Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
Automotive manufacturing technologies – an international
viewpoint
Steven Peters
1,*
, Gisela Lanza
1
, Jun Ni
2
, Jin Xiaoning
2
, Yi Pei-Yun
3
, and Marcello Colledani
4
1
Institute of Production Science (wbk), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Kaiserstrasse 12, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
2
Wu Manufacturing Research Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
3
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, P.R. China
4
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20156 Milan, Italy
Received 15 June 2014 / Accepted 28 July 2014
Abstract – The automotive industry can be described as a backbone in many developed countries such as Japan,
Korea, USA, and Germany, while being an enabler for economic prosperity in developing countries like China, Brazil,
Eastern Europe, and Russia at the same time. However, the dynamics and uncertainty are increasing heavily by market
changes, regulations, customer behavior, and new product technologies. Manufacturing research has to find answers to
increase quality of products, flexibility of plants, and supply chain networks, to manage complexity in technologies and
variants and overall to stay competitive even in high wage countries. In this paper, major technological challenges are
discussed and the current state of manufacturing technology and research is presented. Moreover, for each technolog-
ical and organizational area, future industrial, and research challenges are highlighted.
Key words: Manufacturing technologies, Automotive industries, Sustainable mobility
1. Motivation
Cars represent the pursuit of freedom of each individual like
nothing else. The relevance of the automotive industry for eco-
nomic prosperity and its impact on jobs can be seen in all major
markets and countries. Interestingly, both developed and devel-
oping countries see this industry as their backbone. While the
industry in TRIAD countries (USA, Japan, and EU) became
a high-tech branch, BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India,
and China) started with simpler products.
In the European Union, about 16 million units are manufac-
tured, which is about 26% of the world’s annual production.
Hence, cars are one of the most important products with an
annual turnover of about 700 billion Euro [1]. There are about
2 million direct jobs and another 10 million in related manufac-
turing and other sectors within the automotive industry in the
EU (including truck, suppliers, etc.). With its 210 production
plants in Europe, the automotive industry exports 75 billion
Euro of net trade every year [1]. It is also the largest sector
in private R&D investments with more than 5,800 patents in
2011 [1]. Being the most important player in Europe’s automo-
tive industry, Germany has more than 750,000 employees
working directly in the automotive sector in more than 45 plants
[1]. The automotive industry in the USA accounts for between
4 ~ 5% of the US gross domestic product and employed
716,900 people in 2011 [2]. In Japan, almost 790,000 people
work directly in the automotive industry [3].
It is expected that the BRICs’ share of global vehicle sales
will edge towards the 50% mark by 2018 [4]andTRIADand
BRIC markets are expected to converge in terms of customer
demands and behavior within the next 5–6 years. As a matter
of fact, China has already become the world’s largest automo-
bile producer and market since 2009 [5]. The current 5-year
plan of the Chinese administration prepares China for a
market-share of 30% of all cars in the world [6]andtheChinese
government views the development of the new energy vehicle
industry as a top priority and has introduced policies and incen-
tives in its favor [4].
The presented figures illustrate the importance of the auto-
motive industry for all major economies. However, this leading
industry faces tough challenges due to emission limitations and
public opinion (compare [7]), unsustainable surge in petroleum
consumption, high volatility and a (temporarily) low utilization
of capacity. In the automotive industry the number of jobs
depends to a high extent on manufacturing and consequently
so does the prosperity of an economy. Facing the mentioned
challenges means technological progresses in both, product
and production. In the following, selected technological
approaches are discussed and the current state of manufacturing
technology and research is presented. Moreover, for each
*e-mail: steven.peters@kit.edu
Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
ÓS. Peters et al., Published by EDP Sciences, 2014
DOI: 10.1051/mfreview/2014010
Available online at:
http://mfr.edp-open.org
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
OPEN ACCESS
RESEARCH ARTICLE
technological and organizational area, future industrial, and
research challenges are highlighted.
The paper is therefore organized as follows: firstly current
state and roadmaps of selected core technologies with tremen-
dous impacts on manufacturing are given, secondly some key
enablers and also organizational issues are presented, before
the paper ends with some final remarks. No specific scientific
methodology was used to come up with the roadmap. Instead,
this viewpoint is driven by an ad hoc method to provide a
general assessment as well as a projection of future advanced
automotive manufacturing technologies.
2. Core technologies for future automotive
production
2.1. Battery technology and its manufacturing
Today, batteries for battery electric vehicles (BEV) and
hybrid cars are usually based on Li-ion technology holding
on to achieve 250 Euro/kWh on system level within a couple
of years. However, there are several different designs such as
pouch cells (so called coffee bags), prismatic cells and round
cells. Round cells, which are coiled, require a well-known
process technology and can be produced fast in an established
roll-to-roll process. Pouch cells are more complex in handling
and automation, but enable the easy separation of single, imper-
fect sheets, which are identified by in-line optical inspection
while building up a stack out of hundreds of coated sheets.
Approaches like Z-folding [8] of the separator try to combine
both types of cells, but are generally based on pouch cells.
One major challenge is the lack of knowledge of, and experi-
ence with the long-term behavior of the batteries (‘‘breathing
cells’’), their chemical performance depending on battery man-
agement, the number and shape of cycles (e.g. fast charging),
and the dependence on climate conditions. To enhance
reliability prognosis and identify real critical quality character-
istics, improved electro-chemical and thermal models of
Li-Ion-Batteries are needed [9]. Figure 1 shows a coated cath-
ode on Al-foil in battery production.
Due to the next generation of coating materials, slurries, and
electrolytes manufacturing processes will have to be adapted
again. Therefore, there is only limited time to earn the costs
of the very expensive equipment. Moreover, variable costs
are very high for instance for the air-conditioned dry chambers.
At the same time, the amount of sold electric cars is not
expected to reach dimensions of an automotive mass production
within the next 10 years. Furthermore, Li-Sulphur, and Li-
Polymer are expected to become an alternative between 2020
and2025[10]. Li-Air is a promising option which is in focus
of Volkswagen and IBM among others [11].The US Depart-
ment of Energy (DOE) even expects Li-Air technology to
be ready in 2020 [12]. Alternative approaches deal among
others with Li-Magnesium (e.g. Samsung, LG, Toyota) [11].
Advanced batteries could compete or assist the fuel cell one
day.
To gain knowledge and boost ramp-up new cooperations
occur: Robert Bosch GmbH, GS Yuasa, and Mitsubishi
started a joint venture. Recently a huge research project
‘‘Alpha-Laion’’ (funded by the German government) with
Bosch, Daimler, BMW, BASF, Wacker, and SGL started with
the goal to develop Li-Ion batteries enabling a range of
300 km by BEV.
