C HAPTER 13
4. Future Trends of ERP in Industry 0
Smart facilities are the future factory concept that connects intelligent manufacturing, planning and autonomous decision-making. Therefore, the smart factory model is primarily aimed at facilitating and ensuring the availability of all relevant information for real-time storage, which will be possible through the integration between all elements in the value chain (Majeed and Rupasinghe 2017).
184 Logistics 4.0: Digital Transformation of Supply Chain Management
5. Conclusion
Industry 4.0 ensures many new research and implementation areas for the firms such as investigating and adapting new technologies to classic production environment, changing jobs and skills and training the organization regarding new technologies.
Enterprise resource planning and the future of this concept will be well affected by this new transformation. It is obvious that some concerns are eliminated by implementation of the Industry 4.0 and related activities such as: (i) gathering data from the real production environment will be quite easier than manual data entering, (ii) more reliable data is acquired from the source at once, (iii) more amount of data can be handled and analyzed by cloud and big data approached, (iv) decision capabilities of ERP software are increased by applying artificial intelligence techniques, and (v) future ERP systems are one of the key concepts that controls the bottom and intermediate data storage and analysis in the smart facilities.
References
Al-Mashari, M. and M. Zairi. 2000. Supply-chain re-engineering using enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems: an analysis of a SAP R/3 implementation case [Journal Article]. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 30(3/4): 296–313.
Al-Mashari, M., A. Al-Mudimigh and M. Zairi. 2003. Enterprise resource planning: A taxonomy of critical factors [journal article]. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(2): 352–364.
Angeles, R. 2005. RFID technologies: supply-chain applications and implementation issues. Information Systems Management, 22(1): 51–65.
Anton F., T. Borangiu, S. Raileanu, S. Anton, N. Ivănescu and I. Iacob. 2020. Secure sharing of robot and manufacturing resources in the cloud for research and development. In: Berns, K., D. Gorges [eds.]. Advances in Service and Industrial Robotics. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Vol. 980.
Cham: Springer International Publishing Ag. pp. 535–543.
Armbrust, M., A. Fox, R. Griffith, A.D. Joseph, R. Katz, A. Konwinski, G. Lee, D. Patterson, A. Rabkin, I. Stocia and M.
Zaharia. 2010. A view of cloud computing. Commun ACM, 53(4): 50–58.
Adeyeri, M.K., K. Mpofu and T.A. Olukorede. 2015. Integration of Agent Technology into Manufacturing Enterprise: A Review and Platform for Industry 4.0. New York: Ieee. English (2015 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management).
Babu, M.P. and S.H. Sastry. 2014. Big data and predictive analytics in ERP systems for automating decision making process. In 2014 IEEE 5th International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science. 2014 June (pp. 259–262). IEEE.
Bi, Z.M., Y.F. Liu, B. Baumgartner, E. Culver, J. Sorokin, A. Peters, B. Cox, J. Hunnicutt, J. Yurek and S. O’Shaughnessey. 2015. Reusing industrial robots to achieve sustainability in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) [Article]. Ind. Robot., 42(3): 264–273.
Cre8tive Technology [Internet]. 2019. US: Cre8tive Technology; [cited 30.10.2019]. Available from: https://www.ctnd.com/
the-future-of-erp-top-5-erp-trends-for-2019/.
De Toni, A., G. Nassimbeni and S. Tonchia. 1996. An artificial, intelligence-based production scheduler. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 7(3): 17–25.
Demi, S. and M. Haddara. 2018. Do Cloud ERP Systems Retire? An ERP Lifecycle Perspective [Article]. Procedia Computer Science, 138: 587–594.
Doganis, P., A. Alexandridis, P. Patrinos and H. Sarimveis. 2006. Time series sales forecasting for short shelf-life food products based on artificial neural networks and evolutionary computing. Journal of Food Engineering, 2006 2006/07/01/;75(2):
196–204.
Farhat, J. and M. Owayjan. 2017. ERP neural network inventory control. pp. 288–295. In: Dagli, C.H. [ed.]. Complex Adaptive Systems Conference with Theme: Engineering Cyber Physical Systems, Cas. Procedia Computer Science. Vol. 114.
Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Bv.
Gumaer, R. 1996. Beyond ERP and MRP II: Optimized planning and synchronized manufacturing [journal article]. IIE Solutions, 28(9): 32–36.
Gupta, S., X.Y. Qian, B. Bhushan and Z. Luo. 2019. Role of cloud ERP and big data on firm performance: a dynamic capability view theory perspective [Article]. Manag Decis. 2019 Sep; 57(8): 1857–1882.
