水果去皮机的设计【三维SW模型】【含10张CAD图纸+PDF图】
收藏
资源目录
压缩包内文档预览：
编号：122146129
类型：共享资源
大小：16.76MB
格式：ZIP
上传时间：2021-04-18
上传人：好资料QQ****51605
认证信息
个人认证
孙**（实名认证）
江苏
IP属地：江苏
45
积分
- 关 键 词：
-
三维SW模型
水果
去皮
设计
三维
SW
模型
10
CAD
图纸
PDF
- 资源描述：
-
喜欢这套资料就充值下载吧。。。资源目录里展示的都可在线预览哦。。。下载后都有，，请放心下载，，文件全都包含在内，，【有疑问咨询QQ:1064457796 或 1304139763】
- 内容简介：
-
DOI 10.1007/s00170-003-1843-3ORIGINAL ARTICLEInt J Adv Manuf Technol (2005) 25: 551559S.H. Masood B. Abbas E. Shayan A. KaraAn investigation into design and manufacturing of mechanical conveyors systemsfor food processingReceived: 29 March 2003 / Accepted: 21 June 2003 / Published online: 23 June 2004 Springer-Verlag London Limited 2004Abstract This paper presents the results of a research investi-gation undertaken to develop methodologies and techniques thatwill reduce the cost and time of the design, manufacturing andassembly of mechanical conveyor systems used in the food andbeverage industry. The improved methodology for design andproduction of conveyor components is based on the minimisa-tion of materials, parts and costs, using the rules of design formanufacture and design for assembly. Results obtained on a testconveyor system verify the benefits of using the improved tech-niques. The overall material cost was reduced by 19% and theoverall assembly cost was reduced by 20% compared to conven-tional methods.Keywords Assembly Cost reduction Design DFA DFM Mechanical conveyor1 IntroductionConveyor systems used in the food and beverage industry arehighly automated custom made structures consisting of a largenumber of parts and designed to carry products such as foodcartons, drink bottles and cans in fast production and assemblylines. Most of the processing and packaging of food and drink in-volve continuous operations where cartons, bottles orcans are re-quired to move at a controlled speed for filling or assembly oper-ations. Their operations require highly efficient and reliable me-chanical conveyors, which range from overhead types to floor-mounted types of chain, roller or belt driven conveyor systems.In recent years, immense pressure from clients for low costbut efficient mechanical conveyor systems has pushed con-veyor manufacturers to review their current design and assemblymethods and look at an alternative means to manufacture moreeconomical and reliable conveyors for their clients. At present,S.H. Masood (u) B. Abbas E. Shayan A. KaraIndustrial Research Institute Swinburne,Swinburne University of Technology,Hawthorn, Melbourne 3122, AustraliaE-mail: .aumost material handling devices, both hardware and software, arehighly specialised, inflexible and costly to configure, install andmaintain 1. Conveyors are fixed in terms of their locations andthe conveyor belts according to their synchronised speeds, mak-ing any changeover of the conveyor system very difficult and ex-pensive. In todays radically changing industrial markets, there isa need to implement a new manufacturing strategy, a new systemoperational concept and a new system control software and hard-ware development concept, that can be applied to the design ofa new generation of open, flexible material handling systems 2.Ho and Ranky 3 proposed a new modular and reconfigurable2D and 3D conveyor system, which encompasses an open re-configurable software architecture based on the CIM-OSA (opensystem architecture) model. It is noted that the research in thearea of improvement of conveyor systems used in beverage in-dustry is very limited. Most of the published research is directedtowards improving the operations of conveyor systems and inte-gration of system to highly sophisticated software and hardware.This paper presents a research investigation aimed at im-proving the current techniques and practices used in the de-sign, manufacturing and assembly of floor mounted type chaindriven mechanical conveyors in order to reduce the manufactur-ing lead time and cost for such conveyors. Applying the con-cept of concurrent engineering and the principles of design formanufacturing and design for assembly 4,5, several criticalconveyor parts were investigated for their functionality, materialsuitability, strength criterion, cost and ease of assembly in theoverall conveyor system. The critical parts were modified andredesigned with new shape and geometry, and some with newmaterials. The improved design methods and the functionality ofnew conveyor parts were verified and tested on a new test con-veyor system designed, manufactured and assembled using thenew improved parts.2 Design for manufacturing and assembly (DFMA)In recent years, research in the area of design for manufacturingand assembly has become very useful for industries that are con-552sidering improving