-
Describing digital twins – seeking feedback
Hi all,
Please have a look at this presentation and share you thoughts!
https://digital-twins.kumu.io/describing-digital-twins
-
9 Replies
-
Thanks @Peter
There was a comment on the Gemini Call today: “digital twins will never be a complete ‘mimic’ of the real world but will constantly evolve but will always be behind.”Are there any comments to continue the discussion…
-
@Elvin also had two questions on this topic:1. Should every company in the built environment have a Director responsible for their Digital Twin strategy, before the end of 2021?2. Should Digital Twins always be in Beta?
-
On 13/07/2021 at 13:05, Helena said:
Thanks @Peter
There was a comment on the Gemini Call today: “digital twins will never be a complete ‘mimic’ of the real world but will constantly evolve but will always be behind.”Are there any comments to continue the discussion…
Hi Everyone,
I can’t believe you don’t have the thinking face emoji
Can I caveat that? In terms of data.
In terms of intervention, it should be upfront. Is intervention a good word? Can we not use the digital twin to make the physical better?
On Intervention:
· Types of use cases
· Levels of control
· Types of intervention tools
It’s like Star Trek, when Scottie manages to get the Enterprise to perform just that bit better than the specification. Digital Twin of the Enterprise anyone?…..”Computer?”
-
On 13/07/2021 at 10:59, Peter El Hajj said:
https://digital-twins.kumu.io/describing-a-digital-twin
A great introductory resource.
-
On 13/07/2021 at 18:03, Bola Abisogun OBE said:
A great introductory resource.
Thank you, @Bola. This is only the start and it would be great to get your feedback on it.
-
On 13/07/2021 at 14:26, Rich said:
In terms of intervention, it should be upfront. Is intervention a good word? Can we not use the digital twin to make the physical better?
Not sure I fully got the caveat. Intervention is linked directly with better outcomes from the physical.
I agree we do need a thinking emoticon but there’s the next best thing …
-
Thanks for the reply Pete. I’am new to all of this…..so my view was Intervention comes from the Digital Twin, making the outcomes better for the Physical.
-
On 30/07/2021 at 09:37, Peter Parslow said:
I could envisage a sort of maturity level for city digital twins, ‘starting’ with those which try to keep up & working through to those which actively manage agreed aspects of the city.
Hi @Peter – thank you very much for the comments. I fully agree on your point earlier that the scope of a twin for a city is a social/governance question. I also extend that to say that a core part of the governance is the governance of information quality.
I would be interested in your thoughts on a city digital twin maturity model. If I understood the quoted sentence correctly, the ‘maturity model’ is linked to the maturity of organisations within the city to manage digital twins; this might include defining/managing/assuring/optimising digital twins and the links to the physical world. This makes sense. Going further it might be fair to assume that the maturity of a city in managing digital twins is the same as the maturity the organisation in this city with the lowest maturity (bad data lowers the standards for everyone).
One motive for developing the diagram shared in this thread (https://digital-twins.kumu.io/describing-digital-twins) is that digital twins themselves should be described on a spectrum of complexity dependent on the purpose of the twin which would determine how many parts and links the twin needs. This diagram is mentally built on the idea of an organisation’s maturity (for information management for example) determines what complexity of digital twins it can support and manage efficiently. And from that angle I feel that it links well to [my] understanding of you sentence which I could have misunderstood! Have I missed your point?
-
On 14/07/2021 at 17:16, Rich said:
That Information & Process/Intervention & Decisions I guess as what it’s called now, puts the Digital ahead of the Physical. I suppose what I am say is, can the Digital Twin influence the Physical and can we test the change “What ifs” on the Digital prior to making Intervention & Decisions on the Physical for better outcomes or doesn’t it work like that? How do you know that Intervention will have positive outcomes for the Physical?
Hi @Rich – I think testing “what ifs” scenarios is the prime feature or use case of digital twins. The scenarios could be to intervene on the physical (preventative maintenance schedule) or to prepare for an event in the future (responses to components failure or disaster on infrastructure systems).
I think the main way to know if the intervention is having the intended outcome is build in all digital twins a feedback loop. Depending on the scale of the DT (component, system, system-of-systems) the feedback loop (data input) might look very different and is captured differently. It would be practically easier to assess the performance of a maintenance regime on components of a train, then to determine if the extension of a new road has improved the productivity and social outcomes for a city (but this is very important).
Federation and enabling digital twins interoperability is key, and I think this point on checking if the DT delivered better outcomes emphasises this as feedback data might not come from the same digital twin that did the intervention, but from a different digital twin owned by a different organisation.
Thanks for the reply Pete. I’am new to all of this…..so my view was Intervention comes from the Digital Twin, making the outcomes better for the Physical.
Log in to reply.