Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Manufacturing Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmansys

Review

The evolution and future of manufacturing: A review

Behzad Esmaeilian a , Sara Behdad b,∗ , Ben Wang c
a
Industrial and Systems Engineering, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, United States
b
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Industrial and Systems Engineering, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States
c
Georgia Tech Manufacturing Institute, Stewart School of Industrial & Systems Engineering, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Manufacturing is continuously evolving from concept development to methods and tools available for
Received 20 July 2015 the production of goods for use or sale. Traditionally, manufacturing refers to an industrial production
Received in revised form 2 January 2016 process through which raw materials are transformed into finished products to be sold in the market.
Accepted 7 March 2016
However, these days manufacturing is considered to be an integrated concept at all levels from machines
Available online 16 April 2016
to production systems to an entire business level operation.
Although there have been considerable developments in manufacturing technologies and processes,
Keywords:
the actual scope and elements of manufacturing systems are complex and not adequately defined. This
Advanced manufacturing
Data analytics in manufacturing
paper provides a review of both the tangible and intangible elements of manufacturing systems and
Sustainable manufacturing presents a state-of-the-art survey of published work. It studies the evolution of research in manufac-
Design for manufacturing turing starting from past and current trends to future developments. How manufacturing systems have
Remanufacturing been classified is also presented. Through this extensive survey of the literature, future directions of this
changing field are suggested.
© 2016 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
2. Technical and engineering aspects of production systems: Technology and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.1. Manufacturing processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.2. Industrial control systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.3. Industrial robotics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.4. Fixtures and jigs in assembly systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.5. Material handling systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.6. Storage and warehouse management system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.7. Section summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3. Planning aspects: Operating rules and process planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.1. Production, inventory and resource planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.1.1. Demand uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.1.2. Variability in manufacturing systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.2. Production scheduling and lot sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.3. Quality control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.4. Section summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4. Taxonomy of manufacturing systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
5. Design for manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5.1. Section summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
6. Remanufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
6.1. Remanufacturing business models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 7166455914; fax: +1 7166452883.

E-mail addresses: besmaeilian@niu.edu (B. Esmaeilian), sarabehd@buffalo.edu (S. Behdad), ben.wang@gatech.edu (B. Wang).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2016.03.001
0278-6125/© 2016 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
80 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100

6.2. Production, scheduling and inventory planning of remanufacturing systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

6.3. Determination of recovery options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
6.4. Environmental and cost analyses of remanufacturing operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
6.5. Remanufacturing and product design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
6.6. Session summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
7. Environmentally conscious manufacturing and sustainable manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
7.1. Session summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
8. New manufacturing paradigms originated form data analytics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
8.1. Smart manufacturing, smart supply chain, data analytics in manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
8.1.1. Data visualization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
8.2. Social manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
8.3. Cloud manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
8.4. Cloud-based remanufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
8.5. Cyber-physical systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
8.6. Session summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
9. Advanced manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
9.1. Nano-manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
9.2. Semiconductor manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
9.3. Additive manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
9.4. Session summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
10. Conclusions and future trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

1. Introduction Table 1
Previous review papers and their scope.

As new concepts are introduced in manufacturing, the research Study Scope

community should be able to identify future research frontiers. To [1] Cloud mfg.
date, there has been relatively little review of advanced manufac- [2] Cellular mfg.
[3] Just-in-time mfg. systems
turing concepts in the research literature. However, new trends in
[4] Energy efficiency of mfg. processes
advanced manufacturing are emerging and serve as the motivation [5] Disassembly sequence generation
behind this research. [6] Design for remanufacture
Table 1 provides a list of previous review papers in this field. [7] Mass customization
As shown, the scope of previous reviews is limited to a specific [8] Assembly process planning
[9] Additive mfg.
topic within a particular manufacturing area. This paper presents a [10] Information technology in mfg.
holistic view of manufacturing by analyzing a broad range of pub- [11] Simulation in mfg. systems
lications covering myriad subareas and topics. Some of the drivers [12] Additive mfg. and its social impacts
that are causing industry to adopt new initiatives in their enter- [13] Lean mfg.
[14] Agile mfg. systems
prises, processes, production systems, and equipment levels are
[15] Data mining in mfg.
also noted. [16] Cost engineering for manufacturing
A review of the literature surveyed reveals that manufacturing [17] Hybrid mfg. processes
systems are classified differently according to their development. It [18] Scheduling in cellular mfg. systems
is a challenge to ascertain a consistent type or category of a manu- [19] Flexibility in mfg. systems
[20] Web-based mfg. systems
facturing system from the literature. In fact, a more appropriate
[21] Green supply chain
view is that a number of taxonomies are needed to investigate [22] Intelligent mfg.
different aspects of manufacturing. [23] Sustainable lifecycle design
We organize the literature into eight main areas (1) tech- [24] Mfg. facility location and sustainability
[25] Sustainable mfg.
nical and engineering aspects of production systems, including
[26] Environmentally conscious mfg.
technology and equipment (2) planning aspects, including oper- [27] Environmentally conscious design
ating rules and process planning, (3) taxonomies of manufacturing [28] Environmentally conscious design and mfg.
systems, (4) designs for manufacturing, (5) remanufacturing, (6) [29] Remanufacturing
sustainable manufacturing, (7) new manufacturing paradigms, and [30] Green logistics
[31] Design for remanufacturing
(8) advanced manufacturing concepts. These areas are explained
[32] Sustainable supply chain
in Sections 2–9, respectively. At the end of each section, we [33] Facility location
provide our thoughts, prediction and recommendations for further [34] Green supply chain
research. In some subsections, several qualitative and quantita- [35] Sustainable supply chain
[36] Quantitative models for reverse logistics
tive metrics have been applied to assess technology maturation,
[37] Sensors for unmanned machining
research saturation, and under-developed areas. Fig. 1 provides [38] Performance measure in mfg. systems
more details on the overall structure of the paper. [39] Control architecture in automated mfg.
We have used a three-stage qualitative research method (identi- [40] Servitization of mfg. systems
fication, classification and evaluation) similar to a recent review by
Zaman [41] to analyze prior studies. The relevant studies were iden-
tified through Engineering Village, Compendex, Inspec & GEOBASE As new manufacturing paradigms coming to the market, the
databases and limited by articles published in 1999 to April 2015. existing building blocks of manufacturing systems should be stud-
Finally, studies were classified and evaluated based on the structure ied carefully to explore how new technologies influence the
shown in Fig. 1. current infrastructure. Therefore, Sections 2 and 3 of this paper are
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100 81

Industrial Robotics Fixtures and Jigs in

Assembly systems Material Handling Production, Inventory Production Scheduling
Sec. 2.3 Systems and Resource Planning and Lot Sizing
Industrial Control Sec. 2.4
Sec. 2.5 Sec. 3.1 Sec. 3.2
Systems
Planning Aspects:
Sec. 2.2 Technical and Engineering Quality control,
Storage and Warehouse Operating Rules and
Aspects of Production Systems: Inspection
Manufacturing Management System Process Planning
Technology and Equipment
Processes Sec. 2.6 Sec. 3 Sec. 3.3
Sec. 2
Sec. 2.1
Taxonomy of
Additive
Manufacturing Systems
Manufacturing
Sec. 9 Sec. 4
Sec. 9.3
Advanced MANUFACTURING
Semiconductor Design for Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing Sec. 5
Sec. 9.2
Nano-Manufacturing
Sec. 9.1
Sec. 8
Cyber-physical New Manufacturing Sustainable Manufacturing Sec. 6 Remanufacturing Business Models
sysems Paradigms Originated form Sec. 7 Remanufacturing and Sec. 6.1
Remanufacturing
Sec. 8.5 Data Analytics Product Design
Cloud-based Sec. 6.5 Production, scheduling and inventory
Remanufacturing Smart planning of Remanufacturing systems
Cloud Manufacturing Environmental and cost
Sec. 8.4 Social analyses of remanufacturing Sec. 6.2
Manufacturing operations
Manufacturing Sec. 8.1
Determination of recovery
Sec. 8.3 Sec. 8.2 Sec. 6.4 options
Sec. 6.3

Fig. 1. The scope and structure of the survey along with the section numbers.

assigned to review the tangible and intangible elements of mfg. more information on manufacturing processes, we refer the reader
systems. to the books by Schrader and Elshennawy [50] and Rao [51].

2. Technical and engineering aspects of production 2.2. Industrial control systems

systems: Technology and equipment
This section introduces the basic tangible elements of man-
ufacturing systems, namely, manufacturing processes, industrial
control systems, industrial robotics, assembly systems, material
transportation systems and storage systems.
There will be some detailed discussion on any of these elements.
2.1. Manufacturing processes
Various processes have been widely used for producing
products. There are several traditional classifications for these pro-
cesses. Swift and Booker [42] categorizes processes as casting,
cutting, forming and fabrication. A more comprehensive classifica-
tion is provided by Kalpakjian and Schmid [43] in which processes
are classified into six subcategories of casting, machining and fin-
ishing, joining, sheet metal, polymer processing and deformation
processes. The traditional classifications have some limitations on
identifying the newly developed technologies [17]. To solve these
difficulties, Nassehi et al. [44] proposed a classification in which
processes are categorized into five groups based on the technology:
• Joining technology, where several parts are joined to form a new
part (e.g., welding and assembly) [45].
• Dividing technology (e.g., sawing and disassembly).
• Subtractive technology/material removal processes such as
machining operations [46].
• Transformative technology in which a single work piece is trans-
formed to another one without change in mass (e.g., forming, heat
treatment, cryogenic cooling) [47].
• Additive technology (e.g., rapid prototyping, die casting and injec-
tion molding) [17].
Investment in new process technology has been suggested as a
strategy to improve flexibility of manufacturing systems in terms
of product mix, product change, volume and delivery [48,49]. For
Industrial Control Systems (ICS) is a common term used to
describe all types of control systems, including Supervisory Con-
trol and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Distributed Control
Systems (DCS), small single control devices such as Programmable
Logic Controllers (PLC), sensors, actuators, and other components
often installed in an industrial facility with the purpose of gathering
large scale data in real time [52,53]. ICS are widely used in a vari-
ety of industries such as electrical power transmission, water, oil,
natural gas, chemical, transportation, automotive, aerospace, and
materials handling.
Most ICS technology today was developed years ago, before
information technology became a common part of business oper-
ations. Although ICS have little similarities to modern IT systems,
they have several characteristics such as different risks and pri-
orities that distinguish them from traditional IT systems [52].
Specifically, ICS need different performance and reliability require-
ments than typical IT systems. Over the past decade, research in
information security related to ICS has become a focal point [54].
Many standards have been developed for ICS and SCADA secu-
rity [55,56]. Some studies have focused on the design of security.
A simple example is work by Zhu and Basar [57] on the develop-
ment of a game-theoretic approach to study the integration among
cyber security policy and the robust design of control systems. In
addition, there is some research on resilient control as a new topic
on how to maintain acceptable levels of operation in the face of
undesirable incidents [58,59]. Resiliency is introduced as one of
the most critical objectives of today’s complex industrial control
systems [60]. According to Zhu and Basar [61], the integration of
information technology with control systems made resilience an
important aspect of infrastructure protection. Resilience is defined
by several aspects of system performance such as security, stabil-
ity, efficiency, human interactions or complex interdependencies
[59]. Forsgren and Rahkonen [62] provide some guidelines on how
to specify user requirements in terms of functionality and perfor-
mance based on the experiences reported by users and vendors of
these types of systems.
82 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
In addition to the above-mentioned research on ICS security,
many studies have emphasized the importance of data processing
within ICS. Data mining tools have been widely used as an effective
tool to facilitate data processing [63]. To give a few examples: Li
et al. have offered data mining as a solution to facilitate human
supervisory control of a coal-fired power generation plant [64].
Wang et al. [65] also showed the application of data mining in
operation control and parameter prediction in oil fields. Rojek
and Kusiak [66] provided a data processing approach using arti-
ficial neural networks in which the history and past production of
industrial processes are considered in order to control the current
production. The system compares similarities of current production
with past registered production data.
Besides data processing, the reliability and robustness of data
collection has been listed as a challenge in ICS [67]. The introduction
of Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC) [68] and Radio Frequency
IDentification (RFID) technology [69] as data acquisition and con-
trol hardware enhanced the robustness of data collection.
2.3. Industrial robotics
The trends to enhance human safety, process efficiency and
reduce environmental impact stimulate the use of industrial
robotics in the manufacturing industry. Industrial robots have been
used in a wide range of applications since 1965 [70] because of their
ability to quickly, repeatedly and accurately perform operations
[71]. Production flexibility, the ability to produce a large product
variety, has been reported as one of the most important require-
ments for new robot applications [72]. The extensive application
of robots in manufacturing applications can also be attributed to
an increase in labor costs and aging workforce, and the interest
to avoid 3D (dirty, dangerous, and difficult) jobs in many applica-
tions such as welding, material handling, painting, palletizing, and
assembly [73]. Robots are also classified based on their complexity
and functionality [74].
Many studies have investigated the design of industrial robots,
their control systems, as well as their programming and software
systems based on application necessity [75]. To list a few, Tarkian
et al. [76] integrated multiple analysis tools, including a geometric
model, a parametric dynamic simulation model, and an optimiza-
tion model to design and optimize the automation capabilities of a
robot. Mandl et al. [77] also have formulated the design of a robot
family applying multi-objective and mixed variable design opti-
mization problems. An example of software development is the
work by Ding and Wang that presents a ground control station to
deal with the control requirements of a multifunction aerial robot
[78]. For more information on industrial robots, we refer the reader
to the books by Hegde [79], Nof [80] and Hunt [81].
2.4. Fixtures and jigs in assembly systems
Jigs and fixtures are special work-holding tools that provide sup-
port for production and assembly operations. Fixtures could have
significant influence on the total processing time by improving the
flexibility of manufacturing systems [82]. The design of a fixture is
influenced by the complexity of part sizes, shapes, machine tools,
and assembly and cutting tools [83]. Bakker et al. provided seven
classifications for fixture designs: modular fixtures, flexible pal-
let systems, sensor-based fixtures, phase-change based concepts,
chuck-based concepts, pin-type array fixtures and automatically
reconfigurable fixtures [82].
A review of the studies reported from 2010 to 2014 reveal the
following topics in the fixture design and planning areas. One sam-
ple study is listed for each topic.
• Geometry analysis of fixtures [83].
• Design of modular fixtures [84].
• Assembly variation analysis [85] and re-configurability of the
assembly fixtures [86].
• Programming and control of robot-based fixtures [87].
• Assembly sequence planning [88].
• Virtual simulation of assembly processes [89].
2.5. Material handling systems
Material handling equipment (MHE) are crucial parts of today’s
manufacturing systems and play an important role in enhancing
productivity and flexibility of the entire system as well as effective
utilization of resources. The cost of material handling constitutes
15% to 70% of the total manufacturing cost of a product [90]. Mate-
rial handling systems integrate equipment and other technologies
of manufacturing systems. There is a wide spectrum of models
and brands for handling equipment. Considering only the “Inter-
Departmental Handling of Discrete Parts” group, six categories are
identified by Mirhosseyni and Webb, namely, industrial trucks,
floor conveyors, overhead conveyors, automatic guided vehicles,
cranes and manuals [90].
Selection of material handling systems and integration of them
with other components of manufacturing has been of interest to
researchers over the past three decades. The body of literature in
material handling systems can be classified into three groups: stud-
ies concentrated on design and control of material handling systems,
studies focused on operations of existing systems, studies aimed at
selection of appropriate handling systems.
While there are a few studies that address the assignment prob-
lem (determining the set of handling operations which are served
by each equipment type), the majority of the research tackled the
equipment type selection problem [90]. Analytical models, sim-
ulation, knowledge-based methods and hybrid approaches have
been developed to support the selection problem. To list a few,
Sujuno and Lashkari developed a 0–1 integer programming model
to determine joint optimization of the equipment selection and the
operation allocation in a flexible manufacturing system [91]. Chan
used an integration of an expert system with an analytic hierarchy
process approach to select the most appropriate equipment type
[92]. Nadoli and Rangaswami [93] built a simulator to determine
the layout, vehicle control logic, and material flow of an automated
material handling system.
Additionally, research has focused on designing ergonomically
sound material handling systems [94]. Studies covering the oper-
ational aspects of MHE such as the flow path and the number
of equipment will be discussed under ‘scheduling’ problems in
Section 3.2.
2.6. Storage and warehouse management system
Introduction of new concepts such as just-in-time (JIT), lean
manufacturing (LM), and supply chain management (SCM) over
the last two decades have forced many requirements on ware-
house management systems (WMS) [95]. WMS consist of physical
infrastructure as well as tracking and communication systems
like mobile computers, barcode scanners, RFID, wireless systems,
etc. The operations within a warehouse include goods receiving
and shipping, and storage and delivering orders [96]. An optimal
capacity of storage systems compatible with a flexible produc-
tion system is necessary for the effective performance and cost of
manufacturing systems [97]. Techniques, tools and methods are
being developed to manage, control and optimize the operations
of storage systems, including the way the production processes
are connected to the product storage as well as the distribution
and delivery of goods. As production quantity and variety rise,
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
Fig. 2. The number of published studies from 1990 to April 2015 with the exact
technology-related terms in their titles derived from Engineering Village.
the importance of applying automation technology in warehous-
ing becomes apparent. The Automated Storage & Retrieval System
(AS/RS) is a typical application of automation technology in mod-
ern logistics. AS/RS technology initiated in the late 1970s and its
development continued over the years [98]. Zhang and Li, for exam-
ple, proposed an intelligent control of material flow base on mixed
wireless and wireline networks communication in an automobile
sheet-metal blanking company [99]. Taljanovic and Salihbegovic
have used agent-based modeling to identify the hardware and soft-
ware architecture required for integration of all subsystems in a
design of WMS [95]. Chen et al. [100] discussed the joint applica-
tion of RFID technology and lean manufacturing which can result
in saving the total warehousing operation time by 87% [100].
A review of relevant studies revealed that the research in WMS
from 2000 to 2014 focused mainly on the following topics:
• Storage allocation policy and lot sizing [96,101].
• Warehouse automation ranging from communication and real-
time location systems [102] to RFID technologies [103].
• Warehouse location, shape and capacity [104,105].
2.7. Section summary
Much research has emphasized both experimental and com-
putational methods for understanding different elements of
technology and equipment used in production systems. These
methods are used in the performance of manufacturing processes,
design and development of materials, and mechanics of structure
as well as custom design and engineering of automation systems
that consider cost, performance and the feasibility of industry-scale
implementation.
As shown in Fig. 2, among the tangible elements of production
systems discussed in this section, manufacturing processes, fix-
ture and jigs and industrial robots have received most attention
in the literature. As new manufacturing processes such as additive
technologies are coming to the market, the demand increases for
advanced manufacturing equipment capable of producing mechan-
ical and electromechanical devices from micron to meters scales.
3. Planning aspects: Operating rules and process planning
There are a variety of considerations beyond manufacturing
infrastructure, equipment and hardware, including operating rules
and process planning aspects of production systems. In this sec-
tion we highlight and comment upon a number of key elements of
manufacturing decisions, planning and analysis.
Process planning of manufacturing systems is not only limited
to the production planning, but it includes all aspects of a man-
ufacturing firm such as business planning, capacity planning,
scheduling, inventory planning, procurement planning, quality
83
control, performance measurement analysis, demand modeling
and sales planning.
In this paper, operating rules and process planning aspects of
production systems are described under the following main cate-
gories:
• Production, inventory and resource planning.
• Scheduling and shop floor job assignment.
• Quality control, inspection, statistical quality control.
3.1. Production, inventory and resource planning
Production planning can be defined as the question of finding a
release plan for jobs over a planning horizon with the purpose of
maximizing profit [106]. It deals with determining how much and
when to produce. Production planning has been mainly addressed
as an optimization problem in the literature. To list a few studies,
Yu et al. presented a nonlinear multi-objective programming model
for production planning of mineral processing [107]. Alfares [108]
used an integer programming (IP) to model production planning
of battery manufacturing in a mid-size company. Wang et al. pro-
posed a framework to support production planning optimization
while integrating with ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) as the
information systems [109].
A view of the various optimization models used in production
planning shows the variation in the type of constraints included
in the models ranging from industrial constraints such as produc-
tion capacity and inventory levels to labor constraints, which are
imposed by various labor laws. Limited use of overtime is an exam-
ple of labor laws [110]. In addition, different planning objects such
as customer order, production task, purchase order and process job
have been targeted [109]. A close look at the prior research reveals
two challenges in this area: uncertainty in demand and variability
in manufacturing systems [106].
3.1.1. Demand uncertainty
The effectiveness of production plans is highly influenced by the
uncertainty in demand. For more than three decades, researchers
have been working toward better ways of planning production
activities under demand uncertainty. While different stochas-
tic models have been developed to solve the planning problem
[111,112], the synergy between simulation methods and optimiza-
tion models has been recognized as a promising solution in a
considerable number of studies [113,114].
3.1.2. Variability in manufacturing systems
The formulation of production planning problems differs
depending on the type of manufacturing systems. Examples are
the work by Stecke [115] in flexible manufacturing systems [115],
Raminfar et al. in Cellular manufacturing [116], Sadeh et al. in
Agile manufacturing [117], and Mehra et al. in complex sys-
tems composed of several work centers and multiple parts [118].
New management concepts and methodologies emerging into the
manufacturing systems comprise new planning and scheduling
requirements. Concepts such as Just In Time (JIT), Manufacturing
Resource Planning (MRPII), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP),
Lean, Agile, Leagile, and Kanban are among those concepts which
create a demand for process planning not only at the factory level
but also at the device, production line and enterprise (supply chain)
levels.
3.2. Production scheduling and lot sizing
Scheduling problems deal with determining when and where to
perform a set of tasks while making trade-offs between the impact
of early or late completion of tasks [119]. Scheduling is defined as
84 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
the question of finding what to make using resources and equip-
ment. Typically, there are n jobs to be processed on m machines. A
schedule allocates each job to each machine over time and deter-
mines the sequence of operations based on decision criteria such as
earliest due dates or minimizing the sum of weighted completion
times [120].
Similar to manufacturing systems, different classifications can
be provided for production scheduling problems. From a produc-
tion point of view, Ribas et al. [121] categorized studies into parallel
machine scheduling (PMS), where the key decision is the job alloca-
tion to machines, and flow shop scheduling (FSS), where the main
decision is the sequence of the jobs.
In addition to sequencing, lot sizing problems have been exten-
sively covered in the literature. Sox et al. [122] identified two lines
of research, including studies that use continuous time models rec-
ognized as an Economic Lot Sizing and Scheduling Problem (ELSP)
and studies employing discrete time models identified as Capaci-
tated Lot Sizing problems. The main purpose of an ELSP problem
is to determine the lot size and sequence of lots while minimizing
setup and inventory costs. There is often a trade-off between setups
costs and inventory costs. If production runs in large batches, the
setup cost can be minimized, while inventory cost increases. In con-
trast, small batches will result in lower inventory cost and higher
setup cost [123].
According to Karimi et al. [124], features such as: planning
horizon (short-term vs. long-term), number of operations (single-
level vs. multi-level), number of final products, resource constraints
(capacitated vs. incapacitated problems), and demand (static vs.
dynamic) impact classification and modeling of lot sizing problems
[124].
In terms of computation times, scheduling problems are either
polynomial solvable or NP-hard. A wide range of techniques has
been offered to solve scheduling problems. Studies can be classified
based on their solution methods into: mathematical models result-
ing into optimal solution [125], heuristics methods [126], hybrid
approach [127], simulation [128], expert systems [129], dispatch-
ing rules [130], neighborhood search [131], and artificial neural
networks [132].
While early research on scheduling concentrated on determi-
nistic models, recent studies have addressed the problem in the
face of uncertainty. Demand [133] and processing times have been
considered to be the main sources of uncertainty [134]. Stochas-
tic optimization is a very common approach in the literature to
handle scheduling under uncertainty [135]. Li and Ierapetritou
[136] divided scheduling programming models into two groups of
two-stage or multiple-stage programming and chance constraints
programming approach. Beside the probability-based stochastic
optimization approach, there are studies that handled the sched-
uling optimization through non-probabilities treatment methods
such as fuzzy set approach [134]. For more information on sched-
uling problems, we refer readers to the following review papers:
[121] and [124].
3.3. Quality control
Quality in manufacturing systems has been studied from dif-
ferent aspects such as product inspection, quality control, quality
management and quality assurance. The most common definition
of quality is the one provided by Genichi Taguchi, the father of
Japanese quality control, as the minimum variation in the process
[137]. Statistical quality control makes the use of control charts to
monitor the output of manufacturing processes, identify unnatu-
ral variations in the measurements, and specify their assignable
causes.
With the widespread application of advanced manufactur-
ing, cutting-edge technologies, automation and computation, the
quality control activities traditionally performed by practition-
ers are becoming automated [138]. Not only the collection of
quality-related big data has been facilitated through equipping
manufacturing systems with hundreds of sensors, but also the anal-
yses (e.g., process parameters shift detection and prediction) have
been becoming automated using new analytical methods such as
neural networks and computational algorithms.
3.4. Section summary
The overarching goal of studies that targeted soft aspects of
manufacturing was mainly planning, control and design of oper-
ations. Various analytical and computational methods have been
developed with the aim of facilitating material flows, production
planning, scheduling, and monitoring of manufacturing processes.
As new mfg. technologies (e.g., data-enabled technologies) come
to the market, new planning activities need to be adapted to take
advantage of the capabilities of new technologies and incorporate
those capabilities with the design, planning and control of opera-
tions.
4. Taxonomy of manufacturing systems
A review of manufacturing policies, strategies, technologies and
management concepts reveal different classifications for manufac-
turing systems.
From the technology perspective, the evolution of automation
tools and advanced technologies in production systems can be
described as Computerized Numerical Control machine (CNC),
Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM), and Computer Integrated
Manufacturing (CIM). CIM was introduced as a concept in 1973 and
is defined as the full integration of information technology with all
manufacturing processes [139]. Fig. 3 depicts different components
of CIM.
From the production philosophy perspective, manufacturing
systems are recognized under Lean Manufacturing, Agile Manufac-
turing and Leagile Manufacturing.
Lean manufacturing is concentrated on elimination of waste and
non-value added activities as much as possible [140]. The focus is
on elimination of seven types of waste: transportation, inventory,
motion, waiting time, over production, over processing and defects
[141]. Lean manufacturing also uses just-in-time strategies where
products are delivered in small quantities and have short lead times
[142].
While the lean system is defined as a system with minimum
waste, an agile production system is recognized as a system with
capability to meet the rapidly changing demand of the market both
in terms of the volume and variety of products [143]. The agile
system is fairly compatible with make-to-order strategy, where the
Software Market and Planning
CAD/CAE: Computer Information:
Aided Design/Engineering ERP: Enterprise Resource
Planning
MRPII: Manufacturing
CAM: Computer Aided
Manufacturing Resource Planning
CAPP: Computer Aided Hardware:
Production Planning
Automated Machines
CAQ: Computer Aided
Control Systems
Quality
Material Handling Systems
Storage Systems
Fig. 3. Elements of Computer Integrated Mfg. (CIM) Systems.
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100 85

