D-R Compressor Cell

RIT Senior Design Team P13458

Systems Design Review

Agenda

Project Introduction Desired Outcome Project Description & Motivation Customer Needs

Systems Design Specifications Concept selection process Systems architecture Concept discussion

Next steps Risk Management Plan Work Breakdown Structure

Desired OutcomeBased on the following specifications and proposed concepts:

Come to a decision on which design to pursue for the remainder of MSD I and MSD II Gain any feedback, recommendations, and direction

Discussion of next steps for detailed design, test, prototyping, etc.

Project Summary Overall goal of project:

Transform the fixed material position assembly process for the gas application reciprocating compressors into a flowing cell layout

Specific Task: Create the material handling system that will allow the

assembly to travel through this cell and will support the lean manufacturing initiatives this project is pursuing

Note: A consultant has created a conceptual design of the process flow through this cell.

Motivations Prepare for a projected increase in demand for

their newly released MOS compressor Break into separable compressor market share

Increase their on-time delivery rating from 35% to 95%

Proposed Productivity/Volume Increase: 150%

Create a safer environment for the operators (no overhead cranes)

Current & Proposed LayoutBuild

Future Flow

Line

The

Mov

e

Test

Paint

Wash

Sub-Assy

Future Layout

Customer Needs

TitlePriority

MultiplierDescription

Safety & Ergonomics

3 Capacity to prevent work-related injury

Cost 2 Upfront Purchase/Installation Cost (capital investment)

Transportability 2 Ease of Motion

Current Capability

1 Compatibility with current facilities

Scale 3 Impact of installation, no monuments allowed

Guidance 2 Ability to remain inline

Flexibility 3 Capacity for systems integration

Maintenance 2 Operational Cost, Frequency of Repairs, Repair Costs

Returnability 2 Ability to return empty fixture to beginning of the line

Ease of Use 2Minimize worker frustration, encourage proper use of the system

Key for Priority Multiplier:1 It would be nice2 Should be incorporated3 Must have, absolutely

necessary

Systems Design Discussion

Specifications

Eng MetricsTarget Value Marginal Value Dir

Safety & Ergonomics

Purchase and Install

CostEase of Motion

Compatable with Facility

Minimize installation

impactGuidance to

remain in lineCapacity for integration Ease of Use

Repair and operation

cost Returnability to startCost per cart $5,000 $10,000 - X X XPeople to move 1 3 - X X X XTime to move 5min 20min - X X XUnits moved 6 1 + X XTime to setup move 0min 10min -Sick bay size 4 2 + X X X X XTime to return 10min 30min - XCart Weight 1500lb 2500lb - X X X XNumber of Carts 18 12 + X X X XForce to move 100lb 500lb + X X X XStays in Line 3ft 5ft + X X XCart Height 18" 16-20" 0 X XPower Sources Required 1 2 - X XStopping distance 5ft 10ft - X XForce to stop 0lb 500lb - XWeight per cart 15T 10T + X X

Customer needsMetric Value

Concept Selection

Concept Selection Translational Motion

Wheeled Cart Industrial casters connected to a frame construct

Air Skids Air bearings connected to a frame construct

Rails are no longer being considered Propulsion

Powered Hand Cart Battery/Electric Air powered

Systems Architecture

Material Handling System

Support System Frame

Translational Movement

System

Caster Wheel

Air Bearing w/ Skid

Propulsion System Tugger

Compressed Air

Electric

Goal:Choose 1 of 2 methods

Center of GravityDiffering cylinder sizes and loading patterns allow for a range of C.G. locations.

These varying locations must be accounted for in order to avoid hazardous loading conditions.

The maximum CG envelope for the HOS and MOS models from all loading scenarios is shown in red.

The frame design must take into account a factor of safety. This safe CG envelope is shown in yellow.

The frame architecture must support the compressor from outside of the CG envelope.

