This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2017.2732340, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications

Cloud-based control strategy: downstream defect

reduction in the production of electric motors

D. Coupek, A. Lechler, A. Verl

Institute for Control Engineering of Machine Tools and Manufacturing Units (ISW),
University of Stuttgart
Stuttgart, Germany
Daniel.Coupek@isw.uni-stuttgart.de

Abstract—Classical computing is shifted gradually into the
cloud, offering completely new possibilities in information usage,
computing power and application of learning algorithms. In this
paper, a cloud-based architecture of control systems is
investigated showing the benefit for multi-stage production
systems. All sequential manufacturing and assembly processes
are connected via a cloud-based architecture, which allows using
information from a previous production step in one of the
subsequent steps for downstream deviation compensation. This
strategy is applied to the rotor production of electric motors in
the automotive industry, as the current production shows high
defect rates due to the lack of adequate sensor signals and
optimization algorithms. The magnetization process of
permanent magnets is executed in saturation, so that the
generation of deviations cannot be avoided by process control or
process optimization. Instead, the variance in the magnetization
signal must be compensated in a downstream process, here the
rotor assembly stage. Project results show how such a cloud-
based architecture can increase the product quality while
decreasing the amount of scrap parts in a real industrial
scenario, consequently saving valuable resources like energy and
raw materials. Reduction of deviations is crucial for this
emerging industrial sector as electric motor production for
vehicles is moving towards mass production in the future.
Keywords—Control, Production, Defect, Cloud Computing,
Electric motor, Optimization
I. INTRODUCTION
The transportation sector can improve its energy efficiency
by changing the travel behavior and the vehicle fleet, with
respect to the amount of cars and the technology used [1]. In
2015, the transportation and traffic sector caused 16% of the
global emissions [2]. In order to reduce emissions, the trend is
going towards zero-emission vehicles using electric motors [3].
The main drawbacks of electric vehicles, namely low range and
high costs, are being overcome by the development of new
engines cannot be transferred directly to electric motor
production [11]. Challenges of the electric motor production
and strategies to overcome them are part of the research carried
out in the European funded project MuProD [12], while the
focus is on the permanent magnet synchronous motors
(PMSM) that are widely used in electric drive trains [13,14].
This paper describes how cloud computing is used to
enhance the multi-stage production line of rotors in order to
increase the product quality while decreasing the amount of
scrap parts. Data acquisition distributed among the production
line provides the cloud with raw data for optimization tasks
that require high computational effort. The results are
transferred back to local control units in the corresponding
process stage where the assembly takes places. Section 2
introduces briefly the production line and the rotor type under
analysis. Section 3 discusses the cloud-based control
architecture in general while Section 4 focuses on its
application for downstream defect compensation and presents
preliminary results. Finally, conclusions and future research
activities are discussed.
II. PRODUCTION LINE OF ELECTRIC MOTORS
A. Multi-stage production system
Electric motors consist of the three main components rotor,
stator and housing and they are manufactured in multistage
production systems consisting of about 50 processes. A very
simplified model of this multi-stage production system with
focus on the rotor production is indicated in Fig. 1.
Rotor Line
M1,1 M2,1 M3,1 M4,1
M1,2 M2,2 M3,2 M4,2
M5 M6
…

battery systems [4,5]. Current studies show the huge potential

of electric motors replacing combustion engines (petrol and M1,N M2,N M3,N M4,N M7 M8 Motor
diesel), starting with medium-sized cars [6,7]. Governmental
regulations and targets for increasing the amount of electric Stator Line Scrap
vehicles accelerate this development [8–10]. The increasing Housing Line
need for electric motors in the automotive sector requires
efficient mass production, considering that optimized methods Fig. 1 Simplified scheme of the multi-stage production system for electric
and machines from current production lines for combustion motors in the automotive industry, with focus on the rotor production.

