Masters Thesis

IDPPOPEXD:05:93

FinaBox- Emergence of New Paradigm

Abedullah Zaman
Masters in Production and Logistics Management
Department of Innovation, Design and Product Development
Mlardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden
azn04002@student.mdh.se
abedullahzaman@hotmail.com

Supervisor:
Professor Mats Jackson
Department of Innovation, Design and Product Development
Mlardalen University, Eskilstuna
Sweden

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................................................4
ACKNOWLEDGMENT.............................................................................................................................................5
1

INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................6
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7

CRAFTMANSHIP TO FINABOXA PARADIGM SHIFT................................................................................9

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.9.1
2.9.2
2.9.3

TYPES OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................40

FINABOX--SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND CONTROL ARCHITECTURE ...............................................................40
FINABOX INTEGRATION ARCHITECTURE ....................................................................................................43
MODULAR PRODUCTION- LITERATURE REFERENCES .................................................................................44
FINABOXCONCEPTUAL MODELS ...........................................................................................................46
Scenarios for Adoption .....................................................................................................................47
Realization of Concept......................................................................................................................49

FINABOX INDUSTRIAL DEMONSTRATORS...............................................................................................52

4.1
4.2
4.3

CRAFTSMANSHIP .......................................................................................................................................9
MASS PRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................9
LEAN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS...................................................................................................................11
MASS CUSTOMIZATION ............................................................................................................................13
AGILE PRODUCTION SYSTEM ...................................................................................................................17
HOLONIC MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS .......................................................................................................21
BIONIC MANUFACTURING SYSTEM ............................................................................................................26
FRACTAL FACTORY ..................................................................................................................................28
FINABOX .................................................................................................................................................31
Flexibility ...........................................................................................................................................32
Mobility..............................................................................................................................................39
Speed................................................................................................................................................39

FINABOXFORMULATION OF CONCEPTUAL MODELS .........................................................................40

3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.5.1
3.5.2

PROBLEM STATEMENT ...............................................................................................................................6

OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................................7
EXPECTED EFFECTS ..................................................................................................................................7
RESEARCH QUESTIONS .............................................................................................................................7
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................7
LIMITATIONS ..............................................................................................................................................8
OUTLINE OF THESIS ...................................................................................................................................8

PHARMADULE EMTUNGA AB ....................................................................................................................52

BOMBARDIER TRANSPORTATION ..............................................................................................................54
ABB ROBOTICS.......................................................................................................................................54

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................56
5.1
5.2

ACHIEVING OBJECTIVE OF THESIS .............................................................................................................56

FURTHER RESEARCH ...............................................................................................................................57

REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................58

APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................................................61
FINABOX PROJECT PLAN .......................................................................................................................................61

TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Methods to Achieve Mass Customization ...............................................................................................14
Figure 2: Design for Mass Customization ..............................................................................................................15
Figure 3: Manufacturing Process of a Customized Product...................................................................................16
Figure 4: Customer Involvement and Modularity in Production Cycle ...................................................................16
Figure 5: Holonic Manufacturing System ...............................................................................................................22
Figure 6: Holonic elements and interfaces .............................................................................................................24
Figure 7: Reference architecture for HMS..............................................................................................................24
Figure 8: Functional Model for manufacturing Control ...........................................................................................25
Figure 9: Structural Model for HMS........................................................................................................................26
Figure 10: Similarity of Biological and Manufacturing Structures...........................................................................27
Figure 11: Operation of Fractal Entities..................................................................................................................28
Figure 12: Reorganization of system in FrMS ........................................................................................................30
Figure 13: Functional Modules and relationships of a fractal in FrMS ...................................................................30
Figure 14: Flexibility: a framework for classification...............................................................................................34
Figure 15: Hierarchical framework for flexibility......................................................................................................35
Figure 16: A Consolidated framework for Flexibility...............................................................................................36
Figure 17: Flexibility Measurement ........................................................................................................................37
Figure 18: Different control architectures ...............................................................................................................41
Figure 19: A Modular Manufacturing Unit...............................................................................................................45
Figure 20: Scenarios for FinaBox Adoption............................................................................................................47
Figure 21: Possible situation for FinaBox adoption................................................................................................47
Figure 22: FinaBox as leased production capacity ................................................................................................48
Figure 23: FinaBox used to produce close to customer.........................................................................................48
Figure 24: FinaBox used for Customized products ................................................................................................49
Figure 25: Shifts in overall ......................................................................................................................................49
Figure 26: Journey of Manufacturing Sector ..........................................................................................................50
Figure 27: Competitive factors for 21st century ......................................................................................................51
Figure 28: FinaBox Demonstrator at Pharmadule..................................................................................................52

ABSTRACT
As todays competitive environment continues to change rapidly, it is recognized that low cost and
high quality alone are not enough to sustain firms competitive position in market place. Strategic
managers are now concentrating on flexibility and reconfiguability to achieve new forms of
competitive advantages.
The fast pace of manufacturing technology and customers demand for tailored products require
companies to innovate continually and to bring these product innovations to the marketplace
immediately. The trend towards a global market and the increasing customer-involvement is
generating need for customized products. This customization alone is not enough, customer
demand customized products immediately, produced at-the-spot.
The recent notions like time-to-market describe time-based competitive scenario. This is the
orientation to a new manufacturing paradigm. This paradigm is termed as FinaBox--Mobile
Production Capacity on demand. FinaBox with its three key components- Flexibility, Mobility,
Speed- is ready to sought as a new paradigm to win the time-based race.
The objective of the thesis is to investigate the major novel conceptual feature of FinaBox concept.
A detailed survey of existing production systems is made to see relevance of this concept with
existing industrial practices. Objective of the thesis is achieved by investigating certain questions
which draw final conclusion regarding usability of the FinaBox concept in real industrial setting.
It is expected that this thesis will increase the understanding of the FinaBox concept within industry.
It will help to create a feel that still there exist ways to compete with cheap input countries. Further it
will create understanding that innovation in products alone is not enough, innovation in production
system is true enabler of todays competitive factors.
Keywords: Flexible Production System, Mass Customization, Holonic System, Agile Systems,
Modular Production System.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First, I would like to thank my supervisor Professor Mats Jackson for his support, fruitful
discussions and guidance. He introduced me to research and taught me how to see the things in
different perspectives. He has been available all the time for productive discussions to evolve nice
ideas. His polite attitude will be a nice asset of my memory.
I would like to send my gratitude to my coordinator and teacher Sabah Audo who was always kind
and ready for help.
I am thankful to Dr. Waqas Arshad and Amjad Bashir to make my stay in Sweden convenient. I am
equally thankful to my colleagues and friends at MDH.
Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to my family; my mother and father to support and believe in me;
my brothers to give me self confidence; my sisters for their concern and care (my sisters mail
always remind me my birthday).

INTRODUCTION

History of production starts from early craftsmanship when each product was made on demand and
as per customers needs. During this era, every worker had full set of skills and they were often
owner of their own small business. This scenario was characterized with low volume and high
costs. Mass production system became a common industry practice after invention of moving
assembly line at Ford. Mass production system enabled companies to provide standardized
products at reasonably low prices. This system is still successful under scenarios of mass
consumption. Taiichi Ohno at Toyota developed a new production system called Lean production
system. Lean systems emphasize on waste elimination and process improvements. The salient
features of this system are multi skill employees who believe in fault detection instead of fault
correction. The main focus of this system is to reduce overall response time in order to
accommodate marker changes in cost efficient manner.
But all this is not enough as manufacturing success and survival are becoming more difficult to
sustain because increasing global competition is diminishing defined markets. This scenario has
forced manufacturers to find innovative and unique ways to do business. Global competition allows
customers to demand, readily available best product at best price. Ready delivery and service are
additional attributes demanded by the customers. These requirements call for up-to-date innovative
features and customization to meet individual desires. Best price refers to the products value that
should be sufficiently higher than cost and low enough so that it is the best buy for customer.
Immediate availability means that when customer expects it to be delivered. Service includes
responding to problems, providing information, maintenance etc. all this force companies to be
innovative not only in products but also in means and ways of producing and delivering products.

1.1

Problem Statement

The growth and sustainability of Swedish economy depends heavily on the success of its industry.
The manufacturing sector comprises major portion of Swedish exports. Around 700,000 people
work in this sector and an about 1.4 million are indirectly dependent on it. So competitiveness of
industry in toadys turbulent environment is a must for survival of economy.
Factory-in-a-box is an ambitious attempt to face the challenge of globalization quite differently.
Today most of the companies on the globe are striving to face the challenge with single competitive
priority i.e. cost. Companies are relying on outsourcing for cheap input and one of those is cheap
labor in Asia and Eastern Europe. The driving theme behind FinaBox is a strategic question; Does
an existing trend of outsourcing mean it is not possible to compete with internal production? Is
production knowledge not a core competence for a company that develops products?[1]
FinaBox is an attempt to address the current manufacturing sector related problems quite
differently, it aim to use the production knowledge in unique innovative way. The national Swedish
ambition to increase the number and sizes of Swedish industries is often counteracted by lack of
competitive production. Competitive production capacity is claimed to be the readily available
capacity at any location. Also companies, without in-house production capacity, have few options if
they need resources for pilot production of new or modified product.

1.2

Objective

The objective of the thesis is to investigate the major novel conceptual feature of FinaBox concept.
A detailed survey of existing production systems is aimed to find a link, positive or negative,
between FinaBox and ongoing industrial practices.
1.3

Expected effects

It is expected that this thesis will increase the understanding of the FinaBox concept within industry.
It will help to create a feel that still there exist ways to compete with cheap input countries
characterized with low wages etc. Cost is not always a competitive priority; there could be other
ways to compete, like immediate delivery, extreme customization and at-the-spot production.
1.4

Research Questions

Objective of the thesis is strived by investigating certain questions. These research questions help
to draw final conclusion regarding usability of the concept in real industrial setting. Following
research questions are proposed:
1. How to compete with production in Sweden in comparison with cheap labor countries in
Asia and Eastern Europe?
2. What existing production system theories contain ideas of flexibility, mobility and speed?
3. What are major novel conceptual features of FinaBox concept?
4. What are technical components to implement FinaBox concept?

1.5

Research Methodology

Literature Survey

Literature surveyed for this thesis comprises early craftsmanship to todays manufacturing
practices. It is long journey from crafted goods to individualized goods. There are many social and
technical reasons which enabled this change and each scenario is discussed here to see the
paradigm shift form craftsmanship to FinaBox. Mostly accredited journals are searched for stateof-art articles and there are only two web references.

Survey of Work Done in FinaBox

To understand the actual work under various FinaBox demonstrators, various related documents
were reviewed. There include projects plans, design briefs, concept presentation documents and
pre-studies. For me reading all the material in Swedish was a difficult thing but I managed this
through lexikon and with the help of friends.

Field Study

All four modules within the FinaBox project are analyzed through interviews. Interviews of following
persons were conducted:
Module 1: Milun Milic, Mikael Hedelind
Module 2: Andreas Ask
Module 5: Carin Stillstrm
1.6

Limitations

The objective of this thesis is to investigate the novel feature of FinaBox and find a link between
FinaBox and ongoing industrial practices.
The scope of the thesis as claimed in objective industrial practices is limited to five companies
participating in this project. All these companies belong to five different industries. So the research
area is limited to these five industries.
1.7

Outline of Thesis

This thesis is divided into seven chapters. Chapter one include introduction covering problem area,
objective and research questions; chapter two covers detailed literature survey from mass
production to FinaBox. Chapter there covers the conceptual models developed according to the
knowledge and understanding acquired in chapter two. Chapter four gives information about
various demonstrates or FinaBoxes developed at three industrial partners of the project.
Conclusion and answers of the research question are presented in chapter five and it is essence of
thesis. Appendix include full project proposal of FinaBox, reader is referred to Appendix while
reading chapter three for detailed information about the FinaBox project.

CRAFTMANSHIP TO FINABOXA PARADIGM SHIFT

2.1

Craftsmanship

The history of craftsmanship goes back to over 500,000 years. The salient features of each product
made at that time was its uniqueness, it was tailored according to the customers specific needs
and made on demand (Ross 1996). Craft production had the following characteristics [3].

Workforce was highly skilled in design, machine operation and fitting. Most workers started
their career as apprentice to achieve full set of craft skills and progress toward to run their
own machine shops.

Organizations those were extremely decentralized although concentrated within a single

city. Most parts and much of that vehicles design came from small machine shops. That
system was coordinated by an owner/entrepreneur indirect contact with everyone involvedcustomers, employees and suppliers.

There were general-purpose machine tools to perform drilling grinding and other operations
on metal and wood.

Productions volume was very low about 1000 or fewer automobiles a year.

In spite of this low volume, there were not build to same design and these were not exactly
alike because craft techniques inherently produce variations.

The major drawbacks of this type of production were longer lead time due to uniqueness of each
product, inconsistency in quality and higher costs.
2.2

Mass Production

The era of mass production in the nineteenth century can be attributed to the Industrial Revolution
(1770-1800). The effects of mass production were already felt in the USA industry during midnineteenth century, but its true pioneer is Henry Ford (1913) who actually developed the basic traits
of mass production era. Ford initiated a set of firm values and techniques which enabled mass
production. These beliefs heralded the beginning of the twentieth century in the industrial world.
Mass production is characterized with three main features:

Division of labor

Interchangeable parts

Mechanization

Although this interchangeability remained a challenge throughout the nineteenth century, Fords
system of manufacturing became the symbol of industrialization and this system in early 1850
proved itself as the dominant mode of manufacturing. The European method on the other hand
relied more on human skills and less on mechanization or interchangeability. Carrying most of
operations through hand-fitting were common practice in European industry [3].
Model T of Ford Motor Company has been the first product produced in huge quantities with parts
that were interchangeable. Production of the Ford Model T (1908-1927) early in this century is most
famous and one of the most successful examples of mass production. After painstaking attempts,
9

Henry Ford succeeded to manufacture a car with a selling price lower than $400, half of the normal
price of any car at that time. Henry Ford built a network that integrated the full range of operations,
from mining to distribution. Process specialization, innovative use of materials and vertical
integration made it possible to reduce production costs gradually and lower the purchase price of
the Model T. A key element in this network was the moving assembly lines, which became the
symbol of modern mass production. Ford won his bet: the purchase price of the car was reduced to
under $300. Also, with the invention of this moving assembly line, the worker's pace would be
dictated by the machine (Womack).
As firms using mass production increased considerable in size, they faced more complex situations
to handle. The complexities arise due to growth in markets, expansion of facilities and increased
productive capacities. This increased interests in organization which led to scientific management.
Frederick W. Taylor (1865-1915) was its pioneer and chief artisan [2]. Scientific management
enabled systematic organization of work and to make it easier to manage. After long scientific
analyses/experiments, Taylor tried to find the "one best way" to perform any activity. He also
proposed the creation of a production planning department.
The principles of scientific management resulting from Taylor's analyses led to greater division of
tasks and figured out distinction between those who think and those who execute. The human
impact of Taylors can be summed as:
Just as the system of mass production required that products be assembled from interchangeable
parts, Taylor's system rationalized the workplace so that it could be "manned" by interchangeable
workers."
The new flexibility granted management total independence from its workforce, thus leading to
hiring and firing practically at any time. The four main characteristics of mass producers are the
following:

They are mainly concerned with reducing costs by increasing the volume of production
(economies of scale). They consider trade-offs between the cross-functional performance
criteria of quality, time and cost as a necessity.

