Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
Availableonline
onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Manufacturing 31 (2019) 91–96
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
9th Conference on Learning Factories 2019
9th Conference on Learning Factories 2019
Learning in Context with Horizontally & Vertically Integrated
Learning in Context with Horizontally & Vertically Integrated
Curriculum
Manufacturing Engineering
inInternational
Societyin
a Smart Conference
Learning2017,
Factory
MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
Curriculum a Smart Learning
2017, Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain
Factory
Ragu Athinarayanana,a, *, Brittany Newellaa, Jose Garciaaa, Jason Ostanekaa, Xiumin Diaoaa,
Ragu Athinarayanan *,Sundararajan
Brittany Newell , Jose Garcia , Jason Ostanek
a , Xiumin Diao ,
0

a a
Raji
Costing modelsRaji capacitya,,optimization
forSundararajan Henry
0

Zhang , Grant Richards

a in Industry a4.0: Trade-off
Henry Zhang , Grant Richards
between used capacity and operational efficiency
a
School of Engineering Technology, 401 N Grant Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
a
School of Engineering Technology, 401 N Grant Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA

A. Santanaa, P. Afonsoa,*, A. Zaninb, R. Wernkeb

Abstract
Abstract a
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
In this work we present the development of baUnochapecó, Smart Learning Factory
89809-000 (SLF)SC,
Chapecó, at Brazil
Purdue University for preparing students with the
skills,
In this capabilities,
work we presentand technological
the development experiences
of a Smart necessary
LearningtoFactory
excel in(SLF)
an Industry
at Purdue 4.0University
environment. Functionally,
for preparing the SLF
students with isthea
replicacapabilities,
skills, of an actual andcyber-physical
technological production
experiences factory
necessarydesigned
to exceltoinintentionally
an Industry 4.0 foster collaboration
environment. between courses
Functionally, the SLFfromis a
multipleofdisciplinary
replica an actual areas, particularly
cyber-physical mechanical,
production electrical,
factory mechatronics,
designed and robotics.
to intentionally foster Our objective isbetween
collaboration to reducecourses
course from
silos
Abstract
by deliberately
multiple fusingareas,
disciplinary the interconnection between courses
particularly mechanical, by mechatronics,
electrical, using SLF as the andcommon
robotics.unifying platform.
Our objective is toActivities in design,
reduce course silos
manufacturing
by deliberately processes,
fusing the production,
interconnectionproduction
between management, automation,
courses by using SLF asenergy,
the commoninformation,
unifyingand communications,
platform. Activities teamwork
in design,
Under the concept
and collaboration
manufacturing processes,of production,
"Industry
are integrated 4.0", production
a vertical
usingproduction and
management,processes
horizontal will framework.
integration
automation, be pushed
energy, to be increasingly
Unifying
information, project
and interconnected,
activities
communications, wereteamwork
designed
information
introduced based
and collaboration areon
into these a real
integrated time
courses basis
using
using and,
this necessarily,
framework.
a vertical and As amuch
horizontal result,more efficient.
22 courses
integration framework.wereIn this context,
integrated
Unifying and acapacity
project total of 26
activities optimization
vertical
were and
designed
goes
and beyond
horizontal
introduced the traditional
integrated
into projects
these aim of
courses capacity
developed.
using this maximization,
Thisframework.
integration also contributing
As afacilitated
result, 22the alsowere
for organization’s
development
courses and profitability
of an energy
integrated acredential andthe
using
total of 26 value.
verticalSLF.
and
Students progressing
Indeed,
horizontal lean
integrated from freshman
management
projects through
developed. Thissenior
and continuous year inalso
improvement
integration college will better
approaches
facilitated understand
suggest the
the development interconnection
capacity
of an energy of content
optimization
credential between
instead
using the SLF.of
different courses,
Students progressing
maximization. apply
The fromtheir
study learning
freshman
of to a optimization
through
capacity manufacturing environment,
senior year and
in college
costing gain a holistic
willmodels
better is an perspective
understand of the interdependent
the interconnection
important research of content
topic structures
between
that deserves
of the cyber-physical
different courses,
contributions from system,
apply
both their the connected
thelearning
practicalto aandenterprise,
manufacturing
theoreticaland the manufacturing
environment,
perspectives. gain ecosystem.
a holistic
This paper perspective
presents and of the interdependent
discusses structures
a mathematical
of the cyber-physical system, the connected enterprise, and the manufacturing ecosystem.
model for capacity management based on different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
developed
© 2019
2019 Theand it wasPublished
Authors. used to analyze idleB.V.
capacity and to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
Peer
© review
The under Published by
the responsibility
Authors. by Elsevier B.V. committee of the 9th Conference on Learning Factories.
of the scientific
Elsevier
value. The
Peer review trade-off
under capacity
the responsibility maximization
of the scientificvs committee
operational efficiency
of the is highlighted
9th Conference on Learning
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 9th Conference on Learning Factories.
andFactories.
it is shown that capacity
optimization might hide
Keywords: Horizontally operational
and Vertically inefficiency.
Integrated Curriculum; Smart Factory; Cyber-Physical Production
© 2017 The
Keywords: Authors. Published
Horizontally by Integrated
and Vertically Elsevier B.V.
Curriculum; Smart Factory; Cyber-Physical Production
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
2017.