Low High Demand

Responsiveness
Engineer- Make-to- Make-to- Assemble- Make-to-
to-Order Order Forecast to-Order Stock Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine n
High Low
Customization CON WIP
Demand
Fig. 4. Comparison of various production strategies in terms of customization and
responsiveness (modified from [146]).

Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine n

system is flexible enough to act as fast as possible in the case of a
change in market demand. KANBAN
However, managers are often under pressure to be both market-
responsive and low cost; to be both lean and agile [144]. This system Demand
is identified as a leagile system. The main idea is to position a decou-
pling point and use a different paradigm (lean or agile) on each side
of this point. A decoupling point is an inventory buffer to meet the Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine n
discrepancy between actual demand and the sales forecast. In leag-
ile supply chain, the downstream acts based on the agile concept to BASE STOCK
respond as quickly as possible to a volatile market demand, while
Fig. 5. Schematic view of information and material flows in three control modes in
the upstream follows the lean concept [145]. pull production systems (modified from [150]).
From the inventory control perspective, different production sys-
tems are identified such as ‘Engineer-to-order’, ‘Make-to-order’,
Table 2
‘Make-to-forecast’, and ‘Make-to-stock’. Meredith and Akinc [146] Types of machining systems (summarized from [155]).
compared these production inventory control strategies in terms
Type of machining Tooling and Economic production
of responsiveness and customization (Fig. 4). According to Mather
systems automation objective
[147], customization and responsiveness is regarded as tradeoff
DMS: Dedicated Fixed tooling One specific part type
between consumer and manufacturing lead times.
machining system
Based on the production control strategies, manufacturing sys- FMS: Flexible Fixed hardware, fixed A part family
tems are classified as push, pull, or hybrid push/pull systems. Pull machining system but programmable
systems are based on the make-to-order strategy where parts are software
pulled from suppliers based on the actual demand, while push sys- RMS: Reconfigurable Reconfigurable Flexibility in a family
machining system software and hardware part in response to
tems push products to retailers based on forecast demand with the
changes in technology
assumption that they will be sold [148]. Push systems are recog-
nized by Material Requirements Planning (MRP) and pull systems
by Kanban controlled systems [149]. Zheng et al. discuss three con- Based on the types of machining systems, three types of manu-
trol modes for pull production strategy [150]: facturing systems are identified (Table 2) [155]:

• CONWIP: Constant work-in-process method which is a combina- • Dedicated machining system.

tion of pull and push strategies.
• Kanban: Aims to minimize WIP and manufacture only parts
which are needed downstream.
• Base Stock strategy is based on the concept that each machine
has a certain number of WIP.
A schematic view of these three production control strategies is
shown in Fig. 5 using system dynamics representation. Production
strategies that combine both push and pull concepts known under
hybrid control systems have been well discussed in prior studies
[151,152].
Based on the production layout, manufacturing systems can be
categorized into two groups:
• Flexible machining system.
• Reconfigurable machining system.
Fig. 6 provides a multidisciplinary representation of the taxon-
omy of mfg. systems from six different perspectives discussed in
this section. Each row represents a specific view point standing
alone by itself. For example, from production philosophy perspec-
tive, mfg. systems spectrum are categorized under three classes of
Lean, Agile and Leagile, while from the inventory control standpoint,
mfg. systems are classified into four categories of Make-to-Stock,
Make-to-Forecast, Assemble-to-Order and Make-to-Order. The
chronological list of categories in each row depicts the evolution
of these themes over time.

• Single Station Manufacturing Cells. 5. Design for manufacturing

• Group Technology and Cellular Manufacturing System (CMS):
CMS is an application of group technology aims at reducing inven-
tory, work in process and setup time. In CMS parts are grouped
into families based on similarities such as tolerance, shape, and
manufacturing operation and then they are assigned the same
manufacturing cell. Furthermore, CMS focuses on layout design
to arrange machines, tools and equipment on the shop floor in
the most efficient way to improve manufacturing performance
in terms of lead time, material handling cost, throughput time,
and so on [153]. Depending on the changes in market demand,
two types of cms can be considered: dynamics and static [154].
Design for Manufacturing (DfM) is defined as the application
of manufacturing information at the early stage of design [156].
There are studies in the literature looking at performance meas-
ures as well as manufacturing cost of a design. Specifically, DfM
is becoming popular in the semiconductor industry. Holden devel-
oped a cost model to estimate the cost of printed circuit boards
based on the manufacturing yield [157]. Webb [158] showed that
the joint optimization of poly layer and manufacturing parame-
ters of 45 nm process in the semiconductor industry can result in
a high yield process while maintaining Moore’s law. Cheng [159]
86 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
Computerized
Numerical Control
Informaon machine (CNC), 1940s
Technology
Lean Mfg.
Producon 1980s
Philosophy
Push Systems:
(e.g., Material
Producon Control Requirements Planning,
Strategy
Make-to-Stock Make-to-Forecast
Inventory Control
Strategy
Single Staon
Manufacturing Cells
Producon Layout
Dedicated Machining
Machining System
System
Configuraon
ASPECTS
Fig. 6. Classifications of manufacturing systems.
discussed DfM principles in the design of Integrated Circuit (IC) in
nano-CMOS (complementary metal-oxide semiconductor) chips.
A broad range of manufacturing methods have been presented
under Design for X. Examples are Design for Assembly (DfA) [160],
Design for Quality (DfQ) [161], Design for Packaging (DfP) [160],
Design for Resilience [162], Design for Environment (DfE) [163],
Design for Sustainable Manufacturing [164] and Design for Addi-
tive Manufacturing (DfAM) [165]. Mottonen et al. [166] conducted
20 interviews with all DfX and top managers of an ICT company
to identify the main challenges toward full implementation of DfM
principles. Insufficient utilization of standards, complex organiza-
tional structure, and inaccurate formulation of requirements into
data are among the points mentioned by respondents.
As Advanced Manufacturing Technologies (AMT) become
important due to the need for high-value low-volume products,
recent studies started exploring design for advanced manufac-
turing concepts. Hamidi and Farhmand [167] provided a list of
principles and process specifications and capabilities to create a
common language between designers and production engineers.
Pierson and Singh [168] discussed process capability in terms of
cost and introduced a bar feeder technology as a step toward
adding a high degree of automation into CNC machines. Kwon and
Wu [169] looked at the quality aspect of advanced manufactur-
ing and conducted an empirical study to show the application of a
touch probe as an appropriate tool for real-time quality inspection
compared to using coordinate measuring machines. According to
Maldonado et al. [170] while advanced manufacturing technolo-
gies have improved the process capabilities in terms of cost, speed
and precision, the human factors and ergonomic aspect have not
received enough attention. They suggested an axiomatic design
approach to evaluate the ergonomic aspect of AMTs.
Among AMT models, Additive Mfg. has been the focus of recent
research. Ponche et al. [171] defined a three-step methodology
to define both design requirements and process constraints in a
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) concept. The main idea
is to consider the capabilities and limitations of AM technology
at the design stage. AM has changed the way we manufacture as
well as the way we design. Adam and Zimmer [172] provided a
set of design rules based on geometry of products for three pro-
cesses, namely Laser Sintering, Laser Melting and Fused Deposition
Modeling. These rules can be generalized to other AM processes.
Computer Aided Computer
Manufacturing Integrated
(CAM), 1960s Manufacturing
Agile Mfg. Leagile Mfg.
1995 1999
Pull Systems: Hybrid Push/Pull
(e.g., Just in Time, Kanban
1953, CONWIP, 1990)
Assemble-to-Order Make-to-Order
Group Technology, Cellular Manufacturing
Systems, 1925
Flexible Machining Reconfigurable Machining
System System, 1990s
Time
Hu et al. [173] introduced an approach for considering two man-
ufacturing constraints, namely the volume and processing time
while determining the design of heterogeneous objects (optimal
material and build direction) in ultrasonic consolidation processes
within rapid prototyping technologies. Rosen [174] discussed the
limitations of conventional manufacturing processes on fabricating
geometrically complex designs and the micro-scale issues asso-
ciated with variations and materials structures. Bin Maidin et al.
[175] created a database of design features to support DfAM. The
effectiveness of the suggested database of AM design features has
been tested through some user trials. Seepersad [176] discussed
the existing barriers associated with DfAM. Designers’ cognitive
tendency to traditional design thinking, limitation of current CAD
tools in representing AM parts, poor integration of CAE tools with
simulation-based techniques, inefficiency of current topology opti-
mization and computational methods are among those challenges.
5.1. Section summary
Various studies on Design for X methods have been suggested
where X is either a specific domain (e.g., additive manufacturing)
or a specific functionality (e.g., manufacturability). Future design
research should be focused on development of new modeling tech-
niques and algorithms, and further taking advantage of newly
developed information and communication technologies such as
immersive visualization, data mining techniques, human computer
interactions, cloud computing, and data mining to support the
design [177].
6. Remanufacturing
Environmental regulations, consumer interest in green prod-
ucts, scarcity of resources, and potential profitability of salvaging
operations have motivated manufactures to consider remanu-
facturing as part of their business models. Lund [178] defined
remanufacturing as “the process of restoring non-functioning, dis-
carded, or traded-in products (cores) to like-new performance.”
Economic profitability of recovery operations, legislation and envi-
ronmental concern such as preserving the embodied energy of
original production are among the drivers of remanufacturing.
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100 87

