocesses, in the second a new lifecycle
starts). 4.2 Foresight studies on Manufacturing: vision of the
future
Before the installation, both over capacity and over
functionalities (intended as system features) were Man-Industry Value Chain (M-l VC) will greatly change, in
planned in many cases. Planning over capacity is more the next 15 years, due to man's needs and NEST context
common than planning over functionality. Among those radical evolution. As described in paragraph 2.2, this will
who planned over capacity, those who actually be supported by the R-l VC mechanism and its actors.
exploited it balance those who did not exploit it. The Such changes, initially concerning "demand paradigms",
extra capacity was never utilised in 20% of the cases, will require new "response paradigms" and related
while the extra functionality was never utilised in 30% TPs/ETs.
of the cases. Following the model shown in Figure 4, this calls for
The time to design the system is considered critical foresight activities integrated by "roadmaps" to produce
(even if less than expected). scenarios and, hence, contribute to develop or revise
policy in terms of:
 RTD goals, instruments, and procedures of public and intelligent design and process advisors;
private programmes; knowledge repositories and validation centres;
policy measures concerning framework conditions for distributed control across extended enterprises;
"innovation" (science-society relations, industrial
relations, human resources mobility, IPR, etc.). engineered materials and surfaces;
Foresight and road mapping activities have been carried freeform manufacturing;
out by most of the advanced as well as some of the new European approach
emerging countries, covering several domains in the MI-
The European Union DG Research, Directorate of
VC, from health needs to manufacturing [go], [91], [92],
Industrial technologies, commissioned a large foresight
study FutMan to gain an updated and thorough strategic
perspective of the future of manufacturing in Europe for the
Two different approaches adopted, respectively, by the years 2015-2020 [91]. This is also in view of the next
USA and the European Union are presented along with seventh Framework Programme.
current results.
USA approach
The USA approach - bottom up, mainly industry lead but
supported by Publish Institutions - is based on two main
steps:
Definition of a vision of the manufacturing enterprises
of the future (NGM Project) and of its attributes, the
corresponding required TPs and ETs, and the definition
of the necessary R&D activities.
Definition of the future manufacturing technology
requirements and outline solution paths to meet these
requirements through "roadmaps" (IMTR Initiative).
The Next-Generation Manufacturing (NGM) Project was
initiated in 1995 and started using a hierarchical format
that first identified the global drivers of the new market
place.
Following the work carried out by the NGM project (ended
Figure 10: The scenarios on the future of manufacturing in
in 1997) the integrated Manufacturing Technology
Europe 201 5-2020 (FutMan).
Roadmapping (IMTR) Initiative was launched (see
paragraph 3.3) in 1998.
The scenarios shown in Figure 10 represent the general
The IMTR developed a vision of the future manufacturing
output of FutMan. This aims at offering imaginative
enterprises, focusing on how they will function internally as
pictures about potential socio-economic developments and
well as how they will interact with their customers,
future technologies that are likely to shape the European
partners, suppliers, workforce and other stakeholders.
manufacturing sector over the coming years. The
Using a structured methodology, the IMTR defined future scenarios highlight important trends, possible trend-
manufacturing technology requirements and outlined breaks, critical challenges and possible opportunities, and
solution paths to meet these requirements in four present four possible visions of manufacturing in Europe in
interrelated areas: the years 2015-2020. They map the space for sustainable
Information Systems for Manufacturing Enterprises development (SD) in the future.
(IS); The highlighted scenarios are structured around two
Modelling & Simulation (M&S); qualitative dimensions of change. The first dimension
Manufacturing Processes & Equipment (MPE); relates to the kind of policy making, addressing the
balance between public values and consumer attitudes.