Innovation is the preferred means of improve

g the production system. These innovations, usually few in number, are the result of large
projects designed and directed by experts and managers.

Direct labor is confined to executing production tasks under the supervision of managers
(design/execution dichotomy).

There is an almost adversarial relationship with suppliers. Suppliers are considered

opportunists and are thus kept at arm's length and are pitted against each other in order to
obtain the best possible deals.

The mechanistic organization structure, discontinuous technological choice and financial-based

performance evaluation are three other significant characteristics of this paradigm.
Mass production is often more rigid and can not respond quickly to handle demand variation that
occurs because of changes in buyer behavior. Mass production have build-in tendency to resist
changes and if any change occur it is very expensive and hence, not economical for short periods.

10

2.3

Lean Production Systems

The concept of Lean production was evolved at Toyota during 1950s. Lean management is proved
to be an applied philosophy that many manufacturing, service and government organizations have
adopted to eliminate waste, enhance productions speed and pushing innovations. The scenario
after World War II was the main force which makes Toyota to be lean. Following are the main
factors which developed this system [3]:

The small market of Japan was demanding a variety of vehicles, ranging right luxury cars
for government officials to fuel efficient mall cars for general public.

Japanese work force was not willing to be treated as variable cost or interchangeable parts
like those at Ford.

Economy of Japan was strived of capital and for foreign exchange; it means it was not
possible to make massive purchase and keeping large inventories.

Unlike rest of the world there were not "guest workers" who can accept substandard
temporary jobs.

Lean production has following basic principle [5]:

Produce things only when they are needed-just in time rather than just in case.

Turn everybody into a quality checker, responsible for correcting errors as they happen.

Defect prevention not fault rectification.

Thinking of a company in terms of a value stream that extends all the way from suppliers to
customers, rather than as isolated products and processes.

Production pull not push with smoothed demand.

Active participation for root-cause problem solving to maximize added value.

Integrating activities form raw material to customer through partnership.

Team-based, flexible work organization with multi-skill workers.

The concept of lean manufacturing is widely discussed in literature and many researchers have
contributed in it ranging from conceptual notes to individual firm case study experiences. This
literature is rich with description of methodologies and philosophy associated with lean production
in various industrial settings. This literature has widely used exploratory or confirmatory analysis
tools to form unidirectional factor matrix [6]. Other approaches are creating index for human
resources practices in lean philosophy [8] [8]. There is general agreement on the basic lean system
components/ enablers i.e. JIT, TPM, TQM and HRM among leading researchers. There are number
of manufacturing practices that are commonly associated with lean production. These practices are
summarized in a table 1 by [9] and reproduced by [9], it gives a good understanding of the lean
concept and associated practices.

11

Lean Practices and their appearance in key references (Adapted from McLachlin).
Lean Practices

Sources
1

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Bottleneck removal (prod.

Smoothing)
Cellular manufacturing

Competitive benchmarking
Continuous improvement
programs
Cross-functional work force

*
*

*
*

Cycle time reductions

Focused factory production

JIT/continuous flow production

Lot size reductions

Maintenance optimization
New process equipment/
technologies

Planning and scheduling

strategies
Preventive maintenance

Process capability measurements

Pull system/Kanban

*
*

Quality management programs

Quick changeover techniques

*
*

Reengineered production process

Safety improvement programs

Self-directed work teams

Total quality management

*
*

(1) Sugimori et al. (1977); Monden (1981); Pegels (1984); (2) Wantuck (1983); (3) Lee and Ebrahimpour (1984); (4)
Suzaki (1985); (5) Finch and Cox (1986); (6) Voss and Robinson (1987); (7) Hay (1988); (8) Bicheno (1989); (9) Chan et
al. (1990); (10) Piper and McLachlin (1990); (11) White (1993); (12) Shingo Prize Guidelines (1996); (13) Sakakibara et
al. (1997); (14) Koufteros et al. (1998); (15) Flynn et al. (1999); (16) White et al. (1999).

Lean manufacturing is successful in the cases like:

There are not so many product options that limit the distinction between products.

The suppliers are situated close the manufacturing facility, such that they can provide
components frequently and in smaller volumes.

12

2.4

Mass Customization

The term mass customization was first anticipated by Alvin Toffler in 1970 in his book Future
Shock. The concept was further refined by Stan Davis in his book Future Perfect.
After this initiation this concept has undergone extensive research work comprising both conceptual
notes and propositions for its implementation at various levels. The conceptual visionary definition
of mass customization expresses it as:
the ability to provide your customer with anything they want, profitably any time they want it,
anywhere they want it and any way they want it[11].
This visionary definition however is of conceptual nature and can not be shaped to deliverable form.
The practical definition should be:
the use of flexible process and organizational structures to reduce varied and often individually
customized products and services at low cost at a standard mass production system[11].
Other definitions of mass customization are [13]:
A proactive approach that anticipated the range of customization and design in into product
families and the production system. Andersson 1997
A general term that refers to the process of combining low/cost efficiencies of mass marketing
(standardization) with the strategic effectiveness of customization (individualization). Kahn and
Huffman 2000
The process of reflecting very specific and varied customers requirement within a high volume
production process without affecting leas time cost or quality. Beaty 1996

Benefits of Mass customization

The benefits of Mass customization can be expressed as [14]:

Improved fit with customers unique needs.

More efficiency due to lower inventory levels throughout the distribution channel.

Ability to raise the praise of a good or service.

Improved ability to analyze opportunities due to continuing dialogue with customers.

Other benefits cited are [15]:

Increased customer satisfaction.

Increased market share.

Increased customer knowledge.

Reduced order response time.

Reduced manufacturing cost.

Increased profit.

How to achieve mass customization:

Certain principles to achieve mass customization are [16]:
13

1. Modularization of product architectures and use of product platforms (reusability,

commonality) following the concept of reusability and a product family design approach.
2. Limitation of customization possibilities reflecting the product family and technological
constraints of the demand of stable processes.
3. Made-to-order approach (values creating activities are performed to a specific extend only
after customers order is places)
4. Modularization of process and stable fulfillment processes.
5. Split of fulfillment system into standardization and customer specific part (decoupling or
postponement point)
6. Use of dedicated information system for configuration, manufacturing planning, order
tracking and relationships management.
The goal of mass customization is to develop such a process in an organization ranging from
people, process organizational structure and people to provide customers exactly what they want.
The approach to achieve this goal of mass customization is expressed in Figure 1 (Adopted from
Selladurai) [17].

Figure 1: Methods to Achieve Mass Customization

Here company uses standardization approach for parts, process product and procurement. Using
this commonality or standardization company attain benefits of economies of scale and reduce
inventories.
The typical requirements for implementations of mass customization lies in there areas [11]:

Time to market (quick responsiveness)

Variety (customization)

Economies of scale (mass efficiency)

In purist of attainment of balance between these there typical requirements, following technical
challenges must be addressed:
14

Maximizing Reusability: Maximizing reusability calls for commonality in design, which lead to
reusable tools, equipment and expertise in manufacturing. This similarity helps to achieve low cost
and high efficiency which make the concept operational.
Product Platform: Product platform provide basis to accommodate customization, managing
variety and leveraging core capabilities. Product platform is based on inputs form design concept,
process capabilities, skills technological trend and competitive direction as well as customer
requirements.
Integrated Product life-cycle: The realization of mass customization requires integration across
product development process and product life-cycle concerns. The product life cycle concerns
include functionality, cost, schedule, reliability, manufacturability, marketability and serviceability.

Figure 2: Design for Mass Customization

A frame work called Design for Mass Customization was developed to explain the concept of mass
customization [11]. This DFMC explain the traditional boundaries of product design to comprehend
larger scope from sales and marketing to distribution and services. Above diagram explain the
conceptual implication of DFMC in terms of a mix of both design scope and product differentiation.
Modularity in Mass Customization
Modularity enables a company to provide mass products which are unique and differentiated.
Modularity is considered an essential attribute to achieve mass customization [18]. Modularity helps
to reduce number of components, yet not sacrificing greater range of end products. It reduces the
delivery time and provides economies of scope as well as volume related economies.
Each customer order consists of some common component or parts and some components which
are special/ unique for that product. These standard or common pats provide modularity which truly
makes the concept of modularity functional [19].

15

Customized
Component
Order

Customized
Component
Design

Customized
Component
Manufacturing

Customer
Order

Assembly

Standard and
Common
Component
Order

Customer

Standard and
Common
Component
Manufacturing

Figure 3: Manufacturing Process of a Customized Product

The framework given below is based on the concept of modularly; it uses the design and process
as a referent point and assigns different types of modularity to various phases of product cycle [20].

Figure 4: Customer Involvement and Modularity in Production Cycle

Another framework proposes four approaches to achieve customization. Company can use
cosmetic approach by changing the packing of product, transparent approach can be used which
changes the product itself. The collaborative approach calls for changing both product and
packaging and adaptive approach is based on customer own power to customize the product
during its use [21].

16

Levels and Approaches of Mass Customization

Stages
Design
Fabrication
Assembly
Additional services
Usage

Approaches
Collaborative, Transparent
Collaborative, Transparent
Collaborative, Transparent
Cosmetic
Adaptive

Types of products
Tailor-made products
Tailor-made products
Modular products
Customized additional
Adaptive products

Another comprehensive framework comprises eight generic level of mass customization ranging
from pure customization (individually designed product) to pure standardization [22].
Generic levels of mass customization
MC Generic Levels

MC Approaches(1)

MC Strategies(2)

8. Design

Collaborative;
transparent

Pure customization

7. Fabrication
6. Assembly

Tailored
customization
Customized
standardization

Stages of MC(3)

Types of
Customization(4)

Modular production

Assembling
standard
components into
unique
configurations
Performing
additional custom
work
Providing additional
services

5. Additional custom
work

Point of delivery
customization

4. Additional services

Customized services;
providing quick
response

3. Package and
distribution
2. Usage

Segmented
standardization

1. Standardization

Pure standardization

Customizing
packaging
Embedded
customization

(1) J. Gilmore, J. Pine 1997; (2) J. Lampel H. Mintzberg 1996; (3) Pine 1993; (4) J. Spira 1996.

Mass customization concept is used successfully for made-to-order product types and in
situations where product family approach is applicable. Modularization approach is proved to be
successful in certain industries. But still, true economies of scale is not fully achieved and its reason
is mainly technical barriers which include slow responsiveness and expensive reconfiguability of
production systems.
2.5

Agile Production System

The concept of Agile Manufacturing was proposed by a group of researchers at Iacocca Institute,
Lehigh University in 1991[23]. The report published as product of research work described various
considerations of manufacturing. The research group involved various senior executives of US
industry and it mainly address the issues faced by US manufactures. It described the emerging
manufacturing trends and proposed Agile Manufacturing as recommendations to US firm to play a
leading role in 21st century. This report includes a detailed view of Agile manufacturing enterprise,
its components infrastructure and operating method. It also describes the competitive foundations
and elements/subsystems for its implementation. This report gained popularity among academic,
industry practitioners and US government authorities. Further research on this concept identified
various flaws in this research, but this report is still acknowledged as pioneer in this field.
17

The driving force behind Agility is the rapidly changing business environment of 21st century.
Twenty first century is characterized as century of uncertainty and change, it outpaced may
companies using traditional ways/approach.
Following are the key elements which are key drivers of uncertainty and change associated with
21st century [25]:
Changing Perception of Products

Merging of good and services

Green and safe products

High value added products

Individual customization

Shorter life cycles

Reconfigurable products to meet changing need

Multi-technology products

Information and knowledge-base products

Substitution of services for goods

Economic and Market

Globalization

Sustainable growth

Emerging markets

Shift of economic power to Asia-pacific region

Diversity of global markets

Niche markets

Customization and customer choice

Increasing competition

Political

Basic human rights

Democratization of world

Peacemaking and disarmament

Relevance of nation states

Re-emergence of local cultural identities

18

Social

Changing value and norms

Changing population mix

Demographics

Labor supply

Growing readiness of ordinary citizens to engage in direct action

Quality of life

Growing disillusionment with materialism, science and technology

Technological

Margining technologies

Potential for substitution

Technology as an enabler for new enterprise practices

Environmentally Friendly Technologies

Environment

Recycling

Remanufacturing

Reducing consumption

Global environment and planetary management

Various researchers has expressed the concept of agility in different ways. It has been defined as
total integration as well as flexibility of manufacturing system, people and organizations [26]. Other
researches have defined it as adaptable system, concurrency and complex whole of IT system [27].
This work is however of academic nature and still there is not such practical example where any
firm has successfully gathered all these specifications practically. In practical, every firm has crafted
its own definition depending upon ground situation as well as available resources. The consensus
is found on at least following two factors while addressing agility [28].
Responding to changes (anticipated and unexpected) in proper ways and due time.
Exploiting changes and taking advantages of changes as opportunities.
The salient features of agility as defined by various researchers can be presented as [29]:

High quality and highly customized products. Goldman et al 1993, Kidd 1994, Booth 1995,
Hilton 1994.

Products and services with high information and value-adding content. Goldman et al 1993,
Goldman et al 1995.

19

Mobilization of core competencies. Goldman et al 1993, Kidd 1994.

Responsiveness to social and environmental issues. Goldman et al 1993, Goldman et al

1995, Kidd 1994.

Synthesis of diverse technologies. Goldman et al 1993, Kidd 1994.

Response to change and uncertainty. Goldman et al 1993, Goldman et al 1995, Pandiarajan

et al. 1994.

Intra-enterprise and inter-enterprise integration. Vastag et al, Kidd 1994, Youssef 1992,
Yusuf, 1996.

Other authors who contributed in developing concept of agility are Brooke 1993, Richards 1996,
Ward 1994, Dove 1996, Kidd 1994, Preiss et al. 1996, and Preiss 1997, Baker 1996. All these
above researchers have contributed to distinguish the Agile manufacturing from other
manufacturing philosophies.
Classification of Agile Manufacturing Literature: Adapted From A. Gunasekaran 1999.
Criteria for
literature
Strategies

Technologies

Systems

People

classification

of Sub-classification

References

Virtual enterprise

[1-9 ]

Supply chain

[10,11,12--14,15-19]

Concurrent engineering

[12,9,17,20-23]

Hardware - tools and equipments

[16,21,24-32]

Information technologies

[33,9,16,28,30,31,34-38]

Design systems

[22,24,39-48]

Production planning and control systems

[7,8,40,47,49]

System integration and database management

[10,7,9,21,34,35, 37,44,49-54]

Knowledge workers

[9,54,55]

Top management
empowerment
Training and education

support

and

employee

[9,18,56,57]
[1,9,42,54,55,57,58]

References.
(1) R.A. Abair; (2) S.K. Gupta; (3) P. Gupta, R. Nagi; (4) J.W. Herrmann; (5) S. Jain; (6) J.J. Mills; (7) L. Song; (8) Y. Tu;
(9) A. Gunasekaran (10) P. Bunce; (11) P.T. Kidd; (12) R. Booth; (13) M.F. McGrath; (14) R.A. Abair; (15) M.J. Tracy;
(16) E.D. Adamides; (17) R.J. Graves; (18) M. Pellew; (19) L.L. Hessney; (20) J.H. Graham; (21) B.P. Erdel; (22) A.
Kusiak; (23) S.S.; (24) M. Hong; (25) J.E. Spencer; (26) S. Ashley; (27) D. Enke, C. Dagli; (28) G.H. Lee; (29) R.G.
Mathieu; (30) F.L. Merat; (31) E.A. Orady; (32) R.D. Quinn; (33) H. Cho, M; (34) P. Bocks; (35) Z.Y. Wang; (36) X. Yang;
(37) J.Y. Jo, Y. Kim; (38) S. Kirk, E. Tebaldi; (39) A. Kusiak; (40) A.C. Sanderson; (41) A. Candadai; (42) C. Forsythe;
(43) S. Iyer, R; (44) M. Jung; (45) D.W. He, A. Kusiak; (46) S. Iyer, R. Nagi; (47) Y. Kim, J.Y. Jo, V.B. ; (48) L. Monplaisir;
(49) S. Lee; (50) A. Candadai; (51) U.G. Gupta; (52) T.B. McMullen; (53) R.D. Quinn; (54) S. Forsythe; (55) F.E;(56) K.M;
(57) C. Forsythe; (58) A. Pinochet.

