Manufacturing Work Cell Redesign for Sentry Group

of Rochester (02001)

Kyle Hagadorn Jacob FeldmanJulie Allen Chris IsaacsonCarolyn Strock Erik Tracy

Presentation FormatIntroduction and Needs AssessmentProblem IdentificationDeveloped ConceptsFlow AnalysisFinancial AnalysisConclusions

Needs AssessmentSentry Group charged our design team with eliminating all ergonomic problems associated with their fireproof safe filling work cell

The design team was also charged with improving the production flow and production flexibility (meeting the same demand with fewer operators) of this cell

Introduction and Needs AssessmentCurrent Work Cell

Ergonomic Problem #1Lid Transport

Workers must manually lift and transport full safe lids from one line to another

Filled safe lids can weight up to 34 pounds

Ergonomic Problem #2Cap Driving

Operators must drive in 4 caps for each safe body by hand Operator Complaints Methods Used Push Forces Measured

& Upper Limit Eliminate 1 or 2

Punches in Safe Design

Push Forces (lbf.) Current Caps (gray)

75

72.5

62.5

67.5

70

Average: 69.5

Ergonomic Problem #3Manual Safe Advancement

Operators Manually Advance The Full Safe Bodies After They Have Been FilledTraverse/Lateral Force Used To Advance SafesEffect Of This Type Of Force & Upper Limit

     

 Overall Push Force Average

 

Push Forces Body (lbf.) AFS type cement0.8 1.2 1.6 2.032.5 31 32 32.535 30 32.5 33

32.5 33 30 3432.5 34 33.5 32.5  

33.125 32 32 33 Average

32.531235 Maximum Push Force

Ergonomic Problem #1: Lid Transport

Lid Weights

  0.8 1.2 1.6 2

Lid AFS 15 21 29 34

Lid BSF 10 14 19 23

Workers were manually lifting and placing lids weighing up to 34 lbs.

NIOSH Lifting Equation

Recommended Weight Limit (RWL): 14.2 lbs

Solutions

Partially Automated Conveyor Assist Method

Automated Conveyor Transport System

Implementation

A servo-driven push arm will advance the safe lids to the safes, eliminating the operator and all of the ergonomic risks factors associated with the advancement

Developed Concepts: Caps(Existing Caps)

Existing Cap Off The Shelf Cap

Developed Concepts: Caps (Redesigned Cap)

• Less Material Allows For Elastic DeformationCausing Easier Insertion

Original Cap Push Forces

Grey Caps (120 degree cuts w/ 80%

of material)

Black Caps (120 degree cuts w/ 80%

of material)

Grey Caps (120 degree cuts w/ 40%

of material)

Black Caps (120 degree cuts w/ 40%

of material) Black Caps Shaved57.5 35 37.5 22.5 17.565 37.5 30 25 17.565 32.5 35 27.5 22.5

62.50 35.00 34.17 25.00 19.17 Average

Current Caps New Caps (black) Grey Caps (Heated) Black Caps (Heated)75 47.5 73 50

72.5 50 70 5062.5 48 72 47.567.5 45.5 7570 52.5 70

69.50 48.70 71.67 49.17 Average20.67

Current Caps (After Filing)202121

Redesigned Cap Push Forces

Sentry Safe Design Caps for Caplugs

Cap Angle Test

Angle "deg." 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 120

Trial 1. "lbs" 30 30 35.5 35 36 39 38.5 59

Trial 2. "lbs" 28 35 32.5 29 32 40 40 69

Trial 3. "lbs" 28 33 35 40 35 39 40 75

Trial 4. "lbs" 30 33 35 32.5 35 40 48.5 69.5

Average 29 32.75 34.5 34.125 34.5 39.5 41.75 68.125

NOTE: 1. 120 degree cap is original cap without cuts.