Technologies for Enterprise Integration (TEI);
The second dimension refers to the degree of integration
Key aspects for the future identified by this vision are: of SD relevant policies, hence considering prevailing public
integrated enterprise management; values, consumer behaviour and demand patterns.
science-based manufacturing; The socio-economic features of the four scenarios, dealing
intelligent process & equipment; with the future of manufacturing in Europe in the years
2015-2020, are listed below:
"plug and play" interoperability;
global governance;
flexible, distributed operations;
EU policy integration/ policy instruments;
fully integrated & optimized design & manufacturing;
consumer behaviour/ values/ demand patterns;
Roadmaps have been developed within the four
interrelated areas IS, M&S, MPE, TEI. innovation policy focus;
Concerning the MPE area, in particular, the following main transport / energy infrastructure;
topics for the future of manufacturing were defined: sustainable development;
zero net lifecycle waste; education system;
first part correct; priorities in higher education;
intelligent control systems; labour market;
innovative breakthrough processes (MEMS, social security;
bioprocessing); "Features" regarding industry, research institutions and
science based manufacturing; RTD have been derived from the above four scenarios.
Focusing on RTD, they may be summarised as follows:
 sustainable technology development to strengthen It is thus important -for universities and research institutes
competitive advantage in advanced manufacturing and centres involved in manufacturing RTD- to make a
systems; wide analysis, considering national and Regional situations
flexible specialisation in design and manufacturing and and reviewing their goals and plans (i.e. assess their own
more socially responsible production; sustainability), the output of which will be beneficial for
them to eventually build up a truly sustainable RTD
new small production systems, specialised "fabric".
nanotechnology clusters;
Roadmaps are being produced to integrate the strategic
foresight exercise. 5 CONCLUSIONS
The MANTYS Thematic Network [108], promoted by Manufacturing industry -covering man's needs/industry
CECIMO (European Committee for Cooperation of the response Value Chain- has undergone several Revolutions
Machine Tool Industries), is generating insight into the in the last 50 years. They were driven by Natural,
mechanisms that relate technological innovation to socio- Economical, Social and Technological (NEST) context
economic factors. Building on this, it is identifying realistic changes and based on RTD Innovation of paradigms, from
scenarios based on likely technological and socio- Flexible Automation to Sustainable Production.
economical developments. These will be used to assess National and supranational RTD programmes have played
strategic impact. a relevant role in promoting and supporting them. Focusing
Also, "Technology Roadmaps" are produced (i.e. Agile on production, the role of paradigms (conceptual level) and
Enterprises, Next Generation Machine Tools) preparing engineering solutions such as FMS (operational level) has
decision makers to orient their activities and to adapt to been analysed.
change. Focusing on production processes and their life cycles,
past and current production paradigms -from Flexible
4.3 Towards new Paradigms. Automation to Sustainable Production- have been
The analysis, as carried out in chapter 3, connecting analysed and mapped. A good correlation between drivers
paradigms the NEST context they respond to, may be and enablers has been described.
extended to the emerging scenarios. These may be A survey concerning running FMSs has been carried out
considered as potential "demand" paradigms, which may and the results reported. The analysis of surveyed FMS
drive the development of new of new " response " performances and data as compared to Flexible
paradigms and related TPs/ETs and RTD actions and Automation paradigms shows that there is a need to
act0 rs. couple the drivers with the enablers very well in order to
The two approaches described in paragraph 4.2 focus successfully implement innovative manufacturing
respectively on the company, to be "fit" to cope with the technologies. The FMS survey shows that the users who
NEST context (as in the case of the USA approach) or on were more careful in this analysis of drivers-enablers were
the NEST context, that needs to be foreseen (as in the also the most satisfied with the FMS implementations.
case of the EU approach). Each of these approaches Foresight studies, leading to NEST context scenarios, may
corresponds to two different environments. help in defining the new paradigms required. Within the
NGM and IMTR Initiative were meant to help the Company Man-Industry Value Chain (M-l VC), two domains have
to win in a difficult context, investing in RTD when needed. been considered:
On the other hand, FutMan and further activities will help consumers and industry up-stream;
to understand the NEST evolution, the role of Europe, man's life cycle needs/man focused services;
future "demand" paradigms, and define RTD Programmes,
besides involving the various actors and stakeholders. Emerging Transformation Processes TPs can be exploited
Both approaches lead to new emerging paradigms. in the future only through the development of innovative
Enabling Technologies ETs in knowledge based
NGM proposes the "responsive" paradigm, covering from manufacturing areas like new materials, nanotechnologies
design to production. and micro & hybrid devices.
