Manufacturing is manufacturing, don't always be led

 

Earlier last year, "Internet +" was once seen as a panacea for "smart manufacturing." After a period of quarrels, practice and precipitation, the integration of “manufacturing + the Internet” has only barely become a positive result. This seems to be just the reverse of the order of a word, but behind the interests of different groups of interests, in the fight for the right to speak.

 

 And this year, with the emergence of "artificial intelligence" in the government report, "AI2.0 + manufacturing" seems to appear in the rivers and lakes. This is for China's manufacturing 2025, I am afraid it is another involuntary shaking.

 

"Intelligent Manufacturing" itself has been completely alienated by public opinion. The word "smart" is strangely the biggest protagonist and fun, and "manufacturing" itself is a supporting role.

 

In this case, the introduction of "AI2.0" will only encourage the "smart" that has already been steaming.

 

Would you like to call it "artificial intelligence manufacturing"? Let "manufacturing" simply become a "third role."

 

AI2.0, can you really lead smart manufacturing?

 

Even IBM's Watson now faces a lot of problems. Watson cooperates with Siemens and is only a supporting role in the industrial field. Only playing the algorithm, will not understand the industry. Everyone likes to use Google's AlphaGo example to show how fast AI runs, but how much it can do with manufacturing. We have hardly any case to show how much AlphaGo has made progress in the industrial field. To put it bluntly, it is just a show.

 

For manufacturing, robots and big data are bubbles that everyone has blown and are floating; artificial intelligence is rising. These bubbles, if they come from the market and investors, the government is happy to see it; however, if the government spends too much time on this type of technology, then smart manufacturing is bound to go astray, this "smart" Overheated manufacturing will be a tragedy in manufacturing.

 

Why does manufacturing need to be led by ICT? Manufacturing is manufacturing, it is itself. There is no need to use various pioneer flags to confuse the audience.

 

Robot + manufacturing has almost become the mainstream of our smart manufacturing. The slogan "machine substitution" has been popular in the past two years, but now it is quickly becoming a suffocating word that no one wants to mention. Robots can't lead manufacturing, but they must look at the national conditions.

 

After the introduction of the "Robot National Strategy" in January 2015, Japan is determined to closely integrate robots with the Internet of Things and with Japanese manufacturing. There is a reason for this. Japan is already one of the world's top robot powerhouses. Borrowing its own advantages is a matter of boating, and Chinese robots are now failing to make breakthroughs in the three key components. The open source robot systems and software are backward. Under the circumstances, the relationship between robots and manufacturing will eventually become the "China's largest market for robots", which is our common ending.

 

At the China Robot Summit held in Yuyao, Zhejiang, Kevin Kelly, the American prophet who madly harvested the appearance fees in China, gave us a reminder from the side. He believes that on the existing basis, the first area affected by artificial intelligence technology should be the financial sector, and this effect has already begun; the other is the retail industry.

 

Maybe Kevin Kelly doesn't understand manufacturing, but he shouldn't see it in the US.

 

Bending down the body to "manufacture" rather than tilting your toes to engage in "intelligence" is a problem that the industry needs to face positively. Don't do the big thing of "the language is not amazing," but to sink and make some breakthroughs that "there is no one in the cold window."

 

Intelligent manufacturing that regulates overheating

 

Smart manufacturing is overheating and is evolving into an unintentional, non-marketing profit-seeking behavior. In this respect, a variety of different ambitions are pointed out. There are new elements to join, easy to understand, easy to "speak the level", and there are also demonstration projects and leadership inspection needs.

 

What is important is that smart manufacturing has become the main paradox and main focus of "Made in China 2025". It is a favorite. Whether it is capital investment, government words and deeds at all levels or policy research institutions, this will be very unfavorable for the development of 2025.

 

The intelligent manufacturing of the door is too high, it is not suitable for China's industry is extremely uneven national conditions. China's industry is a super-melting furnace. The raw rice and cooked rice are very different. The phenomenon of thousands of layers of cakes is everywhere. The problem of commonality is the problem of indifference in industrial thought, weak four-base engineering, and inability to keep up with manufacturing processes.

 

These problems are not "smart" things. But it is the foundation of China's industry that can truly be a "powerful country."

 

The author went to Shenyang Fengcheng to inspect the turbocharger industry cluster a few days ago. The supercharger industrial zone at the foot of the Phoenix Mountain presents the market vitality of the birth of the dragon. Many enterprises engage in technological transformation, technological improvement, and horizontal integration. They are very good and have a good life. There are one or two shadows that can faintly see the German "invisible champion".

 

However, as far as "smart manufacturing" is concerned, it is almost "not moving". Taking the production method as an example, the problem of numerical control of equipment is basically solved at present, but automation is at the stage of coming. However, information technology has not been cultivated, and data analysis has disappeared. As for industrial thought and strategic awareness, it is basically in the stage of the private enterprise's original ecology. The gap is not small.

 

Lean has only a little shadow, and some sporadic 5S billboards are hung in each workshop.

 

If the wind of intelligent manufacturing can't better support such a dynamic "supercharger capital" - Fengcheng, then we can only say that our "smart manufacturing" is too high. There are hundreds of companies here, each with more or less dozens of employees - they are a shining flag in the downturn of the industrial situation in the Northeast. "The spring breeze is not the Phoenix Mountain", that is, the spring breeze does not recognize the people, and the "smart manufacturing" wind should not be hovered over a few enterprises.

 

In the US advanced manufacturing partner program for the future, the national manufacturing innovation network is an important part. However, from the perspective of its distribution, most of the 14 innovation centers are related to materials, processes, and electronics. There is only one with digital manufacturing and intelligent manufacturing. And even the "smart manufacturing platform" emphasizes energy efficiency and public platform issues.

 

That's it, "artificial intelligence" is not on the line.

 

Think about it too. If Google and FaceBook can engage in artificial intelligence, why should Uncle Sam personally attend it?

 

Talking about a little less intelligence, talking about a little more manufacturing, is especially important for China Manufacturing 2025. Made in China 2025 is the first step in the strong country phase, just the first step. For "smart", it is not too late to put 2035 as the focus.

 

In China, it seems that the focus of manufacturing transformation is on smart manufacturing. However, most enterprises in China do not touch the digital manufacturing. If we talk about smart manufacturing, Chinese manufacturing will easily enter a "fog array." "Intelligent manufacturing is the main battlefield of 2025", this choice is inevitably too optimistic. And this will mislead China to create a good climate for 2025.

 

Intelligent manufacturing has no version theory

 

More and more practice and public opinion show that Industry 4.0 can be regarded as the most powerful national marketing pen in Germany. The author was very vigilant about this three years ago. At least for now, most people have begun to distinguish "Industry 4.0" from the "Fourth Industrial Revolution."

 

If we take a rigorous examination of Industry 4.0 from the stage of industrial history development, what is it? It is difficult to give a convincing conclusion. It seems more like a version concept, but it is an arbitrary "industrial history" idea, which is the theory of historical stage theory. If you understand this, then there will inevitably be a theory of supplements.

 

Therefore, "Industrial 2.0 remediation, industrial 3.0 popularization, industrial 4.0 demonstration" will appear. This kind of argument is an instinctive stress response to the "industrial 4.0 history" thinking.