[Robert Prince-Wright]

On 08/08/2023 at 04:48, DRossiter87 said:

Hi Dan2

Domestic radiators radiate heat at the boundary layer which is then transported by convection. 😉

‘However your argument is predicated on ‘twin’ being synonymous with identical.  Twins can be fraternal or identical.’

I was thinking fraternal but would need to write a few para’s to explain what confuses us all. You may be right that we are stuck with DT in the vernacular, but I suspect something better will come along – meanwhile Catapult risks backing the wrong horses, and the UK is left with something that dies on the vine like Concord. 

 

On 08/08/2023 at 04:48, DRossiter87 said:

 

 

 

[Robert Prince-Wright]

Dan, I would go further and say simulation (of models) is an essential part of any ‘digital twin’. It provides a ‘virtual representation’ that many confuse with the DT itself, e.g. the BIM community.

The unsolved part of any digital twin is not the technology stack for secure synchronization – it’s the simulation itself. I say that based on us having cobbled together solutions based on HTTP, REST, and brute force C. We’ve also spoken with others who used MQTT and DDR successfully. I posed this to Catapult before the July Conference and got a tepid response to the ‘provocations’ is was asked to write. That resulted in me posting them here for others to see and mull. 

[Robert Prince-Wright]

Good post Lauren.

I don’t think we can brush off the poor epistemology and ontology that is routinely being used to describe the assemblages of technologies in today’s toolbox. It has, and will, lead to a waste of public funds, and worse still poor implementation. Given you work in aerospace I presume you are aware of the depth of thought being given to ontologies by Airbus and Boeing.  

Robert 

[Robert Prince-Wright]

Hi Dan, a belated thanks for your thoughts. 

I note you’re an academic and wonder if your research touches on this subject?

 

Robert 

[Robert Prince-Wright]

Hi Dan, I would recommend you read the terminology developed by Digital Twin Consortium. It attempts to create robust definitions, but fails on deeper inspection. While it’s true to say DT is widely used terminology it makes no sense to promote something which fails the most basic grammar test. Your post makes my point for me, e.g. “Yes, it is not a twin in the true meaning of the term, but it is a virtual representation of a physical system and is enough of a twin to be useful.”  You’re incorrectly conflating virtual representation with the concept of DT which is, at its heart, the synchronization of something actual with something virtual. 

Personally I would like to see DT die on the vine, and at some point be replaced by a sound and more meaningful terminology. I dabbled with the idea of referring to ‘Digital Twinning’ while a member of DTC and note Grieves has used that term recently – it’s still not good enough tho.  

FYI – I opted to make the original posting after noting now DT had dropped off the ‘radar’ for two of the most influential groups in this arena. I am now increasingly concerned the emperor has no clothes and, worse still, is distracting us and wasting a lot of time and money. E.g. conferences costing millions of dollars that achieve nothing, and government grants that waste taxpayers money. The hard part of twinning is being starved of funding whilst the tens of millions are spent on fluff and eye-candy. Perhaps this is the reason CDBB was closed down?

[Robert Prince-Wright]

Who are you?  I’m Robert, occasionally Bob, an engineer with several Patents from my time working in Shell USA.   

What is your industry and profession?  I work in the oil & gas industry, and have a wide range of R&D, Design and Operations experience. My first degree was Civil Engineering at Imperial College, and my second degree was probabilistic modelling for compliant offshore structures at The University of Glasgow. I ended up working in Technical Safety soon after the Piper Alpha disaster and have authored several complex studies and platform Safety Cases. For the past few years I’ve provided Systems Safety Engineering consulting support to O&G operators and service companies.

Where do you plan to use your new Digital Twin Knowledge? Personally/professionally?  My company Berkeley & Imperial has been developing tools to perform virtual system simulation, software-in-the-loop and hardware-in-the-loop testing. These models are networked and deployed across the internet. Our ultimate goal is to create full lifecycle Digital Twins. 

Why have you decided to join the DTHub?  As a company we are seeking learning, partners and consulting opportunities.  

Have you participated in any of our meetups, or events?  Not yet but will do soon. 

Do you have any examples of work that you have done using Digital Twins?  Yes – depending on how you define Digital Twin.