The need for improving flexibility, optimality, and transparency of industry processes increases since the customer demands are highly diverse and full of uncertainty. Cyber-Physical System (CPS) technology now is being developed to meet those requirements. It can be achieved through Digital Twin (DT). Unfortunately, the application of DT is still limited in practice nowadays, and no standard way to achieve integration. The concept of an Asset Administration Shell (AAS) proposed by Plattform Industrie 4.0 arose as a promising concept to realize DT in standard manner. However, the granularity of AAS remains undefined and still under development. A literature study shows that most of studies only reached static digital twin and only considered a few specific assets especially unmovable assets. Dynamic digital twin is only supported by Virtual Reality (VR) that cannot be used for optimization as well as direct controlling. Therefore, this research intends to contribute to DT development by proposing 3D computer simulation technology as dynamic digital twin by following Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI 4.0) based on AAS Framework. The proposed concept enables DT to do dynamic monitoring, optimization, and direct controlling. As a use case, a smart warehouse in Taiwan is used and assets considered include Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs), Operator, Conveyor, Forklift, and Storage Rack. This research consists of 4 stages. First, AAS Variables Definition, identifying the assets and the data that want to be exchanged via AAS, defining AAS capability and AAS structure. Second, AAS Simulation Modeling with Flexsim software is established. Third, AAS System Integration consists of designing communication networks and information modeling. And last, demonstrating 2 main advantages of using simulation which are simulation-based optimization for AGV capacity planning and creating dynamic dashboard. To support communication between assets, OPC Unified Architecture (OPC UA) and Automation Markup Language (AutomationML) are determined. As a result of demonstration, simulation-based optimization is done for multi-objectives and can find the optimum capacity of each AGV. Dynamic dashboard is also created to ease real-time monitoring process. Later on, data from dashboard can be exported to database and predictive analytics can be done. Based on these capabilities, industry 4.0 scenarios can be integrated systematically and comprehensively.

The need for improving flexibility, optimality, and transparency of industry processes increases since the customer demands are highly diverse and full of uncertainty. Cyber-Physical System (CPS) technology now is being developed to meet those requirements. It can be achieved through Digital Twin (DT). Unfortunately, the application of DT is still limited in practice nowadays, and no standard way to achieve integration. The concept of an Asset Administration Shell (AAS) proposed by Plattform Industrie 4.0 arose as a promising concept to realize DT in standard manner. However, the granularity of AAS remains undefined and still under development. A literature study shows that most of studies only reached static digital twin and only considered a few specific assets especially unmovable assets. Dynamic digital twin is only supported by Virtual Reality (VR) that cannot be used for optimization as well as direct controlling. Therefore, this research intends to contribute to DT development by proposing 3D computer simulation technology as dynamic digital twin by following Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI 4.0) based on AAS Framework. The proposed concept enables DT to do dynamic monitoring, optimization, and direct controlling. As a use case, a smart warehouse in Taiwan is used and assets considered include Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs), Operator, Conveyor, Forklift, and Storage Rack. This research consists of 4 stages. First, AAS Variables Definition, identifying the assets and the data that want to be exchanged via AAS, defining AAS capability and AAS structure. Second, AAS Simulation Modeling with Flexsim software is established. Third, AAS System Integration consists of designing communication networks and information modeling. And last, demonstrating 2 main advantages of using simulation which are simulation-based optimization for AGV capacity planning and creating dynamic dashboard. To support communication between assets, OPC Unified Architecture (OPC UA) and Automation Markup Language (AutomationML) are determined. As a result of demonstration, simulation-based optimization is done for multi-objectives and can find the optimum capacity of each AGV. Dynamic dashboard is also created to ease real-time monitoring process. Later on, data from dashboard can be exported to database and predictive analytics can be done. Based on these capabilities, industry 4.0 scenarios can be integrated systematically and comprehensively.

[1] J. Jasperneite, T. Sauter, and M. Wollschlaeger, “Why We Need Automation Models: Handling Complexity in Industry 4.0 and the Internet of Things,” IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., 2020, pp. 29-40, doi: 10.1109/MIE.2019.2947119.
[2] J. M. Tien, “Manufacturing and services: From mass production to mass customization,” J. Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng., 2011, pp. 129-154, doi: 10.1007/s11518-011-5166-x.