0093-9994 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2017.2732340, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications
The rotor of a PMSM is composed of a number of SP
laminated steel stacks, which contain a certain number MP of
embedded permanent magnets. Common values of the rotor
parameters are SP = 5 and MP = 24. The process stages
necessary to produce a rotor of this type are:
 M1: loading of the stacks from suppliers on the pallet.
 M2: magnet assembly on the stacks by pick and place.
 M3: stack magnetization process and inspection.
 M4: heating station (glue drying).
 M5: rotor assembly machine for SP stacks.
 M6: rotor balancing station.
 M7: motor assembly of stator, rotor and housing.
 M8: EOL quality inspection of the assembled motor.
After the motor is assembled, it undergoes a final quality
control at the end of line (EOL) inspection station. Active and
passive EOL testing for quality inspection is very common in
current production lines of electric motors [15]. The main
drawback of EOL is the late and off-line inspection at the final
stage of the manufacturing chain, where defects of the
production chain have already been accumulated [16].
Consequently, a defective workpiece is machined wasting time,
money and energy resources for creating a final product that is
out of tolerances and has to be recycled or scrapped [17].
Therefore, feedforward control methods [18] are considered
for a downstream compensation of deviations generated at
previous process stages within MuProD. Further details about
the motor composition and the production system can be found
in previous works of the authors [19–21]. The focus of this
research is to obtain a uniform magnetization profile of the
rotor by improving the assembly process through effective data
handling and optimization algorithms. The rotor assembly can
be influenced by optimizing the stack rotation and the stacking
order. The optimization problem must be solved within the
cycle time of the production system, which is 60 seconds in the
case under analysis. The basis of those algorithms is the space-
resolved inspection at stage M3, which is therefore described
briefly in the following section.
B. Space-resolved inspection
After the magnetization process in stage M3, the stacks are
inspected in order to detect deviations from the magnetization
set point. A hall sensor is located next to the rotating stack
yielding a space-resolved (0°-360°) distribution of the
magnetic field B(φ) with φ=0..2Π (Fig. 2, (a)). For the
downstream compensation methods described later, the
complexity of this high-resolution signal is reduced to obtain
one value per magnet resulting in the discrete signal B(k) with
k=1..24 (Fig. 2, (b)). This is done by integrating the signal over
the magnet size. The resulting value B(k) is an indicator for the
magnetic strength of the corresponding magnet k and allows
the identification of defective magnets, e.g. caused by
variations of the raw material properties. This magnetization
vector has to be computed and stored for every single stack in a
central control unit.
0093-9994 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
0°
Magnetization
270° 90°
(a)
180°
(b)
1 12
magnet number
24
Fig. 2 Space-resolved inspection of the magnetic field of one stack (a) and
the reduced magnetization vector (b).
III. CONTROL ARCHITECTURE
A classical control architecture for production systems is
divided into several layers. It starts from the lowest field layer
where sensors and actuators are located and goes up over
machine control and several other layers to the enterprise layer.
Each of these layers has its own control and data management
system with different data models and interfaces. The
connection between these layers and the use of data in another
controller requires a high effort of configuration, if it is
possible at all.
A. Cloud computing
Considering existing mechanisms of internet technologies
like cloud computing, it offers many advantages for production
systems [22]. Cloud computing in general could be defined as
an infrastructure that offers computation power for services
with a minimum amount of manual configuration effort [23].
These technologies are increasingly becoming an integral part
of modern production systems in the digital manufacturing
environment [24], which are generally referred to as cyber-
physical systems (CPS) [25]. They are defined as the
integrations of computation and physical processes. In CPSs,
embedded computers and networks monitor and control
physical processes, usually with feedback loops where physical
processes affect computations and vice versa. Cloud computing
infrastructures offer following main characteristics [26,27]:
 On-demand self-service: this is the provision of
computation power depending on actual needs.
 Broad network access: data and services are
accessible over standard mechanisms from any
device.
 Resource pooling: memory, network bandwidth and
processing is shared.
 Rapid elasticity: Resources are provisioned and
released on demand.
 Measured service: the need of resources of a service is
measured and could be analyzed.
With regard to security aspects, there are different kinds of
clouds like public, private community and any kind of hybrid
clouds. The most relevant service model of cloud computing