Agile manufacturing system was developed at USA to help US companies to face the current
market challenges where traditional US mass production strategy is not successful. Agility is
supposed to achieve through virtual factory concepts which is a dynamic consortium of
independent factories that act as one factory toward the customer. Modern IT tools and pervasive
CAD make the product development and manufacturing easy in virtual environment.

20

2.6

Holonic Manufacturing Systems

The term holonic is derived from the word holon, which was introduced by Koestler (1967). The
word holon is a combination from the Greek holos = whole, with the suffix -on which, as in proton or
neutron, suggests a particle or part.
Koestler observed while analyzing hierarchies and stable intermediate forms in living organisms
and social organizations, that although it is easy to identify sub-wholes or parts wholes and
parts do not exist in absolute sense. So, Koestler propose the word holon to describe the hybrid
nature of sub-wholes/parts in real-life systems; holons simultaneously are self-contained wholes to
their subordinated parts, and dependent parts when seen from the other direction. Koestler
described that holons are autonomous self-reliant units; they have a degree of independence and
handle contingencies without asking for instructions from higher level management. Holons, at the
same time, are subject to control from higher authorities [30].
Koestler defines a holarchy as a hierarchy of self-regulating holons which function:

as autonomous wholes in supra-ordination to their parts,

as dependent parts in sub-ordination to controls on higher levels,

in co-ordination with their local environment.

Holonic Manufacturing Systems: Research Project

Holonic manufacturing system evolved in the research work within the framework of Intelligent
Manufacturing Systems (IMS) program. IMS had been a very large research program on
manufacturing. Prof. Yoshikawa from Tokyo University originally proposed it to create
manufacturing science that can meet the needs of the 21st century. IMS was conceived as a tenyear pre-competitive basic research program, supported by the governments of the major
industrialized countries, for their industries and academics to participate. After the IMS initial
feasibility study, research on holonic manufacturing was mainly continued in Japanese domestic
IMS projects and in some nationally funded projects in the rest of the world. K.U. Leuven (the PMA
division) continues its efforts in a nationally funded research project called GOA/HMSConcerted
Research Action on Holonic Manufacturing Systems.
The task of the HMS consortium was to translate the concepts that Koestler proposed into a set of
appropriate/applicable concepts for manufacturing industries. The goal was to attain those benefits
in manufacturing that holonic organization provides to living organisms and societies, i.e., stability
in the face of disturbances, adaptability and flexibility in the face of change, and efficient use of
available resources. During the study, the HMS consortium developed the following list of
definitions to help understand and guide the translation of holonic concepts into a manufacturing
setting [31].
Holon: An autonomous and co-operative building block of a manufacturing system for transforming,
transporting, storing and/or validating information and physical objects. The holon consists of an
information processing part and often a physical processing part. A holon can be part of another
holon.
Autonomy: The capability of an entity to create and control the execution of its own plans and/or
strategies.
Co-operation: A process whereby a set of entities develops mutually acceptable plans and
executes these plans.
21

Holarchy: A system of holons that can co-operate to achieve a goal or objective. The holarchy
defines the basic rules for co-operation of the holons and thereby limits their autonomy.
Holonic manufacturing system: a holarchy that integrates the entire range of manufacturing
activities from order booking through design, production, and marketing to realize the agile
manufacturing enterprise.
Holonic attributes: attributes of an entity that make it a holon. The minimum set is autonomy and
co-cooperativeness.
Literature on holonic manufacturing systems covers research work carried under HMS consortium
[30]. This research covers various aspects of this concept like categories of holon, scheduling for
holons, resources allocation, distributed manufacturing system, shop floor control, and hierarchical
structure [31]. The consortium also applied the concept to process related issues, like assembly
machining, continuous process mobile robotics and sensor integration [32]. Other contributions in
this area are axiomatic framework [35], implantation methods of reconfigurable assembly line [36]
and reusable holonic system [37].
Reference Architecture for Holonic Manufacturing: PROSA
HMS consortium developed a reference architecture which is an abstraction of a generic solution
that provides a set of models, a set of coherent engineering and design principles, and eventually a
set of tools and a methodology used in a specific domain (Wyns, 1996, 1999). This reference
architecture called PROSA was developed at PMA/K.U. Leuven (Production engineering, Machine
design and Automation, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Leuven, Belgium). It is inter-holon
architecture, identifying the kind of holons, their responsibilities, and the structure in which they
interact.
There are three types of basic building blocks in a holonic manufacturing system (HMS): product
holons, resource holons, and order holons. Resource holon contains a physical part, namely a
production resource of the manufacturing system, and an information processing part that controls
the resource. It offers production capacity and functionality to the surrounding holons.

Figure 5: Holonic Manufacturing System

It holds the methods to allocate the production resources, and the knowledge and procedures to
organize, use and control these production resources to drive production. A resource holon is an
abstraction of the production means such as a factory, a shop, machines, furnaces, conveyors,
pipelines, pallets, components, raw materials, tools, tool holders, material storage, personnel,
energy, floor space, etc. In contrast with most traditional shop floor control architectures, the HMS

22

does not separate the manufacturing system from the manufacturing control system. The HMS
comprises both. A physical manufacturing resource is incorporated inside a resource holon.
Product holon holds the process and product knowledge to assure the correct making of the
product with sufficient quality. A product holon contains consistent and up-to-date information on
the product life cycle, user requirements, design, process plans, bill of materials, quality assurance
procedures, etc. As such, it contains the product model of the product type, not the product state
model of one physical product instance being produced. The product holon acts as an information
server to the other holons in the HMS. The product holon comprises functionalities which are
traditionally covered by product design, process planning, and quality assurance.
Order holon represents a task in the manufacturing system. It is responsible for performing the
assigned work correctly and on time. It manages the physical product being produced, the product
state model, and all logistical information processing related to the job. An order holon may
represent customer orders, make-to-stock orders, prototype-making orders, orders to maintain and
repair resources, etc. Often, the order holon can be regarded as the workpiece with a certain
control behavior to manage it to go through the factory, e.g. to negotiate with other parts and
resources to get produced. The order holon performs tasks traditionally assigned to a dispatcher, a
progress monitor, and a short term scheduler.
As shown in Figure 1, these three types of holons exchange knowledge about the manufacturing
system. Product holons and resource holons communicate process knowledge, product holons and
order holons exchange production knowledge, and resource holons and order holons share
process execution knowledge.
Process knowledge contains the information and methods on how to perform a certain process on
a certain resource. It is knowledge about the capabilities of the resource, which processes it can
perform, the relevant process parameters, the process quality, possible outcomes of a process, etc.
Production knowledge represents the information and methods on how to produce a certain product
using certain resources. It is knowledge about the possible sequences of processes to be executed
on the resources, data structures to represent the outcome of the processes, methods to access
information of process plans, etc.
Process execution knowledge contains the information and methods regarding the progress of
executing processes on resources. It is knowledge about how to request the starting of processes
on the resources, making reservations on resources, how to monitor the progress of execution, how
to interrupt a process, the consequences of interrupting a process, suspending and resuming
processes on resources, etc.
Major functional elements and interfaces of a holon are shown in the fig. a holon exchanges
material, information or resources with other holons visa its interfaces and this is done through
negotiation and cooperation [38].

23

Figure 6: Holonic elements and interfaces

A generic system architecture for holonic manufacturing system is shown in the Fig. This
architecture is comprised of three major modules [38]:

Machining feature-based design in HMS.

Agent-base process planning in HMS.

Function block-base control in HMS.

The dynamic data base is accessible and shred by all these modules. Each module here is like a
holon and there functionality is enabled by inter-holon negotiation and cooperation through their
interfaces as well as through interaction with physical holons.

Figure 7: Reference architecture for HMS

24

Control Architecture for Holonic Manufacturing System.

The control architecture for holonic manufacturing system consists of a functional and structural
model. The functional model addresses the primary issues in any manufacturing control system like
scheduling, control and monitoring. Scheduling is further divided into prediction and optimization.
Monitoring is concerned with measurement of performance and feed back generation where as
control enables disturbance handling through decision making [30].

Figure 8: Functional Model for manufacturing Control

Structural model present the required holons for manufacturing control system at three levels [30].

The lowest level holons-order holon and resource holon- co-operate to accomplish the
required work.

The next higher level- online control holon coordinate the activities of orders and
resources.

At the highest level-scheduling holon- cooperate with manufacturing control holon to

achieve global performance optimization and react to handles disturbances.

25

Figure 9: Structural Model for HMS

Holonic manufacturing system is more of a control system. The cooperative control proposed
instead of traditional command-response control system is useful in highly vulnerable situation. It
ensures rapid response and hence used in distributed production systems.
One interesting fact about Agile and Holonic manufacturing system is that both systems are
developed with aim to face the challenge of 21st century. Agile system was developed in USA
whereas Holonic System is developed at Japan and Europe. Both seem to have same purpose or
goal but procedure adopted is different.

2.7

Bionic Manufacturing System

The bionic manufacturing system has been developed under the Biological orientated expression
and it present the manufacturing system based on structures and behaviors as observed in biology.
The concept first proposed by Okino, assumes that manufacturing companies can be build upon
open, autonomous, cooperative and adaptive entities. In biological system cell is the basic unit
which comprised all other parts of a biological system. Cells are basically similar but perform
different function and are capable of multiple operations. In bionic manufacturing system cell is
modeled by the modelons concept and it is composed by other modelon to for a hierarchical
structure. Each modelon comprised static properties and behaviors and they combine with other to
form distinct entities. The notion of DNA inheritance is translated in to manufacturing context by the
properties and behaviors that ate passed intrinsically to other modelons. The notion enzymes in
biological systems translated into manufacturing concern as supervisors who are responsible for
26

functioning and control of system. Supervisors also play an organizational and structural role,
influencing the modelons relations, imposing self division or aggregation to met requirements raised
by the external environment.

Figure 10: Similarity of Biological and Manufacturing Structures

The properties of manufacturing systems drawn on the basis of biological system are shown in the
Figure 10. Units obtain required inputs form the factory floor environment and send then back to
environment after performing certain operations. Manufacturing unites always act like cells as
building blocks to develop a hierarchical structures such as factories, shops or business units. In
these structures each layer in the hierarchy support other layers and is in turn supported by
adjacent layers. When any input/specification is delivered at the top layer, it is passed down layerby-layer to the bottom and hence reaches the specific tasks. Okino proposed parallelism between
biological system and manufacturing systems and put forward modeling concepts and applications.
He proposed that bionic factory will operate with distributed components and it will have limited life.
These components and parts will communicate the decisions with each other. The basic
information about making or assembly of a product reside in that product, this knowledge is shared
to develop schedules of operations of machines. This information represented by a modelon is
communicated with other modelon which represent the required resources and this cooperation of
modelons enables the system to produce the physical parts/products.

27

2.8

Fractal Factory

The fractal factory concept is based on mathematical fractal concept. The fractal factory is an open
system and is consist of independent self-similar units called fractals. This fractal concept is derived
from mathematical theory of chaos, the fractal companies could be composed by small components
or fractal objects which have the capacity to react and adapt quickly to the new environment
changes. A fractal object has the following features [39]:

Self-organized: the fractal objects do not need external intervention to reorganize itself.

Self-similar: one object in a fractal company is similar to other object. In other words, selfsimilar means that each object contains a set of similar components and shares a set of
objectives and visions.

Self-optimized: It means that these fractal objects continuously increase its performance.

The fractal need to be a coherent whole in order to function properly and this is enabled through
participation and coordination among the fractal supported by an inheritance mechanism to ensure
consistency of the goals. Fractals always have a bottom-up structure and build fractal of higher
order. The units at higher levels always assume those responsibilities in the process which can not
be fulfilled in the lower order fractals. This working principle ensures team work among the fractal
and also forces distribution of power and responsibility [40].

Figure 11: Operation of Fractal Entities

The cooperation between factory fractals is characterized by high individual dynamics and
maximum ability to adapt and react to the influences of their respective environment. This ability is
called vitality and is used to record and evaluate those variables internal to the fractals that are
affected by the environment. The information is also used to measure the changes against six
levels of the work environment i.e. cultural, strategic, socio-informal, financial, informational and
technological [40].
28

Other relevant works on Fractal Factory concept consists of concepts like Fractal Manufacturing
Partnership [41] and Agent Based Manufacturing System [42]. Fractal manufacturing partnership
combine logistical attributes of lean production with the strategic configuration of agile network
capabilities. Fractal manufacturing partnership allows complete flexibility in the operations of the
sub-factory within a factory and provides a physical link between the partners.
Fractal manufacturing partnership is designed to combine the logistical attributes of lean production
with the strategic configuration of network capabilities. It proves foundation for rapid response to
changes in production environment. It assumes that manufacturing facility is structured around
network of suppliers, or fractal objects, each completely independent in ownership but collectively
having the ability to respond quickly to production changes. The properly establish fractal
manufacturing partnership brings improvements in efficiency and productivity of both supplier and
manufacturer. To achieve this objective each component with the system must respond to real-time
customer order equipments. The participating suppliers must have the ability to adapt to changes in
production environment.
The complete system in terms of integration of design and manufacturing is shown in the Figure 11.
It shows the various enterprise functions that are yet to achieve fractal integration, but this model
provide basis to set direction of efforts to enable the idea.
The quoted benefits of fractal manufacturing partnership include [41]:

Improved communication with suppliers which lead to accurate information exchange.

Faster engineering changes and improved resolution.

Reduced assembly time and improved productivity.

Reduced inventory and improved quality.

Reduced product development cycles and faster product launch.

Improved responsiveness as a direct result of improved communication and faster product

development.

Improved design of manufacturing as the supplier is directly responsible for assembly.

Shared benefits between OEM and the suppliers due to commonality of goals, mutual
dependency and shared ownership.

Agent Based Fractal Manufacturing System

Agent based fractal manufacturing system as shown in the Figure 12, provide an overview of
system modules which are further comprised of a set of agents.
System can be recognized and handle the unexpected events like machine breakdowns or
switching to produce new parts on changing the customer needs. In such situations fractals
autonomously and dynamically change their structure via the action of agents for the appropriate
working mechanism of the fractals. Model shows the two facility layouts and the corresponding
compositions of fractals before and after the restructuring process.

29

Figure 12: Reorganization of system in FrMS

A fractal consist of five functional modules, the relationship between these modules is shown in the
figure. The function of each module depends upon its application, but its main function remain
consistent throughout the system.

