1 / 13

Marble Cake Process Improvement – Final Review

Marble Cake Process Improvement – Final Review. Aaron Delahanty Arwen Sharp Benson Yu Kenyon Zitzka Ryan Norris. Presentation Outline.

adrianwilliams
Download Presentation

Marble Cake Process Improvement – Final Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Marble Cake Process Improvement – Final Review Aaron Delahanty Arwen Sharp Benson Yu Kenyon Zitzka Ryan Norris

  2. Presentation Outline Mentality – As a team we have invested a lot into this project and have unavoidably become attached. Despite this, the goal for this final review is to asses our progress up to present, our current project state, and future work in an honest and clear way that provides the most value to our customer. • Project Re-scope • Schedule • Customer Needs • Current Status • Near future test plans • Known Issues • Deliverables • Project Insights • Acknowledgements

  3. Project Re-scope Due mainly to a quickly approaching deadline, fabrication, assembly and testing of the system components critical for task completion have been major focus of the second quarter.  Fabrication, assembly, and testing of the following system components has been halted: • Cart • Shielding • Gate Mechanism Team resources have been allocated to: • Assembly / calibration of Machine Head • Development of test process (product line mock-up) • PLC / Controls integration

  4. Project Re-scope – Further Justification • Option 1 • Force the delivery of a under tested, unproven system • Option 2 • Deliver well developed machine ‘head’ prototype • Spend more resources further investigating primary mechanisms • Better develop PLC logic • More time testing and revising • Provide Wegmans with more thorough documentation (including complete system design)

  5. Current Project Status • Completion of Motor Module • Motor • Gear Train • Quick Disconnect • Swirlers • Complete Assembly of Machine Head/Chassis • Pneumatic Actuation • Sensor Integration • Initial PLC programming complete • Sensor / PLC integration • Development of a test stand • Simulation of product line environment

  6. Initial Motor Module Testing(out of chassis) Swirl performance: Initial Swirlers provide satisfactory results Further refinement of design could significantly improve swirl aesthetics 

  7. Near future Test Plans  Prototype capability: • Full mock-up of bakery conveyor line, designed to test and debug PLC integration • Complete sheet pan batter testing • Quality • Repeatability • Process Cycle Time • Batter Drip • Fatigue / Endurance Testing

  8. Known Issues 1 1 1 • Vertical Translation – Pneumatics / Guide Rails Design: • Root Cause – Design requires unrealistic precision given available resources • Warping of box frames •  Low angular misalignment allowance • Even if consistently smooth translation achieved, must be secured as well • Potential Solution: • Alternative linear bearings • Neutrally load the middle frame (Solutions 1 & 2, low cost, easily implemented) • Stronger box frame • High precision machining • Investigation of alternative lift / alignment mechanisms • Signal communication between sensors, actuators, PLC • Root Cause – Poor schematic documentation • Temporary Test Set-up • Potential Solution: • Complete electrical schematic • Cleaner wire routing 2

  9. Known Issues • Inadequate Aesthetic Swirler Performance (unconfirmed): • Root Cause – Untested final swirler prototype • Variability due to manufacturing • Potential Solution: • Further testing • Swirler redesign and remanufacture (Relatively low cost, easily implemented) • Further Pan Alignment Calibration • Root Cause – Edge tolerances • (Both inductance sensor and Swirler Maximum • Radius Condition) • Potential Solution: • Development of auxiliary guide mechanism • 2. Loosen Edge Tolerances (Sacrifice swirl area) 3 4

  10. Summary of Deliverables  • Complete functioning prototype • PLC Logic • Wiring Schematics • Complete CAD library • Drawings • 3D models • Hierarchy • BOMs • Explanation of current design choices and recommendations for future work

  11. General Insights / Recommendations for future work • Early communication with machinists • Lack of PLC / ladder logic from either ME or EE RIT curriculum • Make availability of resources known • PLC programming • Wegmans recommended parts and specs • Manufacturability of Design

  12. Acknowledgments • Professor John Kaemmerlen • Mike Least • Gary Kittrell • Rick Norder • Tony Contrera and Dean Wight • Professor Scott Bellinger and his class

  13. And thank you to Wegmans for the opportunity.

More Related