infrastructures for production systems is Software as a Service
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2017.2732340, IEEE
(SaaS) [28]. For SaaS the application is running on the cloud
infrastructure and is accessible from every client or other
service. The service access is independent of any hardware or
operating system.
The decision whether a cloud-based architecture increases
the productivity or not depends on the way information is
generated and in which way it has to be available. In addition,
the amount of needed computing power has to be taken into
account. Cloud-based architectures are convenient if one of the
following criteria is fulfilled:
 Information during production is generated at
different location or time,
 Information is needed from different parts and
previous process steps,
 Calculations need high computation power,
 Calculations are acyclic.
B. Cloud-based assembly service
In the present production process for electric motors, three
of the criteria mentioned above are fulfilled. First, the
measurement takes place in an upstream inspection stage (M3)
while the information is used in the downstream assembly
process (M5). Second, solving the optimization problem
requires high computation powers and storage capacities.
Third, calculations are acyclic.
The information about magnetization of the single
permanent magnets is generated at an early production process,
the magnetic field inspection stage (M3), and used in a later
process step. The data acquired by the sensor system is
communicated and stored in a cloud database for each
individual stack. There, the data reduction takes place to obtain
a reduced magnetization vector. During combination and
assembly of the rotor in stage M5, the calculation of
optimization algorithms is done in the cloud as a service. The
resulting stack rotation and assembly order is sent to the local
controller of the assembly station for execution. Fig. 3 shows
schematically the integration of cloud-based control into the
production line of electric motors for the rotor assembly. The
production of a number of SP stacks results in parallel
production lines and consequently in parallel data acquisition
streams.
Cloud based Optimal assembly
Measurement
control policy
Stack 1
M1 M2 M3 M4
…
Stack SP M5 M6
M1 M2 M3 M4 M7
Stator Line
Housing Line
Fig. 3 Integration of cloud-based control into the multi-stage production
system of electric motors.
0093-9994 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Transactions on Industry Applications
C. Information Sharing Platform
A first implementation of such a cloud-based software
application called Information Sharing Platform (ISP) was
designed and realized within MuProD [29]. The ISP is the
central element for the collection, storage, and analysis of data
obtained from a production line from different sensor systems
and machine controls. Fig. 4 shows the control architecture of
this cloud infrastructure with the corresponding interfaces to
the machines and the operators. The ISP consists of three main
services, the collector, the data storage and the ISP viewer
(graphical user interface, GUI).
The collector obtains measured values from the machine
controls or sensor systems and sends them to the data storage
component. Meta files and raw data are stored in the database.
The ISP viewer controls the single components (collector, data
store) and allows to plot the measured data online in real time
or to display the stored data from earlier measurements offline.
Moreover, online data analysis and knowledge extraction
methods are controlled and configured in the ISP viewer.
Operations on the data can be performed either by using intern
analysis methods of the ISP or by exporting the data to other
tools and services using offline import and export functions
that support several file formats like txt, csv, xml, etc.
The ISP can be used as fully distributed system on various
computers. The data is transferred via a local network or the
internet. For example, the collector can be installed on the
control frontend of a machine tool for data collection. The data
is stored and processed on a cloud server, which is connected
to several machine tools or sensor systems and the user can
access the data via the network from each client. This
application is the setup for a complete production line. Data
from several machine tools and sensor systems can be stored in
the cloud database. The knowledge gained from one machine is
present for all machines and different users can access the data
at their local clients. The GUI of the ISP is shown exemplarily
for the analysis of a stack magnetization profile in Fig. 5. The
upper screen shows the raw data acquired from the hall sensor
while the lower screen shows the processed and reduced
magnetization vector.
user operator
viewer
ISP
analysis offline txt
methods export
storage csv
meta files
offline xml
data base
…
import
collector
mat
M8 Motor software
online
interface online export
import
Scrap
machine data machine/
data user
control generator sensor
Fig. 4 Structure of the ISP with software components and interfaces (blue)
to external users or applications (green).
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2017.2732340, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications

Cloud-based control

Optimization
Database algorithm
magnetic optimal
profiles B(φ) rotation and
stack order rotor
assembly

pos. neg.
deviation deviation uniform magnetic
field of assembled
rotor
stack buffer

Fig. 6 Sequential rotor assembly using cloud services.

If a brute-force algorithm is used to search the complete

Fig. 5 GUI of the ISP with raw magnetization data (above) and reduced
discrete data points (below) for one rotor stack.
The application of this tool for downstream defect deviation
within the multi-stage rotor production line is described in the
following section for two optimization strategies.
IV. DOWNSTREAM COMPENSATION
Deviations in the magnetic field of single rotor stacks occur
in the previous process stages (upstream) by variability of the
magnetization process and the stack properties (stage M3). In
addition, handling of the magnets in the pick and place process
(M2) can cause cracks and other defects that reduce the
magnetic field intensity. Downstream compensation means that
those deviations are compensated by applying an optimal
assembly strategy πopt in the downstream assembly stage (M5),
where SP stacks are assembled to form one rotor. The effects of
downstream compensation methods on the overall system
performance that are induced by additional buffers or
decoupling stations are discussed in [30,31] for the electric
motors production system described above. In the following,
the two approaches of downstream compensation sequential
and selective assembly are presented with respect to the cloud-
based control architecture described in the previous section.
solution space for the global optimum, the number of possible
rotations πrot and consequently the calculation time grows
exponentially with the amount of stacks needed for one rotor:
S P 1
 MP  .
 rot    (1)
 2 
Table 1 shows the number of possible combinations of
stack rotations and the averaged computation time for different
numbers of stacks. Table 2 shows the number of permutations
πord=SP! and computation time for finding the optimal stacking
order of the corresponding stacks. The total time is the sum of
both calculation times. A local control unit, e.g. the numeric
control of a machine tool, cannot handle this kind of
optimization task for rotors consisting of a high number of
stacks. Instead, more computation power is required, which can
be provided by the cloud based control architecture [32].
Parallelization of the optimization problem can be achieved by
distributing the possible permutations on several cores of the
cloud. This decreases the computational effort in a linear way.
As the complete solution space is analyzed, the global optimum
is found yielding the most uniform magnetic field of the
assembled rotor. The variance of the magnetic flux across the
circumference of the rotor is reduced by 65% compared to the
current assembly.

A. Sequential assembly
TABLE I. EXPERIMENTAL ESTIMATION OF THE COMPUTATIONAL TIME
The sequential assembly strategy finds online the optimal OF ROTATION OPTIMIZATION FOR DIFFERENT SP.
combination of the SP stacks in one batch that are needed to
SP MP Permutations [-] Computation time [s]
form one rotor [12]. After the magnetization process, the 3 24 144 0.001
complete batch is inspected, so that SP magnetic profiles B(φ) 4 24 1 728 0.012
are available. The collector of the ISP acquires the 5 24 20 736 0.156
measurements sequentially in real time and sends it to the data 6 24 248 832 1.960
storage service. The data is stored in the cloud database as raw 7 24 2 985 984 25.089
8 24 35 831 808 319.993
data and also as reduced data B(k). Based on those reduced
magnetization profiles the sequential assembly optimization
TABLE II. EXPERIMENTAL ESTIMATION OF THE COMPUTATIONAL TIME
algorithm calculates the best rotation and stack order to gain OF STACKING ORDER OPTIMIZATION FOR DIFFERENT SP.
uniformity and reduce variability of the output field intensity.
The algorithm imposes an angular misalignment α between the SP MP Permutations [-] Computation time [s]
3 24 6 0.0001
stacks with respect to a reference axis and finds an optimal 4 24 24 0.0002
sorting policy by minimizing a cost function. Those 5 24 120 0.0009
calculations are performed as cloud service, while the resulting 6 24 720 0.0057
assembly policy πopt is transferred to the assembly control as 7 24 5 040 0.0423
new set point, a vector of scalar values (Fig. 6). 8 24 40 320 0.3601

0093-9994 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2017.2732340, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications

B. Selective assembly Cloud-based control

Selective assembly consists in measuring the key quality
feature Classi- optimal
characteristics of each sub-component and sorting the Database extraction fication assembly
components into clusters according to the measurement
outcome (sorting policy) [33–35]. Existing approaches use
magnetic
clustering algorithms to create groups of mating parts. In profiles B(φ)
[36,37] the impact of reducing the dimension of the feature cluster Ci
vector on clustering and classification processes is analyzed C1
rotor
and methods are proposed to reduce the feature dimensions. In assembly
order to improve the product quality, the assembly station is C2
allowed to assemble components only according to assigned pos. neg.
component cluster matching (assembly and matching policy). deviation deviation C3
uniform
By selective assembly, high precision assemblies can be magnetic field
produced from low precision components, at the cost of classification execution of
increasing the complexity of the system management, the of stacks offline policy
work-in-progress and of decreasing the production rate of the
system [38,39]. Fig. 8 Selective rotor assembly using cloud services.