Figure 13: Functional Modules and relationships of a fractal in FrMS

30

Observer: the function of an observer is to monitor the state of the unit, to receive message and
information from outer fractals and to transmit composite information to corresponding fractals.
Analyzer: The function of analyzer is to analyze alternative job profiles with status information to
rate dispatching rules and to simulate analyzed job profiles in real-time. Analyzer finally reports
results to the resolver so that the resolver can use tem to make decision.
Resolver: A resolver plays most critical role in a fractal, generating job profiles, goal-formation
process and decision-making processes. During goal formation processes, resolver may employ a
variety of numerical optimization or heuristic techniques to optimize the fractal goal. Resolver may
execute negotiation, cooperation and coordination among fractals.
Organizer: The function of organizer is to manage the fractal status and fractal addresses,
particularly for dynamic restructuring process. The organizer may use numerical optimization
techniques to find and optimal configuration while reconfiguring fractals. The fractal status is used
to select the best job profile among several alternatives and the fractal address is used to find the
physical address of the fractal on the network.
Reporter: The function of a reporter is to report results from all process in a fractal to others. In the
case of a bottom level controller the fractal is similar to a traditional equipment controller. Therefore,
most of its messages are commands for controlling the hardware.
Fractal factory concept is based heavily on IT. This concept however is similar to the Virtual
Enterprise and its industrials implication can be seen in case of Distributed Production
environments.
Virtual enterprise refers to a group of companies who share cost and skills to enjoy advantages of
a specific business opportunity. It is defined as: The virtual enterprise constitutes groups of people
that work together on a common undertaking, regardless of their physical location, across
enterprises and countries, in real time (synchronously) or deferred time (asynchronously). They are
able to react to changes rapidly, and at low cost.
In case of virtual enterprise production in always distributed, simply we can say virtual enterprise
enables distributed production.

2.9

FinaBox

Term FinaBox is abbreviation of Factory-in-a-Box. The aim of concept FinaBox is to provide mobile
production capacity on demand. It can be described as:
Factory-in-a-boxMobile Production Capacity on Demand demonstrator will provide
solutions for availability and mobility of flexible production capacity.
The key features of FinaBox concept are:

Mobility

Flexibility

Speed

31

Vision for Project

The FinaBox concept as aimed in the project proposal will consist of standardized production
modules that are installed in a container and transported by e.g. a truck or by train. The modules
may then rapidly be combined into production systems that can be reconfigured for new product
and or scaled to handle new volumes. Production capacity may be provided as a mobile and
flexible resource that rapidly can be tailored to fit the needs of a company, at a specified point of
time. The emphasis on mobility in the FinaBox concept presents a future possibility for a
production-on-demand market. Mobility, flexibility and speed are order winner on that market.
Full project proposal of FinaBox is given in Appendix which gives detailed introduction to the
proposed FinaBox concept.

Building Blocks of FinaBox

FinaBox has the following three key elements. This literature survey is aimed to find any link
between past research and FinaBox key components i.e. flexibility, mobility and speed.

2.9.1

Flexibility

Manufacturing flexibility is emerging as a competitive weapon in todays fast pace and rapidly
changing environment. Manufacturing flexibility helps firms to accommodate the customer needs as
well as other unanticipated changes arising from competitive pressures. In order to be successful a
firm must develop new methods and perspectives in time and cost effective manners. Substantial
research has been done regarding manufacturing flexibility which mainly covers the basic concept
of flexibility and classifies different types of flexibility to find practical ways to increase system
flexibility and to measure it.
Flexibility can be defined as,
ability to change or react with little penalty in time, cost or performance (Upton, 1994).
the ability to implement changes in their internal operating environment in a timely manner
at a reasonable cost in response to changes in market conditions (Watt et al., 1993).
"In short run flexibility means the ability to adapt to changing conditions using the existing
set and amount of resources. In the long run, it measures the ability to introduce new
products, new resources and production methods and to integrate these into existing
production system (Olhager, 1993)
the ability to respond effectively to changing circumstances (Gerwin,1987, Gupta, 1991).
the capacity of a manufacturing system to adapt successfully to changing environmental
conditions and process requirement. It refers to the ability of the production system to cope
with the instability induced by the environment (Swamidass, 1988).
Flexibility can be internal or external in nature. Internal flexibility refers to the internal capabilities -what we can do-- whereas external flexibility refers to catch a competitive advantage in particular
environment -- what customers want. Other approach to describe flexibility is in terms of potential
or demonstrated flexibility.

32

Flexibility Dimensions

Machine Flexibility

The number of heterogeneity (variety) of operations a machine can execute without incurring high
transition penalties or large changes in performance outcomes. It is a key variable in shop floor
scheduling and the dual resource constrained job shop. The range element of machine flexibility
can be assessed by the number of different operations a machine can perform and the speed at
which it operates.

Process Flexibility

Process flexibility refers to the ability to produce a given set of part types, each possibly using the
different material in several ways. It shows the ability to change between productions of different
products with minimal delays.

Product Flexibility

The ability to changeover to produce a new set of products very economically and quickly. It refers
to the ability to change the mix of products in current product.

Routing Flexibility

The ability to handle breakdown and to continue producing the given set of part types. It describes
how a part take a variety of alternative paths through the system, visiting various machines during
the manufacturing process and it accommodate changes in machine availability.

Volume Flexibility

Volume flexibility refers to the ability to operate efficiently, effectively and profitably over a range of
volumes. It enables a system to respond quickly and cost effectively to both increase and decrease
in aggregate demand. Major performance outcomes for volume flexibility include production costs,
quality levels and system profitability.

Expansion Flexibility

The capability of building a system and expanding it as needed easily and modularly. It relates to
increase the capacity or capability of the system. It is not limited to the resource availability but
accommodate new machines purchased, new labor force added or new technology implemented.

Operation Flexibility

The ability to interchange the ordering of several operations for each part type. It refers to the
number of products which have alternate sequencing plans and heterogeneity of plans used
without incurring high transition penalties or large change in performance outcomes.

Production Flexibility

The universe of part types that the FMS can produce. Production flexibility often describes holistic
aspects of flexibility.

Material Flexibility

Flexibility of a material handling system is its ability to move different part types efficiently for proper
positioning and processing thorough the manufacturing facility it serves. It is actually the ability to
transport work pieces between various processing centers over multiple paths economically and
effectively. Improper martial handing subsystem can limit the functions of a flexible manufacturing
33

system. The paths or routes can act as bottleneck that starves downstream stations if processing
times are too long.

Program Flexibility

The ability of the system to run virtually unattended for a long enough period.

Market Flexibility

The ease with which the manufacturing system can adapt to a changing market environment.

Figure 14 shows a framework based on these eleven types of flexibilities. This framework presents
sequence of order in which these flexibility types support each other and construct methodology for
its application. The component flexibilities contribute to those of the system, which in turn influence
the aggregate flexibilities. The manufacturing strategy on the other hand dictates the extent of the
system flexibilities that in their turn dictate the component flexibilities required.

Figure 14: Flexibility: a framework for classification

Another extensive literature survey on flexibility have produced hierarchical relationship between
ten flexibility types. This study help to understand the concept in holistic fashion by allocating the
flexibility dimensions to different tires. This hierarchical relations shows how some flexibility
dimension support the development of other flexibility dimensions. Flexibility dimensions at the
lower tires are those which serve as building block for the flexibility dimensions in the upper tiers.
The lower tier dimensions are more tactical and dimensions at the upper tires tend to be more
strategic. The cone shape of this model exhibit flexibility as capacity and when an organization
progress in the area of flexibility its capabilities in relation to flexibility increases.

34

Figure 15: Hierarchical framework for flexibility

Flexibility -- A Consolidated Framework

A framework was proposed to illustrate the concept and assist the operations mangers to
understand it. The framework was originally proposed by Gerwin and later amended by Beach. The
framework shows the impact of any change in environment on manufacturing system.

35

Figure 16: A Consolidated framework for Flexibility

Identifying and Measuring Flexibility

One objective behind classification of research work on flexibility has always been to measure or
quantify the various flexibility dimensions. The research work on flexibility can be categorized as
either qualitative or quantitative.
Qualitative research on flexibility addresses the issues in general terms, focusing on concepts such
as those related to process technology and business strategy. This work include studies to classify
flexibility types, exploring relation between flexibility and productivity, proposing different production
frameworks and formulating strategies for increasing flexibility.
Quantitative research on flexibility deals with the specific manufacturing issues and is more of
operational nature. Examples of the quantitative research include development of mathematical
36

models and measures of flexibility to support other connected flexibility types. These models
include path analytical modeling, Petri net modeling, financial analysis model, value based model,
contingency models and empirical data analysis models.
Flexibility Measurement for FinaBox
FinaBox will be attached to any company to provide additional production capacity. This concept
reveals that in order to integrate FinaBox to any company, the company must have Volume,
Expansion and Material handling flexibility. Expansion flexibility is aimed to allow a company to
expand production progressively instead of investing in purchase of new machinery. This heavy
investment is often so difficult when demand pattern is not clear or it fluctuates at short intervals.
The FinaBox on the other hand have machine flexibility to provide required production capacity and
Labor Flexibility to handle different operations requiring different type of expertise and skills.

Parent
Company

FinaBox

Volume Flexibility
Expansion Flexibility
Material Handling Flex

Machine Flexibility
Labour Flexibility

Figure 17: Flexibility Measurement

Parent company refers to the company which needs additional capacity and is using the FinaBox to
acquire this additional capacity required. This company before hiring FinaBox will measure the
volume flexibility.
Volume Flexibility
Volume flexibility refers to the ability to operate effectively and profitably over a range of volume.
Greater volume flexibility is attained by having lower operating fixed cost, lower variable cost or
higher unit price. Increasing unit price is not possible as prices are often market driven.

Measurement: The first step in measuring the volume flexibility is to determine the range over
which the system remains profitable. It means we have to determine volume for which system run
profitably. To determine this range we have to set the lower limit where volume is the breakeven
point and an upper limit which is the maximum capacity of the total system. Breakeven point for
production of a single product is defined as the quantity for which Average total cost is equal to the
marginal revenue, this is the point where profit is zero:
37

It can be written as

VF =

VR
Cmax

Vr =
Cmax=
a=
Nb=

= Cmax - aNB
Cmax

Profitability Range
Maximum capacity of system
No. of capacity unit required per part produced
lower limit of profitable production range

Traditionally break even occurs when operating fixed income is zero, it mean company is neither
making profit nor suffering loss. The basis equation Sales- V. Cost - F. Cost= Operating Income
can be written as,
PuN CuN- F = Operating Income.
Where,
Pu= Unit price
Cu= Unit variable cost
N= No of units
F= Fixed operating cost
Also for N = Nb
PuNb CuNbF= 0
Therefore breakeven point of a single product is:
F
NB =

PU CU

Where, b= Pu Cu is contribution margin for the product. Volume flexibility for the product is then,
VF = 1

aF
bCmax

This equation assumes that feasible production lies within the available capacity. The number of
units required to breakeven (f/b) is less then the available production to the part (Cmax/a) so f/B=
Cmax/a.
Since most of the manufacturer has multi-product portfolio, more details about this can be found in
ref. which describe two products and a single capacity constraint.
Expansion Flexibility
Expansion flexibility can be described as ability to add capacity to existing system. It refers to the
ease with which its capacity can be increased when desired. Traditional means of increasing
expansion flexibility include using multi purpose machinery, reusable material handling system and
infrastructural changes to sustain growth and change.

38

FinaBox as per its definition of Mobile Production on Demand, could be a mean of expansion
flexibility. The decisions to hire FinaBox however need more comparisons with conventional means
to expansion flexibility. There must be some measure of expansion flexibility that help top
management to make decision either to invest in conventional system or to hire FinaBox. The
traditional tools for such measure include calculating the total capital outlay on additional capacity.
When marginal investment is less, expansion flexibility is greater. One tool available for this
measurement is based on Expected Monetary values.
Difference between the EMV of conventional option and EMV of flexible option give the expansion
flexibility measure.
EF= EMVf EMVc.
This model is based on comparison of two systems. The disadvantage of this model is, it do not
evaluate the system stand alone i.e. it does not describe the system based on its own merits. In
the original model, comparison is made on EMV of conventional option EMVc and EMV of Flexible
option EMVf.
Here this flexible option is amended as FinaBox and EMVf stand for EMVf. The biggest advantage
of this model is that it is measured in currency terms, so it can be presented for evaluation and
decision making. Further details can be studied in Reference.
2.9.2

Mobility

The term Mobility was first introduced by Upton under his work summarizing the flexibility
dimension and flexibility elements. He defined flexibility elements as the characteristics which are
required and to what degree they are needed or are already availability. Flexibility elements are
basically ways of being flexible for a given dimension and time period. Upton elaborated there
elements of flexibility namely; Range, Mobility and Uniformity. Here mobility shows the ease with
which system moves form one state to other. Mobility can be measured in terms of cost of change
or time taken.
This literature survey on manufacturing flexibility shows that concept Mobility was used only by
Upton and in quite different means than that of its meaning in FinaBox. So this concept of Mobility
in FinaBox is unique and presented for the first time.
Mobility in FinaBox refers to the transportability of production unit (module). FinaBox is supposed to
be designed as a Mobile Platform to be moved anywhere. The definition of Mobility here, is
however associated only with this FinaBox feature of being portable or transportable.
2.9.3

Speed

Detailed literature survey on manufacturing flexibility shows that the concept Speed in FinaBox is
totally new and unique. The term was used once by Upton to describe the speed of machinery in its
usual meaning of velocity.
Speed in FinaBox refers to time taken to make the module fully operational i.e. it include set-up
time. Other than this usual definition of speed FinaBox will actually reduce the time to market.
Time to market refers to the time when customer trigger or place an order till customer receives the
product. Lead time to bring a new product into line is very short. Another term used is speed-tomarket which refers to speed up the engineering as well as delivery time [47].

39

FINABOXFORMULATION OF CONCEPTUAL MODELS

Understanding about different types of manufacturing system is vital in order to draw a working
model of FinaBox.
3.1

Types of Manufacturing Systems

There are the three types of manufacturing system:

1. Dedicated Manufacturing Lines DML
Dedicate manufacturing lines also called transfer lines are comprised of fixed automation and
produce the core products at large volumes. Typical each line is dedicated to produce a single part
at high production rate and when demand is high, cost per part is relatively low. Such systems are
useful and beneficial as long as demand exceeds supply and when they operate at full capacity.
Mass production is good example of such systems.

2. Flexible Manufacturing Systems

Flexible manufacturing system is comprised of such system which can produce a large variety of
products at varying volume.
Flexible manufacturing system is often constitute computer
numerically controlled CNC machines and other programmable automation. Throughput of FMS is
lower than DML and cost per unit is often high because of high equipment cost and low throughput.
Initial set up cost for FMS is also higher and production capacity is low.
Flexible manufacturing is often popular in lean manufacturing systems
3. Reconfigurable Manufacturing System
Reconfigurable manufacturing system can be described as:
A reconfigurable manufacturing system is designed at the outset for rapid change in
structure, as well as in hardware and software components, in order to quickly adjust
production capacity and functionality with a part family in response to sudden changes in
market or in regulatory requirement.
Reconfigurable manufacturing system is new approach to accommodate market changes and it
combines the high through put of DML and flexibility of FMS. It enables production system to react
to changes quickly and efficiently. RMS enables system scalability in response to market demand
and adaptability of complete system/machine to new/modified products. Architectural structure may
be changed at system level (e.g. adding new machines) and at machine level (changing machine
hardware and other control software.
Reconfigurable systems are applied in lean and mass production systems.
3.2

FinaBox--System Integration and Control Architecture

FinaBox is a step ahead Reconfigurable Manufacturing System. All the benefits claimed for RMS
are not fully achieved. One reason is that in RMS, most of efforts are made for the reconfiguablity

40

of machines. FinaBox in its essence, aim to reconfigure whole manufacturing system - from
machines/ equipments to process layouts.
Control Architectures
An architecture is always a description of a system or its subsystem and it allows one to present a
complex system in a simple structure. Drafting an architecture deals with specification of
components, their interfaces, intersection and constraints. This specification of a system which is
result of a design process provide basis for further design and implementation activity. A well
defined architecture plays vital role in re-design of a system. Both for production control system and
for products, it is advantageous to use as many parts of existing system or product design as
possible. At the time of reengineering, architectural model of system allows one to pinpoint and
discuss the areas requiring major change and to integrate the new specification to the existing
model.
Control Architecture Background.
Rapid advancement in computing and communication technology brought new opportunities in
design of control architecture. The growth in technology and extremely fragile manufacturing
environments enabled evolutionary growth in this area.
Figure below shows the evolution of control architectures, it clearly shows an increase in autonomy
and reduction of master-slave relationships.