Table 3 number of returns. Xerox, producer of electrical and electronic

Basic difference between manufacturing and remanufacturing systems.
products and a Swedish company offering baby strollers are exam-
Manufacturing Remanufacturing ples of OEMs adopting leasing policy [181]. Shi and Min [182]
Basic life cycle stages Design, sourcing Disassembly, sorting, modeled the volatility of remanufacturing cost and conducted a
materials, production, inspection, cleaning, series of sensitivity analyses to determine the cost effective reman-
assembly, quality refurbishment, ufacturing timing in a leasing contract. In addition to selling service,
control reassembly, quality there are studies focusing on integrated manufacturing and reman-
control
ufacturing systems in which companies employ hybrid business
Patterns in input Known quality and Uncertain quality and
quantity quantity models using economic and environmental benefits offered by
Process time Fixed Highly variable remanufacturing. Naeen et al. [183] developed a dynamic program-
Production volume High volume/low Often low volume ming model to solve a lot-sizing problem on the number of products
volume
should be manufactured or remanufactured. Mahapatra et al. [184]
Patterns in output Known quantity and Uncertain quantity and
quality quality used mixed integer linear programming model to show changes
Inventory cost Often low cost High cost in production rate based on the heterogeneity in the quality and
Inventory planning Market driven Waste stream and uncertainty in quantity of returns.
approach approach market driven
approaches
Man-machine Machine driven Labor intensive 6.2. Production, scheduling and inventory planning of
production remanufacturing systems
Industrial pollution High pollution Less pollution
Investment High investment Less investment
Economy model Linear Circular Zhao [185] and Guide [186] characterized the way produc-
Production Scale, size Small scale Larger scale tion planning in remanufacturing is different from manufacturing
through several factors such as quantity and timing of returns, no
correlation between demand and returns, and uncertainty in disas-
Various studies describe characteristics that differentiate sembly time, production lead time and manufacturing rate due to
remanufacturing from manufacturing systems. Table 3 provides a the fact that incoming returns are of different conditions and qual-
comparison of these two industries. ity. A considerable number of studies have been focused on finding
Beginning with investigating the environmental relevance of better ways of production and inventory control planning in the
remanufacturing and its connection to product design [179], remanufacturing industry and consider uncertainty to be an impor-
research in remanufacturing expanded to consider remanufac- tant factor. In general, production planning in remanufacturing has
turing as a business model and develop techniques that allow a been handled as an uncertain optimization problem. Jing et al. [187]
remanufacturer to manage and control often uncertain business used robust optimization to solve the problem where they modeled
operations. Recent research in remanufacturing is explored under the uncertain number of returns and demand using a set of sce-
the following categories (Fig. 7): narios with specific probability. Doh and Lee [188] developed a
production planning optimization model to assist remanufacturers
• Business models for product remanufacturing. in answering questions about the number of disassembled prod-
• Production, scheduling and inventory planning. ucts, number of components to be purchased or disposed of and the
• Determination of recovery options. number to be reassembled. Besides optimization, simulation mod-
• Environmental and cost analyses of remanufacturing operations. els have been developed to support production planning. Li et al.
• The applicability of remanufacturing to product design. [189] applied a hybrid simulation based optimization methods to
• Industrial case studies. determine the optimum number of production, inventory capac-
ity and stock level, and production capacity and workforce level.
6.1. Remanufacturing business models Wang and Murata [190] used system dynamics simulation models
to investigate the long-term effect of capacity planning strategies.
The need for increasing core competency, regulatory pressure to Turning to inventory control planning, Chung and Wee [191]
reduce environmental impact, and the need to reduce production developed a model to determine the optimal replenishment policy
costs have resulted into new business models based on capabilities in an inventory control system for remanufacturing of short life-
that remanufacturing offer to companies. One example is shifting cycle products. Inventory holding cost, technology evolution and
from selling products to leasing and business model based on sell- the ratio of remanufactured products are listed as the main factors
ing service [180]. In leasing contracts, consumers do not have the affecting inventory planning. Van der laan et al. [192] discussed
ownership of the products and OEMs can control the timing and the inventory related impact of remanufacturing and compared the

Product Design and Remanufacturing Production Planning, Inventory
Planning and Scheduling
• Design for X: disassembly, modularity, considering sources of uncertainty:
recycling, reassembly, reuse
• Disassembly sequence planning • Quantity and quality of returns
• Timing of returns
• List of design principles
• Remanufacturing operations
Environmental and Economic
Analysis
• Economic profitability and size of
remanufacturing industry
• Life cycle assessment and
environmental burden

Decision Making on Best Recovery Options Business Models

• Quantification of changes in components • Selling service and leasing
value over time • Integrated mfg. and remfg.
• Optimal end-of-use option systems

Fig. 7. Research fields in remanufacturing.

88 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
traditional pull and push systems without remanufacturing with a
controlled hybrid system in which both manufactured and reman-
ufactured products are used to respond to market demand.
6.3. Determination of recovery options
Alongside work focused on product design, there are studies
developing decision tools that help in determining the best end-of-
use options for take-back products. To name a few studies, Kumar
et al. [193] discussed that the choice of recovery option depends
on consumers’ perceptions on product value. They developed a
method to quantify the perceived value by users based on the
changes in product value over its lifecycle. Jun et al. [194] quanti-
fied the cost of a recovery option based on the quality and product
degradation and developed a multi-objective algorithm to select
the best end-of-life option. Behdad et al. [195] used a stochas-
tic model to determine the level of disassembly for a returned
product and the most profitable fate for the resulting subassem-
blies considering uncertainty in the number of returns. Mashhadi
et al. [196] determined the best EOU option considering the uncer-
tainties in quantity, quality and market demand for refurbished
products. Mangun and Thurston [197] evaluated a case study of per-
sonal computers and concluded that establishing a leasing program
and selling service instead of products could benefit manufacturers
since they can control when products are taken back.
Inadequate standards for product recovery, rapid changes in
product technology, lack of assessment tools to identify reman-
ufacturability of used items, and unwillingness of consumers to
purchase refurbished items are among barriers to appropriate end-
of-use product remanufacturing [198].
6.4. Environmental and cost analyses of remanufacturing
operations
Lund and Huaser [199] provided a report on the economic
profitability and size of the remanufacturing industry in the US
economy. Sutherland et al. [200] compared energy savings of
remanufacturing vs. manufacturing of heavy equipment engine
components. Sima and Wang [201] used the industrial cluster the-
ory to explain the role of the remanufacturing industry in the
growth of regional economy. Skerlos et al. [202] discussed the
effect of offering remanufactured cellphones in the global market
by considering the characteristics of markets in both developed
and developing countries. They concluded that although remanu-
facturing processes result in less environmental impact as opposed
to original production, the remanufacturing industry may bring
more environmental burden to the telecom industry due to other
limiting factors such as transportation infrastructure and technol-
ogy of energy grid issues.
6.5. Remanufacturing and product design
It is known that the specific requirements for product recov-
ery can be addressed through effective product design. Mabee
et al. [203] provided a list of design attributes and criteria in
five categories of the remanufacturing process, namely disassem-
bly, sorting, cleaning, refurbishment and reassembly to assess
remanufactureability of design alternatives. Okumura et al. [204]
developed an optimization model to determine the physical life
span of a reusable component. Jukun et al. [205] discussed the
importance of material selection to promote remanufactureability
and suggested designers should use assessment methods to eval-
uate materials based on service life, recoverability, environmental
impact, economy and separateability.
Design for X methods such as design for disassembly [206],
reuse [207], remanufacturing [208], recycling and reassembly
are examples of design efforts. Among DFX methods, research
in design for disassembly has developed rapidly. Methods have
been suggested for minimizing disassembly time, defining the
most efficient disassembly sequence [209], reducing disassembly
cost through product modularity [210], and disassembly sequence
planning [211].
6.6. Session summary
Traditional views to a circular economy, including many of those
in the Design for X domain, largely focus on improvement of end-of-
pipe recovery activities such as disassembly and recycling, but fail
to comprehensively consider the complete pathway of a product
and the business opportunities that exist early on at the end-of-
use stage. Although recycling and remanufacturing have received a
lot of attention in the circular economy domain, the circular econ-
omy has moved beyond simple material recovery [212]. The true
success of a circular economy depends on new business models
that extract the actual value that is still embedded in a product.
Examples of these business models are: selling high quality long-
lasting products, selling a combination of short-lived and durable
products, and selling service rather than products. The success of
these business models depend on many factors ranging from effi-
ciency of supply chain and brand reputation to product design
strategies. Appropriate design strategies such as design for ease of
repair and design for product durability have broad business impli-
cations in an economy. One of the most pressing areas of research
in need of exploration is the connection between business mod-
els and design-for-remanufacturing strategies. The possibility of
adopting design-for-remanufacturing strategies in a business con-
text and the associated consequences on business profitability has
remained largely unexplored [213].
7. Environmentally conscious manufacturing and
sustainable manufacturing
Sustainable manufacturing aims to create and distribute innova-
tive goods that: minimize usage of resources (mfg. process inputs),
and remove unnecessary process outputs, including waste, toxic
materials, CO2 emissions over the product lifecycle [214]. Different
analysis methods, energy and material reduction efforts and even
transportation and packaging systems have been implemented in
sustainable manufacturing. Perhaps the term ‘sustainable business’
is a better descriptor of this system than ‘sustainable manufactur-
ing’ since efforts toward reduction of environmental impact and
improving the economic and social impacts through the entire life-
cycle of the product is a business-wide effort where manufacturing
is just one important step of it.
Dornfeld et al. made a clear distinction between green man-
ufacturing and sustainable manufacturing in which sustainable
manufacturing meets the requirement of the triple bottom line of
environmental, social and economic factors, while green manufac-
turing targets environmental and social factors. Table 4 provides a
summary of different types of manufacturing paradigms in terms
of the three pillars of sustainability [215].
Table 4
Categorization of mfg. systems based on three pillars of sustainability (summarized
from [215]).
Sustainability aspect covered
Environmental Social Economic
Green mfg. X X
Lean mfg. X X
Mass mfg. X X
Sustainable mfg. X X X
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
Table 5
steps toward becoming a sustainable enterprise (summarized from [216]).
Features of a sustainable business
1 Zero waste to the earth’s biosphere. This includes elimination of any
types of waste and rework
2 Benign emissions: elimination of any organic and inorganic extraction
from the earth’s lithosphere. This means preventing toxic substances
to enter the factory processes in the upstream
3 Renewable energy sources including solar, wind, hydrogen fuel cells,
biofuel and geothermal
4 Closing the loop: use of recycled rather than virgin materials and
different end-of-use options such as reuse, remanufacture, recycle,
and refurbishment
5 Efficient Transportation
6 Investment in society (e.g., education)
7 Redesign of commerce, new business lines (e.g., selling service rather
than products)
Although the manufacturing industry has a number of drivers
(e.g., regulation, consumer interest toward green products, and
process improvement) motivating it toward green efforts, manu-
facturers still face a number of challenges. High investment cost, a
long pay back capital time, current technological limitations, lack
of decision support tools, lack of appropriate metrics, lack of infor-
mation, especially in small and medium size companies, and lack
of a standard environmental impact assessment tool are among the
barriers to sustainable systems.
The focus on sustainability has encouraged more research that
addresses sustainability principles. Ray Anderson has outlined
seven main steps (listed in Table 5) that companies can take to
become a sustainable enterprise. He called that enterprise a “Pro-
totypical Company of the 21st Century” [216].
In addition to strategies, a significant number of standards have
been provided over the last two decades to facilitate development
of sustainable solutions. Rachuri at al. [217] listed a summary of
them, including but not limited to, Energy Star, End of Life of
Vehicles (ELV), Waste Electric and Electronic Equipment (WEEE),
Restriction of Hazardous Substances directive (RoHS), Institute of
Printed Circuits, National Science Foundation, and ISO standards.
Recent research has focused on discussing the role of technol-
ogy on sustainability. Chertow [218] described different variants
of the IPAT equation used over the past 30 years. IPAT equa-
tions aim to define Impact as a function of several forcing factors,
including Population, Affluence and Technology. Although the tra-
ditional IPAT models define Impact as a multiplication of P × A × T,
recent researchers believe that multiplication implies the indepen-
dence of these forcing factors. However, these are not independent
[219]. Chertow [218] concluded that there was a shift in envi-
ronmentalism’s view toward the role of technology in sustainable
development. Waggoner and Ausubel [219] considered technology
as efficiency with emission/energy as dimension where producers
act on using technology and quantify the impact of changes in tech-
nology by the amount of emissions.
In addition to technology, sustainability has other enablers such
as education as presented by Garreti and Taisch [220], and ethics
and accountability as suggested by Molamohamadi and Ismail
[221].
The interest in sustainable mfg. has encouraged a lot of research
in the development of decision-making tools, metrics and sus-
tainability measurement systems. According to Despeisse and
Vladimirova [222], OEMs do not fully incorporate the non-financial
aspects of sustainability in their decision making. Therefore, they
are missing some improvement opportunities due to their con-
centration on short-term economic-based decision making rather
than long-term decision making based on all three dimensions of
sustainability. Yuan et al. [223] suggested an evaluation technique
using three components – technology-energy-material – with the
aim of creating strategies for pollution prevention. Vinodh and
89
Girubha discussed the application of a fuzzy-based Multiple Cri-
terion Decision Making (MCDM) method in a sustainable material
selection problem. Reich-Weiser and Dornfeld [224] employed an
Economic Input Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIOLCA) method to
compare four modes of transportation: water freight, rail, trucking,
and air freight in terms of environmental impacts as a step toward
sustainable supply chain.
Although various sustainable manufacturing practices have
been implemented by industry, a limited number of detailed
published cases are available in the research community [225].
Despeisse et al. selected 83 cases of practical applications of sustain-
able concepts released by books and environmental organization
websites. They further narrowed down the number of cases to 20
sufficiently detailed practices, where they identified the practice
improvement focus for each case. The focus of practices includes
energy use, air emissions, water use, waste water, material use,
and material waste. In addition, they categorized cases based on the
geographical origins, where North America, Europe and Africa are
among the regions with the highest number of reported sustainable
practices, respectively.
Various Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and metrics have
been developed over the past decade to enable evaluation of indus-
trial sustainable practices [226]. Metrics are often categorized
under the triple bottom line: environmental, economic and social
performance. Amrina and Yusof [227] suggested a list of 41 KPIs
for the automotive industry. The amount of emissions, resource
utilization and waste categories are listed under environmental
performance. Quality, cost, delivery and flexibility measures are
for evaluation of economic performance and measures related to
employees and suppliers are for social performance. Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) methods and software tools often are used to
calculate environmental impacts. Table 6 provides examples of
metrics in each aspect of sustainability. There are some metrics
such as the amount of pollutants and emissions that cover several
aspects of sustainability and they can be fitted under more than one
category.
According to Zhang et al. [230], sustainable manufacturing
assessment requires system thinking approach in all three levels
of operations, facility and enterprise. Decision makers in sustain-
able manufacturing should consider complex interactions of many
factors including system variables and human behaviors. They sug-
gested a conceptual model for using system dynamics as a tool for
assessing the impact of sustainable manufacturing efforts. For more
information on sustainable manufacturing literature, we refer the
reader to the review paper by Haapala et al. [231].
7.1. Session summary
The manufacturing phase is often a major contributor to the
overall environmental impacts of many product lifecycles. Increas-
ing use of new technologies introduces new sources of uncertainty
in material flows and environmental impact assessment models.
Advanced manufacturing technologies such as additive manu-
Table 6
Examples of KPIs for sustainable manufacturing (gotten from [227–229]).
Category Examples
Economic Net present value, Life cycle costing, Total cost of
ownership, Product reliability, Cycle time, Process
flexibility, reuse rate
Social Equity, Ethical consideration, Labor development and
welfare, Employees turnover rate, Training, Employees
health and safety, Supplier commitment, Consumer
satisfaction
Environmental Emissions, Wastes, Energy consumptions, Land used,
Global warming potential (GWP), reuse rate
90 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
facturing, energy harvesting technologies, new technologies for
printed electronic, nano-particle enable technologies, and new
technologies for metal extraction may bring improvements but sig-
nificant data gaps avoid clear-cut evaluation of newer technologies.
Further, while environmental indicators such as energy and cli-
mate impacts have been extensively studied, other indicators such
as toxicity, human health and water footprint have received less
attention.
8. New manufacturing paradigms originated form data
analytics
8.1. Smart manufacturing, smart supply chain, data analytics in
manufacturing
The use of data analysis to improve the performance of manu-
facturing systems has been extensively considered in the literature.
In fact, data modeling and analysis are an integral part of almost
any data-driven decision making. The advanced manufacturing sys-
tems equipped with hundreds of sensors facilitate collection of a
huge amount of data known as big data and provide opportunities
for enhancing the performance of manufacturing processes.
However, big data technologies are shifting from data collec-
tion to data analyses and outcome. According to Deutsch [232],
data analytic models are growing at a slower rate compared to data
collection infrastructure-centric technologies. Zhu et al. [233] pro-
vided a comparison of big data of cloud manufacturing and data
collected from traditional manufacturing in several aspects such as
data management (scattered management vs. centralized manage-
ment), variety of data (limited type vs. various types), and value
(low utilization vs. integrated value mining).
Research in data mining and knowledge discovery tech-
niques has developed rapidly in recent years, where many
knowledge-extraction algorithms have been proposed specially by
non-engineering researchers [234]. These algorithms cover a wide
range of disciplines, including machine learning techniques, statis-
tical analysis methods, artificial intelligence, and data visualization
techniques [235]. Data mining techniques can be classified into two
groups of discovery techniques and predictive techniques. While
the focus of discovery techniques (e.g., clustering, link analysis, etc.)
is to capture patterns inside a dataset, predictive techniques (clas-
sification, association rules, case based reasoning, artificial neural
networks, etc.) aim to identify the connection between a set of
variables and a target variable [236]. Further, a large number of
applications have been reported for data mining in different man-
ufacturing levels. To name a few, Mazlan et al. [237] used data
mining to determine the success rate of starting up a new business
in a particular region based on demographic data and economic
factors such as GDP. Stockton et al. [238] employed data min-
ing to develop a new cost modeling technique for manufacturing
operations. Wang et al. [239] provided a review of data mining
applications, including failure evaluation, quality control, safety
analysis, capacity planning and engineering design, where appli-
cation of data mining in semiconductor industry was listed as the
most common application. The focus of the research so far is not
just on data mining techniques but also on the stages before and
after data mining, including data collection, processing, cleaning,
transformation and decision making based on data.
The value of data collection and analysis depends on how much
decision support they provide [240]. Although the progress in data
mining algorithms is impressive, the progress in decision making
using knowledge derived from those algorithms is not significant
[234]. While data mining facilitate identification of patterns and
trends in the data, tools are needed to harness the full potential of
the available knowledge [241]. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)
and Statistical Process Control (SPC) are among the techniques
suggested for real-time monitoring of operational performance of
manufacturing systems.
Fig. 8 provides an overview of three different research directions
identified in manufacturing data analytics and the new manufac-
turing paradigms and concepts generated from them.
The application of data analytics to improve manufacturing
operations ranging from data analysis in the warehouse [242],
development of a manufacturing performance dashboard [243],
and price optimization based on data mining of consumer prefer-
ence [244] to predictive models for power consumption [245] and
data mining techniques for suppliers’ selection [246].
Poor quality data [247], lack of a holistic database that integrates
both operational and decision-making data [242], and lack of anal-
ysis models [248] are among the current data-related challenges in
manufacturing systems.
8.1.1. Data visualization
Visual representation of data and knowledge has been reported
in many studies as an important method for supporting decision
making.
Various tools and techniques ranging from iconic displays to 3D
displays and Immersive Computing Technologies (ICT) have been
developed to support data visualization [249]. For example, Shao
et al. used simulation and modeling techniques to develop a pro-
totype data validation system [250]. Pantförder and Vogel-Heuser
[251] conducted a study to evaluate if the type of data visualiza-
tion (2D vs. 3D) has any impacts on the operator’s reaction time in
detecting defective conditions. Thron [252] developed a software
visualization tool added to the ERP system to show the work-in-
process quantities in production systems to facilitate scheduling
activities.
In addition to data visualization techniques, establishment of
various Virtual Reality (VR) technologies such as desktop sys-
tems, head mounted display, and CAVE systems led to widespread
research in the area of VR applications to improve product devel-
opment and manufacturing planning [253]. According to Sung and
Ou [254], all groups of engineering tasks within manufacturing sys-
tems, including design, implementation and operational activities
can benefit from advances in VR technologies. Seth et al. [89] dis-
cussed the potential of VR in considering human motions in the
time and cost of assembly operations. Berg et al. [255] showed the
application of VR for assembly and disassembly process training.
Behdad et al. [256] discussed a framework in which VR would create
synergy between descriptive and normative decision-making tools
to facilitate disassembly sequence planning under the operator’s
cognitive biases.
8.2. Social manufacturing
Manufacturing systems capable of handling, processing and
manipulating a huge amount of data are recognized as smart manu-
facturing systems [245]. For more than several decades, researchers
have been focusing on better ways of collecting data and developing
big data infrastructure technologies. In addition to sensor technolo-
gies, other options such as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and
Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES) are used for data collec-
tion [257]. The most recent studies in line with data collection tech-
nology are focused on the development of cloud service platforms
[233]. Cloud computing is known to have a critical role in trans-
forming the manufacturing industry [258]. The application of intel-
ligent service terminals and cloud technology is especially impor-
tant as ‘social manufacturing,’ a novel manufacturing paradigm in
apparel and fashion industry, started receiving attention. The term
‘social manufacturing’ was coined by Professor Feiyue Wang in
2012 where it represents a system in which consumers are fully
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100 91