The leading-edge cluster ‘‘CLUSTER ELECTRIC MOBIL-
ITY SOUTH-WEST’’ plays an important role in the industriali-
sation of a strongly performing, low-emission and market-
driven mobility system of the future in Germany.
2.2. Fuel cell technology and its manufacturing
Fuel cell vehicles (FCV), with hydrogen as energy carrier,
have the potential to significantly reduce the dependence on
fossil fuels and lower harmful emissions. Proton exchange
membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), enjoying merits of quick
start-up, zero emission and high efficiency, are considered to
be the most promising candidate for FCVs [13]. However, sev-
eral challenges must be overcome before these vehicles will be
competitive with conventional vehicles. From a technological
point of view, costs, and durability are the two greatest barriers
for the commercialization of FCVs. On the one hand, the fuel
cell costs for mass production have been reduced from $275/
kW in 2002 to $73/kW in 2008. This corresponds to almost
$6,000 for an 80 kW system, which is still more than twice
as expensive as internal-combustion engine systems [14].
In 2011, the cost further decreased to $49/kW for an 80 kW
(net) integrated transportation fuel cell power system, however,
they are still higher than the US Department of Energy’s (DOE)
target to reach $30/kW by 2015 [15]. The largest part of a fuel
cell’s cost is the membrane electrode assembly (MEA) that con-
sists of a Nafion
Ò
membrane and platinum-based catalyst.
The Pt loading has been reduced by two orders of magnitude
in the past decade and there is still room for further loading
reduction [16]. Another important factor is the improvement
of manufacturing technology for bipolar plates (BPPs), which
account for 40% of the total stack costs [17]. Metallic BPPs,
Figure 1. Development of automotive batteries focuses on reducing
material costs, reducing mass and improving durability. Core
technologies are automation, type-flexible lines and in-line quality
inspection devices. (Picture: KIT)
2S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
with 0.1 mm stainless steel sheets as raw material and stamping
process as mass production method, can reduce the costs more
than conventional graphite BPPs [18]. Another target of the
DOE is to achieve a life time of 5,000 h durability with less
than a 10% decay in performance for FCVs by 2015 [15]. Both
MEA and BPPs suffer degradation during long-term operations.
At the moment, most fuel cells show a major performance decay
after approximately 1,000 h of usage [19,20]. However, it is
reported that 3M Company recently achieved over 7,500 h of
service lifetime for the membrane electrode assembly (MEA)
during their single-cell testing on the laboratory level, making
it possible to meet the DOE’s 2015 target [16]. Besides, a multi-
layer carbon film coated on the surface enables the metallic BPPs
to meet the durability requirement [21,22]. It should also be
noted that the production, storage, end-use, and infrastructure
of hydrogen are still issues that need to be solved before
commercialization. Figure 2 shows an approach of Honda.
From a political point of view, governments, and companies
around the world are supporting further development and com-
mercialization of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies through
policies and incentives. Germany, for example, has launched
one of the largest programs in the world: the ‘‘National Hydro-
gen and Fuel Cell Technology Innovation Programme (NIP)’’
[23]. The US government provided $41.9 million for the
Recovery Act to accelerate fuel cell commercialization and
deployment. The California Fuel Cell Partnership released
‘‘A California Road Map: Bringing Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehi-
cles to the Golden State’’, stating that with an estimated
53,000 vehicles on the road by 2017, more than 100 stations
will be built to ensure that the network has enough capacity
for additional vehicles [24]. The Japanese car manufacturers
Toyota, Honda, and Nissan committed to launch programs for
cars powered by fuel cells in four metropolitan areas by the year
2015. Moreover, Korea, and Japan are working on fuel
cell power plants and communication infrastructure [23]. China
is in its 12th Five-Year Economic Development Plan (2011–
2015). The Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) has
approved a budget of 738 million RMB for electric vehicle
(EV) R&D, of which 21% (155 million RMB) are designated
for FCVs. Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC),
one of the largest car manufacturers in China, announced that
there will be about 1,000 FCVs assembled by the end of
2015 [25]. Furthermore, there is a string of alliances created
for the advancement of the commercialization for FCVs in
2013. General Motors and Honda Motor Co. will partner to
develop a common system for FCVs, while Toyota Motor
Corp. and BMW AG paired up on a fuel-cell production alli-
ance. Besides, Daimler AG, Ford Motor Co., and Nissan Motor
Co. announced that they would jointly develop a line of afford-
able fuel cell electric cars for sale as early as 2017. In summary,
the potential of FCVs has been well recognized worldwide,
although the fuel cell technology and most of all infrastructure
still need further advancement. Commercialization of FCVs is
expected to begin around 2015 and the overall popularization
might be around 2050 [26].
2.3. Hybrid lightweight construction and its
manufacturing
In order to increase the fuel efficiency and driving agility of
cars, lightweight strategies must be developed – especially with
respect to increasing efforts and weights caused by safety
restrictions and additional features such as entertainment
devices. However, the requirements depend on the vehicle seg-
ment and volume. For the future, it is likely that a multi-
material approach will be used in many modern vehicle
designs, which may include next-generation AHSS (advanced
high strength steel), Al, Mg, metal matrix compounds, compos-
ites, etc. Furthermore steel provides huge remaining potentials
as demonstrated by the FutureSteelVehicle [27]. The new US
Institute ‘‘Lightweight & Modern Metals Manufacturing Inno-
vation (LM3I) Institute’’ focuses on lightweight by innovative
metals [28]. USDrive gives a brief overview of significant
challenges in the current material technology roadmaps [29].
Nanotechnology plays an important role in future development
of advanced metals (compare [30]) as well as microtechnology
which will enable functional surfaces for instance (compare
‘‘surface engineering’’ [31]). In the meanwhile near-net-shaping
and forming will be continuously improved to enable a reduc-
tion of waste and additional processes in production while
reducing weight at the same time.
When talking about composites, the automation of process
chains including in-line inspection, when hybridizing metals
and fiber-reinforced plastics, is an important precondition for
series production [32]. Especially the technologies and devices
for handling and joining (mechanical, thermal and chemical)
are very complex (compare Figure 3) and of crucial importance
for short cycle times in production and long durability in the
field. Davies gives a comprehensive overview of component
manufacturing and materials joining technologies [33].
