The definition
A digital twin is a digital representation of a physical asset, such as a robot or a production line, that stays synchronized with it, so what happens on the asset shows up in the model (ISO 23247-1:2021). Michael Grieves introduced the concept in 2003 as a physical product and a virtual one tied together by data and information.
ISO 23247-1:2021, the framework for digital twins in manufacturing, defines the twin as a fit-for-purpose digital representation of an observable manufacturing element, with synchronization between the element and its representation. The standard counts eight kinds of observable element: personnel, equipment, material, process, facility, environment, product and supporting documents. In the United States, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine published their own definition in 2024, built largely on one the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) released in 2020; it asks the twin to be updated with data from its physical counterpart and to inform decisions, and it calls the bidirectional interaction between the virtual and the physical central to the concept. The idea is older than both documents. Grieves recounts in a 2014 white paper that he presented a virtual, digital equivalent of a physical product in 2003, in his executive course on product lifecycle management (PLM) at the University of Michigan, and that he attributes the name Digital Twin to John Vickers of NASA. His model has three parts, and the third is the one that makes it a twin: the connections of data and information that tie the virtual product to the physical one.
The difference from a simulation lies in which way the data flows. A simulation starts from assumptions and computes what should happen. Grieves proposed turning digital factory simulation, which tries to predict how a product will be made, into a digital factory replication that shows how it is actually being made, and the National Academies record it as a finding: a digital twin is more than just simulation and modeling. A twin can run simulations, and ISO 23247 treats simulation and synchronization as separate requirements of the framework, yet it feeds them with what the machine measures. A 3D model is a different thing again. Opening a CAD file at 1:1 scale in a headset, as Hololight Space does, serves a design review, and Grieves describes the 3D models some plants put on terminals next to the work cells as a reference that a person has to connect to the physical part by hand. Fyware's case on a production line in augmented reality for Target Robotics draws the same line: a digital twin is connected to the machine's data and reflects what is happening on it, and what was delivered there was full-scale visualization.
For a buyer, the question that sorts proposals is where the data comes from. ISO 23247 does not prescribe data formats or communication protocols, so each project has to decide which controller or sensor variables enter the twin, how often they refresh, which protocol carries them and who keeps the connection working when the line changes. In Fyware's robot case, the link to the controller was specified over OPC UA, against DIN EN IEC 62541-5 and the VDMA OPC UA for Robotics profile. A proposal without that connection delivers a 3D model or a simulation, and it should say so in writing.
Industrial metaverse is the name Siemens and NVIDIA gave in June 2022 to a partnership to connect Siemens Xcelerator with NVIDIA Omniverse, a platform for 3D design and collaboration, and to pair physics-based digital models from Siemens with AI from NVIDIA. The announcement speaks of digital twins with live performance data and of making immersive simulations easier to reach for companies of all sizes.