Redesigned CapCap Angle Test

y = 0.0041x2 - 0.2122x + 33.943

R2 = 0.9822

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

Angle "Degrees"

Forc

e "l

bs"

Redesigned Cap Push Forces

Angle to Force Relationship by Quadratic Equation

Degree 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Lbs 31.4053 31.4678 31.5385 31.6174 31.7045 31.7998 31.9033 32.015

NOTE: 1. 32 lbs is max force operator is allowed to exert per cap.

Optimizing Final Cap Design Angle

Trial 1 31.7Trial 2 31.8Trial 3 31.6Trial 4 31.8Trial 5 31.8

Average 31.74

36 Degree Force Test

Developed Concepts: Safe Filling

Dual Safe/Dual Hose Filling Method

Developed Concepts: Safe Filling

Dual Safe/Dual Hose Filling Method

80% Automated, Manual Top Off At Later Date (Christmas)

Developed Concepts: Safe Filling

Step-By-Step Assembly Instructions Manual

Production Flow

New concepts analyzed via Arena simulation softwareDual safe fillingInline safe body fillingFill and cap lids with one operatorAutomatic movement of lids onto bodies80 percent fill of bodies with top offCombinations of the concepts

Simulation Output (Results)

OUTPUTS Identifier Value _________________________________________ Base.NumberIn 48.000 Base.NumberOut 40.000 Lid.NumberIn 49.000 Lid.NumberOut 35.000 BaseFiller.TimesUsed 42.000 BaseFiller.ScheduledUti .47173 LidFiller.TimesUsed 43.000 LidFiller.ScheduledUtil .32426 LidPlacer.TimesUsed 35.000 LidPlacer.ScheduledUtil .29302 System.NumberOut 75.000

OUTPUTS Identifier Value _________________________________________ Base.NumberIn 48.000 Base.NumberOut 39.000 Lid.NumberIn 49.000 Lid.NumberOut 35.000 BaseFiller.TimesUsed 41.000 BaseFiller.ScheduledUti .39267 LidFiller.TimesUsed 43.000 LidFiller.ScheduledUtil .32426 LidPlacer.TimesUsed 35.000 LidPlacer.ScheduledUtil .29302 System.NumberOut 75.000

Current System Inline Filling

Simulation Output Continued

OUTPUTS Identifier Value _________________________________________ Base.NumberIn 48.000 Base.NumberOut 45.000 Lid.NumberIn 49.000 Lid.NumberOut 45.000 BaseFiller.TimesUsed 22.000 BaseFiller.ScheduledUti .39542 Topoff.TimesUsed 47.000 Topoff.ScheduledUti .53812 LidFiller.TimesUsed 45.000 LidFiller.ScheduledUtil .51253 System.NumberOut 90.000

80% Fill w/ Top off

OUTPUTS Identifier Value _________________________________________ Base.NumberIn 48.000 Base.NumberOut 41.000 Lid.NumberIn 49.000 Lid.NumberOut 45.000 BaseFiller.TimesUsed 44.000 BaseFiller.ScheduledUti .86695 LidFiller.TimesUsed 45.000 LidFiller.ScheduledUtil .51253 System.NumberOut 86.000

Dual Hose Fill

Flow ConclusionsServo pusher arm allows one operator to more efficiently produce lids than 2 operators could previously produce.80 percent filling of bodies with top off has fastest throughput times.Dual hose and 80% fill times would most likely decrease with more practice and operator acceptance.Dual hose and 80% fill allow for a 21% increase in production numbers, provided that the servo pusher arm can operate fast enough.

Developed Concepts: Layout

Original Layout

Developed Concepts: Layout

Dual Safe/Dual Hose Filling Layout Design

Financial AnalysisBecause the implementation of many of these concepts is an ongoing process, costs can only be estimated. A one-time investment of approximately $9,000 will yield an annual savings of $65,000-$85,000Future implementation of the 80% fill and top off could lead to an additional annual savings of $50,000-$65,000Total annual savings will be $115,000 - $150,000 if all aspects are implemented

ConclusionsAll ergonomic problems identified will have been eliminated or reduced to acceptable limits pending final implementation by Sentry GroupProduction throughput and flexibility will also improve significantly pending implementation of 80% fill and top off method

Questions?