Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
online atonline
Available www.sciencedirect.com
at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
ScienceDirect
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia CIRP 00 (2017)

Procedia 000–000
CIRP 84 (2019) 209–214
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

29th CIRP Design 2019 (CIRP Design 2019)

29th CIRP Design 2019 (CIRP Design 2019)
Experiential Learning of CAD Systems Interoperability in Social Network-
Experiential Learning 28th CIRP of CAD Systems May
Design Conference, Interoperability
2018, Nantes, France in Social Network-
based Education
based Education
A new methodology to analyze the functional and physical architecture of
Cátia Alvesaa, Goran Putnikaa*
existing products for an assembly Cátia Alves oriented
, Goran Putnik product
* family identification
Department of Production and Systems Engineering & ALGORITMI Center, University of Minho, Campus of Azurém, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
a
a
Department of Production and Systems Engineering & ALGORITMI Center, University of Minho, Campus of Azurém, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 253 510 355. E-mail address: putnikgd@dps.uminho.pt
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 253 510 355. E-mail address: putnikgd@dps.uminho.pt
École Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, LCFC EA 4495, 4 Rue Augustin Fresnel, Metz 57078, France

*Abstract
Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: paul.stief@ensam.eu
Abstract
Experiential learning model for acquiring skills on CAD Systems interoperability, using the Social Networked-based Education model and the
Experiential learning
Learning Factory model for
platform, acquiring skills
is presented. on CAD Systems
The experiential interoperability,
learning leads studentsusing the Social
to acquire Networked-based
knowledge on CAD Education model and the
Systems interoperability
Abstract
Learningthe
through Factory platform,
principle is presented.
of “Project-first, The experiential
just-in-time principles”.learning leads students
The experiential to acquire
learning is appliedknowledge
in Computeron Aided
CAD Systems interoperability
Design/Computer Aided
through the
Process principle
Planning of “Project-first,
(CAD/CAPP) just-in-time
and Computer principles”.
Aided The experiential
Manufacturing learning isunits,
(CAM) curricular applied in Computer
within the fourthAided
year Design/Computer
of Integrated MasterAided
on
InProcess
today’s business
Planning environment,
(CAD/CAPP) the
and trend towards
Computer Aidedmore product variety
Manufacturing and
(CAM) customization
curricular is
units, unbroken.
within theDue to
fourth
Industrial Engineering and Management course and along seven years in row. The experiential learning model developed and implemented this
yeardevelopment,
of Integratedthe need
Master of
on
agile andthat
Industrial
proved reconfigurable
Engineering production
experientialand Management
learning systems
provides emerged
course
capacity to
andofalongcope with
seven
teaching various
years
of new products
in row.
features and productoffamilies.
Theexperience
and experiential learning To
4.0design
Industry model and optimize
developed
environment production
and implemented
while keeping the
systems
proved as well
that as to choose
experiential
actual “curricula”. the optimal
learning providesproduct
capacitymatches, product
of teaching analysis
of new methods
features are needed.
and experience of Indeed,
Industrymost of the knownwhile
4.0 environment methods aimthe
keeping to
analyze a product or one product family on the physical level. Different product families, however, may differ largely in terms of the number and
actual “curricula”.
nature
© 2019ofThe
components. This fact by
Authors. Published impedes
ElsevieranB.V.
efficient comparison and choice of appropriate product family combinations for the production
© 2019
© 2019AThe
system. The
newAuthors. Published
methodology
Authors. by Elsevier
is proposed
Published by B.V. existing products in view of their functional and physical architecture. The aim is to cluster
to analyze
Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of the
of the scientific
the scientific
scientific committee
committee of
of the
the CIRP
CIRP Design
Design Conference
Conference 2019
2019.
these productsunder
Peer-review in new assembly oriented
responsibility of product families
committeefor the
of optimization
the CIRP Designof existing assembly
Conference 2019 lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
assembly systems. Based on Datum Flow Chain, the physical structure of the products is analyzed.