their facilities and manufacturing methodol-ogy. However, there has not been enough work done in the areaof design for conveyor components, especially related to the is-sue of increasing numbers of drawing data and re-engineeringof the process of conveyor design based on traditional methods.A vast amount of papers have been published that have investi-gated issues related to DFMA and applied to various methodolo-gies to achieve results that proved economical, efficient and costeffective for the companies under investigation.The main classifications of DFMA knowledge can be iden-tified as (1) General guidelines, (2) Company-specific best prac-tice or (3) Process and or resource-specific constraints. Generalguidelines refer to generally applicable rules-of-thumb, relat-ing to a manufacturing domain of which the designer shouldbe aware. The following list has been compiled for DFMguidelines 6. Design for a minimum number of parts Develop a modular design Minimise part variations Design parts to be multifunctional Design parts for multiuse Design parts for ease of fabrication Avoid separate fasteners Maximise compliance: design for ease of assembly Minimise handling: design for handling presentation Evaluate assembly methods Eliminate adjustments Avoid flexible components: they are difficult to handle Use parts of known capability Allow for maximum intolerance of parts Use known and proven vendors and suppliers Use parts at derated values with no marginal overstress Minimise subassembliesFig.1. Layout of conveyor sys-tem for labelling plasic bottles Emphasise standardisation Use the simplest possible operations Use operations of known capability Minimise setups and interventions Undertake engineering changes in batchesThese design guidelines should be thought of as “optimalsuggestions”. They typically will result in a high-quality, low-cost, and manufacturable design. Occasionally compromisesmust be made, of course. In these cases, if a guideline goesagainst a marketing or performance requirement, the next bestalternative should be selected 7.Company-specific best practice refers to the in-house designrules a company develops, usually over a long period of time, andwhich the designer is expected to adhere to. These design rulesare identified by the company as contributing to improved qualityand efficiency by recognising the overall relationships betweenparticular processes and design decisions. Companies use suchguidelines as part of the training given to designers of productsrequiring significant amounts of manual assembly or mainte-nance. Note that most of the methodologies are good at eitherbeing quick and easy to start or being more formal and quanti-tative. For example, guidelines by Boothroyd and Dewhurst 8on DFA are considered as being quantitative and systematic.Whereas the DFM guidelines, which are merely rules of thumbderived from experienced professionals, are more qualitative andless formal 9.3 Conventional conveyor system designDesign and manufacturing of conveyor systems is a very com-plex and time-consuming process. As every conveyor system isa custom-made product, each project varies from every otherproject in terms of size, product and layout. The system design553is based on client requirements and product specifications. More-over, the system layout has to fit in the space provided by thecompany. The process of designing a layout for a conveyor sys-tem involve revisions and could take from days to months or insome instances years. One with the minimum cost and maximumclient suitability is most likely to get approval.Figure 1 shows a schematic layout of a typical conveyorsystem installed in a production line used for labelling ofplastic bottles. Different sections of the conveyor system areidentified by specific technical names, which are commonlyused in similar industrial application. The “singlizer” sec-tion enables the product to form into one lane from multiplelanes. The “slowdown table” reduces the speed of productonce it exits from filler, labeller, etc. The “mass flow” sec-tion is used to keep up with high-speed process, e.g., filler,labeller, etc. The “transfer table” transfers the direction of prod-uct flow. The purpose of these different conveyor sections isthus to control the product flow through different processingmachines.A typical mechanical conveyor system used in food and bev-erage applications consists of over two hundred mechanical andelectrical parts depending on the size of the system. Some ofthe common but essential components that could be standard-ised and accumulated into families of the conveyor system areside frames, spacer bars, end plates, cover plates, inside bendplates, outside bend plates, bend