1. Multidisciplinary Engineering Senior Design Project PO6208 – ArcWorks Closure Tube Assembly Adaptation Preliminary Design Review 02/24/2006 P roject Sponsor: ARC Works of Monroe County Team Members: Team Leader George Gooch, Bill Lucas, Chris Donati, Drew Stone-Briggs, Hui Kim, Mike Hayden, Mike Levis, Jeff Coppola Team Mentor: Dr. DeBartolo (ME) and Dr. Marshall (IE) Acknowledgements: This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. BES-0527358. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

2. Presentation Overview Sponsor  Who they are  What is their current process Team Goals  How are we going to help ArcWorks  Needs, Feasibility, and Concepts Final Concept  What improvements are being made  Time, Flow, Material Handling SD II

3. ArcWorks ArcWorks is the vocational division of the Arc of Monroe County  Have been serving individuals with developmental disabilities and their families for over forty years.  Specialize in providing subcontracting manufacturing services  Comprised of over 250 assembly operators

4. ArcWorks – Closure Tube Assembly (CTA) A process that supports the assembly of a bent stem closure with a tube attachment Quantities produced are close to 500,000 units per year Currently there are 3 process steps  The team is dealing primarily with steps 2 and 3

5. CTA - Components Finished Closure Components Closure (Various Sizes) Adapter Tube (Various Lengths)

6. Step 1 Step 1 – Straw Cutting Process Machine 10 tubes at once are inserted into the top of the automated tube cutter. The machine cycles, cuts the tubes and they drop through into a box.

7. CTA - Step 2 (Closure/Adaptor Sub-Assembly) Process Machines Closures are placed in the bottom fixture and Adapters are placed in the top fixture of one of two style manual presses. The presses are cycled to create the Closure / Adapter Sub- assembly.

8. CTA - Step 3 (Final Assembly Press) Process Machine Closure / Adapter Sub- Assemblies are placed in the top fixture of the automated press. Tubes are placed in the bottom fixture. The machine is cycled to create the final assembly.

9. Team’s Task Lean Development – integration of sub assembly production orders/releases to ensure minimum/maximum quantities are on hand and flow as required (SD I) Production Process – improvement of the assembly process, changeover & set-up, ergonomics/safety, and improvement of operator productivity (SD I) Purchasing Function – ordering of the raw tubing that is cut to length for finished goods assembly (SD II) Inventory Management – of both raw and cut tubing (SD II)

10. Needs Assessment Tools Used  Problem Scope/Definition The mission of this design project team, PO6208, is to redesign a process that supports the assembly of a bent stem closure with tube attachment called the Closure Tube Assembly. In this design the team hopes to improve the process flow, daily production and worker safety/comfort.  Objective Trees Objective Trees  5 Why’s 5 Why’s

11. Needs Assessment - Outcome It was decided through evaluations that this machined needed to:  Combine assembly steps  Decrease the number of moving parts  Limit complexity of design  Create fixtures that can be used for all product sizes  Use standard components  Improve ergonomics  Add counters

12. Feasibility Assessment Tools Used  REST Resource, Economics, Schedule, Technical  Pugh Method Un-weighted, all attributes equally important  Weighted Comparison Method Looks at attribute importance

13. REST Method Compares the chance of success of each idea Rating Scale  1=low chance  5=high chance Design Idea Avg. Score  1 - 4.10  2 - 4.13  3 - 3.36  4 - 4.10  5 - 3.90  6 - 3.83 Top 3 = Idea 2, 1, 4

14. Pugh Method Idea 1Idea 2Idea 3Idea 4Idea 5Idea 6 +7.007.336.008.505.834.67 -2.60 7.501.333.175.00 012.5012.178.1711.8312.6712.00 Compares against a baseline considering all attributes are equally important Top 3 – Idea 4, 1, 2

15. Weighted Method 123456 3.8543.6632.7863.7792.9533.115 Compares against a baseline considering all attributes are not equally important, but have a weighting Idea Top 3 – Idea 1, 4, 2 Top 3

16. Feasibility Assessment - Outcome Main concerns after feasibility assessment:  Fixtures Closure Holding and Size Variation Tube Holding and Size Variation Adapter Holding  Assembly Alignment  Combining Operations  Budgeting

17. Feasibility Assessment - Results Top 3 ideas from feasibility methods Idea 1 Idea 2 Idea 4 These ideas were the basis for the teams final design.