[3] A. W. Colombo, S. Karnouskos, O. Kaynak, Y. Shi, and S. Yin, “Industrial Cyberphysical Systems: A Backbone of the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., 2017, pp. 6-16, doi: 10.1109/MIE.2017.2648857.
[4] J. Johnson, “Internet usage worldwide - Statistics & Facts | Statista,” Statistica, 2020. https://www.statista.com/topics/1145/internet-usage-worldwide/.
[5] Bitkom, VDMA, and ZVEI, Implementation Strategy Industrie 4.0. 2015.
[6] G. Lampropoulos, K. Siakas, and T. Anastasiadis, “Internet of Things in the Context of Industry 4.0: An Overview,” Int. J. Entrep. Knowl., 2019, pp. 4-19, doi: 10.2478/ijek-2019-0001.
[7] A. Seif, C. Toro, and H. Akhtar, “Implementing industry 4.0 asset administrative shells in mini factories,” 2019, pp. 495-504, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.204.
[8] K. Schweichhart, “Reference Architectural Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI 4.0) - An Introduction,” Plattf. Ind. 4.0, 2016.
[9] P. Adolphs, S. Auer, H. Bedenbender, M. Billmann, M. Hankel, R. Heidel, M. Hoffmeister, H. Huble, M. Jochem, M. Kiele-Dunsche, G. Koschnick, H. Koziolek, L. Linke, R. Pichler, F. Schewe, K. Schneider, and B. Waser, “Structure of the Administration Shell,” 2016.
[10] X. Ye, J. Jiang, C. Lee, N. Kim, M. Yu, and S. H. Hong, “Toward the Plug-and-Produce Capability for Industry 4.0: An Asset Administration Shell Approach,” IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., 2020, pp. 146-157, doi: 10.1109/MIE.2020.3010492.
[11] E. Tantik and R. Anderl, “Integrated Data Model and Structure for the Asset Administration Shell in Industrie 4.0,” 2017, pp. 86-91, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2017.01.048.
[12] X. Ye and S. H. Hong, “An AutomationML/OPC UA-based Industry 4.0 Solution for a Manufacturing System,” 2018, pp. 543-550, doi: 10.1109/ETFA.2018.8502637.
[13] P. Marcon, C. Diedrich, F. Zezulka, T. Schröder, A. Belyaev, J. Arm, T. Benesi, Z. Bradac, and I. Vesely, “The Asset Administration Shell of Operator in the Platform of Industry 4.0,” pp. 1-6, 2019.
[14] A. Al Assadi, C. Fries, M. Fechter, B. Maschler, D. Ewert, H. Schnauffer, M. Zürn, and M. Reichnebach, “User-friendly, requirement based assistance for production workforce using an asset administration shell design,” 2020, pp. 402-406, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2020.02.192.
[15] S. Muralidharan, B. Yoo, and H. Ko, “Designing a semantic digital twin model for IoT,” 2020, pp. 1-2, doi: 10.1109/ICCE46568.2020.9043088.
[16] CyberFactory#1, “Factory SoS Modelling and Simulation State of the Art Analysis – version 1.0,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://itea3.org/project/workpackage/document/download/6667/State of the Art: Modeling and Simulation of Factories of the Future (v1.0).pdf.
[17] S. Vaidya, P. Ambad, and S. Bhosle, “Industry 4.0 - A Glimpse,” 2018, pp. 233-238, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.034.
[18] S. Erol, A. Jäger, P. Hold, K. Ott, and W. Sihn, “Tangible Industry 4.0: A Scenario-Based Approach to Learning for the Future of Production,” 2016, pp. 13-18, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2016.03.162.
[19] Platform Industrie 4.0, “Aspects of the Research Roadmap in Application Scenarios,” Platf. Ind. 4.0, 2016.
[20] L. Shi-Wan, B. Miller, J. Durand, G. Bleakley, A. Chigani, R. Martin, B. Murphy, and M. Crawford, “The Industrial Internet of Things Volume G1 : Reference Architecture,” Ind. Internet Consort. White Pap., 2017, pp. 5-58.
[21] A. Helmann, F. Deschamps, and E. D. F. R. Loures, “Reference architectures for industry 4.0: Literature review,” 2020, pp. 171-180, doi: 10.3233/ATDE200074.