At the moment, an improved Resine Transfer Molding
(RTM ) process is a promising way to reduce cycle times in
theproductionofCFRPdowntolessthan3min[34]. During
the next years, R&D in composite technology is likely to focus
on the improvement of the RTM technology with for example
high-pressure injection and compression [35]. New handling
technologies may be based on controlled vacuum or ultra-sonic
Figure 2. Development of fuel cells focus on material costs and
durability. Core technologies are ultra-low Pt catalysts, metallic
bipolar plates and advanced automation in production. (Picture:
Honda Motor Co.)
S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10 3
handling devices that neither damage the sheets nor pollute
them with any additional materials [36]. The integration of
patches with metal inserts enables a multi-material mix
and mechanical joining such as screwing or welding. Again,
re-manufacturing and recycling become more and more impor-
tant for separating the different materials of the car body, e.g. by
thermal treatment in pyrolytic processes or by mechanical
processes. Moreover, the carbon footprint from cradle to grave
has to be concerned when talking about composites. A revolu-
tion in CFRP might be possible by alternative (e.g. lignin-
based) pre-cursors [34].
From 2020–2025 onwards, multi-material-designs, proba-
bly based on improved metallic structures (but also compare
‘‘Multimaterial Space Frame’’ by Audi), could be used to be
enriched with an intelligent mix of highly specialized automo-
tive steels, Al, Mg, thermoplastics and maybe organic sheets as
well as CFRP, GFRP. The long-term goal might be a function-
integrated and system-oriented lightweight design like the one
demonstrated in the project InEco
Ó
[37]. One of the most
ambitious approaches in the market can be seen by BMW
AG with the latest concepts for BMW i3 and i8 as well as
the innovative Joint Venture SGL Automotive Carbon Fibers
(ACF) between SGL Group and BMW Group. A very compre-
hensive roadmap on lightweight approaches was presented by
the Automotive Council UK [38].
2.4. Additive manufacturing
Today, additive manufacturing as ‘‘production on demand’’
is widely used in rapid prototyping, tooling, surface coating and
producing or repairing dies. Mortara et al. [39]haspresenteda
comprehensive classification of additive manufacturing technol-
ogies e.g. by types of energy or used materials. Using laser is
currently one of the most common approaches for working
on metal powders in the automotive area. The market of such
photonic technologies is expected to grow significantly until
2015 [40]. Additive manufacturing has not been used for com-
ponents in series production of cars. However, applications of
selective laser melting (SLM) in the aerospace industry show
promising results for almost all kinds of very complex (usually
small) geometries or highly individualized components. GE has
announced to produce 40,000 parts per year by additive
manufacturing starting in 2018 [41]. In the future, material
models are required in order to simulate the process and
increase the overall understanding of the process. Multi-
chamber systems, hybrid automats with integrated cutting tools
and in-process quality inspection are not only key research
fields, but also lead to an ongoing increase in the build-up rate.
The key approach to an application in series production
involves an integrated view of new designs, knowledge of
material behavior and increased process technologies (Figure 4).
A ‘‘simple’’ substitution of process technologies used for exist-
ing parts, however, is not promising at all. On the one hand, the
potential of a new paradigm ‘‘Manufacturing for Functionality’’
(compare [42]), which enables new function integrated parts,
must replace the restrictive philosophy of ‘‘Design for Manu-
facturing’’. This means that for the first time, designers are
not confined by manufacturing restrictions in terms of reacting
to the customers’ requirements. On the other hand, the whole
value chain from design to assembly can be shortened, for
example by using SLM-automats or 3D-printers closer to or
even in final assembly lines, in order to produce the parts ‘‘just
in time’’ and ‘‘right there’’. Moreover, additive manufacturing
can be used to fabricate innovative new materials with defined
microstructural patterns [43]. Although the technology has
revolutionary potential, substantial work needs to be done
regarding the ‘‘improved performance in terms of power, beam
properties, efficiency, and size, as well as better spatial & tem-
poral control and stability – and all at lower cost’’ [40]. Roland
Berger expects tremendous improvements in built-up rates until
2018 [44]. The ‘‘National Additive Manufacturing Innovation
Institute (NAMII)’’ in the US [45] was founded and is funded
to strengthen additive manufacturing technologies. NAMII
established an ‘‘Innovation Factory’’ in Youngstown, Ohio.
At the same time huge initiatives have been started in Europe
(especially in UK and Germany) while China has probably
the largest amount of papers published on the SLM technology
(compare SCOPUS). [46]and[47] have provided com-
prehensive roadmaps on digital- and direct-manufacturing
technologies.
Figure 4. Development focuses on shortening cycle times and
cutting costs (e.g. for materials) as well as on increasing reproduc-
ibility. Core technologies are holistic optimization of chains and
material models. (Picture: Fraunhofer ILT)
Figure 3. Efforts in lightweight construction and manufacturing
focus on multi material understanding (corrosion, thermal expan-
sion), shortening of cycle times and cutting costs of materials. Core
technologies are predictive modelling as well as handling, joining
and automation. (Picture: KIT)
4S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
2.5. Flexible manufacturing of body in white
In this context, flexible manufacturing (FM) is, in its
essence, the capability of making different vehicles on the same
line without long delays due to tool change. The key technolo-
gies of FM for body in white are extensive use of robots and
supervisory computers. Cooperating robots are one of the major
innovations in automation during the last years. Today cooper-
ating multi-axes robots can be controlled in real-time during
handling processes of whole body in whites. No work men
are needed to finish a body in white, starting from the coil.
Usually the body in white production comes before the order
penetration point, where parts are adjusted to the customers’
requirements. Consequently, frames are not named to a specific
customer in terms of a push production. Those highly efficient
systems of today will have to become more flexible in variants
and materials, as customers expect more individualization.
However, modern welding guns and positioning devices usu-
ally depend on a pre-defined, single geometry and the designed
opening spaces of the frames are very limited. To this aim, a
promising welding technology to ensure the required flexibility
level, also reducing energy consumption (30%), tooling
requirements and processing times (20% of spot welding), is
represented by Remote Laser Welding (RLW). By having laser
optics embedded into the robot and a scanning mirror head as
the end-effector, RLW can easily create joints in different loca-
tions of the product through simple robot repositioning and
laser beam redirection from a remote distance (e.g. 0.898–
1.22 m from last mirror to the welding target). Volkswagen
has been playing a pioneering role in RLW area. The German
automaker has been progressively introducing robot-guided
YAG laser welding to its body shops over the past years and
has adopted an innovative hybrid welding process combining
laser and arc welding for door assembly. As much as 75% of
body in white has been welded by this technology e.g. for
Golf [48].
However, it is already possible to make completely different
vehicles on the same line without delays due to vehicle change.