Johansson, B. and P. Ruivo. 2013. Exploring Factors for Adopting ERP as SaaS. Procedia Technology, 2013/01/01/;9:94–99.
Koch, C., D. Slater and E. Baatz. 1999. The ABCs of ERP [Article]. CIO Magazine, pg. 22.
Kurbel, K.E. 2016. Enterprise Resource Planning and Supply Chain Management. Springer-Verlag Berlin An.
Kwon, O.B. and J.J. Lee. 2001. Amulti-agent intelligent system for efficient ERP maintenance. Expert Systems with Applications.
2001/11/01/; 21(4): 191–202.
Lasi, H., P. Fettke, H.G. Kemper, T. Feld and M. Hoffamn. 2014. Industry 4.0 [journal article]. Business & Information Systems Engineering. 2014 August 01; 6(4): 239–242.
Li, J.H., M.M. Sun, D.F. Han, X. Wu, B.Yang, X. Mao and Q. Zhou. 2018. Semantic multi-agent system to assist business integration: An application on supplier selection for shipbuilding yards [Article]. Comput. Ind.Apr., 96: 10–26.
Mabert, V.A., A. Soni and M.A Venkataramanan. 2003. Enterprise resource planning: Managing the implementation process [journal article]. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(2): 302–314.
Manupati, V.K., G.D. Putnik, M.K. Tiwari, P. Ávila and M.M. Cruz-Cunha.. 2016. Integration of process planning and scheduling using mobile-agent based approach in a networked manufacturing environment [Article]. Comput. Ind. Eng. Apr., 94:
63–73.
Majeed, A.A. and T.D. Rupasinghe. 2017. Internet of things (IoT) embedded future supply chains for industry 4.0: An assessment from an ERP-based fashion apparel and footwear industry [Article]. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 6(1): 25–40.
Markus, M.L., C. Tanis and P.C. Van Fenema. 2000. Enterprise resource planning: multisite ERP implementations [journal article]. Communications of the ACM, 43(4): 42–46.
O’Hare, G.M., N.R. Jennings and N. Jennings. 1996. Foundations of distributed artificial intelligence. Vol. 9. John Wiley &
Sons.
Mesbahi, N., O. Kazar, S. Benharzallah, M. Zoubeidi and S. Bourekkache. 2015. Multi-agents approach for data mining based k-means for improving the decision process in the ERP systems [Article]. Int. AJ Decis. Support Syst. Technol. Jun–Apr., 7(2): 1–14.
Ranjan, S., V.K. Jha and P. Pal. 2017. Application of emerging technologies in ERP implementation in Indian manufacturing enterprises: an exploratory analysis of strategic benefits [journal article]. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. January 01, 88(1): 369–380.
Rao Siriginidi, S. 2000. Enterprise resource planning in reengineering business [journal article]. Business Process Management Journal, 6(5): 376–391.
Rojek, I. and M. Jagodziński [ed.]. 2012. Hybrid Artificial Intelligence System in Constraint Based Scheduling of Integrated Manufacturing ERP Systems2012; Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; (Hybrid Artificial Intelligent Systems.
Roy, B.V., D.P. Bertsekas, Y. Lee and J.N. Tsitsiklis [ed.]. 1997. A neuro-dynamic programming approach to retailer inventory management. Proceedings of the 36th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control; 12–12 Dec. 1997.
Sadigh, B.L., H.O. Unver, S. Nikghadam, E. Dogdu, A. Murat Ozbayoglu and S. Engin Kilic. 2017. An ontology-based multi- agent virtual enterprise system (OMAVE): part 1: domain modeling and rule management [Article]. Int. J. Comput. Integr.
Manuf., 30(2-3): 320–343.
Sakagami, Y., R. Watanabe, C. Aoyama, S. Matsunaga, N. Higaki and K. Fujimara [ed.]. 2002. The intelligent ASIMO: system overview and integration. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems; 30 Sept.–4 Oct. 2002.
Shehab, E.M., M.W. Sharp, L. Supramaniam and T.A. Spedding. 2004. Enterprise resource planning: An integrative review. Business Process Management Journal [Journal Article], 10(4): 359–386.
Tan, K.C., L.H. Lee and K. Ou. 2001. Artificial intelligence heuristics in solving vehicle routing problems with time window constraints. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence. 2001/12/01/; 14(6): 825–837.
Turkey’s Industry 4.0 Platform. 2019. [Internet]. Turkey: ElektrikPort; [cited 30.10.2019]. Available from: https://www.
endustri40.com/endustri-4-0-ile-katmanli-uretim/.