tracks and shafts (drive, tail andslave). The size and quantity of these parts vary according to thelength of conveyor sections and number of tracks correspond-ing to the width and types of chains required. The problems andshortcomings in the current design, manufacturing and assemblyof mechanical conveyors are varied, but include: Over design of some parts High cost of some components Long hours involved in assembly/maintenance Use of non-standard partsTable1. Conveyor critical parts based on parts cost analysisProduct descriptionQtyMaterial usedCost (%)Improvement possible (Yes/No)Leg set68Plastic leg + SS tube20.22YesSide frame802.5 mm SS16.07YesSupport channel400C channel SS15.00YesBend tracks8Plastic14.36NoRt. roller shaft13920 dia. SS shaft6.70YesTail shaft3935 dia. Stainless steel6.27NoSpacer bar13550X50X6 SS5.43YesSupport wear strip4004010 mm plastic5.36YesSupport side wear strip132Plastic3.01YesEnd plate392.5 mm/SS1.88YesCover plate391.6 mm S/S1.57NoBend plates82.5 mm/SS1.29YesTorque arm bracket186mm S/S plate1.21YesSlot cover97Stainless steel0.97YesInside bend plate82.5 mm/SS0.66YesTotal100.00Critical parts4 Areas of improvementIn order to identify the areas of cost reduction in material andlabour, a cost analysis of all main conveyor parts was conductedto estimate the percentage of cost of each part in relation to thetotal cost of all such parts. The purpose of this analysis was toidentify the critical parts, which are mainly responsible for in-creasing the cost of the conveyor and thereby investigate meansfor reducing the cost of such parts.Table 1 shows the cost analysis of a 50-section conveyor sys-tem. The analysis reveals that 12 out of 15 parts constitute 79%of the total material cost of the conveyor system, where furtherimprovements in design to reduce the cost is possible. Out ofthese, seven parts were identified as critical parts (shown by anasterisk in Table 1) constituting maximum number of compo-nents in quantity and comprising over 71% of overall materialcost. Among these, three components (leg set, side frame andsupport channel) were found to account for 50% of the totalconveyor material cost. A detailed analysis of each of these 12parts was carried out considering the principles of concurrent en-gineering, design for manufacture and design for assembly, anda new improved design was developed for each case 10. De-tails of design improvement of some selected major componentare presented below.5 Redesign of leg set assemblyIn a conveyor system, the legs are mounted on the side frame tokeep the entire conveyor system off the floor. The existing designof conveyor legs work, but they are costly to manufacture, theyhave stability problems, and cause delays in deliveries. The delayis usually caused by some of the parts not arriving from over-seas suppliers on time. The most critical specifications requiredfor the conveyor legs are:554 Strength to carry conveyor load Stability Ease of assembly Ease of flexibility (for adjusting height)Figure 2 indicates all the parts for the existing design ofthe conveyor leg. The indicated numbers are the part numbersdescribed in Table 2, which also shows a breakdown of cost an-alysis complete with the labour time required to assemble a com-plete set of legs. The existing leg setup consists of plastic legbrackets ordered from overseas, stainless steel leg tubes, whichare cut into specified sizes, leg tube plastic adjustments, whichare clipped onto the leg tube at the bottom as shown in Fig. 2.Lugs, which are cut in square sizes, drilled and welded to the legtube to bolt the angle cross bracing and backing plate to supportleg brackets bolts. The # of parts in Table 2 signifies the numberof components in each part number and the quantity is the con-sumption of each part in the leg design. Companies have usedthis design for many years but one of the common complaintsreported by the clients was of the instability of legs.From an initial investigation, it became clear that the connec-tion between the stainless steel tube and plastic legs bracket (partFig.2. Existing leg design assembly with partnames shown in Table 1Table2. Cost analysis for old leg design assemblyPart no.Part description# of partsQtyCostSource1Plastic leg bracket22$30.00Overseas5, 6Leg tube plastic adjustment42$28.00Overseas4Lug22$4.00In-house7Angle cross bracing11$5.00In-house2Backing plate22$4.00In-house3Leg tube22$25.00In-house8Bolts66$3.00In-houseTotal assembly cost (welding)$15.00In-houseTotal1917$114.001 and part 3 in Fig. 2) was not rigid enough. The connectionsfor these parts are only a single 6 mm bolt. At times, when theconveyor system was carrying full product loads, it was observedthat the conveyor legs