[22] Y. Lu, K. C. Morris, and S. Frechette, “Standards landscape and directions for smart manufacturing systems,” 2015, pp. 998-1005, doi: 10.1109/CoASE.2015.7294229.
[23] S. Han, “A review of smart manufacturing reference models based on the skeleton meta-model,” J. Comput. Des. Eng., 2020, pp. 323-336, doi: 10.1093/jcde/qwaa027.
[24] H. S. Park and R. A. Febriani, “Modelling a platform for smart manufacturing system,” 2019, pp. 1660-1667, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2020.01.118.
[25] M. Grieves, Product Lifecycle Management: Driving the Next Generation of Lean Thinking. 2006.
[26] Institute of Intellectual Property Research & Development, “Sample Landscape Study Digital Twin Technology,” 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.iiprd.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Sample-Landscape_Study_Digital_Twin.pptx.
[27] I. I. Krasikov and A. N. Kulemin, “Analysis of Digital Twin Definition and Its Difference from Simulation Modelling in Practical Application,” KnE Eng., 2020, pp. 105-109, doi: 10.18502/keg.v5i3.6766.
[28] G. V. Gageldonk and P. Waterings, “Digital twins: the power of a virtual visual copy - Unite Copenhagen 2019,” Prespective, 2019. https://www.slideshare.net/unity3d/digital-twins-the-power-of-a-virtual-visual-copy-unite-copenhagen-2019.
[29] Industrial Internet Consortium (IIC), “Digital Twins for Industrial Applications,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.iiconsortium.org/pdf/IIC_Digital_Twins_Industrial_Apps_White_Paper_2020-02-18.pdf.
[30] C. Wagner, J. Grothoff, U. Epple, R. Drath, S. Malakuti, S. Güner, M. Hoffmeister, and P. Zimmermann, “The role of the Industry 4.0 asset administration shell and the digital twin during the life cycle of a plant,” 2017, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/ETFA.2017.8247583.
[31] P. Adolphs, H. Bedenbender, and D. Dirzus, “Status Report: Reference Achtitecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI4.0),” VDI/VDE-Gesellschaft Mess- und Autom., 2015.
[32] M. Schleipen, E. Selyansky, R. Henssen, and T. Bischoff, “Multi-level user and role concept for a secure plug-and-work based on OPC UA and AutomationML,” 2015, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/ETFA.2015.7301640.
[33] A. Lüder, L. Hundt, and A. Keibel, “Description of manufacturing processes using AutomationML,” 2010, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1109/ETFA.2010.5641346.
[34] IEC 62714-1, “Engineering data exchange format for use in industrial automation systems engineering (AutomationML) Part 1 - architecture and general requirements,” Eng. data Exch. format use Ind. Autom. Syst. Eng. Autom. Markup Lang. Archit. Gen. Requir., 2012.
[35] B. Lee, D. K. Kim, H. Yang, and S. Oh, “Model transformation between OPC UA and UML,” Comput. Stand. Interfaces, 2017, pp. 1-44, doi: 10.1016/j.csi.2016.09.004.
[36] OPC Foundation, “OPC Unified Architecture Part 1: Overview and Concepts Version 1.02,” OPC Foundation. 2012.
[37] X. Ye, T. Y. Park, S. H. Hong, Y. Ding, and A. Xu, “Implementation of a Production-Control System Using Integrated Automation ML and OPC UA,” 2018, pp. 242-247, doi: 10.1109/METROI4.2018.8428310.
[38] R. Henßen and M. Schleipen, “Interoperability between OPC UA and AutomationML,” 2014, pp. 297-304, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2014.10.042.
[39] A. M. Law and W. D. Kelton, “Simulation Modeling and Analysis (éd. 3rd Edition),” New York, MA McGraw-Hill., 2000.
[40] T. Burgess and M. Pidd, “Computer Simulation in Management Science, 4th Edition.,” J. Oper. Res. Soc., 1999, pp. 284-285, doi: 10.2307/3010694.
[41] F. Fontanili, A. Vincent, and R. Ponsonnet, “Flow simulation and genetic algorithm as optimization tools,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., 2000, pp. 91-100, doi: 10.1016/S0925-5273(99)00047-X.