FutMan shows the emergence of a paradigm combining The competition for resources, the mechanisms to acquire
sustainability and competitiveness, where flexile them, the presence of new competitors on the research
automation or rather reconfigurability may play a market, is a strong challenge for universities, research
fundamental role. institutes and companies. A strong selection may take
Finally both approaches underline a new Industrial place and change, in the next five to ten years, the
Paradigm, i.e.: international research landscape and market. This calls for
current production and RTD based generation of new the Sustainability of actors, as a fundamental prerequisite
products and processes are two fundamental, for the competitiveness and sustainability of industry.
integrated Company functions; Finally, the decreasing attention to manufacturing -while
networks of Companies and Networks of Research new needs and requirements are "springing up" which call
actors, may perform, respectively, the previous two for new RTD based "answers" from manufacturing -may
functions, being integrated; lead to a strategic disaster [ I 101.
This emerging Industrial Paradigm may be called New strategic RTD programmes should be launched.
Manufuture [109].
RTD actors towards the future 6 AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The competition for resources, the mechanisms to acquire The authors are pleased to acknowledge the contribution
them and the presence of new competitors on the research of professor Uwe Heisel, professor Fritz Klocke, professor
market are strong challenges for universities, research Toshimichi Moriwaki, professor Gunther Seliger, professor
institutes and companies. Hans Peter Wiendahl, as well as the contribution by Dott.
Ing. A. Urbani and several other members of the institute
A strong selection may take place and change, in the next
ITIA-CNR.
five to ten years, the international research landscape and
market.
7 REFERENCES 1191 Wiendhal. H. P.. Fiebia. -, C..
, Hernandez, R.. 2002. "A

EC, Workshop "The Machine-Tool sector and the transformable and reconfigurable factoh: strategies,
FP6", Leuven - 25th October 2002 methods and case study", Proceedings of the ASME
IMECE 2002, November, New Orleans, USA
Jovane, F., "Research based Evolution of the Man-
Industry Value Chain", ITlA series, MRI, November Klocke, F., "Changeability from the perspective of
2002 Technology" Presented at the STC "0"Meeting ClRP
General Assembly, 2002
Federal information processing standard, December
1993, Integration Definition for Function Modelling Ashburn, A,, "People and Automaton", American
(IDEFO), Publication 183 Mach. Automated Manufacturing, Vol. 130, No. 6, 97-
112, June 1986
Jovane, F., Carlesi, L., "The Elementary machine: an
atomic model to analyze and device production Emerson, C., "Detroit Style Automation", American
systems" 3gth ClRP General Assembly, Trondheim - Mach. Automated Manufacturing, Vol. 131, No. 7, 81-
August 1989 92, July 1987
Van Brussel, H., "Manufacturing paradigm shifts Groover, M.P., "Automation, Production systems,
during 50 years of CIRP" Presidential address, and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Prantice
Opening Session, 51th General Assembly, Nancy, Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J, 1987
France, 2001 Pessen, D., W., "Industrial Automaton", John Wiley
Dorf, R.C., Kusiak, A,, (edited by), (1994), and Sons, Inc., New York, 1989
"Handbook of Design, Manufacturing and Raafat, F., "A comprehensive bibliography on
Automation" justification of advanced manufacturing systems",
Pine, J.B., 1993, Mass Customization: The New International Journal of Production Economics
Frontier in Business Competition, Harvard Business Volume: 79, Issue: 3, October 11, 2002, pp. 197-208
School Press, Boston, Mass., USA Ashley, S., 1997, Manufacturing Firms Face the
Boer, C.R., Jovane, F., 2002, Flexible and Future, Mechanical Engineering, June, pp 70-74
reconfigurable manufacturing automation for Mass Sahin, F., 2000, Manufacturing competitiveness:
Customization, Proceedings of the IFAC 15thtriennial different systems to achieve the same result,
