1 / 29

68K Blade Process Handling

68K Blade Process Handling. Team 9. Michael Brantley 2 , Ryan Ferm 2 , Nadia Siddiqui 2 , Jason Newton 1 , Reginald Scott 1 1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 2 Department of Industrial Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.

edythe
Download Presentation

68K Blade Process Handling

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. 68K Blade Process Handling Team 9 Michael Brantley2, Ryan Ferm2, Nadia Siddiqui2, Jason Newton1, Reginald Scott1 1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 2Department of Industrial Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

  2. Outline • Background • Problem statement • Tools • Concept generation • Mechanism • Container • Storage • Conclusion

  3. Background ProblemStatement Concept Generation Conclusion Background • TECT Power • Thomasville, Georgia • Boeing, Pratt & Whitney, GE • 68k blades • 2000 68k/ Year, 7-8 per day • Weighs 45lbs

  4. Background ProblemStatement Concept Generation Conclusion Plant Layout SHIPPINGRECEIVING STORAGE BROACHING INSPECTION POLISH/ CONTOURING

  5. Background ProblemStatement Concept Generation Conclusion Broaching Machine • Raised Oil Bed • 8 inches high

  6. Background Problem Statement Concept Generation Conclusion Problem Statement • Blades arrive unorganized • 5-12 blades per container • Nested • Operators manually lift blades from receiving container • Lift a minimum of 30 in. • From cart onto milling fixture

  7. Background Problem Statement Concept Generation Conclusion Objectives • Eliminate manual lifting • Redesign the receiving methods • Redesign storage area (optional) • Design and fabricate a blade handling mechanism • Easy maneuverability • Stability • Constraints

  8. Background Problem Statement Concept Generation Conclusion Voice of the Customer

  9. Background Problem Statement Concept Generation Conclusion House of Quality Direction of Improvement: ↑ Increase ↓ Decrease 0 Negligible (S) (M) (W)

  10. Background Problem Statement Concept Generation Conclusion RULA Worksheet

  11. Background Problem Statement Concept Generation Conclusion

  12. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism Concept 1: Cart-in-Cart Blade L0 is maximum height of inner cart H is the outer cart height Variable Height for Loading/Unloading Extendable to reach milling fixture Vertically Rotating Holder H Lo Vertically Hinging Platform Variable Inner Cart Height Extendable Inner Cart Blade Blade Blade L Oil Bed Oil Bed L< Lo

  13. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism 1: Cart-in-Cart • Cons • Only holds one blade • Uni-axial elevation • Design complexity • Pros • Highly maneuverable • Three axis control Blade Blade Blade Blade

  14. Mechanism 2: Conveyor Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Conveyor system suspended above broaching and storage Loaded in storage Off loaded at each machine Continuous rotation of parts STORAGE BROACHING `

  15. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism 2: Conveyor Extended for loading Retracted for relocation Extended for milling Unloading Loading Transfer Blade Storage Container Blade Blade Milling Fixture

  16. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism 2: Conveyor • Cons • Expensive • High Maintenance • Requires constant loading • Increased time loading/unloading • Increased risk due to elevated blades • Failure prevents further blade processing • Pros • Does not hinder factory traffic • Could have holders for vertical and horizontal mounting

  17. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism 3: Vehicle Lift Rear mounted lift on small vehicle Approximately 360° of rotation Holds entire blade container

  18. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism 3: Vehicle Lift • Cons • Cost • Very low maneuverability • Could hinder access to other machines • Pros • Easy to Implement • Holds large number of blades • Could hold horizontally or vertically • Could be used for other needs

  19. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Mechanism 4: Revolving Barrel Front - View • Extendable insert to reach milling fixture • Pros • Rotational blade elevation • Holds multiple blades D1 h1 Side - View • STORAGE BIN • Cons • Weight of payload may decrease maneuverability = 1 blade

  20. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Storage Container Design 1 • Individual compartments • Horizontal orientation • Blades slide out onto the mechanism = 1 blade FRONT VIEW

  21. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Storage Container Design 2 • Vertical orientation • Blade will be picked up from top and pulled out • Individual compartments = 1 blade SIDE VIEW

  22. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Storage Container Design 3 • Diagonal orientation • Open structure • Less restriction from the sides • Blades can be accessed in multiple ways = 1 blade SIDE VIEW

  23. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Storage Container Design 4 • Horizontal orientation • Removed from side or from top • Single Layer = 1 blade SIDE VIEW = 1 blade TOP VIEW

  24. Background ProblemStatement ConceptGeneration Conclusion Storage area • New layout proposed for better organization • Mechanism requires more accessibility than current layout allows • Elevated table with rollers

  25. Background ProblemStatement Concept Generation Conclusion Selection Matrix 2 3 4 1

  26. Background ProblemStatement Concept Generation Conclusion Conclusion • Reduce risk of injury • HOQ, RULA to interpret VOC • Proposed concept ideas • Mechanism • Containers

  27. Background ProblemStatement Concept Generation Conclusion Future Work • Analyze the designs further • Select the most feasible design • Measure phase • Time study • Recommended Weight Limit • FBD for force measurements

  28. Sources • http://www.gti-power.com/turbine_package_parts.aspx • http://www.chinahydraulicjacks.com/autorepairtools199861-1000lbcapacitypickuptruckcrane.htm • http://www.lincolnservice.com/Modules/Webstore/Images/17/Ez-Go%20Industrial%20Utility%20Vehicle%20881.jpg • http://www.tectcorp.com/scope/tect-power/ • http://www.tectpower.com/company-overview/locations-and-contact/ • http://www.titanconveyors.com/assets/images/Assembly-1.jpg

  29. Questions?

More Related