were unstable and caused mechanical vi-bration. One of the main reasons for this was due to a single boltconnection at each end of the lugs in part 3 and part 7. The sta-bility of the conveyor is considered critical matter and requiresrectification immediately to satisfy customer expectations.Considering the problems of the existing conveyor leg de-sign and the clients preferences, a new design for the conveyorleg was developed. Generally the stability and the strength ofthe legs were considered as the primary criteria for improve-ment in the new design proposal but other considerations werethe simplicity of design, minimisation of overseas parts and easeof assembly at the point of commissioning. Figure 3 shows, thenew design of the conveyors leg assembly, and Table 3 gives adescription and the cost of each part.Figure 3 shows that the new design consists of only five mainparts for the conveyors leg compared to eight main parts in theold design. In the old design, the plastic leg bracket, the legtube plastic adjustment and the leg tube were the most expensiveitems accounting for 72% of the cost of leg assembly. In the new555Fig.3. New design for leg assembly with partnames in Table 3Table3. Cost analysis for new design leg assemblyPart no.Part description# of partsQtyCostSource1Stainless steel angle (50503 mm)22$24.00In-house3Leg plastic adjustment22$10.00Overseas4Cross brassing11$7.00In-house5Bolts84$4.00In-house2Backing plate22$4.00In-houseTotal assembly cost$10.00In-houseTotal1511$59.00design, those parts have been replaced by a stainless steel angleand a new plastic leg adjustment reducing the cost of leg assem-bly by almost 50%. Thus the total numbers of parts in the leghave been reduced from 19 to 15 and the total cost per leg setuphas been reduced by $55 in the new design.The new conveyor leg design, when tested, was found to bemore secure and stable than the old design. The elimination ofpart number 1 and 5 from old conveyor design has made the newdesign more stable and rigid. In addition, the width of the crossbracing has also been increased with two bolts mount instead ofone in old design. This has provided the entire conveyor leg setupan additional strength.6 Redesign of the side framesThe side frame is the primary support of a conveyor systemthat provides physical strength to conveyors and almost all theparts are mounted on it. The side frame is also expected to havea rigid strength to provide support to all the loads carried onthe conveyor. It also accommodates all the associated conveyorcomponents for the assembly. The critical considerations of sideframe design are: Size of side frame (depth) Strength of the material Ease for assembly Ease for manufacturingFigure 4 shows the side frame dimension and parameters.The side frame used in existing design appears to be of rea-sonable depth in size (dimension H in Fig. 4). From the initialinvestigation, it was found that the distance between spacer barholes and return shaft (dimensions G and F in Fig. 4) could bereduced, as there was some unnecessary gap between those twocomponents. The important point to check before redefining thedesign parameters was to make sure that after bringing those twocloser, the return chains would not catch the spacer bar while theconveyor is running. The model of the new side frame design wasdrawn on CAD to ensure all the specifications are sound and theparts are placed in the position to check the clearances and thefits. Using the principle of design for manufacturing the new sideframe design was made symmetrical so that it applies to all typesof side frames. This change is expected to reduce the size of sideframe significantly for all sizes of chains.Table 4 shows a comparison of dimensions in the old designand the new design of side frames for the same chain type. It556Fig.4. Side frame dimensionsTable4. New and old side frame dimension parametersOld designChain typeABCDEFGHIJKL3.25?LF/SSSTR/LBP/MAG319271196651052112411365885196TAB2283621875696202232127New designChain typeABCDEFGHIJKL3.25?LF/SSSTR/LBP/MAG/TAB311007317367107167199925885152is noted that the overall size (depth) of the conveyor has beenreduced from 241 mm to 199 mm (dimension H), which givesa saving of 42 mm of stainless steel on every side frame manu-factured. Thus, from a stainless steel sheet 15003000 mm, theold design parameters allowed only six 3m long side frames butwith the new design parameter now it was possible to produceseven side frames of 3 m long from the same sheet size.The amount of material used for side frames was also re-viewed for further investigation. It is estimated that about 55%of the total cost of the conveyor system is spent on materials.The current material