Figure 18: Different control architectures

41

Early control system use centralized approach, but with advances in manufacturing sciences led
decision makers to consider other option while drafting control architectures. Following is brief
discussion on various control architectures.
Hierarchy
Hierarchical architecture is characterized with usage of control level and contains several control
modules arranged in pyramidal structure. The levels have specific purpose and function. The
activities of the subordinate level are dictated by the supervisor level and control decisions are
operated top-down.
Heterarchy
Heterarchical control structure is comprised of distributed autonomous entities that communicate
with other entities without the master/salve relationship found in hierarchical architecture. The main
idea of heterarchichal control architecture is to get full local autonomy and use co-operative
approach for global decision making. Supervisory decision making is located locally at the point of
information gathering and not at any central location.
Modules
The concept of modules is used in several disciplines. One essential property of a module is that its
interfaces are precisely defined and a clear distinction is made between the input interface and
output interface. The input interface contains all specification of other modules that must be known
to design, validate and operate the module. The output interface contains all specification of the
module itself that are available to other modules. Modules in system architecture have the following
properties.
1. Modules have a clear and recognizable function.
2. Modules have explicitly defined interfaces, with clear distinction between input and output.
3. Modules can be designed independently, without knowledge of external specification unless
explicitly stated in the input interface.
4. A module can be validated and tested as a stand alone unit.
5. A module can be integrated with other modules without further testing as long as the
interfaces match.
6. A module can be operated (controlled independently without knowledge of specifications
and state of environment except for the input interface.
7. A module can be exchanged when interfaces remain unchanged.

Theoretically there are two ways to integrate a module:

Parallel Module Integration

In parallel module integration all entities are at the same level. Since there is no restriction between
them so when new job enters the system, it can be processed by any suitable module. In case of
parallel integration, system becomes more reliable but often it is more expensive.

42

Sequential Module Integration

A typical sequential integration exists when a job needs more than one process. Such integration is
extremely important in manufacturing because multiple process manufacturing is much more
common than single process manufacturing.

There can be many possibilities to use such integration to enhance flexibility of overall system.
First: Group technology can be applied to determine the product family that can be manufactured
by the given process sequence.
Second: Some station can be rendered idle so that same module is able to process a greater
variety of products.
3.3

FinaBox Integration Architecture

Case 1: FinaBox as Complete Production Unit

FinaBox as a stand alone production module/entity can be integrated to existing production facility.
FinaBox as complete production unit is used in the cases shown in Figure 21, under Market led
Reasons and Manufacturing led Reasons.
Normal production system layout

43

FinaBox as complete production unit

Case 2: FinaBox Used for One/Few Operations

If FinaBox is not producing complete product i.e. this module is used for one or few operations,
then its integration can be viewed as other machines in complete production process. It can be
used in parallel to any operation in the process, this may be the case when company wants to
balance line by removing bottleneck at any operation or replace any machine/set of machines
because of maintenance, or service expressed as Machine Downtime in Figure 21.

To handle the factors Variability of Outputs and Workforce Variability FinaBox integration will
have the following layout.

Mass customization is the term used frequently to provide the customized products. System should
be capable to handle variability and switch to new products at almost zero setup cost.
3.4

Modular Production- Literature References

The reason to use the concept of modularity in production systems is to increase the
responsiveness and flexibility of operations. Although, most of the research in this field doesnt use
the term Modularity but they aim to develop the capabilities to integrate, interchange and
44

reconfigure the production systems. Examples for the development of modular production system
include the following [48]:

Modular, distributed Equipment Development

Modular control system Development

Modular team based development

Enterprise modularity

A conceptual model for modular manufacturing unit development is shown in Fig 19 [48].

Figure 19: A Modular Manufacturing Unit

Figure above shows the core components required to operate such a system. Critical factor for the
success is the coordination of all the equipment, control/decision processing and human factor
involved.
Modular manufacturing system enables to manufacture good at extreme local bases to the market
where they are intend to sell. It makes savings on transportation and distribution cost and reduces
overall production-to-market lead-time. Other advantages of modular facilities quoted are [49]:
1. It enables to design and construct via stepwise growth.
2. Modular design enables to develop multilevel facilities by coupling the modes.
3. It makes both expansion and integration of process horizontally as well as vertically.
4. It reduces the time to market.
5. It provides standardization that helps to copy and transfer successful plants and processes
globally.
6. Factories piece-by-piece is the term used to describe the shifting the complete production
system in the form of pieced modules.
45

There is only comprehensive theoretical descriptive model of modular production system. This
module is conspired of four classes, process machine primitives, motion units, modular fixtures and
configurable control systems [50].
Process Machine Primitives

These are the principal material processing subsystem that operate upon and change the state of
material. For many processes, such as pressing, injection mounding and drilling, the modules are
functionally similar to existing process machinery. However, they now confirm to precise,
predefined, performance, dimensional and control standards.

Modular Actuators Elements

These are for the provision of motion tasks and perform two central roles:
1. In association with modular tooling and jigging, MAEs are used to build simple material and
components transfer systems.
2. When appropriate PMPs do not exist, MAE is used with modular tooling a jigging to form the
basis of new special propose process machinery-. For example
Modular Tooling and Jigging

Tooling and jigging hardware for tailoring PMP and MAEs units to perform specific factions such as
those defined above.
Configurable Control Systems

These provide the communication network for programming, commanding and synchronizing the
various MPS subsystems.
This model is good attempt to formulate a basic action-plan for functioning of modular production
system. This model however, has limited scope as it portrays the traditional metal component
production technique/procedure. Still a more general frame work for modular production system is
lacking in literature.
All literature discusses the issue on machine level or process level and NOT on system level.

3.5

FinaBoxConceptual Models

Environmental uncertainty and variability in output are two main reasons that force companies to be
flexible and operate according to varying demands. Both uncertainty and variability are a function of
change and it can be categorized as planned or unplanned change. The unplanned changes are
most difficult to handle and occur independently of an organizations determination. Planned
changes often happen as a result of the organization conscious managerial decision and provide
considerable time for planning and execution. Unplanned changes often require flexibility and
influencing factors is turbulent environment with changing customer demands. Summing up we can
say all these changes require variability of outputs of a manufacturing system.

46

3.5.1

Scenarios for Adoption

FinaBox in general provide solution to handle variability in outputs. There are various factors that
generate need to use FinaBox. These factors can be broadly divided into two categories; market
related and Manufacturing related.

Scenarios for FinaBox Adoption

Market led Reasons

Manufacturing led Reasons

Other Strategic Reasons

Demand Variability

Machine Downtime

Need for Customization

Products Shorter Life

Cycles

Variability of Inputs

Avoid Outsourcing

Shorter Life of Technology

Workforce Variability

Get control of
Subassembly

Factors casiudn need for FinaBoc Reproduced from sami karim.

Increased Product Range

Shorter Delivery Time

Figure 20: Scenarios for FinaBox Adoption

Figure 21: Possible situation for FinaBox adoption

47

Figure below shows the situation when a company has leased FinaBox. The company can lease in
order to meet the fluctuation in demand which otherwise need heavy investment.

FinaBox Conceptual Model: Renting/Leasing FinaBox

Manufacturer

FinaBox Provider

Customer

Product Design
Marketing
Quality
Standards

Machine
Selection
Process layout
Labor force
Quality
Assurance

Produced Nearby
Increased
Customization
Rapid Response

Figure 22: FinaBox as leased production capacity

The model below shows the scenario when company need at-the-spot production. This can be
under circumstances of contract manufacturing or when immediate/emergency delivery is a
competitive must.

FinaBox Conceptual Model: at-the-spot Production

Product Develop

Manufacturing

Customer

Product Design
Product
selection
Marketing
attributes

Machine
Selection
Process layout
Labor force
Quality
Assurance

Produced Nearby
Increased
Customization
Rapid Response

Figure 23: FinaBox used to produce close to customer

48

Rapid configuration and flexibility is the feature of FinaBox which help to manufacture customized
products.

FinaBox Conceptual Model: Customized Production

Product Develop

Manufacturing

Customer

Product Design
Product
selection
Marketing
attributes

Machine
Selection
Process layout
Labor force
Quality
Assurance

Produced Nearby
Increased
Customization
Rapid Response

Figure 24: FinaBox used for Customized products

3.5.2

Realization of Concept

FinaBox concept can be realized now because of a paradigm shift from mass production to readily
available production capacity anywhere called FinaBox.
Following figure shows a shift from capital intensive environment to intelligence intensive
environment.

Capital Intensive Env.

Dedicated Lines
Fixed Automation
Mass Inventories

Intellegence Intensive Env.

Intelligent Machines
Intelligent Decision Making
Intelligent Work Force

Figure 25: Shifts in overall

49

Another reason of this paradigm shift is state of technology. Every invention in manufacturing
supporting technology contributed toward pushing up the whole manufacturing paradigm. Below
diagram shows this journey of manufacturing sector.

Mobility
Modularity

Mfg. Technology

Intellegent
Robot, CBR
Flex. Machin
Fixtures
CAD, CAM,
Concr. Eng.
CAD, CAM,
MRP
JIT, TQM,
CNC
Moving
Assembly L.

FinaBox

Mass
Customization

Agile & Holonic

Manufacturing

Lean
Manufacturing
Mass Production

Time

Figure 26: Journey of Manufacturing Sector

50

Figure below describe the paradigm shift in competitive advantage factors scenario. Under mass
customization the most effective factor to compete was cost. Competitive factors under lean system
are cost as well as quality. In the next stage under agile manufacturing delivery reliability was
added to cost and quality. Mass production further added product variety to the existing factors.
The perceived competitive factors under FinaBox (Mobile production capacity on demand) are cost,
quality, delivery reliability, product variety and mobility of production system. It means now a
company can add this factor mobility as a competitive advantage to win orders in market place.

Mass Customization

Agile Manufacturing

Lean Production

Mass Production

Mobility

Competative Advantage Factors

Manufacturing System

FinaBox

Variety

Reliability

Quality

Cost

Figure 27: Competitive factors for 21st century

51

FINABOX INDUSTRIAL DEMONSTRATORS

This chapter covers the description of all three FinaBox demonstrators. There demonstrators are
good example of usability of the concept. All demonstrators are practical solution for a particular
scenario and provide real business case for the concept.
4.1

Pharmadule Emtunga AB

Pharmadule Emtunga AB is the world leading supplier of advanced modular production facilities for
the pharmaceutical and biotech industries and living quarters for the oil and gas industry.
Pharmadule Emtungas production concept is based on building and outfitting individual modules
according to a standardized and industrialized production process and then assembling the
modules into complete facilities that are fully adapted to the customers specific needs. The key
here is that modular concept enables a more optimal manufacturing process, giving the customer
shorter delivery times, higher reliability and better cost control.
The modular concept enables Pharmadule Emtunga to offer significantly shorter delivery times than
with conventional construction. A modular facility can be extended step-by-step to meet growing
markets or changing demands. Initial investment in production can be kept to a minimum until the
market is proven. If market situation changes, the whole plant or parts of it can be relocated to
another site. A Pharmadule Emtunga facility can be built and rebuilt to accommodate any layout.
The modular concept also offers greater potential to meet customer requirements in terms of
flexibility. The customer also benefits because less work needs to be done at the final construction
site and a new facility can be built or an existing one expanded with no major production
disruptions.
The FinaBox module at Pharmadule Emtunga consists of equipment for; pipe cutting, joint
preparation, automated welding equipment, tools for pipe fixturing and material handling. At
present, Pharmadule Emtunga is outsourcing this pipe welding process to sub-contractors and this
process is fully manual. Pharmadule Emtungas vision for FinaBox includes:

Combine or reconfigure FinaBox for new product or for varying volumes.

Pre-fabrication close to final assembly.

Transport out to production site or within workshop.

Can be leased out.

PHEM
Module

FinaBox

Store
Pipe
Cutting

Joint
Preparation

Welding

Quality
Control

Assembly

Figure 28: FinaBox Demonstrator at Pharmadule

52

The FinaBox key performance indicators can be described as:

Flexibility

Handle changes in production volume

Handle pipe diameter of 25 - 250 mm

Handle pipe thickness of 2 -10 mm

Handle pipe length up to 6 meter

Handle different material qualities, Carbon A106B

Mobility

Module can be speedily carried from work shop to workplace

It can be placed in 20 feet container for easy transportation on a truck

It can be re-located within the production facilities by using a fork lift/truck

Material choice will enable repair/ maintenance at different places globally

Speed

Set up time (arrival till operation starts) will be maximum one day including testing

Lower cost through short lead time

Shorter time for change over between pipe diameter, material quality and welding method.
This increases the speed of operations.

Technical Challenges/Goals

Reduce lead time by 30%

Known techniques applied in a new package

Increased efficiency reduces cost by at least 30%

Major changes in technique or procedure can be summarized as:

Existing Technology/
Method
Manual Cutting
Angle grinder

Required
Technique/Equipment
Semi-automatic pipe cutter.
(George Fischer RA

Joint Preparation

Manual beveling
Angle grinder

Semi-automatic pipe bevel cut.

(George Fischer RA)

Welding

Manual Welding

Equipment for orbital welding.

Quality Control

5 % of the welds are x-rayed.

No change

Assembly

Manual assembly be bolting or

welding.

Manual assembly be bolting or

welding.

Operation
Pipe Cutting

53

4.2

Bombardier Transportation

FinaBox in case of bombardier will consist of assembly of one part of propulsion system called High
Voltage Box. At present this component is produced in Sweden. The aim to develop the FinaBox at
bombardier is kind of customer compulsion. Bombardier had received a big order for trains and
customer want Bombardier to build trains at that country. This particular scenario is called Contract
Manufacturing. Bombardier has two alternatives solution, one is to make a new factory there and
other is to develop a mobile factory using the FinaBox concept. Building a new factory will need
huge investment and may be of no use after completion of order. FinaBox will be kind of movable
asset featuring capable to disassemble and relocate.
Key FinaBox feature for this demonstrator are:
Flexibility

Quick ramp-up

Standardized assembly and testing

Handle different volumes

Customization close to customer

Effective and standardized

Mobility

Easy to move

Can be moved globally

Cab be moved within X days (X= time taken)

Speed

Time from reaching at location till production start should be one day

Unique Feature of this Demonstrator

They unique feature of this FinaBox module is that it will be fully manual. This is main difference
between this module and other modules at ABB and Pharmadule.
4.3

ABB Robotics

The FinaBox demonstrator for ABB robotics is comprised of fully automatic cell to assemble robot
control cabinets. Overall goals are to:

Reduce led time for robot operation.

Reduce production cost.

Decrease manual work FinaBox by at least 30% compared with today's fully manual
assembly.