After magnetizing a single stack, its magnetic profiles B(φ)

and B(k) are stored in the cloud where relevant signal features
are extracted. Based on those features, the stacks are classified
into the clusters Ci. For classification, specific artificial neural
networks, self-organizing maps (SOM), are suitable [40]. SOM
allow to identify signal structures that are not obvious for
human operators and can therefore classify unknown effects or
deviations [41]. Similar signals are grouped in similar classes,
yielding a topological map. The SOM are implemented as a
cloud service and they are trained with training data (several
thousands of stacks) before being applied for classification
tasks of real production data. The cloud architecture allows to
run offline training without any connection to the production
system as well as online classification tasks of sensor data.
Based on the identified classes, an offline assembly and
matching policy is derived and stored as rule base in the cloud
application. These rules determine which stacks have to be
assembled in order to obtain a uniform magnetic field of the
final rotor. Several approaches for finding the optimal
assembly policy have been investigated, where fuzzy inference
systems [42] yield promising results. Preliminary experimental
results (Fig. 7) show that using a fuzzy controller for the
assembly of two stacks can significantly reduce the variability
of the magnetic field compared to random assembly currently
applied in industry [21]. The fuzzy system uses a rule base that
is stored in the cloud application (Fig. 8). Due to high
computational effort and special libraries [43], those algorithms
run as cloud service instead as local optimization task on the
control unit. The assembly policy πopt is finally transferred to
the assembly control unit for execution of the assembly.
V. CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK
This paper is based on [44] and discusses the application of
a cloud-based control architecture in the production line of
rotors for the automotive industry. Compared to numeric
controls of machine tools the cloud offers higher storage space
and computational power that is used for improving the
assembly process. Downstream compensation methods use
data acquired in upstream process stages (magnetization of
single stacks) for optimizing the downstream rotor assembly
process. In this paper, sequential and selective assembly and
their linkage to the proposed cloud-based controller
architecture are presented as two possible strategies.
Experimental results within the project MuProD based on
rotors from industrial fabrication have shown that the
application of the proposed strategy yields a significant
increase of 16,5% in the production rate of conforming engines
of the system. At the same time, the variance of the magnetic
flux across the circumference of the rotor is reduced by 65%
compared to the current assembly. This paper describes briefly
the ISP, which is a first implementation of the presented cloud-
based control architecture that was realized within MuProD.
The data acquisition and process optimization algorithms were
implemented as services. The ISP was used in an experimental
setup at laboratory scale as distributed system for the rotor
assembly optimization.
Future work will focus on the implementation of the
solution in an industrial production system and it will quantify
the potential of improvement experimentally. As the strategies
and the software are modular and flexible, a generalization and
application to other industrial applications is possible and will
be investigated in future research.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The research leading to these results has received funding
from the European Union Seventh Framework Program
(FP7/2007-2011) under grant agreement n° 285075 in the
project MuProD. The authors would like to thank the
Mechanical Engineering Department of Politecnico di Milano
and the Robert Bosch GmbH for the support in this research.
Fig. 7 3D FEM simulation of random rotor (left) and optimized rotor (right).