used for side frames is 2.5 mm thick stain-less steel food grade 304. Currently, there are other materialsavailable in the market with alternative thickness that could beconsidered as an option. For this, a deflection analysis has beenconducted to estimate if there was any other type of material suit-able to replace the existing material so that it does not fail itsstrength criteria.6.1 Deflection analysis for side framesFigure 5 shows the experimental setup to determine the deflec-tion of new side frame in X and Y direction under differentloading conditions. With the new design parameters a set ofside frames were manufactured to investigate the deflection on1.6mm thick stainless steel side frames. A section of side framebolted with spacer bar and return shaft was assembled for test-ing with the experiment. The results for deflection were obtainedby applying variable loads on a section of the side frame viaa hydraulic press. As shown in Fig. 5, the deflection gaugesare placed on vertical (Y) and horizontal (X) axes to measureany reading observed on the side frames. The loads are appliedon side frame via the hydraulic press in downward direction.The side frames are supported by stands from the same positionwhere the legs are mounted on the side frames.Three sets of experiments are conducted on four, six andeight tracks of conveyor sections to observe any abnormalitiesunder big loads. The loads applied on the experimental conveyorsections are over estimated and are higher than actual load con-ditions for conveyor system in real applications. The conveyorsare usually designed to carry load under one tonne per metre forindustry application in the food and beverage industry. The pur-pose ofapplying a big load was toestimate the point ofdeflectionfor side frame under high loads. Figures 6 and 7 show the resultsof the experiments for the conveyor sections of four tracks andsix tracks, respectively.From the results obtained, it is observed that under 2 KNof loads, the deflection values are almost under 2mm for allFig.5. Experimental set upto investigate deflection onnew side frame design557Fig.6. Deflection results for 4-track 1.6 mm stainless steel side frameFig.7. Deflection results for 6-track 1.6 mm stainless steel side frametypes of sections. Under the given circumstances, the 1.6 mmstainless steel side frame design can be a possible alternativeto the existing conveyor side frame design. It is expected thatwith wider conveyor sections, the deflections on side frame willstay within the allowable limits, that is, 5mm. The main rea-son why this experiment was conducted is to ensure that theside frames do not buckle under high loads. Thus there was noevidence of buckling occurrence for any of the types of con-veyor sections used. It is also expected, based on the experiencesof engineers and the investigation during the current research,that after the complete assembly is made, the conveyors willconceive additional strength, which will further reduce the possi-bilityof deflection onthe side frame. The deflection, for instance,was measured for each set of experiments outwards. With theleg mounted on the side frame, the forces will act in oppositedirection that will push the side frame inwards. The full obser-vation of this assumption can be concluded when a completetest conveyor is manufactured and tested based on new designparameters.With all the results obtained from the experiments, it is con-cluded that 1.6mm stainless steel grade 304 side frames canbe manufactured for conveyors for food and beverage industryunder the specified guidelines for loads. The cost saving made inthis area is expected to be significant since 80% of material usedin a conveyor system is made of stainless steel.Table5. Cost analysis for side frameSide frame cost analysis for old designProduct/process descriptionMaterialQtyCostSide frame (3000241 mm2.5 mm1$60.00$360 per sheet)Slot (50 cent per slot punch)8$4.00Holes (20 cent per hole punch)30$6.00Fold2$3.00Total cost$73.00Side frame cost analysis for new designProduct/process descriptionMaterialQtyCostSide frame (3000199 mm1.6 mm1$23.00$162 per sheet)Slot (50 cent per slot punch)8$4.00Holes (20 cent per hole punch)30$6.00Fold2$3.00Total cost$36.006.2 Side frame cost analysisThe material review and deflection analysis has shown that theexisting 2.5mm stainless steel sheet was an over design for sideframe for the food and beverage conveyor application. The an-alysis also showed that 1.6mm thick stainless steel sheet canbe used as an alternative material for the side frame, which willperform its function satisfactorily. Table 5 shows a comparisonof the costing of the old and new design of side frames, whichshows that