Keywords: Experiential Learning; CAD Systems Interoperability; Social Network-based Education; Learning Factory; Functional subassemblies
Industry 4.0 are identified, and
a Keywords:
functionalExperiential
analysis isLearning;
performed.
CADMoreover, a hybrid functional
Systems Interoperability; and physicalEducation;
Social Network-based architecture graphFactory;
Learning (HyFPAG) is 4.0
Industry the output which depicts the
similarity between product families by providing design support to both, production system planners and product designers. An illustrative
example of a nail-clipper is used to explain the proposed methodology. An industrial case study on two product families of steering columns of
thyssenkrupp Presta France is then carried out to give a first industrial evaluation
1. Introduction of theTo
company. proposed
realizeapproach.
this principle, the students (the workers
©1.2017
Introduction
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. company.
in a company),realize
To has tothis principle,
have the knowledge,
ability, i.e. students (thetoworkers
realize
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP in Design Conference
a company), has to2018.have ability, i.e. knowledge, to realize
“Experiential learning” is one of many learning theories, or the assign task.
“Experiential
instructional learning”
models is onethe
(within of many
“inquire” learningand theories,
“activity”or theConsequently,
assign task. in the case of students, teacher first present
Keywords: Assembly;
instructional Design(within
models method; Family
the identificationand “activity”
“inquire” Consequently, in theassignment
case of students, teacher this
firstphase
present
learning theory as a wider concept). In its simplest definition, principles before task (in companies is
learning theory as a wider concept). In
“experiential learning” is learning through experience. its simplest definition, principles before task assignment (in companies
not necessary, because workers are employed based on their this phase is
“experiential learning” is learning through
There are evidences that the “experiential learning” is moreexperience. not necessary, because workers are employed
professional knowledge, meaning that they had presented the based on their
There than
1.effective are evidences
Introduction traditionalthat the “experiential
“passive learning”. learning” is more of professional
principles
the product knowledge,
before and meaning
entering
range the companythat they
characteristics had presented
(education)).
manufactured the
and/or
effective than traditional “passive learning”.
Berryman defines passive learning: “Passive learning assembled principles before
This classical entering
learning
in this system. the company
In thispath, (education)).
in passive
context, the main learning,
challenge in is
Berryman
means
Due that defines
to learners
the do passive
fast not interact
development learning:
withinproblems“Passive andlearning
the domain contentof This classical
described
modelling as
and learning
“Principles-first”.
analysis is now path, in passive
not only to cope learning,
with single is
means that
communication learners
and thus do notand do
receive not interact with
the experiential
an ongoing problems
trend offeedback and content
so keyand
digitization described
to products,
However, as “Principles-first”.
experiential
a limited product learning is basedproduct
range or existing on a families,
different
and thus do
learning.
digitalization, not
Students receive
needthechances
manufacturing experiential
enterprises to are feedback
engage so choice,
key to but
facing inimportant However,
learning
also topath, experiential
which
be able learning
is described
to analyze and to is based
ascompare on a to
“Project-first”.
products different
define
learning. Students
judgment, control
challenges in today’s need
processes, chances
marketand to engage
problem formulation;
environments: in choice,
a continuing learning path, which is described as “Project-first”.
they new product families. It can be observed that classical existing
judgment,
need chances
tendency control
towards to make processes,
mistakes.
reduction and
of product problem
(p. 375)” [1]formulation;
developmentcited intimes they product
[2]. and The objective
families are of regrouped
the learning in process
functionisoftoclients
guideor students
features.to
need chances
Passiveproduct
shortened to make
learning, mistakes. (p.
or “inertInlearning”,
lifecycles. 375)”
addition, there [1] cited
is criticizedin [2]. theThe
by some However,
is an increasing objective
so called oforiented
“Flow”
assembly thezone,
learning process
in which
product theis“challenges
families toare
guide
hardlystudents
[for to
the
to find.