For example, in the Toluca plant, Chrysler can manufacture the
PT Cruiser and Dodge Journey interchangeably although they
share only a few parts through FM systems. In the body shop
of Ford, the sheet metal is assembled to form the vehicle’s body,
yet more than 80% of the tooling is not model-specific. It can
be reprogrammed to weld a car, truck or crossover of similar
size. GM has announced to invest $250 million in Flexible
Manufacturing in the Ingersoll Plant. Furthermore, it is reported
that ABB provides a complete body in white welding line to
Changan Ford Mazda Automobile Company’s (CFMA) new
factory in Chongqing. The welding line uses ABB’s FlexLean
Technology, with ABB’s patented FlexTrack and FlexLifter as a
flexible conveying system. The advanced flexible solution
allows the production of different car models on the same line
and will help the manufacturer to improve productivity by 15%.
New context-sensible handling devices adapting to the real
geometry are needed in the future to create a defined position in
flexible production e.g. for welding or clueing (Figure 5). First
steps towards context-sensibility have been discussed for years
now, focusing on the usage of RFID tags in product compo-
nents [49]. As a next step, so called cyber-physical systems
are likely to replace RFID, as they use a wireless internet
connection to coordinate their needs with the production equip-
ment. Future body in white constructions will mix the best
materials available for each requirement in a lifetime of a car.
Therefore, joining technologies of tomorrow (see Figure 3)
are needed [50]. The overall goal will remain to create all
bodies of one car platform on one automated line.
2.6. Autonomous final assembly
Today, final assembly lines in automotive series production
are characterized by dozens of well-defined work places rowing
up in one fixed route. Each station has a fixed work program
and a more or less fixed number of employees which can be
smoothed by the so called ‘‘drifting’’ of single workers [51].
The cars move along the lines and are assembled in a strict
sequence at the stations. The material is delivered to the stations
in the order of processing. There are several mixed lines, e.g. in
Dingolfing, BMW manufactures the 5-, 6- and 7-series and
their derivatives on one final assembly line. Today, robots are
only used very little and only in fixed positions and for specific
tasks in final assemblies.
The next generation of automotive assembly lines
could be influenced by the latest research results (Figure 6)in
human-machine collaboration: lightweight robots and humans
work together to combine their ‘‘individual’’ performance to
achieve the best results for the product. Digital ‘‘poka yoke’’
avoids any mistakes in the assembly by instantly checking
the matching IDs via wireless internet. Approaches of aug-
mented reality will change the required profiles of workers
and support the increasing complexity and variety of variants.
Within the next couple of years, these current fields of research
seem to be on their way into series production, with the next
generation of lightweight and sensitive robots as well as
cyber-physical systems.
Self-moving chassis [52] could revolutionize the conven-
tional fixed routes, as they enable different work packages
for different orders. This of course has a high impact on the
layout and can therefore only be introduced with a new model.
The processes of logistics, the just-in-time delivery and the
sequence of material are highly dependent on a forecast, which
Figure 5. Development focuses on mixed vehicle lines. Core
technologies are robots with flexible tools, internet-based control
systems and context-sensible handling/joining devices. (Picture:
Ford)
S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10 5
is usually made a few hours before delivery. The loss of a strict
sequence leads to the necessity of locating the supplier parks in
close proximity of the assembly. Moreover, there is still a need
for research on autonomous drives for chassis that enable
flexible routes in the assembly (compare [53]). However, this
does not seem to be expected before 2020, although very first
steps can be seen in modern plants where the engine assembly
is flexible and free of static ground-based lines. Within a
German ‘‘industry on campus’’ – project called ‘‘ARENA
2036’’ new concepts for flexible final assembly are developed
together with Daimler AG.
Within one decade, a solution with non-fixed, undetermined
flow speed might be possible, without reducing the overall out-
come. All parts would remain in flow by a continuous adaption
of the speed and a simultaneous re-scheduling of workloads
depending on variants, available employees, technical down-
times and delivery dates in almost real-time. Parallel pits for
unusual versions (such as battery electric vehicles) could be
used in a kind of by-pass to level the processing times, in order
to sustain a continuous flow.
2.7. Remanufacturing
The remanufacturing industry has a long-standing relation-
ship with the automotive sector, as vehicle parts and compo-
nents are subject to significant wear and tear and thus require
repairs during their operating life. With the emerging develop-
ment of electrified vehicles, including hybrid electric vehicles
(HEV), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) and battery
electric vehicles (BEV), remanufacturing of expensive traction
batteries and electronic/mechatronic components has been con-
sidered a sustainable strategy for OEMs. The driving force for
incorporating remanufacturing as a business strategy is not only
the pressure exerted by environmental legislations, but also the
economic benefits given the existing salvage technology,
reverse supply chains and economic-rational remanufacturing
operations [54,55].
Remanufacturing is defined as ‘‘an industrial process to
recover value from the used and degraded products by
re-instating them to ‘‘like-new’’ condition through components
replacement or reprocessing’’ [56]. It recaptures the value of the
durable components, as well as some fraction of the original
manufactured value. The process of product remanufacturing
is usually less expensive than producing a brand new unit,
because modules and components can be reused and thus avoid
the need to procure new components from suppliers [57].
In fact, the cost of remanufacturing can be between 45% and
65% less than the manufacturing cost. Moreover, the
willingness to pay for a remanufactured product is only
between 9.7% and 15.3% lower than for a same new product.
Furthermore, remanufacturing processes use 20–25% of the
energy needed to manufacture the same product.
The importance of remanufacturing of automotive products
is increased by emerging ‘‘Green’’ responsibilities for, and
management of, the end-of-life (EOL) phase. The EU countries,
through diverse directives, are trying to regulate the EOL
processing of automotive parts and components. The remanu-
facturing of products or parts is the most significant in terms
of resource conservation and in economic terms primarily in
relation to the aftermarket supply.
The growing popularity of expensive and sophisticated
mechatronic products, such as rack & pinion steering gears
and electric power steering, together with the rising demand
for automatic transmissions and diesel engines, is expected to
boost the automotive remanufacturing market to a great extent.
While in 2007 the average was 16 mechatronic modules per
vehicle, in 2011 some vehicles incorporate 60–70 mechatronic
modules. Less than 10% of mechatronic components are
currently remanufactured. The most common failures for a
mechatronic unit are: in connectors, because they are a weak
point in some electronic units for various reasons; in the wiring,
for mechanical stress and corrosion; and in the power supply.
The failure often consists of a component which can be easily
diagnosed and replaced. The ideal core for remanufacturing
should have a high remanufacturability rate and a short life
cycle, meaning more cores to be collected during the product
life cycle. For these reasons, the alternators, starters, and brake
calipers are remanufactured by almost 10% of companies.