Keywords: Cost Models; ABC; TDABC; Capacity Management; Idle Capacity; Operational Efficiency

1. Introduction
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-765-494-0448; fax: +1-765-494-6219.
The cost of idle capacity is a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance
E-mail address:author.
rathinar@purdue.edu
in*modern
Corresponding
production Tel.: +1-765-494-0448; fax: +1-765-494-6219.
systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
E-mail address: rathinar@purdue.edu
in several ways: tons of production, available
2351-9789 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.hours of manufacturing, etc. The management of the idle capacity
* Paulo Afonso.
Peer review©under
2351-9789 Tel.:
2019the +351 253 510
Theresponsibility 761; fax: +351
of the scientific
Authors. Published 253 604 741
committee
by Elsevier B.V. of the 9th Conference on Learning Factories.
E-mail address: psafonso@dps.uminho.pt
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 9th Conference on Learning Factories.

2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
2351-9789 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 9th Conference on Learning Factories.
10.1016/j.promfg.2019.03.015
92 Ragu Athinarayanan et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 31 (2019) 91–96
2 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

1. Introduction

As Industry 4.0 gains momentum, many advanced economies are seeking to improve their productivity and
efficiency in industrial manufacturing by incorporating the latest advances in information and communications
technology [1]. In the United States, Industry 4.0 is also referred to as smart manufacturing and is defined by the
convergence of physical production and operations with the smart digital technology, machine learning, and big data
systems to create a more holistic and better connected manufacturing ecosystem [2]. Demand for skilled engineers
who can effectively function in this domain has been increasing and development of Industry 4.0 education has
become one of the priority areas for academic institutions [3].

We present in this work a curriculum model utilized at Purdue University to facilitate development of practical
Industry 4.0 engineering competences in real contexts using the SLF platform [4] [5]. Guided by a 2-stage research
plan, we purposefully used the SLF platform to break down barriers put in place as a result of traditional curricular
structures [6]. In the first stage we studied relevant elements for a SLF framework necessary to support Industry 4.0
education that integrates latest global industry trends, the physical infrastructure, the cyber infrastructure, and related
engineering practices in the United States. This research led to the development of a ‘modified’ SLF framework used
in [7], with heavier reliance on the use of a data strategy and also cloud computing. In the second phase of the
research, we worked on structuring the SLF framework to fit an integrated curriculum model that would be feasible
for implementation at Purdue University. The aim is to facilitate the horizontal- and vertical integration, a technique
successfully used in the preparation of graduates in professional fields, particularly medicine [8] [9] [10].

In this paper we offer details of the ‘modified’ architecture and key elements of the SLF platform to facilitate this
transformation, a review of the strategies used with the vertical and horizontal integration, the impact of our work on
the curriculum, and provide a framework to assist educators in the design and implementation of a thoroughly
integrated curriculum using the SLF as a platform.