Three Research Directions in Big Data Technologies

Data Collection and Security Data Analytics Decision Making Techniques

Technologies:
Data Analysis Data Envelopment Analysis
Barcode systems
Data Mining Data Visualizaon
Sensors, RFID
Data Integraon Stascal Process Control
Portable computers, GPS, etc.
Both human-generated and Performance dashboard
Social networks machine-generated data

New manufacturing paradigms:

Smart Mfg. Cloud Mfg. Social Mfg. Knowledge Responsive Cyber-Physical
driven Mfg. Mfg. System-based Mfg.

Fig. 8. Three main research directions in big data technologies: shift from data collection to data analytics and decision making.

involved in production. Recent progress in information technology,
3D printers and cloud technology are making social manufacturing
a reality [259]. The information that consumers put online impacts
all the supply chain and manufacturing activities.
8.3. Cloud manufacturing
Another manufacturing paradigm generated as a result of cloud
computing technology is Cloud Manufacturing (CMfg). The term
cloud manufacturing first was coined by professor Li Bo-hu in
2010 [260]. CMfg is a service-oriented model that makes physically
distributed resources and abilities controlled by different parties
available to the enterprises that need those resources through
a logically centralized cloud service [261]. Valilai and Housh-
mand [258] developed an integrated manufacturing platform to
facilitate collaboration among several globally distributed man-
ufacturing agents. Cloud manufacturing service platforms aim to
virtualize manufacturing capabilities, connect various manufactur-
ing resources and provide resource sharing.
Wu et al. [262] described cloud consumers, cloud providers,
cloud brokers, and cloud carriers as four main actors in CMfg
collaborating toward delivering four types of services: Hardware-
as-a-service (HaaS, e.g., sharing machine and hard tooling),
Software-as-a-service (SaaS, e.g., sharing software applications
such as ERP, CAD/CAM), Platform-as-a-service (PaaS, e.g., sharing a
platform and search engine), and infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS,
e.g., computing resources such as servers and storage space).
So far, research in CMf can be classified into three groups:
studies focused on designing platform and data-sharing architec-
ture, studies concentrated on resource allocation and management,
and studies aimed at describing new business models and CMf
applications. The first group of studies describes the IT systems
requirement and data integration platforms. Hueng et al. [263]
discussed the architecture of cloud manufacturing service plat-
forms in small and medium-sized enterprises. Suo and Gao [264]
showed how simulation software packages can be used to find the
optimum configuration for cloud manufacturing service platforms.
Zhang et al. [265] illustrated the application of fiber optic sensing in
improving the efficiency of cloud manufacturing service platforms.
The CMfg paradigm enables companies to expand their capabil-
ities and have flexibility in scale depending on market demand.
Helo et al. [266] described the limitation of current IT solutions in
distributed manufacturing in a multi-layer supply chain and pro-
posed a new cloud-based centralized software application, where
a proper information-sharing infrastructure is provided between
suppliers and other supply chain entities.
The second group of studies focused on the task assignment
and resource allocation. Wu et al. [267] applied a stochastic Petri
Net model to evaluate manufacturing capacities and depict how
manufacturers can reconfigure and adjust the uncertainty in their
material flows by renting manufacturing resources from cloud
providers without purchasing new resources permanently. Wei and
Liu [268] and Lin and Chong [269] also solved the resource alloca-
tion problem in CMfg. applying ant colony optimization and Genetic
Algorithm, respectively. Gao et al. discussed the trustworthy net-
work between service consumers and service providers and system
security as a critical factor in successful implementation of CMfg
[270]. Investigation of new service-oriented business models [258]
and energy-saving approaches toward green manufacturing [271]
has been the focus of third group of studies.
8.4. Cloud-based remanufacturing
In addition to the mfg., the remanufacturing industry also will be
affected by the new data analytics paradigms. Particularly, emerg-
ing data collection and information tracking technologies such as
smart embedded systems and software applications provide a new
environment in which the product lifecycle actors are enabled to
collect and analyze the entire product’s lifespan. The technologies
allow information flow to go beyond the first product lifecycle and
to feed the information gathered in the first lifecycle to the reman-
ufacturing decisions being made at the start of the future lifecycles.
As discussed in Section 6, a review of various studies reveals a
set of characteristics in which a remanufacturing system is differ-
ent from the manufacturing. Particularly, remanufacturing today
is an uncertainty-heavy process, but very often this uncertainty is
not adequately handled, and it is not perfectly considered in the
decision-making process. Some of these uncertainties include con-
sideration of quality, quantity and timing of returns [272] as well
as variability in processing times [186].
Inadequate standards for product recovery, rapid changes in
product technology, lack of assessment tools to identify reman-
ufacturability of used items, and unwillingness of consumers to
purchase refurbished items are among barriers to appropriate
end-of-use product remanufacturing [198]. Parlikad et al. [273]
discussed that product identity data are key to enhancement of
product end-of-life recovery phase. Product identity implies access
to a unique information profile, where remanufactures can maxi-
mize efficient reuse and recovery of products.
The lifecycle data have already been a point of interest in
the field of Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM) and machinery
diagnostics [274]. CBM deals with development of maintenance
programs based on the data collected through machinery condition
monitoring. In CBM, machine condition is monitored at a regular
interval and once it is higher than a pre-defined critical level, the
maintenance need will be initiated. The topics in this field vary
from defining the critical levels [275], determining the condition
monitoring intervals, and developing software applications for data
92 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
monitoring, to improving the prognostic capability of diagnostic
algorithms [276] and dealing with incomplete and missing data
[277]. Gao et al. [278] described how the emerging cloud infra-
structure will create a need for developing new prognosis theories
and techniques. Si et al. [279] reviewed the most recent statistical
based data driven approaches used in CBM for estimation of the
Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a machine. They classified the mod-
eling development methods into two broad categories of models,
those that rely on directly observed state of the system, and those
based on indirectly observed system processes. The taxonomy of
approaches includes regression-based models, Wiener processes,
Gamma processes, Markovian-based models, stochastic filtering
based methods and covariate-based models. Finally, they presented
a number of practical problems that require further analysis. (1)
the necessity for more studies that consider the impact of subjec-
tive information in estimating RUL; (2) the need for effective use of
multi-channel condition maintenance data in RUL estimation; (3)
modeling the impact of external environmental variables on RUL
estimation; and (4) the need for a model that can handle multiple
failure modes for a single component.
In particular, the focus of future research can be to extract and
use the information that mainly is not included in Product Life-
cycle Management (PLM) systems and can be collected from the
actual product usage behavior of consumers [280]. PLM is a sys-
tem that provides support for product development based on the
information of the entire product lifecycle. For example, Kiritsis
et al. defined a data structure for recording the data during main-
tenance operations with the aim of employing them in the design
for repair and maintainability [281]. Jun et al. [282] and Parlikad
and MacFarlance [283] have discussed the possibility of applying
Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) technology for feeding the
information of middle-of-life (e.g., maintenance history and pro-
duction information) to the EOL phase. Xu et al. [284] also modeled
the product information flows and feedbacks through wireless
technology in closed loop supply chains.
Bufardi et al. [285] developed a multiple criteria decision making
tool as part of a European Union project termed AEOLOS (An End-
of-Life of Product Systems) to provide users with a tool to help them
in evaluating different EOL recovery options for a used product. Jun
et al. [286] acknowledged the point that it is not easy to make appro-
priate EOU decisions because of invisibility of product information
over the entire lifecycle. Wang et al. [287,288] discussed how a
cloud-based information system should be set up to facilitate the
recovery of electronic waste. In another study, Xia et al. [289] devel-
oped a semantic information framework for information sharing for
proper electronic waste management.
Currently, often a complete and up-to-date record about the
status of a product is not available to remanufacturing personnel.
Future generations of intelligent products, having features such as
extended data sensing, communication and processing and in some
cases decision-making capabilities, provide new opportunities for
the remanufacturing industry.
Future studies should be focused on how to apply the data col-
lected from previous lifecycles of product toward making efficient
decisions about future lifecycles.
8.5. Cyber-physical systems
In addition to the above mentioned paradigms, there
are a few other models such as smart factory and cyber
computational–physical (machine) systems (CPS). These new mod-
els are based on integration of software and embedded intelligence
into industrial products. In CPS, machinery is equipped with pre-
diction tools that process data to extract information and make
real-time informed decisions [270].
The cyber-physical systems can be used in a wide range of appli-
cations. For example, Lanza et al. [290] showed how the optimum
production strategy can be selected using simultaneous simulation
and optimization of the assembly process with the help of real-
time data generated by IT-systems. Wang et al. [291] provided an
overview of the current status of CPS in mfg. systems along with
a conceptual map of CPS. CPS is a feedback system possibly with
human in the loop that are networked and/or distributed, adop-
tive and predictive, intelligent and real-time. In another study,
Wang et al. [292] discussed what the system architecture and data
sharing infrastructure should be for controllability of CPS on the
cloud. Lee et al. [293] discussed the application of CPS and smart
algorithms in the future of equipment maintenance. Cooper and
Wachter [294] studied the application of CPS for thermal modeling
in the additive mfg. processes. Seitz and Nyhuis [295] introduced
the learning factory concept and discussed the importance of CPS
not only to monitor production planning, but also to educate and
train the employees in industrial sites. While the overall impact
of CPS as technological changeovers already has been discussed in
the literature, current studies are still on the conceptual level stage.
Therefore, more detailed studies are needed on how CPS should be
integrated with the existing mfg. infrastructure.
Table 7 summarizes the application of CPS into five levels of
study:
• Technologies enabling supply chain visibility in market demand,
transportation, and real-time information of distribution centers.
• Technologies enabling visibility in the smart factory level.
• Technologies that improve the performance of manufacturing
processes toward leagile manufacturing paradigm of reducing
non-value adding activities and waste while increasing the
responsiveness of the process.
• Sensing technologies for the purpose of machine failure diagnosis
and self-correction.
• Communication technologies enabling data collection and visi-
bility in the product level.
According to the Digital Manufacturing and Design Innova-
tion Institute (DMDII), Mfg. systems should be structured for the
appropriate exchange of information into lower tiers. Integration
technologies should be easy to implement across a network of
companies. The data architecture should change the collaboration
paradigm in the mfg. industry [296]. Most of the time quantify-
ing quality and performance measures of manufacturing processes
requires tracking down critical information at a specific product
level rather than at a factory or company level.
Table 7
Five levels of cyber-physical systems applications.
Product level Device/machine level
• Tooling choice • Material choice
• Material choice • Device configuration
• Remanufacturing choice • Maintenance and self-monitoring
Production line/work station Facility level
• Inventory flow monitoring • Capacity planning
• Product re-work • Energy scheduling
• Layout design • Equipment choice
• Production planning assembly • Waste management
and disassembly
• Quality control
Supply chain level
• Sourcing or partnering choices
• Transit mode choice
• Distribution and warehousing strategy
• Supplier location
• Packaging
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
8.6. Session summary
Design of novel manufacturing machines and equipment inte-
grated with cyber-physical systems, capable of simultaneous data
collection and analysis is one frontier for future research. There
is also a need for development of decision analysis methods that
facilitate decision making by employing data collected from supply
chain and production lines. Investigation of new business mod-
els originating from cloud and smart manufacturing concepts and
simultaneous product and supply chain designs as best practice
is another area for future research. Finally, data security concerns
such as intellectual property theft, data alteration, and external
interference in the manufacturing process require further research.
9. Advanced manufacturing
Anderson Economic Group has defined Advanced Manufactur-
ing as operations that “create advanced products, use innovative
techniques in their manufacturing, and are inventing new pro-
cesses and technologies for future manufacturing.” [297]. Advanced
manufacturing is not just the employment of robots and high tech
processes, but also includes manufacturing of innovative products
and use of creative principles.
Digital modeling and fabrication, nano-manufacturing, power
electronics and semiconductor manufacturing are among technolo-
gies considered in the advanced manufacturing category.
9.1. Nano-manufacturing
Nanotechnology has been reported to have the potential to rev-
olutionize almost any industry sector ranging from electronics,
energy and biomedical to aerospace and materials. Nano manu-
facturing is defined as the production of materials, and structures
with at least one lateral dimension between 1 and 100 nm [298].
The nano manufacturing technologies are categorized in three
groups of top-down, bottom-up and hybrid technologies. While
the top-down technologies aim to create nanoscale features and
patterns using physical processes such as carving and grinding;
the bottom-up technologies focus on micro-scale manipulation of
molecules using chemical processes.
Many studies were focused on the advances in micro/nano
manufacturing processes and systems. According to Hoyle [299],
current processes are centered on lithographic techniques that use
silicon as the base for Integrated Circuit (IC) production; however,
the need for manufacturing high-precise low-cost products has led
the research on developing manufacturing processes that use non-
silicon materials such as metals, polymers, ceramics and glass.
There are many studies in the literature focused on the manip-
ulation of molecules with the aim of self-assembling into desired
non-structures [300]. For example, Li et al. [300] genetically mod-
ified a protein to form a new structure that can be coated with
metals to produce nano-wires.
There are other studies on the advancement of laser-based nano
manufacturing technologies. For instance, Cooper [301] discussed
the idea of using cyber-physical systems to control the performance
of a nanoimprinting process and increase the production rate in a
nonmanufacturing physical system. Lasers have played an impor-
tant role in nano manufacturing. Different laser-based technologies
have been developed, including manufacturing of surface nano-
structure, nano materials and 3D nano-structures manufacturing
via additive techniques [298].
Although a considerable number of ongoing research is con-
cerned with developing innovative nanofabrication techniques,
there are some studies which aim to improve nano-manufacturing
process parameters such as throughput and quality. In general,
93
the research theme in micro/nano manufacturing can be divided
into four categories: (1) product development, (2) material devel-
opment, (3) process development, and (4) production systems.
Obikawa et al. [302] discusses various aspects through which nano
technology affects macro mfg.
9.2. Semiconductor manufacturing
The technologies used for production of semiconductor devices
such as integrated circuits, microchips, nanowires, micro sensors,
inject nozzles, and laser diodes are identified as microfabrica-
tion technologies. Semiconductor manufacturing is highly resource
and energy intensive and requires too many manufacturing steps
ranging from photolithography and etching to thermal oxidation,
chemicals mechanical planarization and cleaning [229]. The fol-
lowing category of studies has been identified in this field: studies
focused on advanced materials development, manipulation and
characterization [303], development of advanced nanomanufac-
turing processes [304], discovery of practical applications [305],
assembly and self-assembly of components in nano-scale systems
[306], industry-scale fabrication of nano systems with high effi-
ciency and low cost [307], and environmental assessment of the
semiconductor industry [308].
9.3. Additive manufacturing
Additive Manufacturing describes the technologies through
which parts are built by melting thin layers of powder and adding
one layer of material, either plastic or metal, on top of another. Each
layer is melted based on the geometry suggested in CAD models
[309]. This technology opens up new design paradigms: ‘manu-
facturing the design’ vs. the traditional ‘design for manufacturing’
approach. The geometrical freedom in design allows engineers
to design products as they visualize, without manufacturing con-
straints.
AM is recognized as the new industrial revolution, where it has
evolved from a tool for building prototypes to one receiving broad
acceptance for batch production of parts that are used directly as
finished components [310].
In terms of global industry growth, the United States was the
pioneer in a number of industrial AM system installations with
38.0% of total industrial AM systems installed over the past 24 years
followed by Japan (9.7%), Germany (9.4%), China (8.7%), the United
Kingdom (4.2%) and France (3.2%) [311]. A simple look at only one of
the 3D printer makers reveals that the 3D printing market is rapidly
growing. Another indicator for measuring the public interest of the
AM industry is the market trend for AM companies. According to
Castle Island Co., the number of industrial 3D printers sold over the
past 25 years has increased from zero in 1988 to 10,000 in 2012
and the number of personal 3D printers sold rose from 0 in 2008 to
more than 70,000 in 2013 [312].
AM is known by other names, such as, 3D Printing, Rapid Pro-
totyping, Rapid Tooling, Rapid Technologies, Rapid Manufacturing,
Freeform Fabrication, Advanced Manufacturing, Additive Fabrica-
tion, Additive Layer Manufacturing, Direct Digital Manufacturing
and Direct Manufacturing [313]. However, AM is not the same as
rapid prototyping; it goes further and could be at the heart of the
next industrial revolution with more potential. Although there are
different terms for AM (3D Printing, Rapid Prototyping, etc.), these
technologies are built on the same principle: the ability to manu-
facture parts with very complex geometries by stacking layers of
materials without the need for tooling and fixtures. The technology
initially was recognized as an application for rapid prototyping,
but it is now widely considered in different industries, including
aerospace, medical, automotive, construction, and art. With the
availability of higher-quality materials for a lower price, and the
94 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100