Passive
authors,of
demand learning,
e.g.customization,or “inert
[1], [3] and [4]being learning”,
citedatin the is criticized
[2].same time in a global by some the so
students]called
On the are “Flow”
balanced
product familyzone, in
withlevel, which
skills” the “challenges
[5]. differ mainly in two
products [for the
authors,
competition e.g.with
Curiously, [1], [3]
Berryman and [4]
competitors cited
claims in
allthat [2].
over passive
the world.learning
Thisfollows
trend, students]
main The are balanced
difference
characteristics: with
(i)between skills”
the number the[5].
of passive
components learning
and (ii) and
the
theCuriously,
which traditional
is inducing Berryman
industrial claims
management
the development that passive learning
style.macro
from Teacher to follows
defines
micro The
experiential
type difference isbetween
learning(e.g.
of components inmechanical, the electrical,
the trajectory passive learning
of the learning path.and
electronical). In
the
and traditional
markets, assign industrial
resultstasks to management
in diminishedeach lot sizesstyle.
student, Teacher
similarly
due defines
as
to augmenting the experiential
passive
Classical learningthe
learning, is inlearning
methodologies the trajectory
considering ofpasses
the learning
pathmainly through
single path.the
products In
and assign
administrative
product tasks
varietiesmanagers to
(high-volume each
assign student,
tasks to each
to low-volume similarly as
worker in
production) the
[1].a orpassive
“Boredom” learning, the
zone, while
solitary, already learning
existing in the path passes
experiential
product through
families learning,
analyze the the
the
administrative
To cope with this managers
augmenting assign tasksas to
variety welleach worker
as to be able “Boredom”
in toa product zone,
structure on awhile
physical in level
the experiential
(components learning,
level) which the
identify
2212-8271 possible
© 2019 The optimization
Authors. Publishedpotentials
by Elsevier B.V. in the existing causes difficulties regarding an efficient definition and
2212-8271
Peer-review©under
production 2019responsibility
system,The itAuthors. Published
is important
of tobyhave
Elsevier
the scientific B.V.of the
a precise
committee knowledge comparison
CIRP Design Conference 2019 of different product families. Addressing this
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the CIRP Design Conference 2019

2212-8271©©2017
2212-8271 2019The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V. B.V.
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of scientific
of the the scientific committee
committee of the of theCIRP
28th CIRP Design
Design Conference
Conference 2019.
2018.
10.1016/j.procir.2019.07.002
210 Cátia Alves et al. / Procedia CIRP 84 (2019) 209–214
2 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
learning path passes through the “Zone of Proximal
Development”. The “Zone of Proximal Development”
represents “what the learner can do with guidance”. The
learning path of two models is represented on Fig.1 [5].
Fig. 1. Learning Path - ‘Project-first’ vs. ‘Principles-first’ [5].
In this paper, implementation of experiential learning for
acquiring skills on CAD Systems interoperability is presented.
The challenge of experiential learning application, by the
learning path “Project-first”, was development of the
experiential learning model and its implementation, to address
the CAD systems interoperability, with multiple objectives:
1. to improve the teaching methodology, more concretely, to
avoid the “Boredom zone” and to guide students through
the “Zone of Proximal Development” to the “Flow” zone,
2. to provide experience of Industry 4.0 environment while
keeping the actual “curricula”, and
3. to develop a “low-cost” model that will provide the above-
mentioned objectives effectively.
To address this challenge, the experiential learning model
uses the Social Networked-based Education (SNE) model and
the Learning Factory (LF) platform. In fact, the SNE is
instrumental and of the greatest importance for development
and implementation of the experiential learning model for the
case (objective 1 above), while the LF platform is instrumental
for achieving objectives 2 and 3 above. (More details on SNE
model and LF platform, for achieving the objectives 2 and 3
above, are not within the scope of this paper).
This paper is further organized as follows. Chapter 2
describes the SNE model and LF platform for implementation
of experiential learning model for CAD systems
interoperability. In Chapter 3, implementation of experiential
learning model is presented. Conclusions are described in
Chapter 4.
2. SNE model and LF platform for “CAD systems
interoperability”
Concerning the learning objective of “CAD systems
interoperability”, the experiential learning model is developed
and implemented following the SNE model.