world congress, Barcelona, Spain Production and inventory management journal, first
Gilmore, J. H., Pine, J. B., "Markets of one, creating quarter 2000
customer-unique value through Mass Ranta, J., Tchijov, I., 1990, "Economics and Success
Customization", Harvard Business School Press, Factors of Flexible Manufacturing Systems: the
2000 Conventional Explanation Revisited', in The
Tseng, M.T., Jiao, J., "Design for Mass International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing
Customization", Annals of the CIRP, Vol. 45/1, 1996 Systems, Vol. 2, pp. 169-190
Anderson, D. M., "Agile Product Development for Benjaafar, S., Tirupati, D., 1998, "Introduction to the
Mass Customization: How to Develop and Deliver Special Issue of Manufacturing Flexibility", in The
Products for Mass Customization, Niche Markets, International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing
JIT, Build to Order and Flexible Manufacturing", Irwin Systems, Vol. 10, pp. 323-324
Professional Pub., 1997 Vessell, C., "Computer Integrated Manufacturing,
Tseng, M., Piller, F.T., "The customer centric and Small and Medium Enterprises", Computer and
enterprise, advances in mass Customization and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 37, issue 1-2, October
personalization", Springer, 2003 1999
Goldman, S.L., Nagel, R.N., "Management, Z., Y. Wanga; Rajurkar, K. P.a; Kapoor, A,,
technology and agility: the emergence of a new era "Architecture for agile manufacturing and its interface
in manufacturing", International Journal of with computer integrated manufacturing, Journal of
Technology Management, Vol. 8, No. 1/2, 1993 Materials Processing Technology Vol: 61, Issue: 1-2,
August, 1996, pp. 99-103
Gunasekaran, A,, "Agile manufacturing: enablers and
an implementation framework, International Journal S. Kant Vajpayee, "Principles of Computer Integrated
of Production Research, Vol. 36, No. 5, 1998, pp. Manufacturing", Pearson Education POD; 1st edition,
1223 - 1247 February 13, 1998
Lee, J., 1998, "Manufacturing Engineering in a Ayres, R.U., Dobrinsky, R., et al., "Computer
Changing World: Issues, Challanges and Strategies", Integrated Manufacturing", Chapman and Hall, 1992
in International Journal for Manufacturing Science Shirinzadeh, Bijana, "Strategies for planning and
and Production, Vol. 1-3 implementation of flexible fixturing systems in a
Newman, W.S., Podgurski, A,, Quinn, R.D., Merat, computer integrated manufacturing environment",
F.L., et. al., (2000), "Design Lessons for Building Computers in Industry, Vol. 30, Issue: 3, October 15,
Agile Manufacturing Systems", I € € € Transactions on 1996, pp. 175-183
Robotics and Automation, Vol. 16-3 Michael L. George, "Lean Six Sigma : Combining Six
Duguay, C.R., Landry, S., Pasin, F., "From Mass Sigma Quality with Lean Production Speed", 2002
Production to Flexi ble/Agile Production", International Kevin J. Duggan, "Creating Mixed Model Value
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Streams: Practical Lean Techniques for Building to
Vol. 17, NO. 12, 1997, pp. 1183-1195 Demand", Productivity Press, New York, NY, 2002
Paolucci, F., "Design of a modular machine" Schonberger, R. J., "Let's Fix It! Overcoming the
Syndicate Groups : How to implement Agility - Crisis in Manufacturing", The Free Press (a division
Manchester 8th nov. 2001 -presentation for EC- of Simon & Schuster, Inc.), New York, NY, 2001
Thematic Network (BRRT-CT98-5080) ARMMS - McCormack, R.A., "Lean Machines: Learning From
Agile Reconfigurable Manufacturing Machinery the Leaders of the Next Industrial Revolution"
Systems
[39] Pincelli, G., Borghi, L., Rusina, F., "Evolution of Metal Control Systems", SPlE Robotics & Machine
Working Strategies in the Automotive Industry: the Perception, Vol. 12, No 1, March 2003, pp. 4-1 1
High Speed Machining", Proceedings of the Carpanzano E. and A. Cataldo. Modular design and
Dedicated Conference on Lean-Agile Manufacturing simulation based verification of the logic control code
in the Automotive Industries, 1994 for an agile shoe manufacturing system. Proc.