the saving per side frame on the new design is ex-pected to be $37 (i.e., a savings of 50.1%).In addition to this cost saving, the reduction of side framesize from 241 mm to 199 mm will also allow the production ofone extra side frame out of the 30001500 mm stainless steelsheet.New design improvements were also carried out in severalother critical parts such as support channel, return roller shaft,spacer bar, support wear strip and support side wear strip, whichresulted in further cost and labour savings and also ease of manu-facturing and assembly. For example, the new design of supportchannel assembly (including support wear strip and side wearstrip) required reduced number of processes, reduced wear stripthickness, use of a new M section channel and provision for usewith different types of chains giving a cost saving of 33.7% inthis improved design. The new design of return roller shaft of-fered a cost savings of 44.5% and a 50% reduction in labourtime. The new design of the spacer bar offered an estimated costsaving of 25% from the old design.7 Design implementation in a test conveyor systemThe implementation of design improvements of individual criti-cal parts and components was carried out in the design, manufac-turing and assembly of a full-fledged test conveyor system. Thisnew and improved test conveyor was then tested and verified forperformance with actual products (plastic bottles). A cost analy-sis was also conducted to compare the overall cost savings in this558test conveyor with the costs involved with an identical conveyorbased on old design 7.The new test conveyor is a singleiser type (Fig. 8), comprisesof three different sections with a total length of 5m. SectionC1 is a six-track conveyor section joined to section C2, whichis a six-track 90bend conveyor. This is connected to conveyorsection C3, which is an eight-track conveyor section with combi-nation of two different types of chains, TAB and STR. The testconveyor contains a total of 26 major parts. Figure 9 shows thetest conveyor used for testing of product flow at the collaboratingcompany.The performance and efficiency of the new test conveyor andits critical new parts were tested for smooth, noiseless perform-ance by observing the product flow of empty plastic drink bottleson the conveyor. All the parts and the conveyor system werefound to show fully functional satisfactory performance.A complete cost analysis on the test conveyor was conductedto measure the difference between old and new designs and alsoto evaluate the ease in assembly and reduction in labour expendi-ture. Quantity of parts, the material used, and the manufacturingFig.8. A singliser test conveyorFig.9. Test conveyor assembly: product flow testcosts were calculated for each part and percentage savings ofeach part and the overall system were determined.8 Results and discussionThe most critical area of consideration was to check if the newsupport channel setup and the drip tray joining were carried outwith less labour consumption. Attention was also paid to makesure that the labourers have been working effectively on the job.The times used for the assembly of conveyor system are expectedto vary depending on the mood of workers and other external fac-tors. But efforts were made to achieve the closest possible time tomanufacture the conveyors.A study of cost analysis reveals the following facts: A manufacturing cost saving of 40% or more was achieved ineight out of 12 of the improved design parts. A cost saving of26% to 34% was achieved in other three parts. Among the high cost parts, the maximum savings wereachieved for the side frame, return roller shaft, leg set andsupport wear strips. The overall cost of the conveyor was reduced by 19%. The overall cost of labour in the assembly of the conveyorwas reduced by 20%.It is observed that the savings accomplished are mainlyachieved for the conveyor parts that had been over designed orare not professionally designed. One of the major changes thataffected the design of conveyor system was the revision of theside frame design parameters, which also affected the changesin other parts that were allied with it. Secondly, the devel
- 温馨提示:
1: 本站所有资源如无特殊说明，都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
2: 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等，如果需要附件，请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
3.本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸，网页内容里面会有图纸预览，若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑，并不能对任何下载内容负责。
6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容，请与我们联系，我们立即纠正。
7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。
人人文库网所有资源均是用户自行上传分享，仅供网友学习交流，未经上传用户书面授权，请勿作他用。
川公网安备: 51019002004831号