AC compressor is in the category of the most remanufactured
components as well. Other components are also attractive for
remanufacturing but not so commonly processed for technical
reasons such as ECUs (Electric Control Units) and transmis-
sion. The emerging technical challenges for automotive mech-
atronic components remanufacturing call for new automated
technologies integrating disassembly, reworking and recovery
in the same plant. An example of a pilot plant for innovative
mechatronic de-manufacturing processes is described in [58].
Remanufactured mechatronic products, which come with
competitive warranties and low price points, are expected to
become popular aftermarket products in the future.
Research has shown that remanufactured products sales
may cannibalize new products sales, however, the sales of
remanufactured products increased the overall market share
in many instances [59]. Due to fast technological advances
and style changes in the automotive industry, direct market
cannibalization by remanufactured products is no risk,
Figure 6. Development focuses on flexible sequencing/scheduling,
flexible speed of assembly lines and just-in-time material flow. Core
technologies are human-machine collaboration and advanced sen-
sors. (Picture: Ford)
6S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
because the remanufactured versions are of an earlier
generation.
End-of-life vehicles (ELVs) recycling
The recycling of End-of-Life vehicles (ELVs) is an increas-
ing concern for vehicle manufacturers due to the rising empha-
sis on environmental stewardship from customers and within
companies, increasing material costs and regulations governing
the future recyclability of vehicles. Moreover, the legislation
emphasis towards EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility) is
bringing car manufacturers to the forefront of end-of-life activ-
ities. In 2009, over 9 million ELVs constituting over 8 million
tons of waste were collected in the European Union, according
to Eurostat. Currently, ELV material recovery rates are in the
range of 75–85% [60], but EU legislation, for example, targets
recovery, and re-use rates of 95%, an energy recovery of 10%
and a maximum of 5% disposal by vehicle weight by the year
2015. Meeting these targets requires both improvements of the
current state of recycling technologies and diligent analysis of
recyclability in the design phase of new components and mate-
rials. The International Dismantling Information System (IDIS)
was developed by the automotive industry to meet the legal
obligations of the EU End of Life Vehicle (ELV) directive
and has been improved to an information system with vehicle
manufacturer compiled information for treatment operators to
promote the environmental treatment of End-of-Life-Vehicles,
safely, and economically.
Material recovery of vehicles remains focused on ferrous
metals, with the recovery of high value non-ferrous metals
and relatively low value plastics incorporated as recycling
demand grows. ELVs are pre-treated by dismantling, which
originally served to capture valuable reusable components,
but evolved to include the capture of parts with regulated and
toxic materials and to isolate components with high material
recycling value, such as catalytic converters. After the vehicles
are stripped, the hulks are sent to recyclers who shred the
vehicles. The remainder of the shredded vehicles (ASR –
Automotive Shredded Residue) can be used in trash-to-ash
schemes or is sent to landfill. While ELV regulation and
licensing of dismantlers in the EU serves to ensure that vehicle
recycling captures harmful materials in this process, the recov-
ery rates of materials from the ELVs and the quality of the
materials recovered is not assured. In particular, market factors,
in both new product manufacturing and End-of-Life processing,
and EU regulations may conflict in the areas of light metals
recycling and plastics and composites recycling.
Advancing beyond the state of the art to achieve higher
recycling rates will require opening traditional ELV recycling
to new disassembly models and recycling processing tech-
niques. State of the art plastic separation techniques including
optical and spectroscopic techniques have difficulty with typical
automotive plastics [61]; however, isolating components with a
limited number of known plastic species may make these types
of separation more feasible. Composite recycling may also
benefit from improved disassembly strategies. New techniques
for separating high value carbon fiber, more and more used in
high-tech, high performance automotive applications may
provide an effective way to recapture composite components
for reuse [62]; however, the composite material must be isolated
effectively through improved recovery strategies and correct
size reduction strategies have to be developed to avoid deterio-
rating the recyclability of the fibers by excessive shredding.
Finally, the development of new techniques for enabling the
optimized recycling of components with advanced engineered
metallic and non-metallic elements will be the basis for deriving
guidelines for new legislations that will govern the end-of-life
treatment of the vehicles of the future, to be collected in the
next 10–15 years.
2.8. Summary of core technologies
The automotive industry is probably facing the most critical
challenges in its whole history. Completely new technologies
for the powertrain and the body of the car are on their way,
new markets in emerging countries prosper and customers’
behavior changes rapidly and inhomogeneous. Despite the
existing new technologies, internal combustion engines
will remain the leading technology for the next decades. Their
development has to be focused on including production
technologies from efficient casting of new alloys to micro-
structured surfaces. Some of the most promising technologies
emphasizing on manufacturing technologies are presented
(see Figure 7).
To manage the changes and to increase the effects of high
investments in research and development, new alliances and
cooperations are designed. Daimler, Ford, and Nissan are work-
ing together in the field of fuel cells. BMW works together with
SGL Carbon in the production of lightweight car bodies. On the
other hand, synergies between industries have the potential for
even more disruptive innovations. Cooperation between auto-
motive and aerospace industries in material and manufacturing
technology clusters can lead to even more new ideas.
In the following, some trends of production management
aspects and factory design are presented, dealing with the outer
effects of manufacturing.
3. Production management
3.1. Near-zero downtime production performance
With a large degree of automation, the automotive industry
needs intelligent machines and maintenance solutions to
achieve higher productivity, improved reliability, greater effi-
ciency and complete quality assurance. Most machine mainte-
nance today is either purely reactive (fixing or replacing
equipment after it fails) or blindly proactive (assuming a certain
level of performance degradation, with no input from the
machinery itself, and servicing equipment on a routine schedule
whether service is actually needed or not). Both scenarios are
extremely wasteful.
The main barriers for predicting health condition/perfor-
mance of a complex system include: (a) the inability to
anticipate unknown faults particularly for complex engineering
systems in which hundreds to thousands of sub-systems
interact and contribute to the overall system functionality and
performance, (b) the inability to sustain system functionality
S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10 7
and performance in the presence of system anomalies and
severe disturbances, especially when the system operates under
varying conditions, and (c) the inability of self-adjusting system
configurations to mitigate internal faults and/or external intru-
sions to achieve survivability.
To meet these challenges, automotive factories need to go
beyond ‘‘predictive maintenance’’ to intelligent ‘‘prognostics’’
– the process of pinpointing exactly which components of a
machine are likely to fail and when to trigger service and to
order spare parts autonomously. When smart products and
machines are networked and remotely monitored and when
their data is modeled and continually analyzed with sophisti-
cated systems, it is possible to reach intelligent ‘‘prognostics’’.