2. The Smart Learning Factory at Purdue University

2.1. Smart Learning Factory Efforts at Purdue University

SLFs are infrastructures with technologies and capabilities associated with Industry 4.0 including: cyber-physical
systems, IoT, and cloud infrastructure solutions for computation, storage, connectivity, monitoring, management,
and process control [11] [12]. Its deployment requires a large number of sensors and networked machines for the
continuous generation of high volumes of data (big data) that is managed and analyzed. It deliberately creates the
need for many cross-functional roles and necessitates the cross-functional integration of activities from different
topics and disciplines. The SLF at Purdue University is developed for the manufacture and production of a Personal
Electric Transporter (PET). This factory has three stages of evolution and each factory version integrates elements of
Industry 4.0 at varying levels. Details of each factory version and motivation for each are provided below:

a. The SLF V1.0 is a smart production infrastructure for the manufacture of conventional bicycles. The bicycle uses
custom parts in its assembly/sub-assembly operations, and all parts are digitally tracked and inventoried in a
central database using RFID-ID tags and barcodes. Data from the production operation, i.e., from machines and
processes are tracked into a MES system and into the Microsoft Data Factory integrated to a SQL Server
database. The goal of SLF V1.0 is to expose students to a cyber-physical manufacturing system for tracking and
control of all processes, use of IoT sensors for data collection and integration, and application of analytics for
optimization and management of production processes. Features of Factory V1.0 are summarized in Table 1
below.
b. In SLF V2.0, students will modify the production infrastructure of SLF V1.0 to integrate an electric drive unit to
provide pedal-assist for the bicycle, and IoT sensors for communication to a smart device such as a smartphone.
The smart device will use a custom APP designed by students for purposes of GPS navigation, real-time route
planning, battery level indication, central control, infotainment, and display solutions. The SLF V2.0 production
 Ragu Athinarayanan et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 31 (2019) 91–96 93
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000 3

will use the Microsoft Azure cloud platform for data storage, computing, and connectivity and for the access of
vehicle data.
c. In SLF V3.0, the smart factory will be reconfigured to manufacture a Smart PET that is integrated to a smart
service provider. This smart product (PET) designed and built in SLF V3.0 is intended to target a market segment
of users, and include Purdue’s Industrial Design majors who will contribute to optimizing the value, appearance,
and design of this personal transporter. Expert consultants will be used to guide students in the development and
the design processes. At least 70% of parts required for construction of the personal transporter will be designed
and manufactured at Purdue University, with the remaining parts purchased commercially. A portion of the 70%
will be outsourced to several Purdue off-site campuses that will become part of a supply chain network to provide
parts for SLF V3.0 at West Lafayette.

Factory versions are summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Factory Version Capabilities.

Features & Capabilities Factory V1.0 Factory V2.0 Factory V3.0
Conventional Bicycle X X
SMART E-Bicycle X X
SMART Services X
"In-House" Designed SMART e-Bicycle X
Buy/Purchase Subcomponents X X
"In-House" Custom Designed Parts X
Outsourced Subcomponents (Statewide) X
Manual Assembly Operations X
Automated Assembly Operations X X
IoT Devices/Sensors X X X
MES/SAP/Cloud/Edge Computing X X
Vertical (Factory/Machine-level) Integration X X X
Horizontal Enterprise-level Integration X
Monitoring of Energy Usage X X
Energy Data X X X
Factory/Production Data Visualization X X X
Augmented Reality Applications X X

Fig. 1. Operational Layout of the SLF.

94 Ragu Athinarayanan et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 31 (2019) 91–96
4 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

The operational layout of the SLF is shown in Fig. 1. The OPxx are designators assigned to the different stations
to perform specific assembly operation in the SLF. For example, the OP20 operation is identified as “Front
Assembly,” is where the front-wheel, handle-bar, and brakes are attached to the bicycle frame. Production related
data from the assembly operations at OP10, OP20, OP30, OP40, and OP90 is collected to track such things as
inventory data, product/process data, quality data, energy consumption data, machine/equipment status data, along
with other data pertinent to activities at the assembly station. This data is connected to an Andon data collection
system for real time monitoring, status, and performance of machines and operations at the assembly stations.

2.2. SLF Framework and the Educational Pillars

a b

Fig. 2. (a) SLF; (b) SLF Framework.

