Flip Label

Project Review PresentationProject #10715

5/14/10

2

Helen Jervey (ISE), Project Lead Charles Nicolosi (ME), Chief Engineer Ian Baker (ME) Ben Bouffard (EE) Brandon Sbordone (ME) George Kilger (EE)

Advised by John Kaemmerlen (ISE)

Rev 02

Project Team

3

Project Overview & Goals

Customer Needs & Project Specifications

System Design Summary

System Testing Plan

Objective System Evaluation

Project Budget & Justification

Project Risk Assessment

Future Project Progress

Ideas for Future Work

Project Review Agenda

Rev 02

4

Problem Statement

The Flip-Label project goal is to reduce direct labor requirements for the flip/label meat package process sequence in the Wegmans Culinary Innovation Center.

Currently an operator is needed to manually flip and align meat packages to enter the x-ray inspection machine.

One or more operators are needed to label packages after they exit the inspection machine depending on product type and process speed.

Objectives

Implement devices to flip and arrange meat packages in optimal configuration on conveyor for inspection by x-ray scanner

Reduce direct labor needed to label packages at current takt

Project Overview & Goals

Rev 02

5

System Design

Rev 02

6

Customer NeedsNeed The Product Needs to Imp.

N 1.1 Product integrity is maintained Meet specifications 5

N 1.2 Equipment satisfies USDA Regulations as well as the AMI checklist

Meet specifications 5

N 1.3 OSHA Safety requirements are met Meet specifications 4 N 2.1 Reallocate direct flipping labor Decrease man-hours 4 N 2.2 Reallocate direct alignment labor Decrease man-hours 4 N 2.3 Reallocate direct labeling labor Decrease man-hours 4 N 2.4 Camera labeling system is low priority Control project scope 4 N 3.1 Maintain or decrease takt time Decrease processing time 4 N 3.2 All packages get scanned by the x-ray at desired belt speed Scan all packages 3

N 4.2 Keep allocation of floor space constant Fit within specified area 3 N 3.3 Control flow to scaling operation(Control flow-rate variance) Minimize variance 3

N 4.1A Label is in proper orientation and position relative to the package

Be aligned 3

N 4.1B All packages are centered in the x-ray beam Scan entire package 3 N 3.3A Packages must flow in a format that works with the X-ray Meet specification 2

N 4.1 Packages are in the proper orientation Be aligned 2 N 4.1Ba Packages are conveyed in single-file Meet specification 2 N 1.3A Remove ergonomic issues and concerns Minimize risks 1

Rev 02

7

Engineering SpecificationsEngr. Spec. # Imp. Need Met  Specification

(description)Unit of Measure

Marginal Value

Ideal Value

ES1 3 N 4, 13 Flow Rate pc/min 7 >7ES2 2 N 9, 10, 12, 13,

14Pc. Alignment in. from center +/- 1 in 0

ES3 2 N 9, 12 Perpendicularity (deg) 90 +/- 10 90 +/- 3ES4 3 N 9, 12 Label Orientation (deg) 90 +/- 10 90 +/- 3ES5 5 N 1, 2 FDA/USDA Specs Pass/Fail pass pass

ES6 5 N 1, 2, 15 AMI Safety Specs Pass/Fail pass passES7 5 N 1, 3 OSHA Specs Pass/Fail pass passES8 4 N 9, 12 Flip Angle Pass/Fail pass passES9 3 N 4, 8 Belt Speed (X-Ray) m/s or ft/s Current Current

ES10 5 N 6, 7 Direct Flip/Align Man Hours

hrs. <75% of current

<50% Current

ES11 4 N 5 Direct Label Man Hours hrs. <75% of current

<50% Current

ES12 5 N 1 Keep Product Integrity Yes/No Yes Yes

ES13 4 N 15 Ergonomic Risk CIC Risk Units Current <24

ES14 1 N 11, 14 Flow Rate Variance % of rate ⁻₊25%-50% 0%-25%

ES15 3 N 16 Floor Space Allocation Sq. Ft. Current +/- 18 in

Current +/- 6 in

ES16 3 N 9 Label Position Coordinate (x,y)

Center +/- 0.5 in

+/- 0.25 in

Rev 02

8

Systems Design

Rev 02

9

System Design-Flip

Rev 02

10

System Design-Flip

Rev 02

11

System Design-Align

Rev 02

12

System Design-Align

Rev 02

42CM LaserSight Photoelectric Beam Sensor◦ Digital beam sensor◦ Detects when a package breaks the projected

beam

45BPD Laser Measurement Sensor◦ Analog distance sensor◦ Outputs a function-dependant voltage based on

the distance between the sensor and the package

System Design-Sensors

Rev 0213

Micrologix 1100◦ Receives all data from sensors◦ Outputs control signals to motors

PanelView Plus Compact Panel◦ Touch screen interface◦ Allows quick, easy control of line