0093-9994 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIA.2017.2732340, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications
REFERENCES
[1] Leal Filho, W., Rath, K., Mannke, F., Vogt, J., Kotter, R., Borgqvist, M.,
Myklebust, B., van Deventer, P., 2015. Fostering Sustainable Mobility in
Europe: The Contributions of the Project “E-Mobility North Sea
Region”, in: Leal Filho, W., Kotter, R. (Eds.), E-Mobility in Europe.
Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 3–25.
[2] International Energy Agency (IEA), 2015. Co2 emissions from fuel
combustion 2015. Organization For Economic, Paris.
[3] Greene, D.L., Park, S., Liu, C., 2014. Analyzing the transition to electric
drive vehicles in the U.S. Futures 58, 34–52.
[4] Catenacci, M., Verdolini, E., Bosetti, V., Fiorese, G., 2013. Going
electric: Expert survey on the future of battery technologies for electric
vehicles. Energy Policy 61, 403–413.
[5] Kurfer, J., Westermeier, M., Tammer, C., Reinhart, G., 2012. Production
of large-area lithium-ion cells – Preconditioning, cell stacking and
quality assurance. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 61 (1), 1–
4.
[6] Bradley, T.H., Frank, A.A., 2009. Design, demonstrations and
sustainability impact assessments for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 13 (1), 115–128.
[7] Plötz, P., Schneider, U., Globisch, J., Dütschke, E., 2014. Who will buy
electric vehicles?: Identifying early adopters in Germany. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice 67, 96–109.
[8] European Commission (EC), 2011. Interim Assessment of the Research
PPPs in the European Economic Recovery Plan, Energy Efficient
Building, Factories of the Future, European Green Cars Initiative.
[9] IEA - International Energy Agency, 2016. Global EV Outlook 2016:
Beyond one million electric cars, Paris, 51 pp.
[10] International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), 2012.
International Perspective on Electric Vehicles.
[11] Kampker, A., Deutskens, C., Nee, C., Wowreczko, D., 2012. Neue
Reserven in der Produktion: Herausforderungen und Lösungsansätze für
die Fertigung von Elektromotoren in Fahrzeugantriebssträngen. WZL
der RWTH Aachen. http://www.industrieanzeiger.de/automotive-und-
elektromobilitaet/-/article/32571342/37441702.
[12] Coupek, D., Verl, A., 2014. Ausschussreduzierung und
Defektkompensation in mehrstufigen Produktionssystemen, in: Brecher,
C. (Ed.), Effiziente Produktion, Als Ms. gedr ed. VDI-Verl., Düsseldorf,
pp. 82–91.
[13] Butov, A., Herrmann, F., Merkert, M., Nägele, F., 2014. Modulares
Fertigungskonzept für E-Motoren. ATZextra (11/2014).
[14] Dorrell, D.G., Knight, A.M., Popescu, M., Evans, L., Staton, D.A.
Comparison of different motor design drives for hybrid electric vehicles,
in: 2010 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE),
Atlanta, GA, USA, pp. 3352–3359.
[15] Butov, A., Verl, A. Comparison of end of line tests for serial production
of electric motors in hybrid truck applications, in: 2014 4th International
Electric Drives Production Conference (EDPC), Nuremberg, Germany,
pp. 1–4.
[16] Klippel, W., 2011. End-Of-Line Testing, in: Grzechca, W. (Ed.),
Assembly Line - Theory and Practice. InTech, pp. 181–206.
[17] Colledani, M., Copani, G., Tolio, T., 2014. De-manufacturing Systems.
Variety Management in Manufacturing Proceedings of the 47th CIRP
Conference on Manufacturing Systems 17 (0), 14–19.
[18] Abellan-Nebot, J.V., Liu, J., Romero Subirón, F., 2012. Quality
prediction and compensation in multi-station machining processes using
sensor-based fixtures. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing
28 (2), 208–219.
[19] Coupek, D., Verl, A., Aichele, J., Colledani, M., 2013. Proactive quality
control system for defect reduction in the production of electric drives,
in: 2013 3rd International Electric Drives Production Conference
(EDPC), Nuremberg, Germany, pp. 1–6.
[20] Coupek, D., Verl, A., Lechler, A., Aichele, J., Junker, S. Defect
reduction in the production of electric drives by downstream
compensation and space-resolved inspection, in: 2014 4th International
Electric Drives Production Conference (EDPC), Nuremberg, Germany,
pp. 1–8.
[21] Coupek, D., Gülec, A., Lechler, A., Verl, A., 2015. Selective rotor
Assembly Using Fuzzy Logic in the Production of Electric Drives.
Procedia CIRP 33, 550–555.