[40] Wiendhal H.-P., Helms K., Lutz S., (1999), ,,Supply Industrial Simulation Conference, ISC2003,
Net - New Methods for Capacity Flexibilisation in EUROSIS, Valencia, Spain, June 9-1 1, 2003, pp.
Production Networks", Proc. 15 th Int.Conf. on 290-294
Computer-Aided production Engineering, 609-610 Dallefrate D., Carpanzano E. and Molinari Tosatti L.
[41] Childe S., (1998), "The extended enterprise - a A reconfigurable numerical control algorithm for high
concept of cooperation", Production Planning & speed machining (in Italian). Proc. International
Control 914: 320-327 Conference on Automation within New Global
[42] Camarinha-Matos, L. M., Pantoja Lima, C., "A Scenarios, Milan, Italy, November 19-21, 2002,
framework for cooperation in Virtual Enterprises", paper 1.7
report from the European funded project PRODNET Hagel, J., Brown, J.S., 2001, Your next IT strategy,
II, the ESPRIT project 22647 Harvard Business Review, October, pp. 105-113
[43] Huang B., Gou, H.,et al., "A framework for virtual Jovane, F., Spinolo, E., Martana, R., Research
enterprise control with the holonic manufacturing Project on "Automotive Components Service
paradigm", Computers in Industry, Vol: 49, Issue: 3, Manufacturing", PON, Ministry of Education,
December, 2002, pp. 299-310 University and Research, November 2001
[44] Xu, W., Wei, Y., Fan, Y., "Virtual enterprise and its Hibbard, J., 2002, Service Economy, Red Herring,
intelligence management Computers and Industrial February 2002, pp. 42-46
Engineering, Vol: 42, Issue: 2-4, April 11, 2002 Franke, C., Seliger, G., Hu, S, J., Koren, Y., "A new
Bibliographic Page, pp. 199-205 Paradigm of Manufacturing: selling use instead of
[45] Valckenaers, P., "Editorial of the Special Issue on selling systems", Proceedings of the JUSFA Japan
Holonic Manufacturing Systems", Computers in USA Symposium on Flexible Automaton, July 17-22,
Industry, Vol: 46, Issue: 3, October, 2001, pp. 233- Hiroshiima, Japan, 2002
234 Urbani, A,, Molinari Tosatti, L., Pasek, Z., 2002,
[46] Mathews, J., "Organizational foundations of Manufacturing practices in dynamic markets:
intelligent manufacturing systems - the holonic reconfigurability to enable a service-based
viewpoint, "Computer Integrated Manufacturing manufacturing capacity supply, Proceedings of the
Systems, Vol: 8, Issue: 4, November, 1995 ASME-IMECE 2002, New Orleans, November 17-22
Bibliographic Page, pp. 237-243 Urbani, A. Colombo, C, "Analytical approach to the
[47] Sun, H., Venuvinod, P.K., "The human side of contract for the service supply of manufacturing
holonic manufacturing systems", Technovation, Vol: capacity", Proceedings of the 34th Cirp ISMS,
21, Issue: 6, June, 2001, pp. 353-360 Saarbrucken, Germany, June 2003
[48] Fischer, K., "Agent-based design of holonic Lay, G., Molinari Tosatti, L., Urbani, A,, "New
manufacturing systems", Robotics and Autonomous business paradigms for machinery, Build-Operate-
Systems, Vol: 27, Issue: 1-2, April 30, 1999 Own or Service Manufacturing: New Challenge for
Bibliographic Page, pp. 3-1 3 European Machine Tool Builders", Track 4
[49] Huang B., Gou, H., et al., "A framework for virtual preparation report: NEXT IP in EC VI FP Proposal
enterprise control with the holonic manufacturing Conklin, J.M., Perue, B.A., "Extending Capabilities
paradigm", Computers in Industry, Vol: 49, Issue: 3, Through Contract Manufacturing", ELECTRO
December, 2002, pp. 299-310 INTERNATIONAL 1994, Boston, MA, May 10-12,
[50] Van Brussel, H., et al., "Reference Architecture for 1994.