18. Final Concept

19. Step 1 – Part Placement

20. Step 2 – Press Anti-Tie Down Buttons

21. Step 3 – Adapter Press

22. Step 3 – Close Up of Adapter Press

23. Step 4 – Cylinder Returns

24. Step 5 – Manual Sub-Assembly Move

25. Step 6 – Manual Straw Placement

26. Step 7 – Gripper Press

27. Step 8 – Dual Cylinder Press

28. Step 9 – Gripper Return

29. Step 10 – Dual Cylinder Return

30. Step 11 – Assembly Removal

31. Performance Needs Pneumatic Design Objectives  Improve safety OSHA 1910.217(b)(6)(i)  Limit cost  Limit the stroke length of the press cylinders  Actuate the press cylinders simultaneously or independently  Control speed and force

32. Pneumatic Layout

33. Analysis of Design ( Mechanical ) Design Parameters  FEA  Calculations Assembly StepForce (lbs)Comments Closure - Adapter8.75 Max 5.40 Average 24mm red closure and clear adapter create max force Tube - Adapter3.00 Max 2.11 Average PPCO tube and red adapter create max force

34. Engineering Analysis Resultant Displacement Air Cylinder Bracket Support Max Displacement  5.86 x 10 -4 inches  Location: End of Bracket Deformation Scale = 3464 Conclusion:  Bracket Support is Rigid

35. Engineering Analysis Von Mises Stress Contour Plot Air Cylinder Bracket Support Max Stress  780 PSI  Location: Bracket Connection Factor Of Safety= 65 Conclusion:  Withstands Applied Forces

36. Engineering Analysis Fatigue Analysis Air Cylinder Bracket Support Fa=Fm= 10 lbs Fatigue Strength=Endurance Limit Factor Of Safety w/ Mod Goodman Criterion= 35 Conclusion:  Withstands Infinite Cycles Fa, Fm

37. Engineering Analysis Buckling Analysis Tube Holder Section 1  Euler Method: Pcr= 11 lbs  Factor Of Safety= 2 Section 2  JB Johnson Method: Pcr= 3446 lbs  Factor Of Safety= 626 Conclusion:  Neither Section will Buckle  Possible Improvement: Limit exposed tube length in Section 1 Pcr 2 1

38. BOM

39. Improvements - Time Estimated productivity increase of 88 CTA’s per hour

40. Improvements – Material Handling

41. Improvements – New Machine Multiple operations done by one operator Machine mounted to table for stability Combines two process steps  Eliminates material handling between stations  Reduces process time

42. Improvements – Ergonomic/Safety Ergonomically friendly  Eliminates repeated manual motion  Reduces ranges of motion  Common plane of motion Safety  Anti-tie-down buttons  E-stop

43. SD II - plans Investigate Warehouse/Inventory Issues  Re-order Points  Safety Stock  Flow of Material Desired Outcomes – Manufacturing Area  Increased productivity by the ArcWorks team  Fewer rejects  Higher satisfaction of workers  Layout Redesign

44. Economic Order Quantity -EOQ Defines the optimal quantity to order that minimizes total variable costs required to order and hold inventory.  Q * = optimal order quantity  C = cost per order event (not per unit)  R = monthly demand of the product  P = purchase cost per unit  F = holding cost factor; the factor of the purchase cost that is used as the holding cost (this is usually set at 10-15%, though circumstances can require any setting from 0 to 1)  H = holding cost per unit per month (H = PF)

45. Questions?

46. Backup Slides Following Slides

47. Straw Cutting Improvements Manual Tube Feeding Concept

48. Needs Worksheets Following Slides

49. Objective Tree – Inventory Management

50. Objective Tree – Production Process

51. Objective Tree – Fixture Development

52. 5 Why’s A) Inventory Management Why do you want us to improve your purchasing and inventory management system?  Don’t want to run out of parts. Why don’t you want to run out of parts?  There is a 4 week lead time to receive the parts from the vendor. Why is there a 4 week lead time?  That’s what the vendor gives us. Why do you use that vendor?  That’s the supplier we have always used Why have you always used that supplier?  That’s who Nalgene used before us and we never looked at any other options. B) Fixture Evaluation Why do you need new fixturing for your machines?  The old ones are not efficient enough. Why aren’t they efficient enough for you?  The current process is too manual. Why is the current process so manual?  That’s the way the original machines were designed. Why were they designed like that?  It met the needs at that time. Why did it meet the needs then and not now?  The demand from the customer for Closure Tube Assemblies has increased. (This has created a bottleneck in the assembly department.)

53. Feasibility Worksheets Following Slides

54. Weighted Method – How the weightings were achieved

55. Weighted Method – How the weightings were used

56. Top 3 Ideas Following Slides

57. Original Concepts Idea 1

58. Idea 2 Original Concepts

59. Idea 4

60. Concepts from Peer Review Following Slides

61. Assembly Process Improvement Pin Style Automated Press Discussion: Pin tube support Sliding Adapter Fixture Press Discussion: Closure Interference, Fixture Alignment, Adapter Orientation

62. Assembly Process Improvement Two Stage CTA Press  Discussion: CTA Removal, Rotation CTA Process w/ Magazine Feeder  Discussion: Alignment

63. Feeding Concepts Automated Feeding  Discussion: Cost, Complexity, Durability, Clip Manufacturability Also… Closure? Feed Escapement TubeAdapter

64. Gantt Chart – SD I

65. Gantt Chart – SD II