The SLF framework shown in Fig. 2 is premised on the four foundational stages for governing the learning
activities in the smart factory, and they represent the didactics, technology, and integration pillars of the SLF [7].
The four foundational stages hereafter we shall refer to as the LF-1, LF-2, LF-3, and LF-4, each serve a unique
function in the academic preparation of the students and are explained in more detail below.

a. The LF-1 Value Creation Stage is aimed at activities in the SLF associated with engineering product design and
use of related manufacturing processes in the factory to convert raw material/s into a final product. It is intended
to provide the students with a systematic view for each of the individual processes in the factory.
b. The LF-2 Production Process Chain is the design and development of the full range of machine-, factory-, and
enterprise-level operations and activities within the manufacturing value chain (design, inbound and outbound
logistics, production planning and control, quality control, maintenance, customer service, etc.) for the intended
product in the SLF.
c. The LF-3 is the cyberinfrastructure to acquire, store, transfer, and manage real-time information from the
processes, machines and operations with the aim of assessing, evaluating, and control of the various elements of
the production system. The conceptual Information and Communication technologies (ICT) model is based on
the CPS 5C architecture [11] by leveraging the control and IoT sensor network platform for connecting activities
at the Machine-, Factory-, and Enterprise-levels.
d. The LF-4 Cyber-Physical Production System Stage (CPPS) is the use of digital technologies for managing the
various systems interconnected between the physical assets and the IT infrastructure in the factory [12]. This is to
allow the display of the full potential in terms of optimization for decision making, efficiency and productivity of
resources, decentralization and autonomy of the productive system in the factory.

Activities associated with LF-1, LF-2, LF-3, and LF-4 were mapped to topics and activities in existing courses
offered in Purdue’s Engineering Technology program. Table 2 shows the course content and activity mapping based
 Ragu Athinarayanan et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 31 (2019) 91–96 95
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000 5

on the SLF framework. Items highlighted in orange represent new topics associated with the technologies of Industry
4.0, and items in yellow are existing topics in the curriculum. Content associated with the technologies of Industry
4.0 such as Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), Augmented/Virtual Reality, Additive Manufacturing, Cloud
Computing, etc. are being developed and will be integrated into existing courses and/or developed as new courses.

Fig. 3. Course Content Mapping to SLF Framework.

3. Curriculum Integration

3.1. Vertical & Horizontal Integration Plan

Within the SLF, the idea transfer and integration of activities have been intentionally combined through
horizontal and vertical integration within courses offered in the School of Engineering Technology. The courses
affected address all levels from freshman to senior and combine classes from a variety of disciplines including
programming, robotics, materials/production management, manufacturing processes, mechanical design, industrial
controls, dynamics and many others. Vertical integration [9] is defined as the action of connecting courses that
advance the knowledge in any one of the foundational pillars of the SLF identified by LF-1 – LF-4. This integration
combines courses at varying levels in a student’s plan of study, for example a freshman class linked with a
sophomore course. Horizontal integration [9] is defined as the connection of courses through sharing of parts, ideas,
data or other resources across the previously referenced foundational stages. It requires the connection of at least two
of the fundamental stages of the learning factory and does not require a specific course level for the linkage. By
focusing on transferring materials, products and ideas in the horizontal course connections, a scaffold is made to
allow for upward movement in the vertical integration [10]. Students from varying backgrounds, courses, and levels
participate and collaborate with a variety of activities in the SLF. This horizontal scaffold provides the opportunity
for advancement of topics such as design, ideation, prototyping, production, infrastructure, and cyber-physical
production in the vertical integration. Students who have been involved in the horizontal integration in earlier level
courses can provide experiential feedback to incoming students through the vertical integration providing a feedback
loop for future designs and experiences and continued success and innovation in the process.
96 Ragu Athinarayanan et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 31 (2019) 91–96
6 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

3.2. The SLF and the Energy Credential

The goals of the curriculum integration efforts were to prepare graduates to work across disciplines and identify
connections between subject areas to better prepare students to face future global challenges. As curriculum
integration efforts were made, it was noted that a common theme should be used to connect ideas and projects within
the curriculum contained in the different courses. As a result, 26 projects were created (15-vertically + 11-
horizontally integrated) using 22 different courses to thematically integrate activities in these different courses. All
courses span a student’s academic career within the college (freshman to senior year) and range in topics from
multiple disciplinary areas. These include but not limited to the topics of computer programming, mechanical
design, manufacturing systems, engineering materials, industrial automation systems, energy and sustainability,
mechatronics, robotics and control, operations planning, production logistics, DFM/DFA, CAD/CAM among others.
Similarly, energy was identified as a unifying theme linking numerous engineering, science, and mathematics
topics and applications. Within the curriculum seven required courses and nine elective courses were identified and
vertically integrated through both the curriculum and also activities in the SLF. Upon successfully completing the
courses and the energy challenges in the SLF setting, students earn the Energy Systems Credential. Students will be
able to put into context the application of these energy systems to a SLF setting through pneumatics, electrical
supply, robotics, motors, and many other energy conversion devices.

