1 / 14

Detailed Design Review

Detailed Design Review. Rochester Institute of Technology Multi-Disciplinary Senior Design Project: P13457. Team Members: Michael Then, Katherine Poehlman , Allison Doster , William Slaughter, William Swift. Dresser- Rand : Rotor Cell Improvement Project Topics: Heat treat B & OS

timothy-slater
Download Presentation

Detailed Design 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. Detailed Design Review Rochester Institute of Technology Multi-Disciplinary Senior Design Project: P13457 Team Members: Michael Then, Katherine Poehlman, Allison Doster, William Slaughter, William Swift Dresser- Rand : Rotor Cell Improvement Project Topics: Heat treat B & OS Capacity Determination

  2. Re-Cap • Improve Throughput in the Rotor-Cell • Layouts: Heat Treat and B&OS • Shelving choices • Quotes and Lead Times • Layout Configurations • Capacity Determination (Moving Forward…MSDII)

  3. Roll-Out Racks Heat Treat • 3 racks for the Heat Treat area • 3 adjustable shelves per rack B & OS • 1 rack for Finger Mandrels • Recommend additional shelf to increase capacity Rack Specs • 2,000lbs /shelf • 48”x 48” shelf space • 15lbs of force to pull-out fully loaded rack

  4. Layout in Heat Treat Layout Option: 3 Large Racks- Straight Line • Most viable given constraints • Can’t move office • Can’t block door • 24-40 impellers

  5. Note: This includes one Rack and extra shelf for B&OS Total Cost: Roll Out Racks • Lead Time = 10-12 business days

  6. B&OS: Standard Racks • 6 racks should fit all parts • Modeled in Auto-Cad • 5 storage shelves/rack • 6th shelf for dust? • Very low, if any, maintenance • Consistent with current shelving • Layout of plates will remain the similar

  7. Standard Racks • Specifications • 3000lbs per shelf • Heavy gauge steel • 72-L x 24-W x 60-H • 72 x 24 x 72 (Second Option) • Versatility • Shelves can be adjusted in 1 inch increments • Not bolted to the floor so they can be rearranged • Accessible on both sides

  8. Layout in B&OS

  9. Rack Quote 1: 6 racks - 5 shelves • Top Shelf open • 60” height • Lower top shelf with 10 inch spaces between shelves. • Total: $3,255.62 • Lead Time = 4-8 business days

  10. Rack Quote 2: 6 racks - 6 shelves • 72” height (6 ft.) • Gives more vertical space options • Lower the 5th shelf • Leave 6th shelf at top to prevent dust settling on parts. • Total: $3861.21 • Additional $600 • Lead Time = 4-8 business days

  11. Moving Forward (MSDII):Capacity Determination Focus is on Impeller throughput • Impeller routings are complex • Rotor Assembly process adds to complexity • Moving Bottleneck • Bottleneck = Plant Capacity First bottleneck: Milling • What to send out? What to keep in house? • Parts mix determines Capacity / Bottlenecks • Monthly standard ≈ 70-80% parts outsourced for this process Goal: • Given your parts mix each month: • Maximize Machine Usage • Maximize Throughput • Keeping Impellers of same Rotor Assembly on same pace • Could you decrease rented vendor space - $$ • Most importantly: What parts mix stabilizes flow?

  12. Why start in Milling? • All parts go through this process • Most Variability in Process Times from part to part • Other processes are more similar • Parts mix is less relevant • Easier problem to analyze • Comes down to stabilizing flow • Process Times can be accurately measured • Decision to send out here initiates “waves” in flow • Creates “Moving” Bottlenecks Stabilizing flow through this step in the process will help flow throughout facility • Add more complexity (i.e. further steps in the process) as we progress

  13. Capabilities • 5-Axis • Large • Single-Piece Basic Model Inputs and Logic Mill 460 • 3 & 5-axis • 29” max for 2-piece • 23” max for 1-piece Mill 437 • 5-Axis • Single-Piece Mill 435 Create Assign Decide Generic Part Created • 5-Axis • Single-Piece • Routes Parts Based on Machine Capability and part Attributes • Gives Parts Attributes based on Parts Mix (Probability) • 2-piece • 1-piece • Semi • Diameter • 5-Axis • 3-Axis Mill 431 • 3-axis Mill 429 • TBD: Vendor Lead Time; Part Types; Affect of Attribute on Time • Batch Sizes for Shipping O/V

  14. Next Steps • Data Collection • John Russell – Highest Month Parts list • DISCO Reports- Milling Times • Programming List- 3-axis, 5-axis, if Vendor was used • Build Preliminary Model of Mills • Validate Model Logic • Initial Goal: • Optimize Planning through Milling • Analyze impact of returning parts quantity on processes downstream • If time allows, incorporate other areas of work cell

More Related