What is Industry 4.0? It’s simply a way to efficiently and effectively leverage new digital and robotic techniques into the manufacturing process.
Such technologies include cloud services, IoT sensors and activators, robotics, wireless networking and more. These would be intelligently combined with manufacturing machines to create what one might call a “smart factory”.
Could 3D printing fit into this paradigm?
Absolutely it could. In fact, 3D printing is perhaps one of the most “flexible” means of manufacturing, as literally each print could be unique. Of course, it’s more expensive than mass manufacturing, but there are many working on that problem.
Currently, however, most 3D printing equipment is more or less “standalone” and provides only simple, if any, interfaces to a larger manufacturing ecosystem.
I believe that 3D printers could be a significant part of Industry 4.0 implementations if they were able to add on control and operational mechanisms to make the printers more “independent” and thus more able to fit into a smart factory.
and amazingly..this 3D printing is applied as a makeup!…Wow it is such a great invention. Less hassle for ladies and everyone can be pro make up artist now!!!! awesome
The format of your abstract will depend on the discipline in which you are working. However, all abstracts generally cover the following five sections:
1. Reason for writing:
What is the importance of the research? Why would a reader be interested in the larger work?
2. Problem:
What problem does this work attempt to solve? What is the scope of the project? What is the main argument, thesis or claim?
3. Methodology:
An abstract of a scientific work may include specific models or approaches used in the larger study. Other abstracts may describe the types of evidence used in the research.
4. Results:
An abstract of a scientific work may include specific data that indicates the results of the project. Other abstracts may discuss the findings in a more general way.
5. Implications:
How does this work add to the body of knowledge on the topic? Are there any practical or theoretical applications from your findings or implications for future research?
The format of your abstract will depend on the work being abstracted. An abstract of a scientific research paper will contain elements not found in an abstract of a literature article, and vice versa. However, all abstracts share several mandatory components, and there are also some optional parts that you can decide to include or not. When preparing to draft your abstract, keep the following key process elements in mind:
Reason for writing: What is the importance of the research? Why would a reader be interested in the larger work?
Problem: What problem does this work attempt to solve? What is the scope of the project? What is the main argument/thesis/claim?
Methodology: An abstract of a scientific work may include specific models or approaches used in the larger study. Other abstracts may describe the types of evidence used in the research.
Results: Again, an abstract of a scientific work may include specific data that indicates the results of the project. Other abstracts may discuss the findings in a more general way.
Implications: What changes should be implemented as a result of the findings of the work? How does this work add to the body of knowledge on the topic?
Interesting write up related to my current research area ” Digital Workplace”
The Future of Work and Employment in the 4th Industrial Revolution
Stream Leader: Professor Valeria Pulignano, KU Leuven, Belgium
Employment and the character of work are changing as the result of increased digitalization, robotization and use of the Internet. The emergence of these new technologies contributes to shifting the boundaries between human and machine capabilities, with dramatic implications on individual jobs and their working conditions as well as the knowledge and skills of human capital alike (Valenduc and Vandramin, 2016). In particular, several studies emphasise a shift towards the ‘commodification’ or ‘marketisation’ of knowledge (Fleissner, 2009). Specifically, it is claimed that recent technological innovations lead to a major shift in the boundary between codified and tacit knowledge, to the detriment of the latter (Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2015). Regarding what the social effects of this shift will be, some scholars argue that machines and robots will replace human capital. This is because technological innovation within the field of big data processing requires a new way to classify tasks (cognitive and manual as well as routine and non-routine) and skills, which will dramatically change the way of working (Autor et al., 2003; Frey and Osborne, 2013). On the other hand, it is argued that society needs to learn to work together with robots i.e. ‘race with the machine rather than against it’ (Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2015). Accordingly, the future of work will depend on achieving an optimum balance between the new generation of high-performance machines and human skills, which is a very different perspective to the traditional view of machines as a substitute for human capital espoused earlier by Frey and Osborne (2013) and Autor et al. (2003).
As a society within an increasingly on-demand economy, choices must be made about how to deploy new technologies, and critically to consider the possibility of shaping their impact. Therefore, crucial questions include: what balance will there be among jobs created as the digital wave flows through our economy and society, and which workers will be displaced (if any)? Will the new technologies generate converging trends in how enterprises will interact with customers and employees? If so, why? What will be the conditions (or factors) for successful adaptations within the interconnections of value chains or the creation of digital customer interfaces? Irrespective of whether it may be feasible to catalogue existing work, particularly work that is routine, as likely to be replaced or reconfigured by digital tools, and perhaps to estimate the numbers of such existing jobs that will be digitized away, it may be more difficult to envisage the new jobs which will be redefined and reorganized in the future.
This stream aims to discuss the challenges digitalization, robotization and the use of the Internet and new technologies alike pose for human capital, as well as the way in which to generate new knowledge and emphasise its relevance for policy and practice. We are particularly interested in papers which help in understanding the social implications, and theorize the processes and dynamics, guiding the changes at the intersections of new technology and human capital. We are also interested in empirical papers involving international comparisons. Papers will be considered for a Special Issue of an academic journal or an edited collection.
By all means contact the Stream Leader or Coordinator to discuss your planned contribution(s).
Prof Valeria Pulignano
Professor of Sociology of Labour and Industrial Relations, KU Leuven, Belgium
Valeria.pulignano@kuleuven.be
Dr Puteri Sofia Amirnuddin
PuteriSofia.Amirnuddin@taylors.edu.my
References
Autor D. H., Levy F. and Murmane R.J. (2003) ‘The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118 (4): 1279-1333.
Brynjolfsson E. and McAfee A. (2015) The second machine age. Work, progress and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies, New York, W. W. Norton & Company.
Fleissner P. (2009) ‘The “commodification” of knowledge in the global information society’, Triple-C, 7(2): 228-238.
Frey C. B. and Osborne M. A. (2013) The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation?, Oxford Martin School Working paper, Oxford, Oxford University.
Valenduc G. and Vandramin, P. (2016) Work in the digital economy: sorting the old from the new, ETUI Working Paper 2016.03
Recent Comments