Structure industrial processes, facilities and technologies

[stap-m]

Description of the issue

Based on industrial materials Use case: OEKG and description of industrial process technologies, that use energy carriers not (only) for energetic purpose. Related to #1572

Ideas of solution

If you already have ideas for the solution describe them here

Workflow checklist

• [ ] I discussed the issue with someone else than me before working on a solution
• [ ] I already read the latest version of the workflow for this repository
• [ ] The goal of this ontology is clear to me

I am aware that

• [ ] every entry in the ontology should have a definition
• [ ] classes should arise from concepts rather than from words

[l-emele]

First proposal: industrial technology: An industrial technology is a technology that describes how to combine industrial plant, energy transformations, material transformation, energy, energy carriers and other materials in a specific way to produce an industrial material.

We don't have yet industrial plant, so let's define it: An industrial plant is an artificial object that applies one or more industrial processes to produce one more kinds of industrial products.

[l-emele]

@stap-m : Do you agree to those two proposals? If so, I will implement.

[stap-m]

I agree.

[l-emele]

Hm, industrial process is missing in the definitions above. That process 'has output' some 'object aggregate' or object'.

However, we also have industrial material: An industrial material is a portion of matter that is the physical output of an industrial process and that has a good role.

I think, we need to align these classes.

[l-emele]

The proposed and currently implemented definition above is: An industrial technology is a technology that describes how to combine industrial plant, energy transformations, material transformation, energy, energy carriers and other materials in a specific way to produce an industrial material.

However, so far I only axiomatised this:

'industrial technology' 'is about' some 
    ('industrial plant'
     and ('participates in' some 
        ('industrial process'
         and ('has physical output' some 'industrial material'))))

This would resemble a definition like: An industrial technology is a technology that describes how to combine industrial plants and industrial processes to produce industrial materials.

The class industrial process itself is defined as:

• An industrial process is a process that has output object or object aggregates that are economic goods. An industrial process consists of several subprocesses. Examples of subprocesses that can be involved in an industrial process are energy transformations, mechanical operations and chemical reactions.

To me, every industrial process has at least energy transformations and material transformations as subprocesses. So I suggest the following redefinition:

• An industrial process is a process that has produces artificial objects[^1] or object aggregates that are economic goods and that involves several subprocesses which are at least one energy transformation and one material transformation.
• Elucidation: Examples of subprocesses that can be involved in an industrial process are mechanical operations and chemical reactions.
• Axioms:
  • 'industrial process' 'has part' some 'energy transformation' and 'has part' some 'material transformation'
  • industrial process' 'has output' (some ('artificial object' or 'object aggregate') and 'has role' some 'good role')

So if we improve industrial process, we don't need to put so much into industrial technology.

[^1]: I replaced object with artifical object here, as an industrial process cannot produce non-artificial objects. The only non-artifical object class we currently have is person.

---

Further, I noticed that industrial material is defined as An industrial material is a portion of matter that is the physical output of an industrial process and that has a good role. But we axiomatised it as ('physical output of' some 'industrial process') and ('has role' some 'COMMODITY role'). I think, both industrial material and industrial commodity are useful concepts, so I suggest to fix this by simply having two classes:

• industrial material: An industrial material is a portion of matter that is the physical output of an industrial process and that has a good role. Axiom: ('physical output of' some 'industrial process') and ('has role' some 'GOOD role')
• industrial commodity: An industrial commodity is a portion of matter that is the physical output of an industrial process and that has a commodity role. Axiom: ('physical output of' some 'industrial process') and ('has role' some 'COMMODITY role'). This will then be an (inferred) subclass industrial material.

[stap-m]

Thanks for the proposals. In general, I agree.

To me, every industrial process has at least energy transformations and material transformations as subprocesses. So I suggest the following redefinition:

• An industrial process is a process that has produces artificial objects or object aggregates that are economic goods and that involves several subprocesses which are at least one energy transformation and one material transformation.

I am fine with the changes of the definition and the axioms. Since energy transformations and material transformations can already occur on molecular level, I find the term "at least one" not expressive. What about "amongst others"?

I think, both industrial material and industrial commodity are useful concepts, so I suggest to fix this by simply having two classes:

Are there industrial materials that are not industrial commodities? If yes, I am fine with the distinction. Otherwise, I'd prefer to unite the two concepts to either good or commodity. The difference between good and commodity seems also vague to me... is the "use in commerce" the relevant distiction?

[l-emele]

From OEO dev meeting 85:

• industrial material und industrial commodity - brauchen wir beides?
• überarbeiten defintion von commodity (interchangable statt exchangable)
• Widerspruch mit Sektoren?
• https://spec.industrialontologies.org/iof/ontology/supplychain/SupplyChain/Industry
• https://spec.industrialontologies.org/iof/ontology/core/Core/ManufacturingProcess --> das gleiche wie industrial process nur ohne Energie?
• vielleicht nicht industrial process und industrial technoloy verwenden, sondern manufacturing process/technology mit alternative labels
• dann auch industrial plant mit manufacturing plant ersetzen--> manufacturing als Hauptterm
• Issue und PR so erstmal abschließen @l-emele
• Neues Issue zu IOF Termen @areleu

[eugenio]

perhaps you have mentioned the wrong person @l-emele?

[l-emele]

I am very sorry. I changed the mentioned persons now.

[eugenio]

no problem :)