4. Conclusion

An approach for designing a model scale cyber-physical production system for competence development in
industry 4.0 and manufacturing was developed using the SLF. The SLF framework was used as a basis for creating
course mappings and horizontal and vertical integration in 22 courses. Twenty-six unifying projects were developed
and introduced into these courses, plus an Energy System Credential was developed using the curriculum integration
framework. In the ongoing work, this outlined approach will be validated for developing students to better
understand the interconnection of content between courses and the interdependent structures of the cyber-physical
systems, the connected enterprise, and the manufacturing ecosystem based on Industry 4.0.

References

[1] Rick Schreiber. The Impact of Industry 4.0: How is it Changing Manufacturing? [Online]. Available FTP: https://www.smith-
howard.com/the-impact-of-industry-4-0-how-is-it-changing-manufacturing/
[2] J. Posada, C. Toro, I. Barandiaran, D. Oyarzun, D. Stricker, R. de Amicis, E. B. Pinto, P. Eisert, J. Dollner, and I. Vallarino, “Visual
Computing as a Key Enabling Technology for Industrie 4.0 and Industrial Internet,” Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, vol. 35, no.
2, pp. 26–40, 2015.
[3] A. Leiden, G. Posselt, V. Bhakar, R. Singh, K. S. Sangwan, and C. Hermann, “Transferring Experience Labs for Production Engineering
Students to Universities in Newly Industrialized Countries,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 297 012053 (2018)
[4] Eberhard Abele, Joachim Metternich, Michael Tisch, George Chryssolouris, Wilfried Sihn, Hoda ElMaraghy, Vera Hummel, and Fabian Ranz,
“Learning Factories for Research, Education, and Training,” Procedia CIRP, 32 (2015) 1-6.
[5] Mo Elbestawi, Dan Centea, Ishwar Singh, and Tom Wanyama, “SEPT Learning Factory for Industry 4.0 Education and Applied Research,”
Procedia Manufacturing, 23 (2018) 249-254.
[6] T. Litzinger, L. R. Lattuca, R. Hadgraft, and W. Newstetter, “Engineering Education and the Development of Expertise,” Journal of
Engineering Education, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 123–150, 2011.
[7] Felipe Baena, Alvaro Guarin, Julian Mora, Joel Sauza, and Sebastian Retat, “Learning Factory: The Path to Industry 4.0,” Procedia
Manufacturing, 9 (2017) 73-80.
[8] David Brauer and Kristi Ferguson, “The Integrated Curriculum in Medical Education,” Medical Teacher AMEE Guide No. 96, 37 (2015) 312-
322.
[9] Branislav Vidic, Harry M. Weitlauf, “Horizontal and Vertical Integration of Academic Disciplines in the Medical School Curriculum,”
Clinical Anatomy Vol 15, no. 3, pp 233-235, 2002.
[10] Wijnen-Meijer, M., Cate, O.T.J. Ten, Rademakers, Jany, Schaaf, M. van der, Borleffs, “The Influence of a Vertically Integrated Curriculum
on the Transition to Postgraduate Training,” Medical Teacher: 2009, 31(11), e528--e532.
[11] Jay Lee, Behrad Bagheri, Hung-An Kao, “A Cyber-Physical Systems Architecture for Industry 4.0-based Manufacturing Systems,”
Manufacturing Letters 3 (2015) 18-23.
[12] L. Montosori, B. Kadar, T, Bauernhansl, S. Kondoh, S. Kumara, G. Reinhart, O. Sauer, G. Schuh, W. Sihn, K. Ueda, “Cyber Physical
Systems in Manufacturing,” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 65 (2016) 621-641.