retailers but also to consumers. These designs will offer mass per-
sonalization to final consumers and provide the CAD–CAM libraries
of downloadable designs to individuals [310].
Successful large-scale Although separation of product design from manufacturing
implementation of AM capabilities is a major advantage of AM, the impact of AM is not
only limited to the design and manufacturing stages. In addition to

Quality Control
Technology
Materials

Software
the freedom of design (elimination of design constraints, material
Design

saving, and free complexity), AM offers other potential benefits to

the industry as well. One of the most immediate potentials of AM is
the possibility of more efficient logistics [312]. AM offers the poten-
tial for reduction of both ‘time to market’ (time from design concept
Innovation
to sale in the market) and ‘time to volume’ (the time to achieve full-
Research and Development scale manufacturing volume). One can envision a future in which
Processes: parts are manufactured not based on a just-in-time approach, but
- Cost of materials and equipment based on just-in-production mode, where products are printed
- Precision, surface finish directly as they are ordered. Such a new paradigm will bring partic-
- Production speed, high yield
Materials: ular implications to the global supply chain. Some of the need for
- Materials flexibility, smart and functional materials shipping parts and warehouse storage will be removed. Moreover,
- Thermal condition the need for assembly line workers to assemble complex products
- Multi-materials will be limited [315]. Reduction in product time-to-market, a rise in
Novel Applications process complexity and the push for companies across the globe to
Quality Control Methods reduce waste and energy consumption are reported among other
Tooling and Fixtures factors that make AM an attractive option [316].
Design for Additive Manufacturing
The successful implementation of AM requires advancement in
Intellectual Property
Technology Dissemination, People five main areas of design, materials, technology, software and qual-
Supply Chain ity control. Although AM has too many capabilities, there are still
Integration with traditional mfg. processes many areas in which further research and development are needed.
Society readiness for any 3D printed products Fig. 9 clarifies those areas and the potential directions for future
research.
Fig. 9. Research pillars in Additive Manufacturing. Future research in AM include: advancement of additive manu-
facturing technologies, materials property analysis, structure with
ability to produce larger products with greater levels of precision multiple materials, scalable additive manufacturing, quality con-
within the next few years or so [314], one can reasonably predict trol and safety tools for additive manufacturing processes, design
considerable supply chain developments on not only the design for additive manufacturing, economic analysis, and cost model-
side, but also in the production side of this technology. The flexibil- ing techniques in AM-based systems, analysis of IP process and
ity in terms of the type of products that can be manufactured and societal impact, new business models that emerge from additive
where the production takes place will allow a large number of com- manufacturing, reconfiguration of supply chain and understanding
panies to soon offer CAD–CAM designs for downloading not only to the impact of AM capabilities (e.g., flexibility in supply, agility)

Trend of most recent manufacturing concepts appeared in literature

450

400

350 Cloud base mfg

300 Smart mfg

Number of Publications

Sustainable mfg
250
Green mfg
200
Social mfg
150 Nano mfg
100 Additive+3D printing