Achieve partial automated assembly that gives an increased quality and a robust production
process.
54

The key features of FinaBox for this demonstrator are:

Flexibility

Handle changes in parameters

Handle changes in design

The cell can also handle more different sizes of control cabinets and several different sizes
that can come in future. So all equipment is capable to handle big differences in cabinet
sizes.

The production cycle in the cell can expand when the volume is low.

Mobility
The cell will be built on a number of work stations that can be fixed on a standard container. It
means that the cell can be moved any where fastly. Footholds on the floor will enable easy
connectivity of electrical and data cabals. This module will be capable to be moved anywhere within
the production premises. Right now different methods are under investigation to add this feature to
this module.
Speed

Short setup time

Short reconfiguration time

Short changeover time for new variants

It is aimed to make a wider part of this cell general in order to provide good basis to configure it
for various operations. The idea during the whole preliminary study of this demonstrator has been
that there will exist a general robotic cell with possibility to organize for different functions.
The system with plug-and-play capabilities will accommodate new additions and will become
extremely flexible and general. Advance calibration and simulation tools enable to handle variations
in both quantity and size of components to be assembled.
Most recent vision technique is used for material handling in the cell. With the aid of vision robot
search the material and then place it at optimized position. This system is extremely quick and easy
as compared with manual, where worker has to search for changing components. The technology
is however relatively costly and its consequences are still difficult to judge. Another technique used
along with vision is force measurement technique in order to get best results. The robot has a force
detector in its gripping kit and knows the best way to grip and drop component safely at required
place.
The most important feature of this demonstrator is extreme flexibility and mobility. A mobile robot
cell will be totally new thing in manufacturing science knowledge.
Difference between demonstrators:

FinaBox demonstrator at Bombardier is fully manual.

FinaBox demonstrator at Pharmadule is Semi Automated.

55

FinaBox demonstrator at ABB Robotics is fully automated.

All three demonstrators are in development stage at the moment. However, FinaBox Demonstrator
at ABB has undergone test stage. But still this Mobility attribute in under investigation. Pre-study
for other two demonstrates is completed and they will be operational next year.

5
5.1

CONCLUSION
Achieving objective of thesis

The objective of this thesis was:

to investigate the major novel conceptual feature of FinaBox concept. A detailed survey of existing
production systems is aimed to find a link, positive or negative, between FinaBox and ongoing
industrial practices.
Five research questions were proposed to achieve this objective. The research questions are
answered by doing a literature review of certain areas named, manufacturing systems,
manufacturing flexibility and modularity in manufacturing systems. The research questions and
corresponding conclusions are presented here under:

RQ1. How to compete with production in Sweden in comparison with cheap labor
countries in Asia and Eastern Europe?
The manufacturing industry is undergoing rapid change, and survival in this turbulent environment
requires ability to adapt and respond to this change quickly. Swedish industry need to undergo a
transformation process featured with great risks along with great opportunities. This transformation
is required both at corporate strategy level and at operation level. One strong point to obsess is that
cost is not ONLY competitive advantage. There could be other factors that give a competitive
advantage. Having Mobility as a competitive factor in production systems could be one strong
attribute to compete. This matrix of competitive factors discovered is shows in Figure 27.

RQ2. What existing production system theories contain ideas of flexibility, mobility
and speed?
Mass production system is rigid and lack flexibility, mobility and speed. Lean system aim to
eliminate waste, reduce changeover time etc., this system is relatively flexible but do not contains
concept of mobility and speed. Agile and Holonic manufacturing system aim to address the
challenges of 21st century characterized with shorter product life cycles and delivery reliability.
These systems are flexible than lean systems, contain concept of time to market but lack mobility.
Mass customization is not a separate system like mass production or lean production systems;
rather it is a concept that is enabled by combining attributes from lean, holonic and agile systems.
We can say that mass customization is attained through agility in systems and having holonic
controls. Mass customization is flexible (in terms of product variety), but it do not considerably
reduce response time and do not contain idea of mobility.

RQ3. What are major novel conceptual features of FinaBox concept?

56

The single most important innovate feature of FinaBox is Mobility. FinaBox enables to make the
production system mobile within the company or produce anywhere, most importantly close to
customer - at-the-spot production. The other important features, flexibility and speed together help
to compete in the market place with the advantages like:

Immediate delivery

Customization

Short lead time

Short ramp up time

Figure 21 shows possible situations where FinaBox can be used.

RQ4. What are technical components to implement FinaBox concept?
This question can not answered by naming some techniques/equipments. The components
(software and hardware) in general, are modular and reconfigurable and these features are key
parameters while designing any demonstrator. Software in case of ABB robotics cell will be highly
flexible enabling various add-ins. Since all these three demonstrates analyzed are from different
industries with different products. Again difference in level of automation mean there are different
components for execution of each demonstrator.
5.2

Further Research

There exists need for analysis of work already done under FinaBox; this may help to
understand the research direction. Combining it with goal of project can generate feedback
and directive measures for further research.

Developing knowledge databases and reusing the experience is vital enabler of this
concept. It can be searched out that how case-base reasoning can integrate with simulation
tools to design the robust production system on one hand and enable online monitoring and
maintenance on the other hand.

It can be investigated how to develop one knowledge database having standardized

interface and distributed front-ends to provide this monitoring/maintenance services for
different FinaBoxes.

There exists room to investigate how to collaborate two or more knowledge databases to
effectively share and use the experience based on cases for rapid configuration and
immediate system ramp-up.

There exist a strong need to draw a generalized framework to see how this concept can be
used in different industries and what its limitations are.

57

REFERENCES

[1] Jackson, M., Is it possible to compete with internal production, Department of Innovation,
design and product, Mlardalen University, Eskilstuna.
[2] Hounshell, D.A., 1984, From the American System to Mass Production, The Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore, MD
[3] Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., Roos, D., 1990, The Machine That Changed the World, Rawson
Associates, New York, NY
[4] Duguay, Claude R., Landry, S., Pasin, F., 1997, From Mass production to flexible/agile
production, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 17 No. 12
[5] Miller, P. 1996, Lean and its limits, Economist, Vol. 340 Issue 7983
[6] Cua, K.O., A theory of integrated manufacturing practices relating total quality management,
just-in-time and total productive maintenance, University of Minnesota, Publication No. AAT
9975753.
[7] Osterman, P., 1994, How common is workplace transformation and who adopts it? Industrial
and Labor Relation Review Vol.47 No.2
[8] MacDuffie, J.P., 1995, human resource bundles and manufacturing performance:
organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and
Labor Relation Review vol.48 No.2
[9] McLachlin, R., 1997, Management initiatives and just-in-time manufacturing, Journal of
Operations Management Vol.15 No.4
[10] Shah, R., Ward, P.T., Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles and performance.
Journal of Operations Management Vol. 21
[11] Jiao, J., Ma, Q., Tseng M.M., Toward high valueadded products and services: mass
customization and beyond, Technovation Vol. 23
[12] Hart, C.W.L., Mass customization conceptual underpinnings opportunities and limits,
International Journal of Service Industry Management. Vol. 6 No.2
[13] Comstock, M., PhD Dissertation, 2004, Linkping Institute of Technology, Linkping, Sweden.
[14] Berman B., 2002, Should your firm adopt a mass customization strategy? Business Horizons,
Vol. 45 No.4
[15] hlstrm, P., Westbrook R., 1999, Implication of mass customization for operations
management, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19 N. 3
[16] Piller, F.T., 2002, Mass customization: four approaches to deliver customized products and
services with mass production efficiency, Engineering Management Conference, IEEE
International Vol.2
[17] Selladurai, R.S., 2004, Mass customization in operations management: oxymoron or reality?
Omega-The International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 32
[18] Pine, B.J. II, 1993, Mass Customization: The New Frontier in Business Competition.

58

[19] Wu, N., Qian, Y., Yu, Z., 2004, Manufacturing Process Reengineering for Mass
Customization by Using Flexibility Analysis, IEEE International Conference on Systems, man
and Cybernetics.
[20] Duray, R., Ward, P.T., Milligan, G. W., Berry, W.L., 2000, Approaches to mass customization:
configuration and empirical validation, Journal of Operations Management. Vol.18
[21] Gilmore, J.H., Pine, B.J., 1997, The Four Faces of Mass Customization, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 75
[22] Silveira, G.D., Borenstein, D., Fogliatto, F.S., 2001, Mass Customization: Literature review
and research directions, International Journal of Production Economies. Vol. 72
[23] Iaccoca Institute, 1991, 21st Century Manufacturing Enterprise Strategy, An Industry-led view.
Volume 1, Lehigh University, Bethlehem PA.
[24] Kidd, P.T., 1995, Agile Manufacturing, Forging New Frontiers, Addison-Wesley, London
[25] Retrieved September 11, 2005 from http://www.cheshenhenbvuryt.com/
[26] Montgomery, J.C., Levine L.O., 1996, The Transition to Agile Manufacturing - Staying Flexible
for Competitive Advantage, ASQC, Milwaukee, WI
[27] Booth, R., 1996, Agile Manufacturing, Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2
[28] Sharifi, H., Zhang, Z., 2001, Agile manufacturing in Practice: Application of a methodology,
International Journal of Production Management, Vol. 21
[29] Yusuf, Y.Y., Sarhadi, M., Gunasekaran, A., 1999 Agile manufacturing: The drivers, concepts
and attributes, International Journal of Production Economies Vol. 62
[30] Bongaerts, L., 1998, Integration of Scheduling and Control in Holonic Manufacturing Systems
PhD Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
[31] Wyns, J., 1998, Reference Architecture for Holonic Manufacturing Systems, PhD
Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
[32] Gou, L., Luh, P.B., Kyoya, Y., 1998, Holonic Manufacturing Scheduling: architecture,
cooperation mechanism and implementation, Computer in Industry, vol. 37
[33] Valckenaers, P., Brussel, H.V., Wyns, J., 1998, Designing Holonic Manufacturing Systems,
Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 14 pp.
[34] Brussel, H.V., Wyns, J., Valckenaers, P., Bongaerts, L., Peeters, P., 1998, Reference
architecture for holonic manufacturing systems: PROSA, Computers in Industry, Vol. 37
[35] Franco, G.N., Batocchio, A., 2001, Towards an Axiomatic Framework to Support the Design
of Holonic Systems, IEEE Proceedings.
[36] Xuemei, H., Yuechao, W., Dalong, T., Mingyang, Z., Fanli, M., 2004, Theoretical analyze and
implementation method of reconfigurable assembly line based on agent an holon, Proceeding
of 5th World Congress in intelligent Control and Automation, Hangzhou, China.
[37] Shu, S., Wilkes, M., Kawamura, K., 2000, Development of Reusable, Configurable,
Extensible Holonic Manufacturing Systems, IEEE Proceedings.
[38] Wang, L., 2001, Integrated design to-to-control approach for holonic manufacturing systems,
Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing. Vol. 17
59

[39] Leitao, P., Resativeo, F., 1999, A framework for Distributed Manufacturing Applications,
Polytechnic Institute of Braganca, Portugal.
[40] Tharumarajah, A., Wells, A.J., Nemes, L., 1998, Comparison of Emerging Manufacturing
Concepts, IEEE Proceedings.
[41] Noori, H., Lee, W.B., 2000, Fractal manufacturing partnership: exploring and new form of
strategic alliance between OEMs and suppliers, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 13
No.5
[42] Ryu, K., Son, Y., Jung, M., 2003, Modeling and specification of dynamic agents in fractal
manufacturing systems, Computer in Industry, Vol. 52
[43] Beach R., Muhlemann, Price D.H.R., Paterson, A., Sharp, 2000, A review of manufacturing
flexibility, European journal of operations research 122
[44] Pels, H.J., Wortmann, J.C., Zwegers, A.J.R., 1997, Flexibility in manufacturing: An
Architectural point of view, Computers in Industry, Vol. 33
[45] Koste, L.L., Malhotra, M.K., 1999, A theoretical framework for analyzing dimensions of
manufacturing flexibility, Journal of operations management, Vol. 18
[46] Parker R.P, Wirth A., 1999, Manufacturing flexibility: measures and relationship, European
Journal of Operation Research. Vol. 118
[47] Vesey, J.T. 1991, The New Competitors: Thinking in Terms of 'Speed-to-Market'
Manufacturing Systems, 9, 6, ABI/INFORM Global.
[48] McFarlane, D, 1998, Modular Distributed Manufacturing Systems and the Implications for
Integrated Control, IEE Colloquium on Choosing the Right Control Structure, London, UK
[49] Savage
C.,
Modular
http://www.pharmadule.com/

facilities.

Retrieved

November

15,

2005,

from

[50] Rogers, G.G., Bottachi L., 1997, Modular production system: a new manufacturing paradigm,
Journal of Intelligent manufacturing Vol. 8

60

APPENDIX
FinaBox Project Plan
SSF Project no.
V04.26
ProViking Board decision date.
2005-02-09

SSF Dossier no.

A3 02:131
ProViking
Lars Frenning
08-505 816 79

1. Collaborating parties
The following parties have agreed to work together according to this project plan:
Chalmers University of Technology and Jnkping University (the Dynamo project)
Linkping University (the FlexAA project)
Mlardalen University (the ExAct project)
Chalmers University of Technology and Fraunhofer Chalmers Centre (the Robust Design &
Variation Simulation project)
ABB Robotics (ATMA/RO) Demonstrator 1
Pharmadule Emtunga AB Demonstrator 2
The Swedish Foundry Association Demonstrator 3
Flexlink Demonstrator 4
Volvo Car Corporation (VCC)
Volvo Construction Equipment Components
The following parties have agreed to participate in the industrial reference group to the project:

SAAB Aerostructure, Linkping

Bombardier Transportation, Vsters
Eskilstuna Fabriksfrening, Eskilstuna
Proton Engineering, Anders Krahner AB, Skillingaryd
Svensk Industriautomation AB, SVIA, Jnkping
Portsystem 2000, Habo
Moddrr AB, Bankeryd
Kongsberg Automotive AB, Mullsj
Kinnarps AB, Jnkping
ABB Corporate Research

2. Problem scope
The globalization and the increasing challenge from low-wage competitors highlight the need for Swedish industries to
enhance their ability to develop and manufacture products competitively. Successful production is increasingly difficult
to ensure. It requires development of efficient manufacturing systems, as well as continuous development and
improvement of production methods, technology, and techniques.
Furthermore, meeting customer demands requires a high degree of flexibility, low-cost/low-volume manufacturing
skills, and an ability to offer short delivery times. Handling a large product scope requires flexibility within operations,
as well as the ability to reconfigure the system for new products and variable volumes.
The national Swedish ambition to increase the number and sizes of Swedish industries is counteracted by lack of
production capacity available on demand and at any location. Also companies, without in-house production capacity,
have few options if they need resources for pilot production. Instead, manufacturing orders are often placed in low-wage
countries, e.g. China or Eastern Europe.
The aim of the concept Factory-in-a-box - Mobile Production Capacity on Demand (FinaBox) is:

Factory-in-a-box demonstrator will provide solutions for availability and

mobility of flexible production capacity!
61

The key features of the FinaBox concept will therefore be:

Mobility
Flexibility
Speed
3. Vision
The FinaBox concept will consist of standardized production modules that are installed in a container and transported by
e.g. a truck or by train. The modules may then rapidly be combined into production systems that can be reconfigured for
a new product and/or scaled to handle new volumes. Production capacity may be provided as a mobile and flexible
resource that rapidly can be tailored to fit the needs of a company, at a specific point of time. The emphasis on mobility
in the FinaBox concept is important in Sweden, where geographic limitations are a reality. The FinaBox concept
presents a future possibility for a production-on-demand market. Mobility, flexibility, and speed are order-winners on
that market.
A scenario of the FinaBox concept is:
Several ProViking FinaBox containers are transported on Swedish-built trucks to Swedish manufacturing
industries, needing cost-efficient production capacity, as an alternative to outsourcing to other countries. The
previous day, the FinaBoxes had been reconfigured by the newly established FinaBox reconfiguration company.
The configuration was based on CAD-information and geometric simulation results transferred on the national
high-capacity Ethernet backbone. Previous experiences from the product development, the machine distributor,
and the maintenance experts have already been contained in an experience database integrated in the FinaBox
module. When the FinaBox arrives at the company, it is located conveniently for the task for which it has been
configured. Calibration of the equipment (internally and externally) is performed. The operating personnel have
already downloaded the experience based information, provided with the FinaBox, and trained manual and semiautomated operations as well as maintenance tasks. Production can now be initiated.
Three examples of customer segments for the FinaBox are:
Company A has a new product design, but without production capacity. The options for the company are to
invest in new production capacity or to outsource production. If the company chooses to outsource, chances are
that production will be placed abroad and that the company may lose control of their product.
Company B has a peek in their production, which exceeds their capacity to produce. The company may need to
outsource production or make large investments.
Company C is a large enterprise, which wants to have full control of the manufacturing of a sub-system, provided
by a supplier. Company C can help a supplier by providing a FinaBox module to improve quality or handle
volume variation.
All three cases would be possible scenarios for FinaBox production units.
It should be possible to place a FinaBox close to product development or customers within the distribution chain. A
likely scenario is that the FinaBox can be rented or leased from production specialists, i.e. a type of functional sales of
production capacity. This would improve the preconditions for larger degree of production, and hence product
development, to remain in Sweden.
4. General requirements for the FinaBox
There are a number of requirements for the FinaBox concept in order to realize the key features of Mobility, Flexibility,
and Speed. These requirements are:

Modules that are easy to transport to the production site as well as to move them at the site, e.g. external and
internal mobility.

