[Rachel Judson]

The technical report is published alongside a high-level summary, The approach to delivering a National Digital Twin for the United Kingdom, detailing the NDT programme’s approach to leading a cultural shift to reduce the technological, commercial and cultural barriers that prevent effective data sharing. It should be read alongside the Pathway document. 

The Approach is also available on the CDBB website: https://www.cdbb.cam.ac.uk/news/approach-delivery-national-digital-twin-united-kingdom

[Tammy Au]

Please join us to discuss the  published IMF Pathway on Monday, 8th June at 18:30.

Miranda Sharp, Commons Lead, National Digital Twin Programme, will lead a panel of experts in a discussion about the IMF pathway followed by an interactive Q&A session with attendees.

The panel:

• Dame Wendy Hall, Regius Professor of Computer Science, University of Southampton
• James Hetherington, Director of e-Infrastructure, UKRI, named author of the IMF Pathway
• Matthew West, Director, Information Junction, named author of the IMF Pathway
• Mark Enzer, Head of the National Digital Twin Programme
• Sam Chorlton, DT Hub Stream Lead, National Digital Twin Programme

Register for the event at: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/webinar-the-pathway-towards-an-information-management-framework-tickets-107198852654

Once you have registered you will be contacted with the link for the event.

We would welcome your questions for our speakers ahead of the event, please send to; enquiries@digitaltwinhub.co.uk

[Dan Rossiter]

Thank you for this @Tammy and @RachelJudson.  I’m still currently reading through with the aspiration to submit comments before the August deadline.  Some of my comments are grammar/terminology related but there is one I wanted to put here for others to discuss.

Under 3.5 (Foundation Data Model) there is a section that asks the question:

Quote

What is the relationship between a digital twin, and the kind of things it describes? Is this a twin of the make and model of my car, or of my specific car?

I was under the impression that “twinning” the make and model as opposed to the specific car would not be a digital twin according to the Gemini principles.  Specifically on page 10 it states:

Quote

What distinguishes a digital twin from any other digital model is its connection to the physical twin. Based on data from the physical asset or system, a digital
twin unlocks value principally by supporting improved decision making… (Emphasis mine)

If a manufacturer has a digital representation of a car, a potential twin, then surely it has no connection to the physical twin as there is no physical “thing” to connect to.  This is largely why I refute the idea that digital twins can be applicable to design and construction as during that period the digital representations created within design authoring tools are also potential twins with no connection to a physical asset/system.

I wonder how do we address the digital twins distinguishing feature (connecting to the physical) when there is no physical to connect to?

[Rachel Judson]

Thanks Dan, you make an interesting point. I will take this up with the IMF Pathway team and come back to you. Thanks