50 Advanced mfg

Remanufacturing
0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Cyber-Physical Systems AND mfg.
Publication Year
Fig. 10. The number of publications found in Engineering Village, Compendex, Inspec & GEOBASE databases from 1999 to April 2015 with titles including one of the following
labels: cloud-based manufacturing, smart mfg., sustainable mfg., green mfg., social mfg., nano-manufacturing, additive mfg. or 3D printing, advanced mfg., remanufacturing
and ‘cyber-physical systems AND mfg’.
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
on adoption of different production, environmental and logistics
policies in supply chains. Moreover, AM technology can be used to
facilitate the remanufacturing, repair, and reuse of old products.
9.4. Session summary
Research in advanced manufacturing is focused on building
technologies across a wide-range of scales from nano to kilome-
ters. The overarching goal is to develop technologies with higher
efficiency, lower cost and environmental impacts. Future research
includes industry-scale nano manufacturing, new experimental
and computational methods for assembly of nano and macro scale
materials, design for advanced manufacturing, and development of
data enabled sensing and control techniques.
10. Conclusions and future trends
This study examined the manufacturing and remanufacturing
literature and provided a broad perspective on the concept of
manufacturing, including the definition of manufacturing, various
classifications and taxonomies in manufacturing systems, technical
and engineering aspects as well as planning aspects of manufac-
turing, new emerging paradigms and manufacturing concepts. The
focus was on advanced manufacturing concepts generated over the
past decade such as sustainable manufacturing, smart manufac-
turing, social manufacturing, nano-manufacturing, semiconductor
manufacturing and additive manufacturing. Fig. 10 shows the num-
ber of published work in the most recent manufacturing concepts
from 1999 to April 2015 found in Engineering Village, Compen-
dex, Inspec & GEOBASE databases. Included in the review were only
those publications with titles that had one of the above-mentioned
manufacturing concepts.
Future research directions in the context of manufacturing are
summarized here using five criteria: objective, business models,
emerging technologies, advanced scheduling, and enabling factors.
Objective: The future of advanced mfg. should be focused on
development of design solutions that facilitate simultaneously
covering the three pillars of sustainability (people, planet, profit)
without the need for making trade-offs between these three objec-
tives. While economic and environmental objectives are tangible,
social impacts are not easily quantifiable. Currently, significant
data gaps prevent clear-cut evaluation of environmental and social
impacts of new technologies.
Business models: As traditional business models will be dis-
rupted, new businesses will enter the market. The business lines
between manufacturers, distributors, end users, and recyclers are
unclear and this is happening very quickly. Democratization of
manufacturing results in the concept of ‘virtualizing manufactur-
ing capabilities, connecting various manufacturing resources, and
providing resource sharing. Traditional views on manufacturing,
including many of those in the design domain, largely focus on
improvement of manufacturing efficiency through transformative
advances in mfg. technologies but fail to comprehensively consider
the complete product development pathway and the business
opportunities that exist over the product lifecycle. Businesses
should focus on offering product experience rather than just tangi-
ble products or services. Although new technologies have received
a lot of attention in the mfg. domain, advanced mfg. is more than
a compilation of high performance technologies. The true success
of advanced mfg. depends on new business models that extract
the actual value that new technologies offer. One example of a
new business model is through development of a smart integrated
system that sells service-products rather than products. The
success of these business models depend on many factors ranging
from flexibility of mfg. processes, efficiency of supply chain, and
infrastructure quality to product design strategies. Appropriate
95
design strategies such as design of the product experience can
significantly alter the traditional business model of advanced
manufacturing.
Emerging technologies: Advanced mfg. relies on new tech-
nologies that enable flexibility, agility, and reconfigure-ability.
Examples of applicable areas are: bio-manufacturing, semi-
conductors, advanced materials, additive manufacturing, and
nano-manufacturing. The focus of future research will be on scal-
able advanced manufacturing such as overcoming the barriers that
prevent manufacturing nanostructures and materials at industry
scale with low cost and high quality solutions. In addition, envi-
ronmental impact analysis such as health and safety challenges of
new technologies is another line of research.
Advanced planning and scheduling: the definition of advanced
mfg. should be extended to include not only the process aspect,
but also the management and leadership methods. Novel qual-
ity management methods, supply chain integration, and advanced
planning, monitoring and scheduling should be equally considered.
Enabling factors: Various factors enable or challenge advance-
ment in manufacturing systems: Law and regulations (e.g.,
Intellectual Property rights), ICT-enabled intelligent production
processes, smart building and infrastructure, data collection tech-
nology, data analytics methods, new knowledge-based decision
making techniques, future skilled workforce capable of using novel
technologies, and innovative education and training are among
those enabling factors.
It should be noted that much more work has been accomplished
in manufacturing that has not been included in this review because
it falls outside of the scope of our analysis. We hope that our review
of the manufacturing literature provides readers with a wider view
of different practical aspects of manufacturing and a clearer path
for studying this evolving field.
References
[1] He W, Xu L. A state-of-the-art survey of cloud manufacturing. Int J Comput
Integ M 2014;28(3):239–50. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/
abs/10.1080/0951192X.2013.874595 [Accessed March 19, 2016].
[2] Reisman A, Kumar A, Motwani J, Cheng CH. Cellular manufacturing: a statis-
tical review of the literature (1965–1995). Oper Res 1997;45(Jul (4)):508–20.
[3] Keller AZ, Kazazi A. Just-in-time manufacturing systems: a literature review.
Ind Manage Data Syst 1993;93(7):2–32.
[4] Apostolos F, Alexios P, Georgios P, Panagiotis S, George C. Energy efficiency
of manufacturing processes: a critical review. In: 46th CIRP conference on
manufacturing systems. 2013. p. 628–33.
[5] Dong J, Arndt G. A review of current research on disassembly sequence gen-
eration and computer aided design for disassembly. Proc Inst Mech Eng B: J
Eng Manuf 2003;217(B3):299–312.
[6] Hatcher GD, Ijomah WL, Windmill JFC. Design for remanufacture: a literature
review and future research needs. J Clean Prod 2011;19(17–18):2004–14.
[7] Ferguson S, Olewnik A, Malegaonkar P, Cormier P, Kansara S. Mass customiza-
tion: a review of the paradigm across marketing, engineering and distribution
domains. In: ASME 2010 international design engineering technical confer-
ences and computers and information in engineering conference. 2010. p.
133–50.
[8] Wang L, Keshavarzmanesh S, Feng H-Y, Buchal RO. Assembly process plan-
ning and its future in collaborative manufacturing: a review. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2009;41(1–2):132–44.
[9] Wong KV, Hernandez A. A review of additive manufacturing. ISRN Mech Eng
2012:208760 (10 pp.).
[10] Bi K-X, Li W-H, Ai M-Y. Manufacturing process innovation under information
technology condition: a systematic review. In: 2010 International conference
on E-product E-service and E-entertainment. 2010.
[11] Negahban A, Smith JS. Simulation for manufacturing system design and oper-
ation: literature review and analysis. J Manuf Syst 2014;33(Apr (2)):241–61.
[12] Huang SH, Liu P, Mokasdar A, Hou L. Additive manufacturing and its societal
impact: a literature review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2013;67(5–8):1191–203.
[13] Punnakitikashem P, Somsuk N, Adebanjo D, Laosirihongthong T. A review
of theoretical perspectives in lean manufacturing implementation. In: IEEE
international conference on industrial engineering and engineering manage-
ment. 2009. p. 1204–8.
[14] Sanchez LM, Nagi R. A review of agile manufacturing systems. Int J Prod Res
2001;39(16):3561–600.
[15] Harding JA, Srinivas M Shahbaz, Kusiak A. Data mining in manufacturing: a
review. J Manuf Sci Eng Trans ASME 2006;128(4):969–76.
96 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
[16] Xu Y, Elgh F, Erkoyuncu JA, Bankole O, Goh Y, Cheung WM, et al. Cost engi-
neering for manufacturing: current and future research. Int J Comput Integr
Manuf 2012;25(4–5):300–14.
[17] Zhu Z, Dhokia VG, Nassehi A, Newman ST. A review of hybrid manufacturing
processes—state of the art and future perspectives. Int J Comput Integr Manuf
2013;26(Feb (7)):596–615.
[18] Krishnamoorthy B, Kamath M. Scheduling in a cellular manufactur-
ing environment: a review of recent research. J Eng Valuat Cost Anal
2000;2(5):409–23.
[19] Saleh JH, Mark G, Jordan NC. Flexibility: a multi-disciplinary literature review
and a research agenda for designing flexible engineering systems. J Eng Des
2009;20(Jun (3)):307–23.
[20] Yang H, Xue D. Recent research on developing Web-based manufacturing
systems: a review. Int J Prod Res 2003;41(Oct (15)):3601–29.
[21] Srivastava SK. Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art literature
review. Int J Manage Rev 2007;9(Mar (1)):53–80.
[22] Shen W, Hao Q, Yoon HJ, Norrie DH. Applications of agent-based systems in
intelligent manufacturing: an updated review. Adv Eng Inform 2006;20(Oct
(4)):415–31.
[23] Ramani K, Ramanujan D, Bernstein WZ, Zhao F, Sutherland J, Handwerker
C, Choi J-K, Kim H, Thurston D. Integrated Sustainable Life Cycle Design:
A Review. J Mech Design 2010;132(9), http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4002308.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers: 091004.
[24] Chen L, Olhager J, Tang O. Manufacturing facility location and sustainability:
a literature review and research agenda. Int J Prod Econ 2014;149:154–63.
[25] Haapala KR, Zhao F, Camelio J, Sutherland JW, Skerlos SJ, Dornfeld DA, et al.
A review of engineering research in sustainable manufacturing. J Manuf Sci
Eng 2013;135(Jul (4)):41013.
[26] Ilgin MA, Gupta SM. Environmentally conscious manufacturing and prod-
uct recovery (ECMPRO): a review of the state of the art. J Environ Manage
2010;91(Jan (3)):563–91.
[27] Gungor A, Gupta SM. Issues in environmentally conscious manufacturing and
product recovery: a survey. Comput Ind Eng 1999;36(Sep (4)):811–53.
[28] Zhang HC, Kuo TC, Lu H, Huang SH. Environmentally conscious design
and manufacturing: a state-of-the-art survey. J Manuf Syst 1997;16(Jan
(5)):352–71.
[29] Subramoniam R, Huisingh D, Chinnam RB. Remanufacturing for the auto-
motive aftermarket-strategic factors: literature review and future research
needs. J Clean Prod 2009;17(Sep (13)):1163–74.
[30] Dekker R, Bloemhof J, Mallidis I. Operations research for green logistics—an
overview of aspects, issues, contributions and challenges. Eur J Oper Res
2012;219(Jun (3)):671–9.
[31] Hatcher GD, Ijomah WL, Windmill JFC. Design for remanufacture: a lit-
erature review and future research needs. J Clean Prod 2011;19(Nov
(17–18)):2004–14.
[32] Nikolopoulou A, Ierapetritou MG. Optimal design of sustainable chemical
processes and supply chains: a review. Comput Chem Eng 2012;Sep (44):
94–103.
[33] Melo MT, Nickel S, Saldanha-da-Gama F. Facility location and supply chain
management—a review. Eur J Oper Res 2009;196(Jul (2)):401–12.
[34] Sarkis J, Zhu Q, Lai K. An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain
management literature. Int J Prod Econ 2011;130(Mar (1)):1–15.
[35] Seuring S, Müller M. From a literature review to a conceptual frame-
work for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 2008;16(Oct
(15)):1699–710.
[36] Fleischmann M, Bloemhof-Ruwaard JM, Dekker R, van der Laan E, van Nunen
JAEE, Van Wassenhove LN. Quantitative models for reverse logistics: a review.
Eur J Oper Res 1997;103(Nov (1)):1–17.
[37] Tlusty J, Andrews GC. A critical review of sensors for unmanned machining.
CIRP Ann—Manuf Technol 1983;32(2):563–72.
[38] Perera S, Harrison G, Poole M. Customer-focused manufacturing strategy and
the use of operations-based non-financial performance measures: a research
note. Acc Organ Soc 1997;22(Aug (6)):557–72.
[39] Dilts DM, Boyd NP, Whorms HH. The evolution of control architectures for
automated manufacturing systems. J Manuf Syst 1991;10(1):79–93.
[40] Baines TS, Lightfoot HW, Benedettini O, Kay JM. The servitization of manufac-
turing. J Manuf Technol Manage 2009;20(Jun (5)):547–67.
[41] Zaman AU. A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste man-
agement: lessons learned and guidelines. J Clean Prod 2014;Dec (91):12–25.
[42] Swift KG, Booker JD. Manufacturing process selection handbook: from design
to manufacture. Waltham, MA, USA: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2013. p. 456.
[43] Kalpakjian S, Schmid SR. Manufacturing engineering and technology. New
York; Toronto: Prentice Hall; 2010.
[44] Nassehi A, Newman S, Dhokia V, Zhu Z, Asrai R. Using formal methods to
model hybrid manufacturing processes. In: ElMaraghy HA, editor. Enabling
manufacturing competitiveness and economic sustainability SE-8. Berlin Hei-
delberg: Springer; 2012. p. 52–6.
[45] Liu J, Lai Z, Kristiansen H, Khoo C. Overview of conductive adhesive joining
technology in electronics packaging applications. In: Proceedings of 3rd inter-
national conference on adhesive joining and coating technology in electronics
manufacturing 1998 (cat. no.98EX180). 1998. p. 1–18.
[46] Niesłony P, Grzesik W. Optimization Procedures for Machining Operations
on CNC Machine Tools. Pomiary, Automatyka Kontrola R 2011;57(2):224–7.
https://www.infona.pl//resource/bwmeta1.element.baztech-article-BSW4-
0098-0025.
[47] Merklein M, Lechner M, Kuppert A. Enhancement of formability of aluminum
alloys in multi-stage forming operations by a local intermediate heat treat-
ment. Prod Eng 2012;6(Aug (6)):541–9.
[48] Beach R, Muhlemann AP, Price DHR, Paterson A, Sharp JA. Manufacturing
operations and strategic flexibility: survey and cases. Int J Oper Prod Manage
2000;20(1):7–30.
[49] Slack N. The flexibility of manufacturing systems. Int J Oper Prod Manage
1987;7(4):35–45.
[50] Schrader GF, Elshennawy AK. Manufacturing Processes and Materials, Fourth
Edition.processes and materials. 4th ed Dearborn, MI: Society of Manufactur-
ing Engineers; 2000. p. 842. ISBN:0-87263-517-1.
[51] Rao PN. Manufacturing technology: metal cutting and machine tools, volume
2. Delhi, India: Tata McGraw-Hill Education; 2013. p. 521.
[52] Stouffer KA, Falco JA, Scarfone KA. Guide to industrial control systems (ICS)
security: supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems, dis-
tributed control systems (DCS), and other control system configurations such
as programmable logic controllers (PLC). In: SP 800-82; Jun, 2011.
[53] Carrasco JA, Dormido S. Analysis of the use of industrial control systems
in simulators: state of the art and basic guidelines. ISA Trans 2006;45(Apr
(2)):295–312.
[54] Kang Wei, Xu Xinguo, Li Lin, Fang Zhiqi. Building safety mechanism in indus-
trial control system based on essential safety. In: Zu Q, Vargas-Vera M, Hu
B, editors. Lecture notes in computer science, 8351. Cham: Springer Interna-
tional Publishing; 2014. p. 218–29.
[55] Piggin, R.S.H. “Development of Industrial Cyber Security Standards: IEC
62443 for Scada and Industrial Control System Security.” In IET Conference
on Control and Automation 2013: Uniting Problems and Solutions, 2013.
11–11. Institution of Engineering and Technology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/
cp.2013.0001.
[56] Reaves B, Morris T. An open virtual testbed for industrial control system
security research. Int J Inf Secur 2012;11(4):215–29.
[57] Zhu Q, Başar T. A dynamic game-theoretic approach to resilient control sys-
tem design for cascading failures. In: Proceedings of the 1st international
conference on high confidence networked systems—HiCoNS ’12. 2012. p. 41.
[58] Wei D, Ji K. Resilient industrial control system (RICS): concepts, formula-
tion, metrics, and insights. In: 2010 3rd International symposium on resilient
control systems. 2010. p. 15–22.
[59] Rieger CG. Notional examples and benchmark aspects of a resilient control
system. In: 2010 3rd International symposium on resilient control systems.
2010. p. 64–71.
[60] Meng D, Moore KL. Studies on resilient control through multiagent consensus
networks subject to disturbances. IEEE Trans Cybern 2014;44(11):2050–64,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2014.2301555.
[61] Zhu Q, Basar T. Robust and resilient control design for cyber-physical systems
with an application to power systems. In: IEEE conference on decision and
control and european control conference. 2011. p. 4066–71.
[62] Forsgren P, Rahkonen T. Specification of customer and user requirements in
industrial control system procurement projects. In: Proceedings of 1995 IEEE
international symposium on requirements engineering (RE’95). 1995. p. 81–8.
[63] Takagi Y, Yukitomo M, Hatano H, Kojima F, Kudo H. An optimal control system
with data mining method for saving electricity. In: Proceedings of the 41st
SICE annual conference. 2002. p. 993–8.
[64] Li K, Peng J, Chen X. Data mining can help human supervisory control of critical
complex industrial systems. In: European Control Conference ECC. 2003.
[65] Wang Tong, Gao Xian-wen, Li Kun. Application of data mining to production
operation and control system in oil field. In: 2012 24th Chinese control and
decision conference (CCDC). 2012. p. 642–7.
[66] Rojek G, Kusiak J. Artificial intelligence and soft computing, vol. 7268. Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 502–10.
[67] Christoph OB, Stevens SP, Christoph RT. Automatic data collection systems:
observed benefits and problems. Int J Oper Prod Manage 1992;12(5):57–68.
[68] Khatri VK, Ghangro AJ, Kumar J, Haque SJU. Industrial data acquisition and
control system using two PLCs’ networked over MPI network. In: 2009 IEEE
symposium on industrial electronics & applications. 2009. p. 399–402.
[69] Wang B, Cao Z, Yan Y, Liu W, Wang Z. Fundamental technology for RFID-based
supervisory control of shop floor production system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
2011;57(May (9–12)):1123–41.
[70] Warneke HJ. Research Activities and the IPA in the Field of Robotics. In Proc.
of the 7-Th ISIR Congress, Tokyo 1977:25–35.
[71] Heyer C. Human–robot interaction and future industrial robotics applications.
In: 2010 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems.
2010. p. 4749–54.
[72] Freund E, Buxbaum H-J. Application of industrial robots for factory automa-
tion. The robot-based flexible manufacturing work cell as a strategic concept.
Autom Prax 1993;35(9):491–4.
[73] Lee D. Robots in the shipbuilding industry. Robot Comput Integr Manuf
2014;30(Oct (5)):442–50.
[74] Farinelli A, Iocchi L, Nardi D. Multirobot systems: a classification focused on
coordination. Syst Man Cybern B: Cybern IEEE Trans 2004;34(5):2015–28.
[75] Moanga A, Mandutianu D., Oprea E, Nedelea D, UdreaB, Advanced control and
programming system for industrial robots, In: Proceedings of the 14th inter-
national symposium on industrial robots and the 7th international conference
on industrial robot technology. p. 487–96.
[76] Tarkian M, Lundén B, Ölvander J. Integration of parametric CAD and dynamic
models for industrial robot design and optimization. In: Volume 3: 28th
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
computers and information in engineering conference, Parts A and B. 2008.
p. 761–9.
[77] Mandl C, Feng X, Ölvander J. Automated design of an industrial robot family.
In: Volume 5: 35th design automation conference, Parts A and B. 2009. p.
927–39.
[78] Ding X, Wang X. Design and realization of ground control station for multi-
propeller multifunction aerial robot. In: 2014 IEEE international conference
on mechatronics and automation. 2014. p. 227–32.
[79] Hegde GS. A texbook of industrial robotics. Delhi, India: Laxmi Publications;
2006. p. 219.
[80] Nof Shimon Y. Handbook of industrial robotics, vol. 1. NY, USA: Wiley; 1999.
p. 1378.
[81] Hunt VD. Industrial robotics handbook. New York, NY, USA: Industrial Press
Inc; 1983. p. 432.
[82] Bakker OJ, Papastathis TN, Ratchev SM, Popov AA. Recent research on
flexible fixtures for manufacturing processes. Recent Patents Mech Eng
2013;6(2):107–21.
[83] Yogeshkumar KS, Ramesh Babu K. An advanced method of jigs and fixtures
planning by using CAD methods. In: National conference on challenges in
research & technology in the coming decades (CRT 2013). 2013. p. 1–5,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/cp.2013.2565. Institution of Engineering and Tech-
nology.
[84] Farhan U, Tolouei-Rad M. Design of modular fixtures using a 3D-
modelling approach. ECU Publications; 2011. p. 405–11. http://ro.ecu.edu.