holonic manufacturing systems : PROSA, Jovane, F. (edited by), Proceedings of the First
Computers in Industry, vol. 37, 1998, pp. 255-274 international Forum on Sustainable Production: A
[51] Koren, Y., Heisel, U., Jovane, F., Moriwaki, T., New Industrial Growth, June 3, Venice, Italy, 1996
Pritschow, G., Ulsoy, G., Van Brussel, H., 1999, Jovane, F. (edited by), Proceedings of the Second
Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems, Annals of international Forum on Sustainable Production: The
the CIRP, Vol. 48/2/1999 Role of Research, November 23-24, Venice, Italy,
[52] Wiendhal, H. P., Fiebig, C., Hernandez, R., 2002, A 1998
transformable and reconfigurable factory: strategies, Boer C.R. and Jovane F. (1996), "Towards a New
methods and case study, Proceedings of the ASME Model of Sustainable Production: ManuFuturing",
IMECE 2002, November, New Orleans, USA Annals of the CIRP, Vo1.45/1/1996
[53] Son, S.Y., Olsen, T.L., Yip-Hoi, D., "Economic Knot, J. Marjolijn C.; van den Ende, Jan C.M.;
benefits of Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems", Vergragt, Philip J., "Flexibility strategies for
Proceedings of the 2000 Japan USA Flexible sustainable technology development", Technovation
Automation Conference, July 2000, Ann Arbor, Volume: 21, Issue: 6, June, 2001, pp. 335-343
Michigan Haner, Udo-Ernst, "Innovation quality-a conceptual
[54] Mehrabi, M., Ulsoy, G., Koren, Y., (1998) framework, International Journal of Production
"Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems: Key to Economics Volume: 80, Issue: 1, November, 2002,
Future Manufacturing", Proceedings of the JAPAN - pp. 31-37
USA Symposium on Flexible Automation, Otsu, Sarkis, Joseph, "Manufacturing strategy and
Japan environmental consciousness", Technovation
[55] Carpanzano E., Dallefrate D. and Jatta F. Volume: 15, Issue: 2, March, 1995, pp. 79-97
"Development of Self-reconfiguring, Manufacturing
[72] Zhang, Hong C.; Kuo, Tsai C.; Huitian, Lu; Huang, on "Environmentally benign manufacturing", April
Samuel H., "Environmentally Conscious Design and 2001
Manufacturing: A State-of-the-Art Survey", Journal of [94] FIATECH, CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY :
Manufacturing Systems Volume: 16, Issue: 5, 1997, Technology Roadmap Initiative, March 2003
pp. 352-371
[95] European Science and Technology Observatory
[73] Craighill, A.L.; Powell, J. C., "Lifecycle assessment (ESTO) : Monitoring Foresight Activities, OST
and economic evaluation of recycling: a case study", (France) and CEST (UK), coordinators with the
Resources, Conservation and Recycling Volume: 17, contribution of VlTO (Belgium), TNO and NRLO
Issue: 2, August, 1996, pp. 75-96 (Netherlands), VTT (Finland), FhG-IS1 and VDI
[74] Dulio, S., Boer, C.R., "The road to shoe mass (Germany), ITA (Austria) - June 2001
customisation calls for increased flexibility: the SPI 6 [96] IMTl First Product Correct: Visions and Goals for the
project", World Congress on Mass Customization 21st Century Manufacturing Enterprise, Published by
and Personalization, Hong Kong, 2001 the IMTl Integrated Manufacturing Technology
[75] EUROShoE Contract G I RD-cT-2000-00343, website Initiative, - Inc. 2000
www.euro-shoe. net [97] IMTR Integrated Manufacturing Technology
[76] Boer, C.R., Dulio, S., "The future of shoe Mass Roadmapping Project :Manufacturing Processes&
Customization as a perfect merge of old and new Equipment - 24 July 2000
economy", World Congress on Mass Customization [98] IMTR Integrated Manufacturing Technology
and Personalization, Hong Kong, 2001 Roadmapping Project : Manufacturing Success in the
[77] Wertheim, R., "Production research, an integral part 21st Century: A Strategic View - 16 July 2000
of the manufacturing chain", Opening session, [99] Agility Forum, Leaders for Manufacturing, and
Presidential address - 5 ~ 2 "general
~ Assembly of Technologies Enabling Agile Manufacturing: Next-
CIRP, San Sebastian, Spain, 2002 Generation Manufacturing A Framework for Action
[78] Moriwaki, T, Private communication Executive Overview - January 1997
[79] MEP: Manufacturing Extension Partnership, [I 001 Agoria Mechanics & Mechatronics sector roadmap.