In the SNE model, students and teachers are seen as
participants that form a network, in which the network
structure, communication, learning process and behavior
exhibit features of a social network. Social networks are so-
called “scale-free networks” because their degree distribution
follows a power law.
In practice, this means participants in SNE are allowed to
establish freely their own ties among themselves and with
teachers.
Their free choices are related to choose what, how and
when to learn and work, as well with whom they collaborate.
This freedom triggers the emergence of self-organization, new
patterns of learning and acquisition of competences.
Learning on CAD systems interoperability in SNE implies
definition of a number of tasks, concerning the CAD systems
interoperability, which are assigned to the students in a
crowdsourcing manner. The tasks are designed in such form
and sequence to present the CAD systems interoperability
challenges to students, in accordance with the principles
“Project-First, just-in-time principles”.
The tasks are launched over LF platform, which
architecture is presented on Fig. 2. [6, 7].
Some work on SNE and LF is presented, e.g. on [7, 8].
Fig. 2. Learning Factory platform logical architecture [6, 7].
In the SNE model, and within the LF platform, students are
divided in two groups with two different roles:
1. “clients” that request services (tasks) to realize their
projects, and
2. “service providers”, composed by individual service
providers and group service providers.
 Cátia Alves et al. / Procedia CIRP 84 (2019) 209–214
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
Students are organized as a social network and they could
work using some platforms for supporting social networks,
such as, e.g. Facebook.
“Clients” have the objective of realization of a CAD
project, contracting services by the “service providers”, which
will accomplish the task for the respective service launched.
The “clients” launch task by task, in a “technological”
sequence, on which the tasks/assignments were launched in
the form of requests for “services” in a crowdsourcing
manner.
Realization of the project through several tasks in a
“technological” sequence, means that “task n+1” cannot be
launched before “task n” is finished.
All “service providers” receive bid for a task and offer
conditions for the task realization: price of the service and
deadline for its finishing. Each “service provider” can realize
any task.
“Client” can contract any “service provider” for any task,
but one “service provider” for one task. “Client” decides on
which service provider” to contract based on negotiation with
each one “service provider” or with just selected ones.
3. Implementation of the experiential learning model,
based on SNE, for “CAD systems interoperability”
3.1. Experiential learning implementation environment
The SNE model is regularly applied in two curricular units:
Computer Aided Design/Computer Aided Process Planning
(CAD/CAPP) and Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM),
within the fourth year of Integrated Master on Industrial
Engineering and Management course.
In this experience, in the last year (2018/2019), 62 students
(in total) were divided in two groups, considering: 7 “clients”
and 55 “service providers” (55 individual service providers
and 7 group service providers). (In previous years the number
of students and distribution was similar).
“Clients” have the objective of realization of a CAD
project, contracting services by “service providers”.
3.2. Experiential learning implementation phases
The clients’ projects are consisting of two tasks*:
 Task_1 “Development of the 3D model for the given
product”, and
 Task_2 “Development of the Technical Drawing for the
3D model”
*Note: in reality there are much more than 2 tasks. In this
paper, only 2 tasks are referred for the sake of
exemplification. In fact, there were launched in 497
tasks/assignments, by 7 “clients” for the two Curricula Units
– CAD/CAPP and CAM – of which the “interoperability
problem” comprise several tasks within the CAD module.
211
3
The experiential learning implementation comprises two
different phases:
 Preparation phase; and
 Realization phase.
The experiential learning implementation phases, for the
CAD systems interoperability, based on the SNE model, is
presented on Fig. 3. The textual notation of the experiential
learning model is given in Appendix A.
In “Preparation phase” students select the CAD software
for realization of CAD services. They are free to select any
software – [the software selected by students were, Autodesk
Inventor Professional 2019, Autodesk Inventor Professional
2018, Autodesk Inventor Professional 2017].
