High Torque Test Stand Aditya - Oriana - Don - Jesse - Ron - Dana - Geoff Lightnin SPX

5 Team Members Aditya Sanghi, IE - Project Leader Dana Harris, IE Ron Mendolera, EE Jesse Warner, EE Dr. William Scarbrough, Project Coordinator Geoff Cusano, ME Oriana Starr, ME Don Strong, ME Dr. Alan Nye, Project Mentor

6 Project Overview Sponsor: Lightnin SPX Manufacture pumps, mixers, etc. Gear reducer production moved to Rochester, NY from Wytheville, VA Evaluate final assembly & testing processes Identify & solve inefficiencies

7 700/800 Series Overview Sizes Configurations Hollow & Solid shafts Weight Assembly process Mixer Gear Reducer

8 Assembly Stand Side Front

9 Assembly Rotation Rotated 90° - front Rotated 90° - back

10 Spin Test & Assembly Area

11 Torque Stand Side Front

12 Project Mission Statement Identify and eliminate process inefficiencies  Redesign & relocate the torque test stand Propose process flow improvements Adhere to constraints  time, cost, footprint & height Avoid hazardous workstations

13 Initial Improvement Ideas Obvious  Reduce long travel distance to torque test Fork truck  Reduce travel time between stands Crane Fork truck “Homerun”  3-in-1 stand  Assembly, spin test, torque test

14 Time Studies - Plan Identified largest areas for improvement 1) Torque test stand setup: 135 min 2) Spin Test Stand setup: 25 min 3) Walk time during large assembly: 20 min 4) Transportation to torque test : 12 min Justify discontinuing development of 3-in-1 concept Torque test stand setup: examine further

15 Eliminate 3-in-1 Concept Impossible to meet yearly production volume  497 min. of build time per reducer, only 1 stand Projected costs were prohibitive Much more risk  Brand new, unique design  If the all-in-one stand breaks down, entire process halted Customer visits interrupt production Can only build one unit at a time

16 Input from Lightnin Meeting with Management: December 2004  100% torque testing – Warranty issues  Remove waste  Relocate torque stand – reclaim dock  Ultimately: accomplish torque AND spin test in the time it currently takes just to spin  This would further encourage 100% torque testing

17 Final Improvement Ideas Perform spin test on torque stand  Eliminate spin test stand & transport time Reduce setup time for torque stand  Adjustable input motor  Universalized couplers with splines  Oil tanks with heater  Simplified operator controls Reunite small & large assembly areas

18 Final Design Concept Current large assembly area Use current assembly stand Redesign the torque test stand  Reduce height & footprint  Torque AND spin test capacity  Make the process more efficient  Standardize controls: direct labor NOT technician

19 CURRENT Torque Test Stand Setup Align shafts: motor output to reducer input  Manually adjust reducer height  Spacer plates Adjust distance: motor output to reducer input  Bolt input shaft Couple the reducer’s output shaft to the slave unit  Measure, bolt Heat the oils  Cannot begin until setup is complete Manually adjust air pressure regulator for torque control

20 NEW Torque Test Stand Setup Align shafts: motor output to reducer input  Automatically adjust input motor height  Universal mounting plate  Scissor lift with elevation control Adjust distance: motor output to reducer input  Rail, keyed couples Couple the reducer’s output shaft to the slave unit  Splined couples Heat the oils  Can begin before the reducer is craned onto the stand  Automatic electronic control Adjust air pressure regulator for torque control  Automatic electronic control

21 Inline Input Motor Same arrangement as current Components  25 HP motor  40:1 Reducer  Clutch  60 HP motor  Torque Sensor Existing Mount

22 Horizontal Movement Function  Allow input motor assembly to slide accommodate 8 different input configurations Rails  Specs Weight Capacity Moment Capacity Actuator  Specs Overcome Friction Forces UNI-LIFT M1 Linear Actuator SKF Profile Rail Guides

23 Vertical Movement Function  Allow input motor assembly to adjust to 8 different input heights Hydraulic Lift  Specs Weight Capacity Transverse Load Capacity 3’ X 7’ Platform Mounting Substructure LK Goodwin Tandem Hydraulic Lift

24 Input Couple Function  Connects Input Motor to Input Shaft of Testing Reducer  Improvements Two Keyways reduces alignment. No Bolting reduces setup time.