http://www.mep.nist.gov Building blocks for the future- 2002, RAND
[80] NGM Next-Generation Manufacturing, A Framework Publications SB-1072 : Critical Technologies - March
for Action, Agility Forum, Leaders for Manufacturing 2003
and Technologies Enabling Agile Manufacturing, [I011 IMTl 21st Century Manufacturing Taxonomy: A
1997. http://www.imti21.org/Documents/ngm.pdf Framework for Manufacturing Technology
[81] IMTR, Integrated Manufacturing Technology Knowledge Management V1.0 - Published by the
Roadmapping Project, Technologies for Enterprise IMTl Integrated Manufacturing Technology Initiative,
Integration, 3 December 1999. http://www.IMT121.org - 12 December 2000
[82] Dalmiglio, D., Romano, P. Tagliaferri, C., "Analysis of [I021 Robert Phaal, Clare Farrukh and David Probert :
EC Framework Programmes evolution", ITIA-CNR, Technology Roadmapping: linking technology
Research Report 2003 resources to business objectives - Centre for
[83] Wiendahl, H.P., Private communication Technology Management, University of Cambridge
[84] Jovane, F., "Progetto Finalizzato Tecnologie [I031 IMTR Integrated Manufacturing Technology
Meccaniche: Relazione Finale", CNR report 1990 Roadmapping Project : Technologies for Enterprise
Integration - 3 December 1999
[85] Cugini, U., Progetto Finalizzato Robotica: Relazione
Finale", CNR report 1995 [ I 041 A Trans-national Analysis of Results and Implications
of Industrially-oriented Technology Foresight studies
[86] EUREKA Secretariat Brussels, www.eureka. be, (France, Spain, Italy & Portugal) :A joint JRCAPTS-
[email protected]. be ESTO Study -February 2002
[87] Jovane, F., "Results of the Eureka Famos Research [I051 PRU - Science and Technology Policy Research,
Program: A European Contribution in Manufacturing University of Sussex: Foresight Futures 2020 -
Technology" Robotics and Computer Integrated Revised scenarios and guidance, UK, September
Manufacturing, Vol 10, N. 1/2, pp. 13-15, 1993 2002
[88] Boer C.R., Private communication: "IMS future: a [I061 Department of Trade and Industry, "Foresight
summary of strategies from IMS Forum in 2000 and programme : Health care 2020", December 2000,
2001", ISC-IMS, 2003 UK.
[89] Boer C.R., Koren, Y., "ERC/CIRP Survey on Flexible [I071 Lamarra, U., Pagani, M., "Manufacturing and
Manufacturing Systems", Working Group on "Flexible biotechnologies: towards an integrated vision in
Automation - Assessment and Future" meeting, Europe", ITIA-CNR, 2003
Paris, January 2003
[I081 MANTYS ECNFP, "Thematic Network on
[go] Martana, R., Jovane, F., "Evolving reference model Manufacturing Technologies: Technology Watch and
for institutional research programmes and initiatives", Technology Foresight activities working documents",
ITIA-CNR Research Report, 2001 2002/2003
[91] EC - DG Research, "The Future of Manufacturing in [ I 091 EC Conference, "Manufuture 2003. European
Europe 2015-2020: The Challenge for Sustainable Manufacturing of the Future: role of research and
Development (FuTMan)", 2002 education for European leadership", Milano,
[92] Institute for Manufacturing - University of Cambridge, December 1-2, 2003
Department of Trade and Industry - UK Government [I101 U.S House of Representatives, Committee on
department, INFORMAN 2000, Manufacturing Sciences, "Hearing on Manufacturing Research and
Foresight Conference, Cambridge, UK, 12-14 March Development", June 5th 2003, USA
2000
[93] International Technology Research Institute-World
Technology (WTEC) Division, WTEC Panel Report