PowerFlex 4 AC Drive◦ Controls the belts◦ Requires no input

System Design-Controls

Rev 0214

Cal-Pak◦ Automated labeling system researched and a

design was agreed upon◦ Implementation delayed until all other

subsystems completed

Label Assist◦ Short-term solution◦ Increases labeling speed while decreasing ergonomic stress

System Design-Labeler

Rev 02 15

16

Results

Rev 02

17

Test Plan Example

Rev 02

18

Objective System EvaluationEngr. Spec. #

Imp. Need Met  Specification (description)

Unit of Measure

Marginal Value

Ideal Value Status

ES1 3 N 4, 13 Flow Rate pc/min 7 >7ES2 2 N 9, 10, 12,

13, 14Pc. Alignment in. from

center+/- 1 in 0

ES3 2 N 9, 12 Perpendicularity (deg) 90 +/- 10 90 +/- 3ES4 3 N 9, 12 Label Orientation (deg) 90 +/- 10 90 +/- 3ES5 5 N 1, 2 FDA/USDA Specs Pass/Fail pass pass PASS

ES6 5 N 1, 2, 15 AMI Safety Specs Pass/Fail pass pass

ES7 5 N 1, 3 OSHA Specs Pass/Fail pass pass PASSES8 4 N 9, 12 Flip Angle Pass/Fail pass passES9 3 N 4, 8 Belt Speed (X-Ray) m/s or ft/s Current Current CURRENT

ES10 5 N 6, 7 Direct Flip/Align Man Hours

hrs. <75% of current

<50% Current

ES11 4 N 5 Direct Label Man Hours

hrs. <75% of current

<50% Current

ES12 5 N 1 Keep Product Integrity

Yes/No Yes Yes

ES13 4 N 15 Ergonomic Risk CIC Risk Units

Current <24

ES14 1 N 11, 14 Flow Rate Variance % of rate ⁻₊25%-50% 0%-25%

ES15 3 N 16 Floor Space Allocation

Sq. Ft. Current +/- 18 in

Current +/- 6 in

+ 18”

ES16 3 N 9 Label Position Coordinate (x,y)

Center +/- 0.5 in

+/- 0.25 in

Key

Pass

Fail

In Progress

Not Yet Tested

Rev 02

19

Project Budget & Justification

System Summary

Subsystem Parts Total Labor Est Subsystem Total

Flipper $2,736 $1,040 $3,776

Flipper Controls $5,131 $0 $5,131

Aligner $4,657 $1,280 $5,937

Aligner Controls $2,618 $0 $2,618

Conveyors $13,482 $0 $13,482

System Total $30,944

Rev 02

20Rev 02

Project Risk Assessment

adsf

Project Risk Assessment

ID Risk Item Effect CauseProposed Actual

Action to Minimize Risk Owner Likelihood Severity Importa

nce Likeliho

od Severity Importance

2 Team member has extended absence

Proposed Critical chain affected Illness, personal issues

9 1 9 9 1 9

Proposed Thorough documentation during absence to reduce “catch up” time; team will communicate as much as reasonable during absence

All

Actual Critical chain affected Illness Actual Team used email and other forms of communication. Documentation was completed and distributed.

4 Parts delayed from supplier

Proposed Critical chain affected, deliverables delayed

Special parts, clerical errors, parts lost

3 9 27 9 9 81

Proposed Use approved vendors, have multiple vendors, use off-the-shelf parts

PM

Actual Critical chain affected, infeasible to complete deliverables

Clerical errors(?), parts lost(?), ???

Actual Contacted vendors, escalated problems.

6 Insufficient risk assessment

Proposed Slow response to problems, critical chain affected, deliverables delayed

Insufficient thought process

3 3 9 9 9 81

Proposed Constantly reexamine project and technical risks to ascertain changes

All

Actual Critical chain affected, infeasible to complete deliverables

Ordering mishaps Actual Contacted vendors, escalated problems.

• Insufficient risk assessment covers other issues in part procurement• E.g.: delayed engineering drawings from Lipe delayed critical chain tasks

21

P10715◦ Continue system manufacturing and assembly◦ Test individual subsystems◦ Integrate subsystems◦ Test complete system◦ Debug and refine process

Secondary line replication

Future Project Progress

Rev 02

22

Ergonomics◦ Develop secondary standardized system for assessing risk for

hand motions/non-lifting tasks◦ Paper recommended by Dr. Matt Marshall (ISE) 2/8/10

“Development and evaluation of an observational method for assessing repetition in hand tasks”. Wendi A Latko; Thomas J Armstrong; James A Foulke; Gary D Herrin; et al. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal; Apr 1997; 58, 4; ABI/INFORM Global. pg. 278

Marinated Meats Line Simulation Project◦ Discrete event simulation of entire marinated meats line

Possibly using ARENA software Scope may necessitate Senior Design Project (primarily ISE) or

multiple ISE co-ops◦ Recommended in conversation with Professor John Kaemmerlen

(ISE) 5/30/10

Rev 02

Ideas for Future Work

23

Questions or comments?

Rev 02