0093-9994 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
[22] Monostori, L., Kádár, B., Bauernhansl, T., Kondoh, S., Kumara, S.,
Reinhart, G., Sauer, O., Schuh, G., Sihn, W., Ueda, K., 2016. Cyber-
physical systems in manufacturing. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing
Technology 65 (2), 621–641.
[23] Verl, A., Lechler, A., Wesner, S., Kirstädter, A., Schlechtendahl, J.,
Schubert, L., Meier, S., 2013. An Approach for a Cloud-based Machine
Tool Control. Procedia CIRP 7, 682–687.
[24] Schlechtendahl, J., Kretschmer, F., Sang, Z., Lechler, A., Xu, X., 2015.
Extended study of network capability for cloud based control systems.
Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing.
[25] Lee, J., Bagheri, B., Kao, H.-A., 2015. A Cyber-Physical Systems
architecture for Industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems.
Manufacturing Letters 3, 18–23.
[26] Foster, I., Zhao, Y., Raicu, I., Lu, S. Cloud Computing and Grid
Computing 360-Degree Compared, in: 2008 Grid Computing
Environments Workshop, Austin, TX, USA, pp. 1–10.
[27] Mell, P.M., Grance, T., 2011. The NIST definition of cloud computing.
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 7 pp.
[28] Huang, K.-C., Shen, B.-J., 2015. Service deployment strategies for
efficient execution of composite SaaS applications on cloud platform.
Journal of Systems and Software 107, 127–141.
[29] Coupek, D., Friedrich, J., Verl, A., Lechler, A., 2014. Modular
Information Sharing Platform for Real-Time Data Processing and
Knowledge Extraction in Modern Production Systems. Proceedings
(CD) of the “6th International Scientific Conference.
[30] Colledani, M., Coupek, D., Verl, A., Aichele, J., Yemane, A., 2014.
Design and Evaluation of In-line Product Repair Strategies for Defect
Reduction in the Production of Electric Drives. Procedia CIRP 21, 159–
164.
[31] Colledani, M., Yemane, A., Coupek, D., Lechler, A., 2015. Quality-
oriented Design of Rotor Assembly Strategies for Electric Drive
Production Systems. Procedia CIRP 36, 141–146.
[32] Keinert, M., Verl, A., 2012. System Platform Requirements for High
Performance CNCs, in: Nylund, H. (Ed.), Proceedings of the FAIM
2012. 22nd International Conference on Flexible Automation and
Intelligent Manufacturing, June 10th-13th, 2012, Helsinki, Finland.
Tampere University Of Technology, Finland, pp. 837–843.
[33] Colledani, M., Ebrahimi, D., 2013. Performance Evaluation of Selective
and Adaptive Assembly Systems. SMMSO 2013.
[34] Pugh, G.A., 1992. Selective Assembly with Components of Dissimilar
Variance. Computers and Industrial Engineering (23), 487–491.
[35] Tan, M.H., Wu, C.F.J., 2012. Generalized selective assembly. IIE
Transactions 44 (1), 27–42.
[36] Liu, H., Motoda, H., 1998. Feature Extraction, Construction and
Selection: A Data Mining Perspective. Springer US, Boston, MA.
[37] van der Heijden, F., 2004. Classification, parameter estimation, and state
estimation: An engineering approach using MATLAB. Wiley,
Chichester, West Sussex, Eng., Hoboken, NJ.
[38] Colledani, M., Ebrahimi, D., 2012. Optimal Process Shift Design in
Selective and Adaptive Production Systems. Procedia CIRP 3, 79–84.
[39] Iyama, T., Mizuno, M., McKay, K.N., Yoshihara, N., Nishikawa, N.,
2013. Optimal strategies for corrective assembly approach applied to a
high-quality relay production system. Computers in Industry 64 (5),
556–564.
[40] Kohonen, T., 2001. Self-Organizing Maps, Third edition ed. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[41] Aroui, T., Koubaa, Y., Toumi, A., 2009. Clustering of the Self-
Organizing Map based Approach in Induction Machine Rotor Faults
Diagnostics. Leonardo Journal of Sciences 2009 (15), 1–14.
[42] Mamdani, 1977. Application of Fuzzy Logic to Approximate Reasoning
Using Linguistic Synthesis. IEEE Trans. Comput. C-26 (12), 1182–1191.
[43] Sivanandam, S.N., Sumathi, S., Deepa, S.N., 2007. Introduction to fuzzy
logic using MATLAB. Springer, Berlin, New York.
[44] Coupek, D., Lechler, A., Verl, A., 2016. Cloud-based control for
downstream defect reduction in the production of electric motors,
in: Proceedings. 2016 International Conference on Electrical Systems for
Aircraft, Railway, Ship Propulsion and Road Vehicles & International
Transportation Electrification Conference (ESARS-ITEC), Toulouse,
France. 02.11.2016 - 04.11.2016. IEEE, pp. 1–6.