Support System - Frame Overview A36 Steel square tubing and plate Frame will rest on four wheels or two air skids 90” Long, 30” wide- outside CG envelope Two carts for 2 and 4 throw, three carts for 6-

throw

Strength of Frame Singularity functions used to analyze beam Started with max deflection of L/240, or 0.36” Beam 6H x 2L x 3/16 selected, max bending

stress too high Design stress limited, factor of safety 2.5 selected

for bending Beam 6H x 6L x 3/8 selected Max deflection 0.08 inches due to bending, factor

of safety 2.47 Frame weight 553 lb for frame

Frame Design

Frame Accessories Feet- can be welded or bolted to go between

wheels or air skid and frame to raise height

Plate- ½” A36 plate welded on top of frame to hold bolt holes

Materials Needed 20 feet 6x6x3/8 steel - $571 4x8x1/2 A36 sheet - $499

Source: metalsdepot.com

Caster Wheel Technology

Swivel Casters

Fixed Casters

Pros & Cons

Pros

Ability to integrate with existing facilities

Ease of movement No power

requirements Low maintenance Cost effective

Cons

Floor surface must be well maintained

Low load capacity with respect to size

Difficulty in directional control

Time intensive directional abilities

Air Bearing Technology

What is an air bearing?

How does it work?

Pros & Cons

Pros

Ability to integrate with existing facilities

High load carrying capacity

Omni-directional movement

Ease of movement Low power requirements

Cons

Floor surface must be flat, crack free, and well maintained

More costly than conventional wheels and casters

Requires a physical line of air to be connected during movement

Requires an independent system to control movement

Requires employee training

Pneumatic systems Pros

Interfaces with existing air systems Units made to attach to air skids

Cons Airlines needed to operate

Propulsion System

Propulsion Systems Battery powered systems

Pros No airlines needed Can be modified to work with either concept

Cons Need to determine hookup system to cart design Limited battery life

Risk AssessmentID Risk Items Effect Cause Likelihood Severity Importance Action to Minimize Risk

1Supplier Information

delay/unavailableProject delay

Unavailable information, provided information is incomplete, we did not

request the right information

3 2 6Try to find alternate suppliers, be

more specific and constant communication.

2 Room reserve conflictMeeting delay and

unprofessionalPoor communication and bad

Planning3 2 6

Early room reservation and good communication.

3Client contact unavailability

delay project progressSchedule conflict, poor

management and staffi ng changes

2 2 4Early notification/planning and good

communication

4 Falling SickAdditional tasks required to complete by available work

forceFlu, diseases and virus 2 2 4

Vaccination, adequate rest and update teammate with updated

work

Qty

Likelihood scale: Severity scale: Importance Scale: Prevent 4

1 This cause is unlikely ‐to happen

1 The impact on the project ‐is very minor. We will still meet needs on time within budget, but it will cause

This is determined by the product of importance and severity multipliers

Reduce 3

2 This cause could ‐conceivably happen

2 The impact on the project ‐is noticeable.We will deliver reduced functionality, go over budget or fail to meet some of our Engineering Specifications

Transfer 3

3 This cause is very ‐likely to happen

3 The impact on the project ‐is severe.We will not be able to deliver anything, or what we deliver will not meet the customer's needs

Accept 2Accept Low importance risks may not justify any action at all. If

they happen, you simply accept the consequences.

Color CodeRating KeysPrevent Action will be taken to prevent the cause(s) from

occurring in the first place.

Reduce Action will be taken to reduce the likelihood of the cause and/or the severity of the effect on the project, should

the cause occur

Transfer Action will be taken to transfer the risk to something else. Insurance is an example of this. You purchase an

insurance policy that contractually binds an insurance company to pay for your loss in the event of accident. This transfers the financial consequences of the accident to someone else. Your

car is still a wreck, of course.

Project PlanDetailed Design through MSD I and beginning of MSD II.

How far with testing, prototyping, and building should we plan for based on needs and resources?

Additional Questions Do you have any suggestions on lifting ideas

without use of an overhead crane that would integrate with our design?

(For D-R) Do we need to design to incorporate the HOSS models?