Within the second phase, “Realization phase”, the process
follows the steps:
1. Client(s)” launch Task_1 to all “service providers” and
negotiate service price and deadline;
2. “Client(s)” allocate the Task_1 to the selected “service
provider”;
3. “Service provider” deliver finished Task_1 to the “Client”;
4. “Client(s)” launch Task_2 to all “service providers” and
negotiate service price and deadline;
5. “Client(s)” allocate the Task_2 to the selected “service
provider”. “Service provider” to whom will be allocated
Task_2, in principle is a different one than the “service
provider” that realized and delivered Task_1. It means, that
the “service provider” for the Task_2 could use a different
CAD software than the “service provider” of the Task_1.
At this point the interoperability problem emerges, if the
“service provider” for the Task_2 uses the CAD software that
cannot “read” the file format produced by the “service
provider’s” CAD software that was used for the Task_1! At
this point, the students, “clients” and “service providers”,
ask for teacher’s guidance.
6. Teacher explains principles of CAD systems
interoperability.
7. “Client” re-launch the Task_1 requesting the then “service
provider” to export the 3D CAD model in the “neutral
format”, and after that re-launch Task_2.
8. “Service providers” apply one of the techniques for CAD
systems interoperability,
or, alternatively,
7. “Service provider” of the Task_2 select another CAD
software, that is capable of “reading” provided file
(originated form Task_1)
8. “Service provider” deliver finished Task_” to the “Client”.
In this way, the principle “Project-first, just-in-time
principles”, for the CAD systems interoperability problem, is
realized.
212 Cátia Alves et al. / Procedia CIRP 84 (2019) 209–214
4 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

Fig. 3. Experiential learning implementation for CAD system interoperability.

4. Conclusions Quality Management (AQM), Reliability and Maintenance

(RM), Concurrent Engineering (CE) and Production Planning
The implementation model for experiential learning, using and Control (PPC).
SNE educational model and (LF) platform, has been validated One of the important outcomes of this paper is that the
along 7 years of application for Curricula Units: CAD/CAPP, model developed, and implemented, proved that teaching new
CAM, and in particular years for Advanced features and experience of Industry 4.0 environment while
 Cátia Alves et al. / Procedia CIRP 84 (2019) 209–214 213
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000 5

keeping the actual “curricula” is possible. This means that it is Professor->Students:Task Select CAD tool
not absolutely necessary updating the curricula contents, activate Professor
which requirement provide many problems (what to do with activate Students
“old” themes, are they necessary – usually yes – or to Professor<--Students:CAD tool selected
eliminate them, but provide the learning of new topics deactivate Students
through “experiential learning”. Professor->Students: Students role distribution
This is one of the most important outcomes and activate Students
conclusions that provides directions how to update the actual Professor<--Students:Client profile constitution
courses. Professor<--Students:Service Providers profile constitution
Similarly, through experiential learning model and SNE deactivate Students
model, students experienced a number of other Industry 4.0 ==Realization Phase==
topics within the actual curricula contents [7]: actor Clients
 Internet-based work (design, management, operation); actor ServiceProvider
 Product/Service Systems (PSS); Professor->Clients: Order to launch Tasks
 Cloud and ubiquitous manufacturing systems and activate Clients
enterprises; Clients->ServiceProvider: Launch Task 1
 Virtuality; activate ServiceProvider
 Agility; Clients<--ServiceProvider: Negotiation email
 Networked organization/Networking (supply-chain); Clients->ServiceProvider: Selected Service Provider
 Social network-based and community-based Clients<--ServiceProvider: Task 1 Report
manufacturing/production; deactivate ServiceProvider
 Crowdsourcing; Clients->Repository: Save Task 1 Report
 Open System architecture-based organization; Clients<-Repository: Pickup Task 1 Report
 Learning organization; Clients->ServiceProvider: Launch Task 2
 Entrepreneurship; activate ServiceProvider