Figure 8 shows the unmet needs of future intelligent mainte-
nance systems (IMS). IMS focuses on developing advanced
degradation modeling and prediction as well as informatics
tools for decision support systems.
The economic benefit of intelligent manufacturing and
maintenance systems has to be measured in order to enable
an optimization of internal and external services [63]. In order
to help the automotive industry build smart factories with near-
zero downtime performance, research is needed to create a sys-
tematic body of knowledge in intelligent maintenance systems
and ultimately to impact next-generation product and service
systems with near-zero breakdown performance [64]. The
potential research areas for near-zero downtime production
systems are listed as follows.
Figure 7. Summary of current trends and possible roads to achieve future goals.
Figure 8. Needs and future trends for intelligent manufacturing and
maintenance systems.
8S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
3.1.1. Machine immune systems
Machine Immune System is a new design and system
methodology that unleashes enormous potential for high
performance and cost-effective automotive production systems.
An engineering immune machine/system can monitor and diag-
nose itself, and if any kinds of failure or degradation happen,
it can still maintain its functions for a while. In order to fulfill
the machine immune function, intelligence is added to the
machine, making it clever enough for functional maintenance.
3.1.2. Decision support tools – predictive maintenance
planning and service optimization application
Design, control and management of maintenance activities
in large production systems boost their productivities and
increase their reliability and responsiveness to changing opera-
tions [65]. The intelligent decision support tools – as part of the
solutions for tomorrow’s vehicle production strategy – have the
following several important issues that need to be addressed:
They include (1) assessment of the impact of a machine
breakdown on the factory throughput, (2) prioritization of main-
tenance tasks, (3) analysis of critical machine downtime effects,
(4) identification of preventive maintenance opportunities, and
(5) resource allocation (e.g. maintenance crews) on the critical
sections of the systems [66]. Moreover, advanced decision
support systems for the automotive industry should be based
on integrated maintenance, production logistics and quality
models to find the right balance between conflicting production
objectives [67]. Future smart factories should leverage the
maintenance intelligence to predict, prioritize, and plan the
actions to achieve the ‘‘every action correct’’ objective.
3.1.3. Embedded and networked prognostics systems –
reconfigurable customizable platform
To enable a production system with a self-maintenance and
self-prognostics function, there are customized prognostics
including embedded sensor systems with energy harvest capa-
bilities, virtual models for augmented component life estimation
(e.g. virtual bearings), and system reliability management.
Collaborative efforts are required to explore new strategic areas,
including self-maintenance systems, resilient systems and engi-
neering immune systems. These new frontier efforts will lead to
new transformational technologies in making future engineer-
ing systems with predictive and preventive capabilities that
avoid potential issues.
3.2. Advanced lean production
Lean Production has been playing a role of overwhelming
importance in production science for decades now – starting
with Toyota back in the 1940s and its worldwide spread in
the last 20 years. Lean addresses two sides today – on the
one hand it is a philosophy focusing on participation and moti-
vation of employees but providing well-defined methods and
approaches on the other hand. Some of the most crucial meth-
ods are just-in-time or just-in-sequence delivery, poka-yoke,
continuous improvement processes, team work or andon
boards. Especially in series production (starting from the auto-
motive industry) lean has been established quite well. However,
its adaptation to smaller production facilities with a very high
variance of products is still a crucial point in research [68].
The current national initiative in Germany called ‘‘Industrie
4.0’’ [69,70] or the Digital Manufacturing & Design Innova-
tion (DMDII) Institute in the US [71] are working on the inte-
gration of advanced solutions of modern information and
communication technology (ICT) in production processes,
equipment, factories, and supply chains. For the methodological
side of lean, advances in ICT can help to reach new potentials
e.g. by using partially automated value stream maps by conse-
quent tracking of workpieces and carriers. Decentralized deci-
sion making and dynamic adjustments of kanbans might help
to increase flexibility and resilience of lean production systems.
3.3. Global production networks
Value creation has become a globally distributed task.
Using the best available production factors (e.g. to reduce labor
and energy costs) as well as being close to the market (and in
doing so, avoiding local-content penalties) are the most impor-
tant reasons for going abroad. During the economic crisis in the
US and the EU, the Chinese market acts as an anchor of stabil-
ization. On the other hand, a crisis in one country can lead to
turbulences in the supply chains, affecting all partners around
the world. Consequently, the design and management of agile
networks which share information and risk become of crucial
importance [72].
The task for future research is the development of a holistic
theory of global production, which enables science and industry
to better understand and control global distributed production.
There has to be a fusion of (existing) approaches to plan and
control global production networks and production and
operations management. Quality issues, problems in logistics,
suppliers’ performance or internal and external barriers (e.g.
local-content or emission regulations) can erode expected ben-
efits of a global production strategy. So far, science is not able
to understand all interlinkages and influencing factors, which
makes a sustainable optimization difficult. It can be stated that
the importance of global production networks has increased in a
way and speed that scientific methods and theories fail to follow
so far. The challenges on the way to a comprehensive under-
standing of global production can be arranged in four levels:
production network, production system, production process
(manufacturing technology) and the product itself. Based on a
simultaneous engineering approach between product develop-
ment and production process description, the overall structure
of a production line or whole factory at a certain location is
determined and its performance analyzed, which affects site
selection and requires the assessment of the interaction with
the surrounding network. When it comes to the above discussed
enabling core technologies (such as battery production for elec-
tric mobility and lightweight construction), this cycle is even
more important. For high-wage countries in Europe it will be
of crucial importance to perform better than others in enabling
new technologies, and in doing so the competition between
S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10 9
companies will be a competition between their production net-
works. For the headquarters, usually in high wage countries,
this means to use the internal competition to push innovations
in product and production technology simultaneously and stea-
dily – for instance by creating a role-model (so called lead
plants) for the production of the latest product technologies with
the latest manufacturing technologies, which is rolled out in all
other countries again and again.
The automotive industry has changed from a ‘‘one-factory-
for-the-world’’ to a ‘‘hub-and-spoke-approach’’ and holds on
for the next step in becoming a real partnership-based network.
Even huge OEMs open their doors of R&D for suppliers and
universities. Networks do not offer economies-of-scales like
the ‘‘world-factory’’ or a hub, but they enable the highest level
of flexibility as capacities can be arranged. However, for net-
works to perform well, the ability to overcome ‘‘egoisms’’ of
single plants and single countries is required. As one part of
the individualization trend, an adaptation of products to regional
and cultural tastes is getting more and more important. There-
fore, R&D has started to follow production plants which have
been following the markets for decades now. The localization
of R&D can be seen as the next step of globalization, which
has already started.