[42] S. Luściński, “Digital Twinning for Smart Industry,” 2018, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.4108/eai.6-11-2018.2279986.
[43] W. B. Nordgren, “Flexsim simulation environment,” 2003, pp. 197-200, doi: 10.1109/wsc.2003.1261424.
[44] C. B. Morgan, J. Banks, and J. S. Carson, “Discrete-Event System Simulation,” Technometrics, 1984, pp. 195, doi: 10.2307/1268124.
[45] D. Solutions, “Best Discrete Event Simulation Software - 2019,” Best Discrete Event Simulation Software - 2019, 2019. https://www.descreye.com/blog/a-comparison-of-discrete-event-simulation-software-2019/.
[46] H. Haße, H. van der Valk, N. Weißenberg, and B. Otto, “Shared Digital Twins: Data Sovereignty in Logistics Networks,” 2020.
[47] J. Arm, T. Bensel, P. Marcon, Z. Bradac, T. Schröder, A. Belyaev, T. Werner, V. Braun, P. Kamensky, F. Zezulka, C. Diedrich, and P. Dohnal, “Automated design and integration of asset administration shells in components of industry 4.0,” Sensors, 2021, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.3390/s21062004.
[48] C. Toro, A. Seif, and H. Akhtar, “Modeling and Connecting Asset Administrative Shells for Mini Factories,” Cybern. Syst., 2020, pp. 1-14, doi: 10.1080/01969722.2019.1705554.
[49] X. Ye and S. H. Hong, “Toward Industry 4.0 Components: Insights into and Implementation of Asset Administration Shells,” IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag., 2019, pp. 13-25, doi: 10.1109/MIE.2019.2893397.
[50] S. Profanter, A. Perzylo, M. Rickert, and A. Knoll, “A Generic Plug & Produce System Composed of Semantic OPC UA Skills,” IEEE Open J. Ind. Electron. Soc., 2021, doi: pp. 128-141, 10.1109/ojies.2021.3055461.
[51] M. Platenius-Mohr, S. Malakuti, S. Grüner, and T. Goldschmidt, “Interoperable digital twins in IIoT systems by transformation of information models: A case study with asset administration shell,” 2019, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1145/3365871.3365873.
[52] K. T. Park, J. Yang, and S. Do Noh, “VREDI: virtual representation for a digital twin application in a work-center-level asset administration shell,” J. Intell. Manuf., 2021, pp. 1-44, doi: 10.1007/s10845-020-01586-x.
[53] G. N. Schroeder, C. Steinmetz, C. E. Pereira, and D. B. Espindola, “Digital Twin Data Modeling with AutomationML and a Communication Methodology for Data Exchange,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, 2016, pp. 12-17, doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.11.115.
[54] S. Cavalieri and M. G. Salafia, “Insights into mapping solutions based on OPC UA information model applied to the industry 4.0 asset administration shell,” Computers, 2020, pp. 1-28, doi: 10.3390/computers9020028.
[55] M. Platenius-Mohr, S. Malakuti, S. Grüner, J. Schmitt, and T. Goldschmidt, “File- and API-based interoperability of digital twins by model transformation: An IIoT case study using asset administration shell,” Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst., 2020, pp. 94-105, doi: 10.1016/j.future.2020.07.004.
[56] G. Steindl, M. Stagl, L. Kasper, W. Kastner, and R. Hofmann, “Generic digital twin architecture for industrial energy systems,” Appl. Sci., 2020, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.3390/app10248903.
[57] S. Cavalieri and M. G. Salafia, “A model for predictive maintenance based on asset administration shell,” Sensors (Switzerland), 2020, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.3390/s20216028.
[58] M. Laguna and R. Martí, “The OptQuest Callable Library,” Oper. Res. Comput. Sci. Interfaces Ser., 2002, pp. 193-218, doi: 10.1007/0-306-48126-x_7.
[59] Benjamin, “Warehouse Optimization,” Flexsim Forum, 2021. https://answers.flexsim.com/questions/87366/warehouse-optimization.html (accessed Mar. 21, 2021).
[60] M. Kordos, J. Boryczko, M. Blachnik, and S. Golak, “Optimization of warehouse operations with genetic algorithms,” Appl. Sci., 2020, pp. 1-28, doi: 10.3390/app10144817.