25 Output Couple Function  Connect output shaft of tested reducer to slave Design  Time Savings Indexing No Height Adjustments  Specs Universal Female Female Spline 700 Series Spline800 Series Spline

26 Coupling Analysis Stress Analysis  782/882 Coupling T max = 310,000 in-lb

27 Fatigue Analysis

28 Spline Development 30 o Flat root profile  Size restriction  6/12 Pitch Analysis

29 Overall Structure Function  Support loads  Set height for slave and new couplers  Universal mounting plate  Actuator mount Design  Two tier design  Footprint: 9’ x 19’  Clearance

30 Stand Analysis Member Analysis  Critical members  Size Recommendations  Mount Requirements Actuator Assembly Universal Plate Loads  Weights  Output Torque

31 Controls Oil temperatures Elevation of input motor Torque

32 Oil Temperature Control Heat oils up to operating temperature before test unit is place on stand Tanks are insulated and temperature-controlled 80-gallon tank for lube oil 50-gallon tank for brake transmission oil

33 Elevation Control Eliminates the need to make manual height adjustments with spacer plates. Uses a programmed PLC with a position sensor in the feedback loop to control the hydraulic pump motor.

34 Elevation Control Algorithm D/A Conversion Table Position Sensor

35 Eliminates the need to make manual adjustments of air pressure regulator to control brake pressure which determines torque. Uses a programmed PLC with a torque sensor in the feedback loop to control an electronic air pressure regulator. Torque Control

36 Torque Control Algorithm Electronic Air Pressure Regulator Torque Sensor

37 Electronic Database Eliminates the need to search through hard copies for previous test data. Visual basic used to create a user-friendly Microsoft Access database

38 Old vs. New Process Comparison Estimated time saved: over 1.5 hours! Task Old Equipment Times (min) New Equipment Times (min) Time Saved (min) HeightSpacer plates16Adjustable lift Distance Flanged input shaft 10Rail & couple Couple Flanged couples 21Spline OilAfter setup60During setup

39 Final Layout Options Two locations  Current large assembly  “Back bay” area Options 1) Just replace spin stand with torque stand 2) Move ALL final assembly operations to the back bay area

40 Layout Option 1 Easiest to implement, less change Rearrange assembly stand Still have wasted transport time from having small & large assembly separated

41 Current Large Assembly

42 Redesigned Large Assembly

43 Layout Option 2 Requires greater willingness to change Move all to back bay, reunites small & large assembly areas, eliminates wasted transportation time Slight downtime, but current production volumes/build times indicate that it could be done during off-times without delaying shipments More room to work, both for reducer assembly, and the areas near current large assembly Flow

44 Back Bay Layout

45 Simulation Results of simulation, given the new design Greatly reduced torque test time, not enough to accomplish ultimate goal  Still takes minutes longer to do torque & spin vs. just spin May still be worthwhile to implement the design  Reclaim dock, improve flow, save time  Future Lean activities may make up the remaining time Standardization, kaizen, etc.

46 Cost of Implementation BOM Cost to Build the stand - $10,000 Sum total = 35,368

47 Incremental Revenue/Savings Incremental Revenues  Revenue by selling extra torque testing as a service (20 $2k/unit)  Revenue by marketing selling extra units due to improved reliability Incremental Savings  Warranty Costs saved due to the 100% testing (25k in Yr2 and 50k thereafter)  Labor Savings (3 /torque tested unit)  Moving from the shipping dock ($10/sq ft)

48 Final Recommendations Build stand Lean, kaizen, process improvements activities “It is very difficult early on to turn the flywheel of improvement, especially from a dead stop, or worse yet a negative rotation.” Good to Great by Jim Collins

49 Acknowledgments SPX Process Equipment, Lightnin Division Dave Engel, Lightnin SPX Al Aponte, Lightnin SPX Jeff Flint, Lightnin SPX Production staff at Lightnin Dr. Hany Ghoneim, ME Department Dr. Elizabeth DeBartolo, ME Department Bob Thomas, Rochester Gear

Questions ?

51 Initial Concept Development Transportation  Rail system, wheels, rotary arm, trolley, etc. Slave unit  Pump, two gears, electric generator, etc. Attachment of test unit to stand  Clamps, magnets, pins, bolts, etc.

52 Needs Assessment Order Qualifiers & Winners  Cost to build SHALL NOT exceed $200,000  Return On Investment  Labor savings  Design software to be compatible with Autodesk Inventor  Utilize existing equipment Scope

53 Simulation Model

54 Slave & Braking Reuse current slave,  Replacements small enough didn’t meet spec  Reduce cost of project Current brake  Works well  Reduce cost

55 Process Flow Distance ~ 500 ft

56 Initial Concept Development Level 0: Station Setup Options Three Stations Two Stations One Station