au/ecuworks2011/645.
[85] Xing Y-F, Zhao X-Y, Wu W-W. Assembly variation analysis model based
on fixture configurations for sheet metal parts. Comput Integr Manuf Syst
2010;16(2):280–6.
[86] Yu H, Li B, Wang Y, Hu Y. Conceptual design and workspace analysis of
reconfigurable fixturing robots for sheet metal assembly. Assem Autom
2012;32(3):293–9.
[87] Shahbazi M, Atashzar SF, Patel RV. A dual-user teleoperated system with
virtual fixtures for robotic surgical training. In: 2013 IEEE international con-
ference on robotics and automation. 2013. p. 3639–44.
[88] Luo Y, Wang X, Chen P, Yang W, Chen L. Fixture design and sequence analysis
for low stress assembly of precision miniature devices without disturbance.
In: 2013 IEEE international symposium on assembly and manufacturing
(ISAM). 2013. p. 163–6.
[89] Seth A, Vance JM, Oliver JH. Virtual reality for assembly methods prototyping:
a review. Virtual Real 2010;15(1):5–20.
[90] Mirhosseyni SHL, Webb P. A hybrid fuzzy knowledge-based expert system
and genetic algorithm for efficient selection and assignment of material hand-
ling equipment. Expert Syst Appl 2009;36(Nov (9)):11875–87.
[91] Sujono S, Lashkari RS. A multi-objective model of operation allocation
and material handling system selection in FMS design. Int J Prod Econ
2007;105(1):116–33.
[92] Chan FTS. Design of material handling equipment selection system: an inte-
gration of expert system with analytic hierarchy process approach. Integr
Manuf Syst 2002;13(1):58–68.
[93] Nadoli G, Rangaswami M. An Integrated Modeling Methodology for Mate-
rial Handling Systems Design. In: Proceedings of the 25th Conference on
Winter Simulation - WSC ’93. New York, USA: ACM Press; 1993. p. 785–9,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/256563.256846.
[94] Resnick ML, Chaffin DB. Some Ergonomic Considerations in the Design of Mat-
eral Handling Devices. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society Annual Meeting 36. SAGE Publications; 1992. p. 644–8.
[95] Taljanovic K, Salihbegovic A, Software agents oriented approach to ware-
house management systems design, In: ISCA—17th international conference
on software engineering and data engineering. p. 157–62.
[96] Colla V, Nastasi G, Matarese N, Reyneri LM. GA-based solutions comparison for
storage strategies optimization for an automated warehouse. In: 2009 Ninth
international conference on intelligent systems design and applications. IEEE;
2009. p. 976–81, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISDA.2009.201.
[97] El-Tamimi AM, Abidi MH, Mian SH, Aalam J. Analysis of performance meas-
ures of flexible manufacturing system. J King Saud Univ Eng Sci 2012;24(Jul
(2)):115–29.
[98] Wang J, Zhang N, He Q. Application of automated warehouse logistics in man-
ufacturing industry. In: 2009 ISECS International colloquium on computing,
communication, control, and management. 2009. p. 217–20.
[99] Zhang Y, Li M. Wireless communication management model of workshop and
warehouse manufacturing system. In: 2009 Second international conference
on intelligent computation technology and automation. 2009. p. 121–3.
[100] Chen JC, Cheng C-H, Huang PB, Wang K-J, Huang C-J, Ting T-C. Warehouse
management with lean and RFID application: a case study. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2013;69(May (1–4)):531–42.
[101] Iris C, Yenisey MM. Computational logistics, vol. 7555. Berlin, Heidelberg:
Springer; 2012. p. 129–41.
[102] Ma X, Liu T. The application of Wi-Fi RTLS in automatic warehouse man-
agement system. In: 2011 IEEE International conference on automation and
logistics (ICAL). 2011. p. 64–9.
[103] Ho GTS, Choy KL, Poon TC, Providing decision support functionality in
warehouse management using the RFID-based fuzzy association rule min-
ing approach, In: Proceedings 8th international conference on supply chain
management and information systems (SCMIS 2010). p. 7, ISBN: 978-1-4244-
7981-8.
97
[104] Azadivar F. Maximization of the throughput of a computerized automated
warehousing-system under system constraints. Int J Prod Res 1986;24(May
(3)):551–65.
[105] Compagno L, D’Urso D, Trapani N. Designing an Optimal Shape Warehouse. In:
Advances in production management systems. competitive manufacturing
for innovative products and services. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2013. p.
248–55.
[106] Liu J, Li C, Yang F, Wan H, Uzsoy R. Production planning for semiconduc-
tor manufacturing via simulation optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2011
winter simulation conference (WSC). 2011. p. 3612–22.
[107] Yu G, Chai T, Luo X. Multiobjective production planning optimization using
hybrid evolutionary algorithms for mineral processing. IEEE Trans Evol Com-
put 2011;15(Aug (4)):487–514.
[108] Alfares HK. A production planning optimization model for maximizing battery
manufacturing profitability. Int J Appl Ind Eng 2011;1(1):55–63.
[109] Wang Q. A framework model of production planning optimization for make-
to-order discrete manufacturing. In: 2009 Chinese control and decision
conference. 2009. p. 2516–20.
[110] Benyoucef L, Jain V, Rezg N, Xie X. Production planning in an assembly system
with social and industrial constraints: a dynamic programming approach. Int
J Serv Oper Inform 2007;2(2):131.
[111] Ait-Alla A, Teucke M, Lütjen M, Beheshti-Kashi S, Karimi HR. Robust pro-
duction planning in fashion apparel industry under demand uncertainty via
conditional value at risk. Math Probl Eng 2014;2014:1–10.
[112] Li C, He X, Chen B, Xu Q, Liu C. A hybrid programming model for optimal
production planning under demand uncertainty in refinery. Chin J Chem Eng
2008;16(Apr (2)):241–6.
[113] Chen K, Chen H-C, Che ZH. Simulation of production and transportation
planning with uncertainty and risk. WSEAS Trans Comput 2008;7(10):
1535–44.
[114] Chen H, Zhao N, Sun G. An approach for production planning optimization
under correlated uncertain demand. In: 3rd International conference on wire-
less communications, networking, and mobile computing—WiCOM ’07. 2007.
p. 3731–4.
[115] Stecke KE. Formulation and Solution of Nonlinear Integer Production Plan-
ning Problems for Flexible Manufacturing Systems. Management Science
1983;29(3):273–88, http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.3.273. INFORMS.
[116] Raminfar R, Zulkifli N, Vasili M, Sai Hong T. An integrated model for production
planning and cell formation in cellular manufacturing systems. J Appl Math
2013;2013:1–10.
[117] Sadeh NM, Hildum DW, Laliberty TJ, Smith SF, McA’Nulty J. Integrated
process-planning/production-scheduling shell for agile manufacturing. In:
Technical report CMU-RI-TR-96-10. Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon Uni-
versity; 1996.
[118] Mehra A, Minis I, Proth JM. Hierarchical production planning for complex
manufacturing systems. Adv Eng Softw 1996;26(Aug (3)):209–18.
[119] Graves SC. A review of production scheduling: theory and practice. In: MIT
Operations Research Center, no. TR-169. MIT Operations Research Center;
1979.
[120] Du D-Z, Pardalos PM, editors. Handbook of combinatorial optimization.
Boston, MA, USA: Springer; 1999.
[121] Ribas I, Leisten R, Framiñan JM. Review and classification of hybrid flow shop
scheduling problems from a production system and a solutions procedure
perspective. Comput Oper Res 2010;37(8):1439–54.
[122] Sox CR, Jackson PL, Bowman A, Muckstadt JA. A review of the stochastic lot
scheduling problem. Int J Prod Econ 1999;62(3):181–200.
[123] Gicquel C, Minoux M, Dallery Y. Capacitated Lot Sizing models: a literature
review; 2008.
[124] Karimi B, Fatemi Ghomi SMT, Wilson JM. The capacitated lot sizing problem:
a review of models and algorithms. Omega 2003;31(Oct (5)):365–78.
[125] Klaus Brockmann WD. A parallel branch bound algorithm for makespan
optimal sequencing in flow shops with parallel machines. In: Proc. 2nd
IMACS international multiconference on computational engineering in sys-
tems applications. 1998.
[126] Chen B. Analysis of classes of heuristics for scheduling a two-stage flow shop
with parallel machines at one stage. J Oper Res Soc 1995;46(2):234–44.
[127] Jeong SJ, Lim SJ, Kim KS. Hybrid approach to production scheduling using
genetic algorithm and simulation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2005;28(Mar
(1–2)):129–36. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00170-004-
2345-7 [Accessed October 14, 2014].
[128] Vaidyanathan BS., Miller DM, Park YH, Application of discrete event sim-
ulation in production scheduling, In: 1998 Winter simulation conference.
Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36274), vol. 2, p. 965–971.
[129] Metaxiotis KS, Askounis D, Psarras J. Expert Systems in Production Planning
and Scheduling: A State-of-the-Art Survey. Journal of Intelligent Manu-
facturing 2016;13(4):253–60, http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1016064126976.
Kluwer Academic Publishers: Accessed March 23.
[130] Ochoa G, Vazquez-Rodriguez JA, Petrovic S, Burke E. Dispatching rules for
production scheduling: a hyper-heuristic landscape analysis. In: 2009 IEEE
congress on evolutionary computation. 2009. p. 1873–80.
[131] Bagheri A, Zandieh M. Bi-criteria flexible job-shop scheduling with sequence-
dependent setup times—variable neighborhood search approach. J Manuf Syst
2011;30(1):8–15.
[132] Akyol DE, Bayhan GM. A review on evolution of production scheduling with
neural networks. Comput Ind Eng 2007;53(Aug (1)):95–122.
98 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
[133] Petkov SB, Maranas CD. Multiperiod planning and scheduling of mul-
tiproduct batch plants under demand uncertainty. Ind Eng Chem Res
1997;36(11):4864–81.
[134] Balasubramanian J, Grossmann IE. Scheduling optimization under
uncertainty—an alternative approach. Comput Chem Eng 2003;27(4):469–90.
[135] Hamta N, Akbarpour Shirazi M, Fatemi Ghomi SMT, Behdad S. Supply chain
network optimization considering assembly line balancing and demand
uncertainty. Int J Prod Res 2014;53(Nov (10)):2970–94.
[136] Li Z, Ierapetritou M. Process scheduling under uncertainty: review and chal-
lenges. Comput Chem Eng 2008;32(Apr (4–5)):715–27.
[137] Taguchi G. Introduction to quality engineering: designing quality into
products and processes. Tokyo, Japan: White Plains: Asian Productivity Orga-
nization/UNIPUB; 1986.
[138] Pacella M, Semeraro Q, Anglani A. Manufacturing quality control by means
of a Fuzzy ART network trained on natural process data. Eng Appl Artif Intell
2004;17(1):83–96.
[139] Salvendy G, editor. Handbook of industrial engineering. Hoboken, NJ, USA:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2001.
[140] Ben Naylor J, Naim MM, Berry D. Leagility: integrating the lean and agile man-
ufacturing paradigms in the total supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 1999;62(May
(1–2)):107–18.
[141] Shah R. Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance. J
Oper Manage 2003;21(Mar (2)):129–49.
[142] Abdulmalek FA, Rajgopal J. Analyzing the benefits of lean manufacturing and
value stream mapping via simulation: a process sector case study. Int J Prod
Econ 2007;107(May (1)):223–36.
[143] Yusuf Y, Sarhadi M, Gunasekaran A. Agile manufacturing. Int J Prod Econ
1999;62(May (1–2)):33–43.
[144] Christopher M, Ryals LJ. The supply chain becomes the demand chain. J Bus
Logist 2014;35(Mar (1)):29–35.
[145] Mason-Jones R, Naylor B, Towill DR. Lean, agile or leagile? Matching your
supply chain to the marketplace. Int J Prod Res 2000;38(Nov (17)):4061–70.
[146] Meredith J, Akinc U. Characterizing and structuring a new make-to-forecast
production strategy. J Oper Manage 2007;25(Apr (3)):623–42.
[147] Mather H. Design for logistics (DFL)-the next challenge for designers. Prod
Invent Manage J 1992;33(1):7–10.
[148] Spearman ML, Zazanis MA. Push and pull production systems: issues and
comparisons. Oper Res 1992;40(Jun (3)):521–32.
[149] Krishnamurthy A, Suri R, Vernon M. Re-examining the performance of MRP
and kanban material control strategies for multi-product flexible manufac-
turing systems. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 2004;16(Apr (2)):123–50.
[150] Zheng W, Ma Y, Zheng Y, Shi X, Li B, Jiang Y. The research of pull production
strategy and method. In: 2010 International conference on management and
service science. 2010. p. 1–4.
[151] Huang C-C, Kusiak A. Manufacturing control with a push-pull approach. Int J
Prod Res 1998;36(1):251–76.
[152] Geraghty J, Heavey C. A comparison of hybrid push/pull and CONWIP/pull
production inventory control policies. Int J Prod Econ 2004;91(Sep (1)):75–90.
[153] Kia R, Khaksar-Haghani F, Javadian N, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R. Solving a
multi-floor layout design model of a dynamic cellular manufacturing system
by an efficient genetic algorithm. J Manuf Syst 2014;33(1):218–32.
[154] Houshyar AN, Leman Z, Moghadam HP, Ariffin MKAM, Ismail N, Iranmanesh H.
Literature review on dynamic cellular manufacturing system. In: 2014 Inter-
national conference on manufacturing, optimization, industrial and material
engineering. 2014.
[155] Mehrabi MG, Ulsoy AG, Koren Y. Reconfigurable manufacturing systems: key
to future manufacturing. J Intell Manuf 2000;11(Aug (4)):403–19.
[156] Peters TJ, Rosen DW, Shapiro V. A topological model of limitations in design
for manufacturing. Res Eng Des 1994;6(Dec (4)):223–33.
[157] Holden HT. The Developing Technologies of Integrated Optical
Waveguides in Printed Circuits. Circuit World 2003;29(4.):42–50,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03056120310478578. Emerald.
[158] Webb C. 45 nm design for manufacturing. Intel Technol J 2008;12(2):121–30.
[159] Cheng Y. A glance of technology efforts for design-for-manufacturing in nano-
scale CMOS processes. Sci China Ser F: Inf Sci 2008;51(May (6)):807–18.
[160] Shilun Z. Products development based on the technology of design for man-
ufacturing and assembly. Int J Adv Comput Technol 2014;6(3):132–41.
[161] Devadasan SR, Goshteeswaran S, Gokulachandran J. Design for quality in
agile manufacturing environment through modified orthogonal array-based
experimentation. J Manuf Technol Manage 2005;16(6):576–97.
[162] Ulieru M. Design for resilience of networked critical infrastructures. In: 2007
Inaugural IEEE-IES digital ecosystems and technologies conference. 2007. p.
540–5.
[163] Bras B. Incorporating environmental issues in product design and realization.
Ind Environ 1997;20(1–2):7–13.
[164] Rosen MA, Kishawy HA. Sustainable Manufacturing and Design: Concepts.
Practices and Needs. Sustainability 2012;4(12):pp. 154–174. Available at:
http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/4/2/154/htm [Accessed March 10, 2016].
[165] Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B. Additive Manufacturing Technologies. New York,
NY: Springer New York; 2015. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/
978-1-4939-2113-3 [Accessed October 5, 2015].
[166] Mottonen M, et al. Managerial view on design for manufacturing. Industrial
Management & Data Systems 2009;109(6):pp. 859–872. Available at: http://
www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/02635570910968081 [Accessed
March 23, 2016].
[167] Hamidi M, Farahmand K. Developing a design for manufacturing handbook.
In: Proceedings of the 2008 IAJC-IJME international conference. 2009. p.
83–92.
[168] Pierson HA, Singh KV. Tunable and transferrable bar feeder damping
design for advanced manufacturing in, volume 2A. Adv Manuf 2013;2A.
V02AT02A098.
[169] Kwon Y, Wu T. Real-time machining qulaity inspection for design for manu-
facturing (DfM). J Adv Manuf Syst 2005;04(Jun (01)):21–36.
[170] Maldonado A, García JL, Alvarado A, Balderrama CO. A hierarchical fuzzy
axiomatic design methodology for ergonomic compatibility evaluation of
advanced manufacturing technology. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2012;66(Jul
(1–4)):171–86.
[171] Ponche R, Hascoet JY, Kerbrat O, Mognol P. A new global approach to design
for additive manufacturing. Virtual Phys Prototyp 2012;7(Jun (2)):93–105.
[172] Adam GAO, Zimmer D. Design for additive manufacturing—element tran-
sitions and aggregated structures. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 2014;7(1):
20–8.
[173] Hu Y, Fadel GM, Blouin VY, White DR. Optimal design for additive manufac-
turing of heterogeneous objects using ultrasonic consolidation. Virtual Phys
Prototyp 2006;1(Mar (1)):53–62.
[174] Rosen DW. Research supporting principles for design for additive manufac-
turing. Virtual Phys Prototyp 2014;9(Sep (4)):225–32.
[175] Bin Maidin S, Campbell I, Pei E. Development of a design feature
database to support design for additive manufacturing. Assem Autom
2012;32(3):235–44.
[176] Seepersad CC. Challenges and opportunities in design for additive manufac-
turing. 3D Print Addit Manuf 2014;1(1):10–3.
[177] Funding—engineering and systems design|NSF—National Science Foun-
dation.” [Online]. Available: https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm summ.jsp?
pims id=13340. (accessed: 01-Jul-2015).
[178] Lund RT, Hauser WM. Remanufacturing —an American perspective. In: Fifth
international conference on responsive manufacturing—green manufactur-
ing (ICRM 2010). 2010. p. 1–6.
[179] Ijomah WL, Bennett JP, Pearce J. Remanufacturing: evidence of environmen-
tally conscious business practice in the UK. In: Proceedings first international
symposium on environmentally conscious design and inverse manufacturing.
1999. p. 192–6.
[180] Mont O, Dalhammar C, Jacobsson N. A new business model for baby prams
based on leasing and product remanufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production
2006;14(17):1509–18. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/
pii/S0959652606000825 [Accessed October 21, 2014].
[181] Gallo, M., Guerra, L. & Guizzi, G., Hybrid Remanufacturing/Manufacturing
Systems: secondary markets issues and opportunities. , 6(1), pp. 31 – 41.
[182] Shi W, Min KJ. Product Remanufacturing: A Real Options Approach. IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management 2014;61(2):237–50. Available at:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=6589203
[Accessed October 29, 2014].
[183] Naeem MA, et al. Production planning optimization for manufacturing and
remanufacturing system in stochastic environment. Journal of Intelligent
Manufacturing 2012;24(4):717–28. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.
1007/s10845-011-0619-0 [Accessed October 30, 2014].
[184] Mahapatra S, Pal R, Narasimhan R. Hybrid (re)manufacturing: manufacturing
and operational implications. International Journal of Production Research
2012;50(14):3786–808. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/
10.1080/00207543.2011.588615 [Accessed October 30, 2014].
[185] Zhao Z. Optimization of the production planning for remanufacturing. In:
2011 International conference on business management and electronic infor-
mation. 2011. p. 372–5.
[186] Guide VDR. Production planning and control for remanufacturing: industry
practice and research needs. J Oper Manage 2000;18(Jun (4)):467–83.
[187] Jing Y, Wang X, Li W, Deng L. Robust production planning with remanufac-
turing and heterogeneous demands under return and demand uncertainty.
Int J Appl Math Stat 2013;41(11):183–96.
[188] Doh H-H, Lee D-H. Generic production planning model for remanufacturing
systems. Proc Inst Mech Eng B: J Eng Manuf 2010;224(1):159–68.
[189] Li J, González M, Zhu Y. A hybrid simulation optimization method
for production planning of dedicated remanufacturing. Int J Prod Econ
2009;117(2):286–301.
[190] Wang L, Murata T. Study of optimal capacity planning for remanufacturing
activities in closed-loop supply chain using system dynamics modeling. In:
2011 IEEE international conference on automation and logistics (ICAL). 2011.
p. 196–200.
[191] Chung C-J, Wee H-M. Short life-cycle deteriorating product remanufac-
turing in a green supply chain inventory control system. Int J Prod Econ
2011;129(1):195–203.
[192] van der Laan E, Salomon M, Dekker R, Van Wassenhove L. Inventory control
in hybrid systems with remanufacturing. Manage Sci 1999;45(5):733–47.
[193] Kumar V, Shirodkar PS, Camelio JA, Sutherland JW. Value flow characteriza-
tion during product lifecycle to assist in recovery decisions. Int J Prod Res
2007;45(Sep (18–19)):4555–72.
[194] Jun H-B, Cusin M, Kiritsis D, Xirouchakis P. A multi-objective evolutionary
algorithm for EOL product recovery optimization: turbocharger case study.
Int J Prod Res 2007;45(Sep (18–19)):4573–94.
[195] Behdad S, Williams AS, Thurston D. End-of-life decision making with uncer-
tain product return quantity. J Mech Des 2012;134(10):100902.
 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
[196] Mashhadi AR, Esmaeilian B, Behdad S. Uncertainty management in reman-
ufacturing decisions: a consideration of uncertainties in market demand,
quantity, and quality of returns. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst B: Mech
Eng 2015;1(Apr (2)):021008.
[197] Mangun D, Thurston DL. Incorporating component reuse, remanufacture, and
recycle into product portfolio design. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 2002;49(Nov
(4)):479–90.
[198] Tan Q, Zeng X, Ijomah WL, Zheng L, Li J. Status of end-of-life electronic product
remanufacturing in China. J Ind Ecol 2014;18(Aug (4)):577–87.
[199] Lund HW, Lund RT, Hauser W. The remanufacturing industry: anatomy of a
giant. Boston, MA: Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Boston Uni-
versity; 2003.
[200] Sutherland JW, Adler DP, Haapala KR, Kumar V. A comparison of manufactur-