Umble, E.J., R.R. Haft and M.M. Umble. 2003. Enterprise resource planning: Implementation procedures and critical success factors [journal article]. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(2): 241–257.
Vidoni, M.C. and A.R. Vecchietti. An intelligent agent for ERP’s data structure analysis based on ANSI/ISA-95 standard [Article]. Comput. Ind. 2015 Oct; 73: 39–50.
Chapter 14
Smart Warehouses in Logistics 4.0
Muzaffer Alım
1and Saadettin Erhan Kesen
2,*
1. Introduction
In recent years, the world has been witnessing dizzying changes in many areas in the light of developing technologies. All these changes have led to the beginning of a new age to the industrial revolutions journey. The journey started with the first industrial period as Industry 1.0 which had been started by the use of steam as a power to the machinery and this was followed by Industry 2.0 in which electricity was used as energy source and mass production began. By the establishment of computer and electronic systems in the production which results in automated systems, a new industrial period has rapidly permeated the industry. The history of industrial revolutions is presented in Figure 1. Following these breakthroughs, we have entered in to a new era which is triggered by the developments in information and communication technologies.
The concept of a new industrial age was first initiated in Hannover Fair in Germany in 2011 and named Industry 4.0 (Rojko 2017). In the same context, similar technological programs were announced and examples to these programs such as “Made in China 2025” by China, “Advanced Manufacturing Partnership” by the United States, “La Nouvelle France Industrielle” by France and Brazil’s “Towards Industry 4.0” are such initiatives,which aim to understand and spread the advances in the context of Industry 4.0 to local companies (Dalenogare et al. 2018; Liao et al. 2018). The interest about Industry 4.0 is not only at the scale of governments but also from academia and industry as well.
Various features of Industry 4.0 distinguish it from the other three industrial periods. First, for the first time in history, an industrial revolution is predicted prior to its existence unlike others which are evaluated as revolutions posteriori (Rainer and Alexander 2014). This will allow to shape its structure by foreseeing and controlling the implications and its effects. Despite the great interest from the market, Industry 4.0 is said to encompass the future to great extent. Second, the
INDUSTRY 1.0 1784
•Using steam as a power
•Mechanisation
INDUSTRY 2.0 1870
•Electrical energy
•Mass Production
INDUSTRY 3.0 1969
•Electronics and computers
•Automation
INDUSTRY 4.0 TODAY
•Cyber- Physical System, IoT
•Connected
Fig. 1: Historical developments of industrial revolutions.
1 Batman University, Technology Faculty, Batman/Turkey.
2 Konya Technical University, Dept. of Industrial Engineering, Konya/Turkey.
* Corresponding Author: [email protected]
impact of Industry 4.0 is expected to be huge on the economic scale due to its substantial improvements on effectiveness of operations as compared to the other periods (Hermann et al. 2016). The connectivity enabled by technologies changes not only the industry but also the society and the speed of this change and impact size have made it so unique from other periods (Schwab 2017).
Despite all its popularity, a common and comprehensive definition of Industry 4.0 has yet to be made as its boundaries are still not fully predictable. Thus, instead of a complete definition, studies have usually identified the structure and purposes of it. The promoters of the Industry 4.0 stated its main purpose as to make fundamental improvements in industrial processes including manufacturing, engineering, supply chain systems, usage of materials and life cycle management (Hermann et al. 2016). Under this purpose the main components of Industry 4.0 have been pointed out by Hermann et al. 2016 as following;
1. Cyber-physical systems (CPS), combination of physical and digital systems by the integration of electronic and physical processes.
2. The Internet of things (IoT), where all the parts of the process are connected to each other in the network.
3. Smart Factory, refers to the manufacturing which use the technological advances such as sensors, actuators and adopted the autonomous systems.
The idea lying behind the emergence and implications of these technologies has created great expectations for benefits due its huge potential. Smart factories enable companies to meet the customer requirements in a more profitable way and the systems become more flexible with the changing working environments in Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al. 2013; Rojko 2017). The connectivity between the smart machines will make them automate the production systems, and also analyse and solve some of the production issues without human intervention (Tjahjono et al. 2017). In addition, monitoring the systems and the detection of failures could be made easier with Industry 4.0. It also offers some solutions to the environmental issues such as effective use of resources and energy (Frank et al. 2019; Kagermann et al. 2013). All these changes in the business systems lead to introduction of new and innovated business models (Gilchrist 2016; Hofmann and Rüsch 2017).
All these benefits brought by Industry 4.0 are expected to have major influences not only in manufacturing but also in logistic systems, leading to the observation of revolutionary changes in classical logistic systems which drive through Logistic 4.0 (Strandhagen et al. 2017).