There was a time when people made stuff. Muscle was the enabling force of Industry 0.0. This was a period of manual labor with some help from horses and wind to provide power.
In the 18th century people figured out how to use water to make stuff. The steam engine and water wheel were the enabling technologies of Industry 1.0. This replaced some of the muscle power so that we could manufacturer more efficiently.
By the late 19th century, people had figured out how to use electricity to make stuff. Electrical distribution to run motors and induction furnaces was the enabling technology of Industry 2.0. Again, fewer resources were required in production and manufacturing became more efficient.
In the 20th century we learned how to make stuff with computers. Analog/digital converters, microprocessors, and software were the enabling technologies for Industry 3.0. This enabled control systems to automatically measure and control industrial processes as well as run advanced algorithms and analytics and provide data to plant wide networks to generate reports. This created further efficiencies by replacing resources and getting things done faster.
We now are in the midst of Industry 4.0. This term emerged in 2011 from the annual Hannover Messe trade fair in Hanover, Germany. How is it different from 3.0? What is the enabling technology and what are we replacing?
- The Internet is the enabling technology. That's it. Functionally nothing has changed from Industry 3.0.
- We still have analog/digital converters, microprocessors, and software doing the work. We haven't replaced them; in fact, we have accelerated their use. What has been replaced? In-house and proprietary connectivity.
If this sounds like my previous article, there is a reason. The way the terms "digitalization", "digital transformation" and "Industry 4.0" are used make them virtually indistinguishable from each other. They really are talking about the same thing. It is using the enabling technology of the Internet to make connectivity and data storage easier and more cost effective.
My previous article also addressed the caveats introduced in this new world. Prior to Industry 4.0 our industrial facilities were not connected to a public data infrastructure. However, many of them were connected to a public electrical power infrastructure and still are. In the same way that a brownout on the grid could take down a facility that doesn't have the forethought to design a backup, connectivity to the Internet creates a vulnerability. While there is this vulnerability, the greatest security threats to your system are relics of Industry 3.0. As bad as you think an intrusion from a hacker can be, the more likely threat is a USB stick with a virus that gets plugged into a port or a person in your facility that has their fingers on a keyboard.
That is what Industry 4.0 means. The ability to have machine learning algorithms, data analytics, digital networks, and automation did not suddenly appear in Industry 4.0. We had that functionality in Industry 3.0. The difference is that we now have the Internet as an enabling technology. In the 4 th quarter 2018 edition of Smart Industry magazine, Haresh Malkani (CTO of CESMII) says that control systems have been around for decades and we have used them to do smart things for a long time. "But the big thing that has changed is our ability to connect all these things together. That's what makes it smarter." However, it isn't that we couldn't connect before Industry 4.0. It is the Internet making it easier in the Industry 4.0 world.
The question will be whether we can do it the right way. In that same issue of Smart Industry magazine, Suzanne Burns (consultant at Spencer Stuart) said "A recent survey shows that 9 out of 10 digital transformation efforts did not meet business objectives." This means that done improperly, the use of Internet connectivity can not only add vulnerability but also be a waste of money.
This is not to say that there isn't something to be gained with Industry 4.0. For example, there are many cases where the data analytics that are currently done with the Industry 3.0 infrastructure are not done in an efficient and standard manner built around business needs. In the paper industry we have seen customers working with the tools from the Industry 3.0 tool box to provide simple things like production numbers. Each facility has their own methodology to produce this number. This means that in larger companies 20+ engineers develop 20+ unique calculations. From an efficiency standpoint they just paid 20+ times what they should have for a single calculation. If business needs change, they now have to manage going into all 20 calculations to make a change. By using Industry 4.0 connectivity through the Internet we can create and manage one calculation for the whole company that will ensure all facilities are being counted and reported in the same manner. There is only one calculation to manage if there is a change. It might seem like a small savings but when the multiplied cost of maintaining each Industry 3.0 solution compares to a single connected Industry 4.0 solution, it often results in a broken system in the former case and a working solution in the latter. This is one of many cases in which Industry 4.0 provides the return on investment that Internet connectivity makes more feasible.
A major cause of the confusion in terminology and understanding is that gains made in other industries that lack the Industry 3.0 benefits we already have in our industry make the business case worthy of further scrutiny. In the process industries (paper, chemical, water, etc) we have been riding Industry 3.0 and it benefits. When the benefits of Industry 4.0 are advertised, they are most often addressed to industries that have no Industry 3.0 to start with. In the November/December issue of Intech magazine, Stefan Zippel makes several great points:
- "Looking at Industry 4.0 as a journey, the process industry is already flying, while other industries are only now checking in"
- "The focus of Industry 4.0 has been on the technology, connecting assets and collecting data. But similar technology has been used in the process industry for decades."
- "In short, Industry 4.0 failed to show how it would raise profit margins, lower operating costs, and manage risks better than the existing standards used in the process industry."
Yes, we are in a new era of industry. There are benefits to be had. But the distinction between this era and its predecessor in our industry requires a deeper understanding beyond the buzzwords. To get a good return on investment and prevent opening a vulnerability, we need to know what enabling technology we are talking about and what it replaces.