Ability to dynamically adapt the degree of automation and flexibility to human interaction.

Reconfigurability in order to meet changing demand and automatic/semi-automatic configuration of modules

and system is prerequisites for scalability for changing production volumes and for fast ramp up of the
production.

Reusability of system components and modules together with simple and fast simulation and programming makes
conditions for faster and cheaper system solutions and system robustness towards disturbances, especially during rampup of production. The reusability also makes it possible to achieve a profitable reduction of production capacity. This is
62

as important as the ability to increase the capacity. The reusability makes it possible to reuse the equipment in other
applications in the same or in other companies. Many companies hesitate to invest in new production
capacity/equipment because of the financial risk involved in the case of future declining production volumes.
There are a number of attributes that are needed in order to fulfil the requirements. These could be of a technological or
methodological nature. Some of the more important ones are:

Standardized production modules of compact size based on both mechanical equipment and software, which
enable system and module reconfiguability.

Modularity, which facilitates quick responsiveness and adaptation to changing conditions, by allowing
reconfiguring of solutions and resources.

Standardized hard- and software interfaces and integrated highly flexible production equipment, integrated
metrology, and sensor-based calibration, combined with sensor integrated robot/equipment control are
prerequisites for flexibility/agility, fast reconfiguration, and with efficient maintenance (e.g. remote CBM).

Generic programming features with Process-oriented Operation Planning of new production and non-nominal
path planning based on simulated system and parts variation is a must for fast reconfiguration and fast ramp-up.

The combination of structured support methods for determining system configuration/level of automation and
virtual module modelling/simulation makes it possible to design the best system for a specific application very
quickly.

In order to attain internal mobility i.e. air cushions can be used for fast and smooth transports of modules or for
the entire FinaBox.

To enable reuse of experience and knowledge and to enhance reliability and disturbance handling, an integrated
knowledge-based tool is used for reconfiguration of modules, combined with case-based experience/knowledge
databases and web access for manual operations to the machines and other equipment of a system.

The use of standardized production modules provides autonomy and reusability. A FinaBox installed at a company
should be integrated with the companys existing technical production capacity and its present workforce. The intention
is to balance automation and manual labour in the FinaBox modules. Thus, each configuration will include e.g.
automation requirements, operator staff requirements, configuration simulation modules, and case-based
experience/knowledge databases.
5. Goals
The goal of the project is to develop and demonstrate a Factory-in-a-box - Mobile Production Capacity on Demand. This
will be achieved by development of four fully operative demonstrators realized and tested in industrial environments in
close collaboration with industry and participating parties.
The FinaBox demonstrators 1-4 will also be computer modelled and simulated in order to demonstrate the requirements
needed and the benefits of the FinaBox concept. The model and simulation will be based on the generic applications;
material handling, assembly, and welding chosen by the industry partners of the project.
Mobility, flexibility, and especially speed emphasize the need to improve communication between product- and
production development in order to enable reuse of experience and knowledge. One goal within the FinaBox project is
to investigate and improve Collaborative Product Development (CPD) and the interaction and collaboration between
product and process development.
The demonstrators will promote and encourage collaboration and experience sharing between industry and academia
through the applications of the new knowledge resulting from the existing ProViking projects. The demonstrators will
inspire and exemplify the possibilities of mobile production modules. SME:s may use the FinaBox demonstrators within
production networks, including other collaborating companies and organizations. Large companies may choose the
FinaBox concept to build internal flexible and reconfigurable production systems. FinaBox containers may even be
placed at freight terminals, producing just-in-time components for immediate distribution.
6. Project description

63

The FinaBox project will mainly use resources from the five research groups and from four existing ProViking projects
and focus on direct development of four demonstrators, where each application is a real business case in the partner
companies.
6.1 Demonstrator 1 ABB Robotics
ABB is leading in robot-based automation with more than 100.000 robots supplied worldwide. To ensure applicability of
the FinaBox project, ABB Robotics will provide a real case.
The first example of a FinaBox module will be demonstrated within ABB Robotics production system an automatic
production module to build robot components. The overall goal of this pilot demonstrator is to develop an automatic
production module, which assembles robot controller cabinets, meeting the overall FinaBox requirements of flexibility,
speed, and mobility. The demonstrator will be developed in parallel with an ongoing product development project of a
new controller: IRC5.
The FinaBox module at ABB Robotics will consist of a robot, equipment and tools. Material and components, supplied
to the module from stock, will be oriented and then automatically assembled completely or partly by flexible automatic
equipment. There will be communication with the internal ERP-system: SAP/R3 regarding e.g. planning and material
supply. The FinaBox will possibly use vision and the internally developed robot configurator, Pickmaster, to handle
supply of components as they are delivered un-oriented in standard pallets.

FinaBox requirements flexibility: In order to assemble different variants of cabinets with short set-up time it
is necessary to have flexible equipment and fixtures. There will be a need of reconfiguring the module and
resources, e.g. configuring the robot online to a customer specific product while still having a robust and
efficient manufacturing. The optimal level of automation will be investigated in the project.

FinaBox requirements speed: Short set-up time is vital for the success of this module. The programming of
the operations should be fast, which will demand reuse of experience. The FinaBox module will enable a
structured production requirement process and a support for design of future cabinet variants. A standard
FinaBox module will also enable virtual system configuration and module modelling and simulation.

FinaBox requirements mobility: The FinaBox module will have to be designed as a Mobile Platform to be
moved anywhere within ABB Robotics production system. Possibly also moved to a supplier or another
production site in Bryne, Norway. The equipment should easily be mounted and reconfigured on i.e. a
standardized rigid base plate with flexible fixation points.

The demonstrator will be developed in cooperation between participating universities, ABB, and external resources. The
demonstrator will be realized and tested in industrial environments within ABB Robotics production system.
6.2 Demonstrator 2 Pharmadule Emtunga
Pharmadule Emtunga AB (PHEM) is the world-leading supplier of advanced modular production facilities for the
pharmaceutical/biotech industries, and also for the oil and gas industry. Industrial know-how, project management,
engineering and validation skills, as well as manufacturing capabilities of PHEM reach back as far as three decades. To
ensure applicability of the FinaBox project, PHEM will provide a real case.
The second example of a FinaBox module will be demonstrated within PHEM and is an automatic welding module for
utility pipes, also including the joint preparation. The overall goal of this demonstrator is an automatic welding module,
which can weld utility pipes (diameter of 30-250 mm) at different locations within the production system of PHEM,
meeting the overall FinaBox requirements of flexibility, speed, and mobility.
The FinaBox module at Pharmadule will consist of a welding robot, material handling unit, welding equipment and
tools. The welding can be done at any manufacturing site at PHEM, at a supplier, or at site. Pipes will be manually
supplied to the module, oriented in some fixture with the FinaBox module in the middle. The steps in this application
are: supply of pipes, diameter control, joint preparation, positioning, welding, control and distribution of welded pipes.
The handling of pipes as well as welding will be completely or partly done by a robot. The pipes used have different
dimensions as well as material quality from stainless steel to ordinary steel. However, demonstrator 2 will be focused on
ordinary steel.
FinaBox requirements flexibility: In order to weld different variants of pipes as well as conducting different
joint preparations with short set-up time it is necessary to have flexible equipment and fixtures. There will be a
need of reconfiguring the module and resources, e.g. configuring the robot online still having a robust and
efficient manufacturing. The optimal level of automation will be investigated in the project. Different
64

machining operations in the module are drilling, joint preparation, and cutting. Pipes will have different
dimensions in terms of diameter and thickness.

FinaBox requirements speed: There is a need to quickly reconfigure the module without long set-up time.
Operations should be started as soon as possible after movement within the manufacturing system or transport
to site. The FinaBox module will reduce the welding time compared to todays manual process. With increased
automation, quality will be improved and the disturbance time will decrease.

FinaBox requirements mobility: The FinaBox module will have to be designed on a Mobile Platform to be
moved anywhere within the production system, to a supplier or to site. The equipment should easily be
mounted and reconfigured on standardized rigid base plates with flexible fixation points. The FinaBox module
should be moveable by a truck specifying the need of a standardized container.

The demonstrator will be developed in cooperation between participating universities and industry. The demonstrator
will be realized and tested in industrial environments within Pharmadules production system.
6.3 Demonstrator 3 The Swedish Foundry Association
The Foundry Association is the Swedish casting industry's technology, trade and training institute. The Association
conducts or coordinates much of the joint research and development in the casting field in Sweden. The Association has
approximately 110 member companies, which together account for about 99% of the castings produced in Sweden. In
addition, the Association counts some 50 suppliers to the casting industry and casting buyers amongst its members. To
ensure applicability of the FinaBox project, a third example of a FinaBox module will be demonstrated within Swedish
foundry industry in cooperation with the Swedish Foundry Association.
To maintain its competitiveness a foundry must meet increasing demands for efficient production and a good working
environment. Production technology and the working environment are two closely related areas. The Swedish high- and
low-pressure die casting industry is showing stable, long-term growth, although there is some threat from cheap
production in low-cost countries. It is becoming difficult to recruit competent personnel and critical success factors are
high degree of automation, shorter lead times due to integration of IT during design, tooling, preparation and quality
control.
The third FinaBox demonstrator is an automatic material handling and material removal/surface improvement module.
The overall goal of this demonstrator is to combine automatically handling with deburring/grinding of casting
components still meeting the overall FinaBox requirements of flexibility, speed, and mobility.
The FinaBox module will consist of a robot, material handling unit, vision system and deburring/cutting/grinding tools.
Cutting with laser will be investigated which means answering questions about e.g. possible cutting thickness, cutting
speed, and necessary working environment using laser technology. Components will be picked unoriented from a pallet
and cut/grinded using CAD geometrys of components and tools. The steps in this application are: 1) pick castings out of
random packed pallets or directly from casting equipment 2) cut off runners and risers plus any heavy flash using e.g.
laser 3) grind casting to remove any flash and sharp edges 4) place casting into pallet for manual inspection.
FinaBox requirements flexibility: In order to handle different components with short set-up time it is
necessary to have flexible equipment and fixtures. There will be a need of reconfiguring the module and
resources, e.g. configuring the robot online still having a robust and efficient manufacturing. The optimal level
of automation will be investigated in the project. Different machining operations in the module are deburring,
grinding, and cutting. Components will have different dimensions.

FinaBox requirements speed: There is a need to quickly reconfigure the module without long set-up time. The
FinaBox module will reduce the handling and material removal time compared to todays manual process. With
the right level of automation, quality will be improved and the disturbance time will decrease.

FinaBox requirements mobility: The FinaBox module will have to be designed on a Mobile Platform to be
moved anywhere within the production system, or to another foundry company. The equipment should easily
be mounted and reconfigured on standardized rigid base plates with flexible fixation points. The FinaBox
module should be moveable by a truck.

The demonstrator will be developed in cooperation between participating universities and industry. The demonstrator
will be realized and tested in industrial environments.
6.4 Demonstrator 4 Flexlink
FlexLink is a leading supplier to the manufacturing and assembly industry across the globe. FlexLinks focus is
automation of production flow within the following processes: Assembly - Filling - Machining - Packaging. FlexLink
65

will, in this project, use their Dynamic Assembly System (DAS) concept in order to demonstrate the principles in the
Finabox-project - Flexibility, Speed and Mobility - in a real customer case.

FinaBox requirements flexibility: Different variants of products with short set-up time require flexible
equipment and fixtures. There will be a need of reconfiguring the module and resources online to a customer
specific product while still having a robust and efficient manufacturing. The optimal level of automation will be
investigated in the project.

FinaBox requirements speed: Short set-up time is vital for the success. The programming should be fast,
which will demand reuse of experience.

FinaBox requirements mobility: The FinaBox module will have to be designed as a Mobile Platform to be
moved anywhere and reused for a new customer in a case of leasing.