3.4. Summary of production management
Figure 9 summarizes the mentioned aspects of production
management.
4. Conclusion
The goal of the automotive industry in developed countries
like Japan, Korea, USA, and Germany is to increase sustainabil-
ity in terms of being profitable, ecological, and socially compat-
ible. New product and production technologies have to be
integrated, new cooperations managed and customer satisfaction
increased by localization andindividualization,while production
costs stay competitive due to smart and flexible factories.
This paper presents a review on recent developments in
industry and science with a focus on manufacturing technolo-
gies as well as organizational issues in automotive industry.
Moreover, it presents potential trends. However, it must be sta-
ted that the paper of course is limited to subjective extrapolation
done by the authors. Moreover, key technologies such as aero-
dynamics or (partially) autonomous driving and innovative sen-
sorsarenotobserved–alsotheymighthaveimpactson
production as well.
References
1. ACEA – European Automobile Manufacturers’ Asso-
ciation (2012) http://www.acea.be/images/uploads/files/ACEA_
POCKET_GUIDE_2012_UPDATED.pdf, accessed in August
2013.
2. SelectUSA (2013) http://selectusa.commerce.gov/industry-
snapshots/automotive-industry-united-states, accessed in July
2013.
3. Jama – Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (2012)
http://autobeatinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/JAMA-
2012-report.pdf, accessed in July 2013.
4. KPMG (2013) http://www.kpmg.com/KZ/ru/IssuesAndInsights/
ArticlesAndPublications/Documents/KPMGs-Global-Automotive-
Executive-Survey-2013.pdf,accessedinJuly2013.
5. APCO (2010) http://www.export.gov.il/uploadfiles/03_2012/
chinasautomotiveindustry.pdf, accessed in July 2013.
6. W. Rohroff (2011) http://rohroff.de/Chinas_12_5JP_2011-
2015.pdf, accessed in November 2013.
7. B. Nunes, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management
19 (2008) 8.
8. J. Kurfer, M. Westermeier, C. Tammer, G. Reinhart, CIRP
Annals – Manufacturing Technology 61 (2012) 1.
9. K.-J. Lee, G.-H. Kim, K. Smith (2010) http://www.nrel.
gov/vehiclesandfuels/energystorage/publications.html#p2010,
accessed in August 2013.
10. A. Thielmann, R. Isenmann, M. Wietschel (2010) http://
www.isi.fraunhofer.de/isi-media/docs/t/de/publikationen/TRM-
LIB2030.pdf, accessed in September 2013.
Figure 9. Summary of current trends in outer effects of production.
10 S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
11. A. Menn (2014) http://www.handelsblatt.com/technologie/
forschung-medizin/forschung-innovation/airbus-plaene-der-
saubere-elektro-flug/9807318.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_
source=twitterfeed.
12. K. Amine, J. Lu, A. Abouimrane, H. Wu, Z. Zhang, P. Du, I.
Belharouak, J. Yang, Y.K. Sun, L. Curtiss, Argonne National
Laboratory, 2012, http://bestar.lbl.gov/bli5/files/2012/06/Amine_
session3.pdf.
13. P. Yi, L. Peng, L. Feng, P. Gan, X. Lai, Journal of Power
Sources 195 (2010) 20, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S037877531000844X.
14. US Department of Energy (DOE) (2009) http://www.hydrogen.
energy.gov/pdfs/epact_report_sec811.pdf, accessed in July 2013.
15. US Department of Energy (DOE) (2011) http://www1.eere.
energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/mypp/pdfs/fuel_cells.pdf,
accessed in August 2013.
16. Y. Wang, K.S. Chen, J. Mishler, S.C. Cho, X.C. Adroher,
Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4.
17. S. Karimi, N. Fraser, B. Roberts, F.R. Foulkes, Advances in
Materials Science and Engineering 2012 (2012).
18. L. Peng, X. Lai, P. Yi, J. Mai, J. Ni, Transactions of the ASME:
Journal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology 8 (2011) 1.
19. Y. Yu, H. Li, H. Wang, X.-Z. Yuan, G. Wang, M. Pan, Journal of
Power Sources 205 (2012).
20. Z.-B. Wang, P.-J. Zuo, Y.-Y. Chu, Y.-Y. Shao, G.-P. Yin,
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34 (2009) 10.
21. R.A. Antunes, M.C.L. Oliveira, G. Ett, V. Ett, International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy 35 (2010) 8.
22. P. Yi, L. Peng, T. Zhou, H. Wu, X. Lai, International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 38 (2013) 3.
23. Fuel Cell Today, D. Carter, M. Ryan, J. Wing (2012)
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/analysis/industry-review/2012/the-
industry-review-2012, accessed in July 2013.
24. Fuel Cell Partnership (2012) http://www.cafcp.org/roadmap,
California, accessed in August 2013.
25. National Energy Administration of China (2012) http://
www.nea.gov.cn/2012-09/27/c_131875692.htm, accessed in
July 2014.
26. Fuel Cell Europe (2010) http://ec.europa.eu/clima/consultations/
0005/registered/88980385100-51_fuelcelleurope_en.pdf, accessed
in August 2013.
27. WorldAutoSteel (2011) http://c315221.r21.cf1.rackcdn.com/
FSV_OverviewReport_Phase2_FINAL_20110430.pdf,accessed
in November 2013.
28. Advanced Manufacturing Portal, http://www.manufacturing.gov/
lm3i.html, accessed in July 2014.
29. USDrive (2013) https://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/
pdfs/program/mtt_roadmap_august2013.pdf, accessed in
December 2013.
30. NanoSteel, http://nanosteelco.com/redefining-steel/alloy-design-
strategy/, accessed in July 2014.
31. M. Chlipala, S. Stockey, M. Hirtler, V. Schulze, G. Lanza,
Proceedings of the 14th international conference of the european
society for precision engineering and nanotechnology (2014)
pp. 170–173.
32. J. Fleischer, A. Ochs, S. Dosch, in New Developments in Sheet
Metal Forming: Papers of the International Conference on
Developments in Sheet Metal Forming M. Liewald (Ed.), MAT
INFO Werkstoff-Informationsgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 2012.
33. G. Davies, Materials for Automobile Bodies, Elsevier, Oxford,
2012.
34. McKinsey & Company (2012) http://www.mckinsey.com/
~/media/mckinsey/dotcom/client_service/Automotive%20and%20
Assembly/PDFs/Lightweight_heavy_impact.ashx, accessed in
April 2014.