ing and remanufacturing energy intensities with application to diesel engine
production. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2008;57(1):5–8.
[201] Sima Q, Wang YB. Research on remanufacturing industrial cluster pro-
moting sustainable development of regional economy. Adv Mater Res
2011;347–353(Oct (2)):621–6.
[202] Skerlos SJ, Morrow WR, Hula A, Seliger G, Basdere B, Prasitnarit A. Economic
and environmental characteristics of global cellular telephone remanufactur-
ing. In: IEEE International symposium on electronics and the environment,
2003. 2003. p. 99–104.
[203] Mabee DG, Bommer M, Keat WD. Design charts for remanufacturing assess-
ment. J Manuf Syst 1999;18(Jan (5)):358–66.
[204] Okumura S, Morikuni T, Okino N. Life Design for Remanufacturing Durable
Products. In Proceedings Second International Symposium on Environ-
mentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, IEEE Comput. Soc
2001:275–80, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/.2001.992364.
[205] Jukun Y, Peizhi C, Xiaoming W, Xiaojun S. Product material design
assessment methods for remanufacturing. In: 2014 Sixth international con-
ference on measuring technology and mechatronics automation. 2014.
p. 459–62.
[206] Soh SL, Ong SK, Nee AYC. Design for disassembly for remanufacturing:
methodology and technology. Procedia CIRP 2014;15:407–12.
[207] Sabbaghi M, Esmaeilian B, Raihanian Mashhadi A, Cade W, Behdad S.
Reusability Assessment of Lithium-Ion Laptop Batteries Based on Con-
sumers Actual Usage Behavior. J Mech Design 2015;137(12):124501,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4031654.
[208] Li J, Liang GQ. A quantitative approach to assessing product design for reman-
ufacturing. Appl Mech Mater 2011;110–116(Oct):4893–8.
[209] Huang J, Esmaeilian B, Behdad S. Multi-purpose disassembly sequence plan-
ning. In: ASME 2015 international design engineering technical conferences
& computers and information in engineering conference. 2015.
[210] Veerakamolmal P, Gupta SM. Analysis of design efficiency for the disassembly
of modular electronic products. J Electron Manuf 2000;9(1):79–95.
[211] Behdad S, Thurston D. Disassembly and reassembly sequence plan-
ning tradeoffs under uncertainty for product maintenance. J Mech Des
2012;134(4):041011.
[212] Park J, Sarkis J, Wu Z. Creating integrated business and environmental value
within the context of China’s circular economy and ecological modernization.
J Clean Prod 2010;18(Nov (15)):1494–501.
[213] Bakker C, Wang F, Huisman J, den Hollander M. Products that go round:
exploring product life extension through design. J Clean Prod 2014;69:10–6.
[214] Rachuri S, Sriram RD, Narayanan A, Sarkar P, Lee JH, Lyons KW, Srinivasan
V, Kemmerer SJ. Summary of the NIST Workshop on Sustainable Manu-
facturing: Metrics Standards, and Infrastructure. International Journal of
Sustainable Manufacturing 2011. August. Inderscience Publishers. http://
www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJSM.2011.042154.
[215] Kaebernick H. Green manufacturing, fundamentals and applications edited
by David A. Dornfeld. New York: Springer, 2012, 289 pp., e-book, ISBN 978-
1-4419-6016-0, $69.95. J Ind Ecol 2014;18(Aug (4)):591–2.
[216] Anderson RC. Mid-course correction: toward a sustainable enterprise: the
interface model. White River Junction, VT, USA: Chelsea Green Publishing;
1998. p. 204.
[217] Rachuri S, Sriram RD, Sarkar P. Metrics, standards and industry best practices
for sustainable manufacturing systems. In: 2009 IEEE international confer-
ence on automation science and engineering. 2009. p. 472–7.
[218] Chertow MR. The IPAT equation and its variants. J Ind Ecol 2000;4(Sep
(4)):13–29.
[219] Waggoner PE, Ausubel JH. A framework for sustainability science: a renovated
IPAT identity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002;99(Jun (12)):7860–5.
[220] Garetti M, Taisch M. Sustainable manufacturing: trends and research chal-
lenges. Prod Plan Control 2012;23(Feb (2–3)):83–104.
[221] Molamohamadi Ohreh, Ismail N. Developing a new scheme for sustainable
manufacturing. Int J Mater Mech Manuf 2013;1(1):1–5.
[222] Despeisse M, Vladimirova D. Advances in production management systems.
Innovative and knowledge-based production management in a global-local
world, vol. 439. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2014. p. 146–53 (no. Part 2).
[223] Yuan C, Zhai Q, Dornfeld D. A three dimensional system approach for
environmentally sustainable manufacturing. CIRP Ann—Manuf Technol
2012;61(1):39–42.
[224] Reich-Weiser C, Dornfeld D. Environmental decision making: supply-chain
considerations. Transactions of the North American Manufacturing Research
Institute of SME, Monterrey, Mexico 2008;35.
[225] Despeisse M, Mbaye F, Ball PD, Levers A. The emergence of sustainable man-
ufacturing practices. Prod Plan Control 2012;23(5):354–76.
99
[226] Veleva V, Ellenbecker M. Indicators of sustainable production: framework and
methodology. J Clean Prod 2001;9(Dec (6)):519–49.
[227] Amrina E, Yusof SM. Key performance indicators for sustainable manu-
facturing evaluation in automotive companies. In: 2011 IEEE international
conference on industrial engineering and engineering management. 2011. p.
1093–7.
[228] Shao J, Taisch M, Mier MO. Advances in production management systems.
innovative and knowledge-based production management in a global-local
world, vol. 439. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2014. p. 406–14 (no. Part 2).
[229] Dornfeld DA, editor. Green manufacturing. Boston, MA, USA: Springer; 2013.
[230] Zhang H, Calvo-Amodio J, Haapala KR. A conceptual model for assisting
sustainable manufacturing through system dynamics. Journal of Manufactur-
ing Systems 2013;32(4):543–9. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0278612513000721 [Accessed December 16, 2015].
[231] Haapala KR, Zhao F, Camelio J, Sutherland JW, Skerlos SJ, Dornfeld DA, et al.
A review of engineering research in sustainable manufacturing. J Manuf Sci
Eng 2013;135(Jul (4)):041013.
[232] Deutsch T. Analytics hype: the next wave in big data backlash. IBM; 2014.
http://www.ibmbigdatahub.com/blog/analytics-hype-next-wave-big-data-
backlash (no. 5).
[233] Zhu HP, Xu Y, Liu Q, Rao YQ. Cloud service platform for big data of manufac-
turing. Appl Mech Mater 2013;456(Oct):178–83.
[234] Kusiak A. Data mining: manufacturing and service applications. Int J Prod Res
2006;44(Sep (18–19)):4175–91.
[235] Choudhary AK, Harding JA, Tiwari MK. Data mining in manufacturing:
a review based on the kind of knowledge. J Intell Manuf 2008;20(Jul
(5)):501–21.
[236] Wang K. Applying data mining to manufacturing: the nature and implications.
J Intell Manuf 2007;18(Jul (4)):487–95.
[237] Mazlan EM, Rahman S, Ahmad R, Kasbon R. Development of a manufactur-
ing industry success rate analyzer using data mining technique. In: 2010
International symposium on information technology. 2010. p. 1032–6.
[238] Stockton DJ, Khalil RA, Mukhongo LM. Cost model development using vir-
tual manufacturing and data mining: Part II—Comparison of data mining
algorithms. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2012;66(Sep (9–12)):1389–96.
[239] Wang K, Tong S, Eynard B, Roucoules L, Matta N. Review on application of data
mining in product design and manufacturing. In: International conference on
fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery. 2007. p. 599–604.
[240] Jain S, Triantis KP, Liu S. Manufacturing performance measurement and target
setting: a data envelopment analysis approach. Eur J Oper Res 2011;214(Nov
(3)):616–26.
[241] Harding JA, Popplewell K. Knowledge reuse and sharing through data min-
ing manufacturing data. In: IIE annual conference. Proceedings. institute of
industrial engineers-publisher. 2006.
[242] Gro J Schlaudraff, Niedermann F, Mitschang B. Data warehousing and knowl-
edge discovery, vol. 7448. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 142–55.
[243] Groger C, Stach C. The mobile manufacturing dashboard. In: 2014 IEEE inter-
national conference on pervasive computing and communication workshops
(PerCom workshops). 2014. p. 138–40.
[244] Wan FC, Qiu MH. Customer data-oriented multi-product pricing model. Appl
Mech Mater 2014;602–605(Aug):106–10.
[245] Shin S-J, Woo J, Rachuri S. Predictive analytics model for power consumption
in manufacturing. Procedia CIRP 2014;15:153–8.
[246] Ni M, Xu X, Deng S. Extended QFD and data-mining-based methods for sup-
plier selection in mass customization. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 2007;20(Mar
(2–3)):280–91.
[247] Wang RY, Storey VC, Firth CP. A framework for analysis of data quality
research. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 1995;7(4):623–40.
[248] Lee J, Kao H-A, Yang S. Service innovation and smart analytics for industry 4.0
and big data environment. Procedia CIRP 2014;16:3–8.
[249] Sackett PJ, Al-Gaylani MF, Tiwari A, Williams D. A review of data visualization:
opportunities in manufacturing sequence management. Int J Comput Integr
Manuf 2006;19(Oct (7)):689–704.
[250] Shao G, Lee YT, McLean C. Manufacturing data validation through simulation.
In: The European simulation and modelling conference. 2003. p. 56–60.
[251] Pantforder D, Vogel-Heuser B. Benefit and evaluation of interactive 3D process
data visualization in operator training of plant manufacturing industry. In:
2009 IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. 2009.
p. 824–9.
[252] Thron T. Work in progress visualization & scheduling within an ERP driven
manufacturing environment. In: 2008 IEEE international conference on
service operations and logistics, and informatics. 2008. p. 1050–3.
[253] Kim Y-S, Yang J, Han S. A multichannel visualization module for virtual man-
ufacturing. Comput Ind 2006;57(Sep (7)):653–62.
[254] Sung W-T, Ou S-C. Using virtual reality technologies for manufacturing appli-
cations. Int J Comput Appl Technol 2003;17(4):213.
[255] Berg LP, Behdad S, Vance JM, Thurston D. Disassembly sequence evaluation
using graph visualization and immersive computing technologies. In: Volume
2: 32nd computers and information in engineering conference, parts A and
B. 2012. p. 1351–9.
[256] Behdad S, Berg LP, Thurston D, Vance JM. Synergy between normative and
descriptive design theory and methodology. In: Volume 5: 25th international
conference on design theory and methodology; ASME 2013 power transmis-
sion and gearing conference. 2013. V005T06A019.
[257] Zheng L, Tang L, Li T, Duan B, Lei M, Wang P, et al. Applying data min-
ing techniques to address critical process optimization needs in advanced
100 B. Esmaeilian et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 39 (2016) 79–100
manufacturing. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD international con-
ference on Knowledge discovery and data mining—KDD ’14. 2014. p. 1739–48.
[258] Valilai OF, Houshmand M. A collaborative and integrated platform to support
distributed manufacturing system using a service-oriented approach based
on cloud computing paradigm. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 2013;29(Feb
(1)):110–27.
[259] Shang X, Liu X, Xiong G, Cheng C, Ma Y, Nyberg TR. Social manufacturing
cloud service platform for the mass customization in apparel industry. In:
Proceedings of 2013 IEEE International conference on service operations and
logistics, and informatics. 2013. p. 220–4.
[260] Xin-yu Y, Wei-jia L. Research and application of the management and
control platform oriented the cloud manufacturing services. In: 2011 Interna-
tional conference on system science, engineering design and manufacturing
informatization. 2011. p. 286–9.
[261] Tao F, Zhang L, Venkatesh VC, Luo Y, Cheng Y. Cloud manufacturing: a com-
puting and service-oriented manufacturing model. Proc Inst Mech Eng B: J
Eng Manuf 2011;225(Aug (10)):1969–76.
[262] Wu D, Thames JL, Rosen DW, Schaefer D. Towards a cloud-based design and
manufacturing paradigm: looking backward, looking forward. In: Volume 2:
32nd computers and information in engineering conference, parts A and B.
2012. p. 315–28.
[263] Huang B, Li C, Yin C, Zhao X. Cloud manufacturing service platform for
small- and medium-sized enterprises. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2012;65(Jun
(9–12)):1261–72.
[264] Suo D, Gao J. A strategy of building cloud manufacturing service platform
based on cloudanalyst. In: Proceedings 2013 international conference on
mechatronic sciences, electric engineering and computer (MEC). 2013. p.
2143–7.
[265] Zhang Fan, Zhou Zude, Xu Wenjun, Zhao Yuanyuan. Cloud manufacturing
resource service platform based on intelligent perception network using fiber
optic sensing. Int J Adv Inf Sci Serv Sci 2012;4(Dec (23)):366–72.
[266] Helo P, Suorsa M, Hao Y, Anussornnitisarn P. Toward a cloud-based man-
ufacturing execution system for distributed manufacturing. Comput Ind
2014;65(4):646–56.
[267] Wu D, Rosen DW, Schaefer D. Scalability planning for cloud-based manufac-
turing systems. J Manuf Sci Eng 2015;137(Jul (4)):040911.
[268] Wei X, Liu H. A cloud manufacturing resource allocation model based on ant
colony optimization algorithm. Int J Grid Distrib Comput 2015;8(1):55–66.
[269] Lin Y-K, Chong CS. Fast GA-based project scheduling for computing resources
allocation in a cloud manufacturing system. J Intell Manuf 2015;(Apr).
[270] Gao L, Liu Q, Lou P. Computational trust in cloud manufacturing. Adv Mater
Res 2013;774–776:1908–13.
[271] Ren L, Zhang L. An efficient IT energy-saving approach based on
cloud computing for networked green manufacturing. Adv Mater Res
2010;139–141(Oct):1374–7.
[272] Raihanian Mashhadi A, Esmaeilian B, Behdad S. Modeling consumer decisions
on returning end-of-use products considering design features and consumer
interactions: an agent based simulation approach. In: Proceedings of the
ASME 2015 international design engineering technical conferences & com-
puters and information in engineering conference. 2015.
[273] Parlikad A, Mcfarlane D, Fleisch E, Gross S, The role of product identity in end
of life decision making. Auto ID centre white paper CAM-AUTOID-WH017,
01-Jun-2003.
[274] Jardine AKS, Lin D, Banjevic D. A review on machinery diagnostics and
prognostics implementing condition-based maintenance. Mech Syst Signal
Process 2006;20(Oct (7)):1483–510.
[275] Wang W. A model to determine the optimal critical level and the monitor-
ing intervals in condition-based maintenance. Int J Prod Res 2000;38(Apr
(6)):1425–36.
[276] Byington CS, Roemer MJ, Galie T. Prognostic enhancements to diagnostic
systems for improved condition-based maintenance [military aircraft]. In:
Proceedings, IEEE aerospace conference. 2002, 6–2815-6–2824.
[277] Fang X, Zhou R, Gebraeel N. An adaptive functional regression-based
prognostic model for applications with missing data. Reliab Eng Syst Saf
2015;133(Jan):266–74.
[278] Gao R, Wang L, Teti R, Dornfeld D, Kumara S, Mori M, et al. Cloud-enabled prog-
nosis for manufacturing. CIRP Ann—Manuf Technol 2015;64(Jun (2)):749–72.
[279] Si X-S, Wang W, Hu C-H, Zhou D-H. Remaining useful life estimation—a
review on the statistical data driven approaches. Eur J Oper Res 2011;213(Aug
(1)):1–14.
[280] Sabbaghi M, Esmaeilian B, Raihanian Mashhadi A, Behdad S, Cade W. An
investigation of used electronics return flows: a data-driven approach to cap-
ture and predict consumers storage and utilization behavior. Waste Manage
2015;36:305–15.
[281] Kiritsis D, Bufardi A, Xirouchakis P. Research issues on product lifecycle man-
agement and information tracking using smart embedded systems. Adv Eng
Inform 2003;17(Jul (3–4)):189–202.
[282] Jun H-B, Shin J-H, Kim Y-S, Kiritsis D, Xirouchakis P. A framework for RFID
applications in product lifecycle management. Int J Comput Integr Manuf
2009;22(7):595–615.
[283] Parlikad AK, McFarlane D. RFID-based product information in end-of-life deci-
sion making. Control Eng Pract 2007;15(11):1348–63.
[284] Xu DF, Li Q, Jun H-B, Browne J, Chen YL, Kiritsis D. Modelling for product infor-
mation tracking and feedback via wireless technology in closed-loop supply
chains. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 2009;22(7):648–70.
[285] Bufardi A, Sakara D, Gheorghe R, Kiritsis D, Xirouchakis P. Multiple criteria
decision aid for selecting the best product end of life scenario. Int J Comput
Integr Manuf 2003;16(Jan (7–8)):526–34.
[286] Jun H-B, Kiritsis D, Xirouchakis P. Research issues on closed-loop PLM. Comput
Ind 2007;58(Dec (8–9)):855–68.
[287] Wang L, Wang XV, Gao L, Váncza J. A cloud-based approach for WEEE reman-
ufacturing. CIRP Ann—Manuf Technol 2014;63(1):409–12.
[288] Wang XV, Wang L. WRCloud: a novel WEEE remanufacturing cloud system.
Procedia CIRP 2015;29:786–91.
[289] Xia K, Gao L, Wang L, Li W, Chao K-M. A semantic information services
framework for sustainable WEEE management toward cloud-based remanu-
facturing. J Manuf Sci Eng 2015;137(Sep (6)):061011.
[290] Lanza G, Haefner B, Kraemer A. Optimization of selective assembly and adap-
tive manufacturing by means of cyber-physical system based matching. CIRP
Ann—Manuf Technol 2015;64(1):399–402.
[291] Wang L, Törngren M, Onori M. Current status and advancement of cyber-
physical systems in manufacturing. J Manuf Syst 2015;37(Part 2):517–27,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2015.04.008.
[292] Wang L, Gao R, Ragai I. An integrated cyber-physical system for cloud manu-
facturing. In: Volume 1: materials; micro and nano technologies; properties,
applications and systems; sustainable manufacturing. 2014. V001T04A029.
[293] Lee J, et al. Industrial Big Data Analytics and Cyber-physical Sys-
tems for Future Maintenance & Service Innovation. Procedia CIRP
2015;38:3–7. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2212827115008744 [Accessed October 28, 2015].
[294] Cooper KP, Wachter RF. Cyber-enabled manufacturing systems for additive
manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J 2014;20(Aug (5)):355–9.
[295] Seitz K-F, Nyhuis P. Cyber-physical production systems combined with logis-
tic models—a learning factory concept for an improved production planning
and control. Procedia CIRP 2015;32:92–7.
[296] DMDII. Project planning document call for white papers, technologies
enabling supply chain visibility; 2015.
[297] Katz J. Advanced manufacturing: where is America today? Ind Week
2015;259(10):26–30.
[298] Li L, Hong M, Schmidt M, Zhong M, Malshe A, Huis in’tVeld B, et al. Laser nano-
manufacturing—state of the art and challenges. CIRP Ann—Manuf Technol
2011;60(Jan (2)):735–55.
[299] Hoyle R. Developments in micro and nano engineering and manufacturing.
Plast Rubber Compos 2008;37(May (2–4)):50–6.
[300] Li Y-F, Li J, Paavola C, Kagawa H, Chan SL, Trent JD. The nano revolution:
bottom-up manufacturing with biomolecules. Microtechnologies for the new
millennium, vol. 6591. International Society for Optics and Photonics; 2007.
[301] Cooper KP. Controlling high-throughput manufacturing at the nano-scale.
SPIE nanoscience+engineering, vol. 8819. International Society for Optics and
Photonics; 2013. p. 881902.
[302] Obikawa T, Postek MT, Dornfeld D, Liu R, Komanduri R, Guo Y, et al. MSEC
2009 state-of-art paper: micro/nano-technology applications for manufac-
turing systems and processes. In: ASME 2009 international manufacturing
science and engineering conference. 2009. p. 295–317.
[303] Dasgupta NP, Sun J, Liu C, Brittman S, Andrews SC, Lim J, et al. 25th anniversary
article: semiconductor nanowires—synthesis, characterization, and applica-
tions. Adv Mater 2014;26(Apr (14)):2137–84.
[304] Guarini KW, Black CT, Milkove KR, Sandstrom RL. Nanoscale patterning using
self-assembled polymers for semiconductor applications. J Vac Sci Technol B:
Microelectron Nanom Struct 2001;19(Nov (6)):2784.
[305] Karlin KD, editor. Progress in inorganic chemistry, vol. 41. Hoboken, NJ, USA:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1994.
[306] Lu W, Sastry AM. Self-assembly for semiconductor industry. IEEE Trans Semi-
cond Manuf 2007;20(Nov (4)):421–31.
[307] Firth SK, Campbell WJ, Toprac A, Edgar TF. Just-in-time adaptive disturbance
estimation for run-to-run control of semiconductor processes. IEEE Trans
Semicond Manuf 2006;19(Aug (3)):298–315.
[308] Şengül H, Theis TL. An environmental impact assessment of quantum dot
photovoltaics (QDPV) from raw material acquisition through use. J Clean Prod
2011;19(1):21–31.
[309] Zhou C, Chen Y. Additive manufacturing based on optimized mask
video projection for improved accuracy and resolution. J Manuf Process
2012;14(2):107–18.
[310] Berman B. 3-D printing: the new industrial revolution. Bus Horiz 2012;55(Mar
(2)):155–62.
[311] Wohlers Terry. Tracking global growth in industrial-scale additive manufac-
turing. 3D Print Addit Manuf 2014;1(1):2–3.
[312] Appleton RW. Additive manufacturing overview for the United States marine
corps; 2014.
[313] Neil Hopkinson PD, Hague Richard. Rapid manufacturing: an industrial revo-
lution for the digital age. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons; 2006. p.
304.
[314] Zhou C, Chen Y, Epstein DJ. Additive manufacturing based on multiple cali-
brated projectors and its mask image planning. In: ASME 2010 international
design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in
engineering conference. 2010. p. 439–49.
[315] Campbell TA, Ivanova OS. Additive manufacturing as a disruptive technology:
implications of three-dimensional printing. Technol Innov 2013;15(1):67–79.
[316] MAL Inc. 3D systems: empowering our customers to manufacture the future.
3D Print Addit Manuf 2014;1(Mar (1)):55–9.