search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
techview


Time for Real Reinvention on the Factory Floor


N


ot too long ago, critical high-volume automotive components like engine blocks, cylinder heads and transmission housings were machined on highly dedicated transfer lines and assembled with equally dedi- cated systems. Introducing a new engine or transmission required a multimillion-dollar investment. Then came “fl exibility” and “lean” and “cells” and “agile” to change everything. Except, as the French say, “plus ça change...,” meaning the more things change, the more they stay the same and we fi nd ourselves in a familiar rut. Let’s say you’re developing a new product, a cylinder head for example. Once the design is complete, it will be up to a manufacturing engineering team to fi gure out how to produce it. They will build a prototype using machining centers, robots and an ad-hoc collection of other highly-fl exible components to do a production and assembly proof of concept. Then, once all the bugs are worked out, they will design


and order a system to produce the product. Of course, that system won’t look anything like the proof-of-concept proto- typing system and it will be built to produce a given number of components annually based on sales projections. If the product is a success, the standard response is to order a duplicate system, which may not be fully utilized. This is essentially the way we’ve been doing production and assembly for the last 100 years or so. “Plus ça change,” indeed. While all this is going on, that proof-of-concept system


has probably been disassembled and repurposed many times. Chances are that at least some of the components weren’t up to production standards and in that form, it prob- ably wasn’t a good candidate solution. But what if those components were up to production


standards, and furthermore, what if they were both modu- lar and fully reconfi gurable? In that case, it’s quite possible that the prototype system could be moved directly onto the production fl oor.


The system can be easily replicated to accommodate any increased production requirements using standard, off-the-


Matthew Rall Promess Inc.


shelf components. Reduced production requirements would simply mean putting the unneeded components back in stock, awaiting another need. One of the 20-kN Electro Mechanical Assembly Presses (EMAP) my company builds weighs roughly 400 lbs (180 kg). That’s exactly what is required to achieve the kind of


standardized, reusable and reconfi gurable system building block we are discussing. So, let’s see what can be done. The EMAP is a servo-driven mechanical press with a steel housing and heavy-duty bearings, motor and ballscrew. It’s built like a tank to make sure it performs well beyond cus- tomer expectations. That’s why it’s so heavy. Many of those features, however, are not needed on a


press intended for use as a robot end effector. Here’s what our engineers suggested to eliminate as much weight as


possible from the press: t Add “flats” to the outer housing, to eliminate steel and reduce overall weight.


t Eliminate unnecessary features like the mounting flange, connectors, and cables that aren’t necessary for a robotic press.


t Use a smaller motor and gearbox. The result? A press capable of up to 50 kN and 350-mm


stroke that weighs less than 150 kg, well within the capability of a large robot. Controlling reaction force is another challenge with a ro- bot mounted press. It is, however, easily overcome by simply building a hard stop into the fi xture and letting the press fl oat up until it comes in contact. At that point, the hard stop controls the force rather than the robot arm. At this point, it’s feasible to have a fully instrumented,


programmable, servo-controlled press as a robot end effector. That means it’s possible to keep standardized, reconfi gurable and retoolable assembly workstations that cover all common assembly operations “in-stock” to be confi gured as ad-hoc assembly systems as, where and when needed.


35 — Motorized Vehicle Manufacturing 2017


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176