35. Fraunhofer Institute for Chemical Technology (2013) http://
www.ict.fraunhofer.de/en/comp/pe/hfv/thermoset_RTM_process.
html, accessed in August 2013.
36. J. Fleischer, A. Ochs, S.-F. Koch, in Technologies and Systems
for Assembly Quality, Productivity and Customization, Pro-
ceedings of the 4th CIRP Conference on Assembly Technolo-
gies and Systems, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2012, S.J. Hu (Ed.),
CIRP, Ann Arbor Michigan, 2012, p. 7.
37. W. Hufenbach (2013) http://www.tudresden.de/die_tu_dresden/
fakultaeten/fakultaet_maschinenwesen/ilk/forschung/ineco_
projekt, accessed in November 2013.
38. Automotive Council Technology Group (2013) http://www.
automotivecouncil.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Lightweight1.
jpg, accessed in December 2013.
39. L. Mortara, J. Hughes, P.S. Ramsundar, F. Livesey, D. Probert,
Rapid Prototyping Journal (2009).
40. European Technology Platform Photonics21 (2013) http://
www.photonics21.org/download/PhotonicsMultiannualRoadmap/
PhotonicsMultiannualStrategicRoadmapDocument.pdf, accessed
in December 2013.
41. T. Rockstroh, D. Abbott, K. Hix, J. Mook, Industrial Lasers
(2013) http://www.industrial-lasers.com/articles/print/volume-
28/issue-6/features/additive-manufacturing-at-ge-aviation.html,
accessed in July 2014.
42. C. Emmelmann, D. Herzog, J. Kranz, C. Klahn, M. Munsch,
Industrie Management (2013) 2.
43. L.E. Murr, S.M. Gaytan, D.A. Ramirez, E. Martinez,
J. Hernandez, K.N. Amato, P.W. Shindo, F.R. Medina, R.B. Wicker,
Journal of Materials Science & Technology 28 (2012) 1.
44. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2013) http://www.
rolandberger.com/media/pdf/Roland_Berger_Additive_Manufacturing_
20131129.pdf, accessed in April 2014.
45. Advanced Manufacturing Portal, http://www.manufacturing.
gov/nnmi_pilot_institute.html, accessed in July 2014.
46. Direct Manufacturing Research Center, http://dmrc.uni-paderborn.de/
fileadmin/dmrc/Download/data/DMRC_Studien/DMRC_Study.pdf,
accessed in July 2014.
47. Diginova (EU Project, FP7) (2014) http://www.diginovaeu.org/
content/dam/diginova/en/documents/Digital_Fabrication_eBook.
pdf, accessed in July 2014.
48. Volkswagen, Industrial Robot: An International Journal (2006) 30.
49. S. Makris, G. Michalos, G. Chryssolouris, Robotics and
Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 28 (2012) 3.
50. J. Fleischer, J. Schaedel, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing
Science and Technology 6 (2013) 2.
51. J.-E. Gans, G. Lanza, R. Mu¨ ller, S. Peters, L. Schoen, wt
Werkstattstechnik online (2011) 3.
52. T. Bauernhansl, interaktiv – Fraunhofer IPA (2012) 2.
53. S. No¨ rdinger, Produktion (2013) http://www.produktion.de/forschung-
entwicklung/arena2036-flexibilisiert-die-automobilproduktion/
accessed in July 2014.
54. X. Jin, S.J. Hu, J. Ni, G. Xiao, IEEE Transactions on
Automation Science and Engineering 10 (2013) 1.
S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10 11
55. X. Jin, J. Ni, Y. Koren, CIRP Annals – Manufacturing
Technology 60 (2011) 1.
56. R.T. Lund, Technology Review 87 (1984) 2.
57. M.E. Ferguson, in Closed-loop supply chains: new develop-
ments to improve the sustainability of business practices,
M.E. Ferguson, G.C. Souza (Eds.), CRC Press, Boca Raton,
Florida 2010.
58. A. Brusaferri, M. Colledani, G. Copani, N. Pedrocchi,
M. Sacco, T. Tolio, The 10th Global Conference on Sustainable
Manufacturing – Towards Implementing Sustainable Manufac-
turing, Istanbul, 2012, p. 332.
59. V.D.R. Guide, J. Li, Decision Sciences 41 (2010) 3.
60. J. Gerrard, M. Kandlikar, Journal of Cleaner Production 15
(2007) 1.
61. D. Froelich, E. Maris, N. Haoues, L. Chemineau, H. Renard,
F. Abraham, R. Lassartesses, Minerals Engineering 20 (2007) 9.
62. N. Perry, A. Bernard, F. Laroche, S. Pompidou, CIRP Annals –
Manufacturing Technology 61 (2012) 1.
63. G. Lanza, D. Appel, in Symposium Proceedings International
Applied Reliability Symposium – Europe 2012, ReliaSoft
Corporation (Ed.), p. 1.
64. J. Ni, X. Jin, CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 61
(2012) 1.
65. Y. Koren, The Global Manufacturing Revolution: Product-
Process-Business Integration and Reconfigurable Systems, John
Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2010.
66. M. Colledani, M. Ekvall, T. Lundholm, P. Moriggi, A. Polato,
T. Tolio, International Journal of Production Research 48
(2010) 7.
67. M. Colledani, T. Tolio, CIRP Annals – Manufacturing
Technology (2012) 61, 1.
68. J. Fleischer, G. Lanza, K. Peter, Quantified Interdependencies
between Lean Methods and Production Figures in the Small
Series Production, in Conference Proceedings MS 2008, 41st
CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems, 26.05.2008–
28.05.2008, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 89–92.
69. Acatech, http://www.acatech.de/fileadmin/user_upload/
Baumstruktur_nach_Website/Acatech/root/de/Material_fuer_
Sonderseiten/Industrie_4.0/Final_report__Industrie_4.0_accessible.
pdf, accessed in July 2014.
70. Deutsche Bank Research, http://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/
DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000333571/Industry
+ 4_0%3A+Upgrading+of+Germany%E2%80%99s+industrial+
capabilities+on+the+horizon.pdf, accessed in July 2014.
71. Advanced Manufacturing Portal, http://www.manufacturing.
gov/dmdii.html, accessed in July 2014.
72. G. Lanza, N. Stricker, S. Peters, Procedia CIRP (2013) 7.
Cite this article as: Peters S, Lanza G, Ni J, Xiaoning J, Pei-Yun Y & Colledani M: Automotive manufacturing technologies – an
international viewpoint. Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1, 10.
12 S. Peters et al.: Manufacturing Rev. 2014, 1,10