 Advanced ICT; Clients<--ServiceProvider: Negotiation email
 Complexity Management in organization; Clients->ServiceProvider: Selected Service Provider
 Integration and interoperability in organizations; Clients<--ServiceProvider: Task 2 Report (**task not
 Cyber-physical system; completed**)
 Negotiation; Professor<-Clients:Request for Professor's Guidance (*)
 Human-centred view of organization vs Technology- deactivate Clients
centred; deactivate ServiceProvider
 Game theory; note right of Professor
 Competition-based environments (markets) and (*)for **Task 2 interoperability problem**
organizations (concurrent engineering); end note
 Collaboration-based environments (communities) and activate Students
organizations (collaborative engineering); Professor->Students: Explain principles of CAD systems
 Large-scale open-ended projects; interoperability
 Open-source projects; deactivate Students
 … Professor->Clients: Order to relaunch Task 1
activate Clients
Acknowledgements activate ServiceProvider
Clients->ServiceProvider: Re-launch Task 1
This work has been supported by FCT – Fundação para a note right of Clients
Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal, within the Project Scope: Re-launch Task 1
UID/CEC/00319/2019. requesting the “service provider”
to export the 3D CAD model in the “neutral format”
Appendix A. Experiential learning model implementation end note
textual notation Clients<--ServiceProvider:Task 1 Report(*)
note right of Clients
This appendix presents the textual notation of the (*) with one of the techniques for representation
experiential learning implementation presented in Chapter 3, of CAD model in the "neutral format" to assure
Fig. 3. The sequence diagram is represented using the the CAD systems interoperability
PlanText UML Editor, available at end note
https://www.planttext.com/: deactivate ServiceProvider
Clients->Repository: Save Task 1 Report
actor Professor Clients<-Repository: Pickup Task 1 Report
actor Students Clients->ServiceProvider: Re-launch Task 2
==Preparation Phase== activate ServiceProvider
214 Cátia Alves et al. / Procedia CIRP 84 (2019) 209–214
6 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
Clients<--ServiceProvider: Task 2 Report (**finished**)
deactivate ServiceProvider
Clients->Repository: Save Task 2 Report
Clients<-Repository: Pickup Task 2 Report
deactivate Clients
Professor<-Repository: Pickup Task 1 and Task 2 Reports
deactivate Professor
References
[1] Berryman SE. Chapter 8: Learning for the Workplace. Review of research
in education. 1993, 19.1: 343-401.
[2] Valdez G, McNabb M, Foertsch M, Anderson M, Hawkes M, Raack L.
Computer-based technology and learning: Evolving uses and
expectations. NCREL, 1900 Spring Rd., Suite 300, Oak Brook, IL 60523-
1480, 1999.
[3] Besser H. Education as marketplace. In R. Muffoletto & N. Nelson
Knupfer (Eds.), Computers in education: Social, political, and historical
perspectives. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. 1993, p. 37-69.
[4] Popkewitz TS, Shutkin DS. Social science, social movements and the
production of educational technology in the U.S. In R. Muffoletto & N.
Nelson Knupfer (Eds.), Computers in education: Social, political, and
historical perspectives. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. 1993, p. 11-36.
[5] Basawapatna AR, Repenning A, Koh KH, Nickerson H. The zones of
proximal flow: guiding students through a space of computational
thinking skills and challenges. In: Proceedings of the ninth annual
international ACM conference on International computing education
research. ACM, 2013. p. 67-74.
[6] Putnik G, Castro H, Ferreira L, Barbosa R, Vieira G, Alves C, Shah V,
Putnik Z, Cruz-Cunha MM, Varela L. Advanced Manufacturing Systems
and Enterprises: Towards Ubiquitous and Cloud Manufacturing:
University of Minho – School of Engineering, 2012.
[7] Putnik G, Costa E, Alves C, Castro H, Varela L, Shah V. Analysing the
correlation between social network analysis measures and performance of
students in social network-based engineering education. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2016; 26(3): 413-437.
[8] Putnik GD, Alves C, Carvalho C, Sousa S, Varela L, Shah V, Castro H.
Social Network-Based Education And Learning Factory As Emergent
Forms Of Education And Training: An Application For Quality
Management. 9th International Quality Conference, Kragujevac, Serbia.
2015.