The Dynamic Assembly System (DAS) concept is designed for stepwise automation from an initial manual work phase
to fully automated work processes, in order to follow the lifecycle of the product. Lambda robot cells are used for the
automated work processes. DAS executes kitting, assembly, inspection, test, repair and packaging. A DAS installation is
composed from a range of standard plug-and-play modules, each one with built-in controls and single point interfaces.
The plug-and play design of the modules gives the flexibility to reconfigure, extend and decrease the size and capacity
of the system, when production volumes change.
The open platform design gives the opportunity to integrate a variety of work processes. The MES software is easily
reconfigured accordingly. Changeover from one configuration to the other can be done within a few hours. Smart
pallets (RFID) provide for decentralized data transmission. The pallets come in 15 sizes to suit each individual
application.
The Manufacturing Execution System (MES) is a unique software platform that covers all information logistics required
in a flexible production process. This is built on standard modules, which together cover all information logistics and
functions required in the production process:

Dynamic ERP connection

Line flow control
Tracking and tracing
Feeding and buffer control
Statistics and reporting
Order execution
Operator information
Automation cell integration
Quality control

Even though a production line can be built up stepwise (according to e.g. increase of volume) in traditional turn-key
projects, other possible commercial conditions will be evaluated such as leasing, pay-per-produced-unit, etc.
demonstrating a type of functional sales of production capacity. The demonstrator will be developed in cooperation
between participating universities and industry. The demonstrator will be realized and tested in industrial environments.
7. Enablers
The FinaBox demonstrators will be accomplished by teaming the resources and knowledge of four running ProViking
projects: ExAct, DYNAMO, Flexible and Accurate Automation, and Robust Design & Variation Simulation.
Knowledge will also be supplied from the other research groups and industrial partners in the project as e.g. the
Wingquist Laboratory/Fraunhofer Chalmers Centre. This project forms a unique combination of flexible and accurate
manufacturing technology, concepts for strategic development of automation, and tools for intelligent reuse of
experience, knowledge, and information.
7.1 Contribution from the ROMUS research group and the DYNAMO project
The contribution of the DYNAMO project is to provide the FinaBox concept with tools for design, measurement,
visualization, and management of dynamic levels of automation (LoA). An automation strategy will be determined for
each pilot demonstrator, proposing how to achieve the right level of automation for each specific life-cycle situation of
the production module by utilizing LoA-variation. The goal is to increase robustness during multiple stages of the
module (such as start-up, ramp-up, and operation) by varying automation level of tasks related to operations, transfer,
66

testing, materials handling, and supervision when necessary. One important prerequisite to achieve this is to be able to
measure and visualize LoA.
LoA describes the relationship between human and machine in terms of function/task allocation, and should be set
within a pre-defined span between 0 (manual) and 1 (full automation) for each task. For each demonstrator,
requirements should be specified for how much the automation level should be possible to vary. It means that
requirements on technology, IT-systems, and human skills are necessary. Creating robustness is made during design and
reconfiguration where most parameters are set, and LoA could, therefore, be utilized as a design variable.
By implementing the research results from the ongoing Dynamo project in the FinaBox demonstrators, it will be
possible to illustrate the potential of controlled dynamic automation level for both product and production practitioners.
It will also establish necessary preconditions to make mobile production capacity on demand possible. Further research
is necessary to determine e.g. LoA interfaces between modules, task allocation for the specific application of each
demonstrator during relevant life-cycle phases, and possible adaptation of general automation strategies for mobile
production capacity. Complexity and risks during start-up and running-in will, for example, be more controllable and
less time will be spent on standstill and expert error recovery, increasing the overall manufacturing efficiency as a result.
A reduction of the not automated work tasks could also lead to improved work satisfaction for the operators.
Besides the specific project contributions, the Dynamo project will also give access to a research group of 15 senior
researchers and PhD students in the field of Robust Production (www.romus.se) with broad competence within
production development, e.g. production systems, design and evaluation, maintenance, disturbance handling, human
factors, automation, lean production, information tasks, and learning strategies. Access will also be given to about 15
industrial partner companies via the Romus research group.
7.2 Contribution from the division of Assembly Technology/Production Systems, Linkpings universitet, of the Flexible
and Accurate Automation (FlexAA) project
The FlexAA contributions concentrate on technical realization of the FinaBox concept and demonstrators. The main
research question for the FlexAA project is how to make the production module/cell accurate and flexible enough to
both fulfil product quality requirements in an assembly- or light-machining cell, and to do this rapidly and effortless.
The FlexAA project is contributing on both the Operation Planning level as well as on the hardware level. FlexAA will
be a further development of the existing Adfast demonstrator that already has a lot of the features important for the
FinaBox demonstrator. Adfast is an airframe assembly application that consists of a highly flexible mobile modular
assembly cell.
On the Operation planning level, process-oriented Operation Planning and 3D-CAD, simulation software, will shorten
and simplify path planning on a robot-oriented abstraction level, and processes on a task-oriented abstraction level. By
using generic robot programming in the execution of the process at hand, in combination with embedded system
controller over standard TCP/IP networks, the sequence of operation on the factory floor with robots and operators, will
be quickly implemented. This will shorten lead-time in ramp-up, and simplify changes and changeovers throughout the
manufacturing processes. This is one of the most important enabling technologies that FinaBox will be based upon.
On the hardware level, production modules will be integrated into mobile platforms. Equipment will be easily mounted
and reconfigured on standardized rigid base plates with flexible fixation points. This constitutes the FinaBox containers
that can easily be moved by a truck and/or forklift. New technology solutions will be developed by integrating existing
robot and metrology systems to induce the capability of robots. Metrology systems already investigated in the FlexAA
project are Laser-tracking technology, Photogrammetry, Indoor-GPS systems and combinations of these. This has
already been proven to provide accuracy enough for aerospace quality requirements in the aerospace, low- to mediumvolume production scenario. Part of FlexAA is to bring sensor-integrated robotics further to real-time performance.
Existing experience from partners in the FlexAA project, using 6DOF flexible tooling modules that do not require
conventional calibration will be used in the FinaBox project. This approach is based on building assembly fixtures that
are configured and reconfigured by the robot that also perform the assembly- and lightweight machining operation. By
using standardized interfaces on product CAD-data and tooling modules, modularity enables easy design in CAD, and
fast ramp-up in the physical preparation, prior to shipping the FinaBox cell to its production site. The idea of using
6DOF flexible tooling as building blocks for the FinaBox cell, in combination with metrology, is one of the enablers for
avoiding time consuming iterations between the nominal CAD product data and the physical product and FinaBox
production system. An important part of the project is to bridge the gap between the virtual and physical world. It must
be easier, cheaper and faster to go from a virtual version of the FinaBox-system to a physical system in full production.
The metrology and sensor integrated robot control, developed in the FlexAA project, will be improved to enable fast
ramp-up of new production. Its flexibility will be increased when applied in the FinaBox-concept. A new solution for
67

low-cost Flexible Metrology is under investigation, as we need to reduce cost and maintain accuracy in Robot
Positioning for fast start-up, ramp-up of production and in order to become flexible for low- and medium-volume
production scenarios. Positions of movable equipment must be easy to measure by automatic means and quick
calibration methods are to be developed. Furthermore, there will be no-need-to-stop production when calibrating in high
volume scenarios. This will enable real-time Robot Control and Fixture Calibration within one system.
7.3 Contribution from the Mlardalen university research group of the ExAct project
Experience is one of the most valuable assets in manufacturing industry, both during design and development of
products and manufacturing systems. During continuous development and improvement of production methods,
technology and techniques to achieve quality and production capacity together with cost reductions experience is
important. A key issue for the FinaBox project is flexible, efficient and quick configuration and production ramp up,
easy to maintain and adjust if requirements change on product or input parts specification change. Experience is
essential, and if all experience related to a box is stored and can be reused for similar production task. The value of the
box increases by offering more flexibility, faster and more reliable configuration and production. Valuable experiences
to reuse are: designs and configurations, fault reports, diagnoses and solutions, quality improvements, cost reductions,
production increase actions, and software components used in producing a specific product.
Also subparts of the production process are seen as experience components. If similar products are produced, the
programming of the operations may become the task of composing previous successfully sub-parts into a complete
program. Experience and knowledge is spatial and only relevant in specific contexts. A designer designing a specific
part of the production process will have access to relevant experience and previous solution to the same or similar
problems that may be reused after some manual or automatic adaptation. Parts of the software components also have
learning capability, which will improve their performance. Finally, experience collected in other FinaBoxes can be
reused by any FinaBox (standards and remote facilities will be a part of the FinaBox concept).
All properties are parts and subprojects of the ExAct project, developed in more generic form for production industry.
This is a complex reality, where many compromises have to be made. Some of the projects have to deal extensively with
how to integrate with, and change, a large and often inflexible production process in order to preserve the valuable
features of the subprojects. In the FinaBox, the context and environment is controllable and limited. The resources will
be used to produce a number of fully functional FinaBox-systems. This will convince industry of the advantage and
motivate them to invest in modifications, enabling the vision of the ExAct project (flexible, learning and experience
sharing semiautomatic and automatic tools and systems continuously improving production, quality, and cost
reductions).
7.4 Contribution from Wingquist Laboratory/Fraunhofer Chalmers Centre and the Robust Design & Variation
Simulation project
Robust design and variation simulation are important quality assurance activities in the product realization process.
Geometrical variation, originating from individual manufacturing and assembly processes, often propagates and
accumulates during production, resulting in non-nominal products and production equipment. Geometrical quality
problems are often discovered during pre-production or when the product is getting ready for market introduction. A
change in the product or production concept at this stage often results in huge costs for product and/or production
changes, market delays, and bad publicity. Therefore, more and more efforts are made in early concept phases to
virtually verify product and production concepts with respect to geometrical variation. These efforts can be used as a
natural base for non-nominal path planning to meet future demands on accuracy and throughput.
A long term vision within the field of production technology is the virtual factory, with high level of accuracy regarding
realism and functionality. Early programming, simulation, verification, and visualization of virtual production
equipment make it possible to reduce the ramp up time in the real factory. Despite that modern industries use virtual
prototypes to replace physical prototypes, visualize assembly processes and program industrial robots off-line, the full
potential of the virtual factory is still not reached. A major limitation is programming time. Most programming of
motions and paths for robots and equipment is still generated manually, since the existing support for automatic path
planning and load balancing is very limited. Another limitation is the geometrical accuracy between the virtual model
and the physical reality. Today, all virtual models used for robot and assembly simulation and verification are nominal.
However, in the real world, all equipment, parts and subassemblies are inflicted by geometrical variation, often resulting
in conflicts and on-line adjustments of off-line generated paths.
Increased demands on ramp-up time, flexibility and plant throughput require robot paths to be generated and verified
with respect to both robot precision and assembly tolerances. Therefore, the goal is to create knowledge, simulation tools
and working procedures that will enable non-nominal path planning for rigid bodies and industrial robots. The project
integrates two basic disciplines that have never been combined before, variation simulation and automatic path planning.
Non-nominal path simulation and verification in concept phases reduces cycle time as well as need for physical
68

verification meets demand on flexibility and speed by avoiding unnecessary tight tolerance, design changes and on-line
adjustment of robot programs. Automatic non-nominal path-planning supports the FinaBox-vision of mobility and
reconfigurability by allowing for fast robot program updates on site.
8. Research within the FinaBox-project
The FinaBox project needs to answer a number of different scientific research questions in combination with succeeding
with practical industrial development in order to build functional FinaBox modules that demonstrates the overall key
features of Mobility, Flexibility, and Speed. The FinaBox concept is built on research results and generated knowledge
within the ongoing ProViking research projects, described in chapter 7, in this project plan.
Regarding practical industrial development to build functional FinaBox modules, the aim is to utilize as much proven
technologies as possible and to integrate the technologies into successful demonstrators. It could be commercially
available technologies as well as technologies developed in other (ProViking) research projects. However, in many cases
these technologies need to be adapted, further developed, and integrated in order to suit the FinaBox demonstrators, thus
demanding more research.
Examples of research questions that will be addressed within the FinaBox-project are:

How to develop and validate a support tool for rapid conceptual design and configuration of flexible production
systems the FinaBox

How can dynamic levels of automation (LoA) be managed and controlled during the life cycle of different
FinaBox production situations to achieve high flexibility and robustness?

How do dynamic LoA affect flexibility, speed and mobility of a FinaBox?

How to efficiently reuse experience and increase learning between different FinaBox projects and FinaBox
orders?

How to enhance reliability of a FinaBox module using conditions based maintenance combined with case-based
experience/knowledge databases?

How to integrate information technology (IT) within a FinaBox module to enhance flexibility and not cause
rigidity and inflexibility?

How to speed up development time of a FinaBox module through improved collaboration between product and
process development?

How to induce the capability of robots when moving FinaBox-modules?

How to design hardware- and software interfaces to achieve flexibility and cost efficiency?

How to speed up installation of a FinaBox module using metrology and sensor integrated robot control?

How to design generic flexible modular fixtures and tools?

How to achieve rapid generic programming with process-oriented Operation Planning of new production?

How can robust design & variation simulation and path planning be combined to solve the problem of nonnominal path planning in FinaBox-modules.

9. Project results and deliverables, what is generic knowledge for industry as a whole?
Each demonstrator should be recognized as the FinaBox concept, that comprises a production module for operations of
certain generality and with predefined interfaces towards the surrounding - and is possible to transport or copy within
and between production sites due to high flexibility and robustness.
The idea of a production module with high flexibility and speed is not new. The major novel conceptual feature of the
FinaBox-concept is the emphasis on mobility and reconfiguability. Concepts like FMS, Holonic Manufacturing Systems,
Fractal Manufacturing Systems, Agile Manufacturing, Mass Customization, etc. have emerged during the last thirty
years. However, their industrial impact has been very limited. The main problem has been to realize the concepts in
industrial settings in a profitable way.
The FinaBox-consortium strongly believes that the time has changed and that it is now possible to successfully
implement the modular concept applied within the FinaBox-concept. The main reasons for this belief are:
The tremendous improvement in computer technology and performance - The tremendous improvement in
computer technology and performance will now make it technologically and financially feasible to improve
simulation techniques and rapid programming of equipment and systems. The utilizing of CAD data,
representing products and system modules, will decrease the time for installation and ramp up of the production
69

system. The development has also made it possible to improve system and equipment/machine control. It is also
feasible to integrate different technologies such as robot control and metrology systems in order to bring sensorintegrated robotics further to real-time performance and to facilitate/speed up calibration prior to ramp up of the
production system.
The new market situation - The market situation has changed; there is now a greater need for the ability to
rapidly adapt to changes in market demand. The company must be able to swiftly transfer production capacity to
manufacturing products with high market demand. On the other hand a company must also have the possibility
to financially adapt to decreasing production volumes. The production system/equipment needs to be adaptable
for use in new applications, within the company or moved to and used in other companies. Many companies
today provide mobile and flexible production capacity in the form of manual labour, which they lease to other
companies. There are, however, very few examples of companies that rent or lease production capacity in the
form of high tech mobile flexible rapid production systems. The high cost of manual labour in Sweden makes it
necessary for Swedish industry to use a higher degree of automation in their future production systems in order
to be able to compete, while still maintaining production in Sweden. There are examples, such as Tetra Pak, that
lease complete highly specialized production systems for processing, packaging and distribution to customers.
These systems are, however, normally neither highly mobile nor flexible.
The interdisciplinary research team and industry partners of the FinaBox project consortium - The
FinaBox interdisciplinary research team and industry partners have competences in the fields necessary to
design and build technically and economically feasible industrial demonstrators. This is a precondition for
achieving successful implementation of the FinaBox concept. Too much of previous research has been
performed by research teams consisting of technology-focused engineers with excess of confidence in the
possibilities of advanced unproven technology. This has prohibited financially feasible implementation in
industry. Research teams with mainly competence in conceptual production system design, but with limited
technological knowledge, have also performed research in the field. This research has not yet resulted in
technically and financially feasible industrial demonstrators.
There are several industrial sectors outside the core project team that could benefit from the results. Generally,
companies that have not been able to industrialize their processes and reach a high level of automation, due to small
series, could benefit from the results. However, the companies must have a need for flexible and mobile production
capacity. The vision is to make results as available as possible and not tied to a specific industry. Some possible
industrial sectors that could be interested in the FinaBox concept are listed below:

Manufacturer of machines and equipment, for the pharmaceutical and biotech industry

Manufacturer of machines and equipment, for the food industry

Manufacturer of furniture

Manufacturer of machines and equipment, for the chemical, oil, gas, pulp and paper industry

The part of the automotive industry with lower volumes, such as trailers, busses and partly trucks

Manufacturer of products and components for material handling

The construction industry

Manufacturer of equipment and machinery for the packaging industry.

The FinaBoxes will demonstrate how mobile production capacity can be provided to industries of varying size, product
range, and geographic location. The concept will be evaluated with respect to cost, quality, lead-time, and additional
company-specific success factors, to determine in which cases FinaBoxes can be alternatives to outsourcing.

Mats Jackson
Main Applicant/Project Leader
Institutionen fr Innovation, Design och Produktutveckling,
Mlardalens Hgskola

70