Process Improvement for Drill Bit Blanks For MN Twist Drill

1
Process Improvement for Drill Bit BlanksFor MN
Twist Drill
University of Minnesota Duluth
Department of Mechanical and Industrial
Engineering

• The Three Orienteers
• Scott Anderson Project Leader
• Andy Johnson Mechanical Engineer
• Tony Niemczyk Industrial Engineer

Report Number UMDMIE-CD-2006WPDK12
2
Problem Statement

• Blanks are coming off of machine without
  orientation
• Manually sorted to bins
• Blanks manually moved approximately 10 feet to
  coning machine
• Manually loaded into coning machine

3
Problem Statement
4
Scope of Project

• Orientate drill bit blanks from cut-off machine
• Directly feed blanks into coning machine
• Increase throughput
• Reduce work in progress

5
Functional Requirements

• Require little maintenance less then 2000/year
• Reduces manual handling labor
• Simple in design
• Utilizes gravity as much as possible
• Maintains or improves throughput
• Adaptable to varying lengths and diameters
• Efficient
• Implemented with little risk due to offline
  testing

6
Constraints Limitations

• The speed of the cutting and coning machines
  which for the cuttingmachine is 200 parts per
  minute
• Budget is a 2 year payback on a 20000 a year
  salary based on the reallocation of labor
• Material type being cut which includes cobalt and
  various types of steel.
• Drill bit diameter and length varying from 1/4
  to 1/2 and 2 ½ to 6 respectively

7
Constraints Limitations

• Set up time as it relates to throughput for the
  entire system
• Control Systems which include a PLC and relays
• Space available
• Factors that involve the safety of the workers
  and the plant.
• Type of power supplied (AC/DC Mechanical etc)
• Weight of the drill bits

8
Project Organization

• Scott Anderson Project Leader
• Andy Johnson Mechanical Engineer
• Tony Niemczyk Industrial Engineer
• Work in parallel whenever possible
• Crucial decisions made as group
• Frequent group meetings

9
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 1
Vibratory Feeder

• Ability to orientate blanks
• Remove blanks that do not meet specifications
• Can Handle up to 200 parts per minute
• Automatic feed of blanks into coning machine

10
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 1
Vibratory Feeder

• Design of Alternative 1

11
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 2
Vibratory Table

• Slight vibration from a vibratory motor would
  break binding
• Vibration agitates the drill bits so that gravity
  brings them into alignment
• Would not allow relocation of labor

12
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 2
Vibratory Table

• Design of Alternative 2

13
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 3
Vibratory Table Rail System

• A vibratory table aligns and feeds blanks into a
  movable transport hopper
• Transport hopper feeds directly into the coning
  machine
• Eliminates the handling of blanks
• Many possibilities for automation

14
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 3
Vibratory Table Rail System

• Design of Alternative 3

15
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 4
Conveyor Methods

• Conveyor takes blanks directly off cut-off
  machine or from vibratory hopper
• Allows for automatic rejection of parts
• Provides blanks sequential order of alignment
• Requires little operator interface

16
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 4
Conveyor Methods

• Design of Alternative 4

17
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 5
Chute Hopper

• Blanks orientate on vibratory hopper and
  down channels to coning hopper
• Coning hopper uses rake mechanism
• Logic senses when blanks are in hopper waiting to
  be fed into coning machine

18
Design Concepts AlternativesAlternative 5
Roofing Hopper

• Design of Alternative 5

19
Preliminary Design Recommendations

• Preliminary recommendation was the hopper and
  rail system
• Met all functional requirements and was simple in
  concept and design
• Reduced labor intensity but did not enable
  relocation of personnel
• Blanks still needed to be loaded into hoppers and
  hoppers removed when emptied

20
Design Evaluation

• Previous concepts were broken down into features
• Features were given a quantitative value and
  weight
• Feature values and weights of each alternative
  were summarized and options were compared
• Hopper and chute was determined to be the best
  option

21
Evaluation Scores
22
Economics

• Installed Cost 10297.55
• Annual Benefits of
• System by itself 37070.00
• System with reduced setup time 747070.00
• Annual Maintenance (10 of installed cost)
  1029.76
• Payback Period of
• System by itself 108 working days
• System with reduced setup time 5 working days

23
Mechanisms

• Vibratory Hopper
• The first step in aligning the blanks from the
  existing conveyor
• Half cylinder shaped hopper attached to a base
  plate that has a vibratory motor attached
• The shape of the hopper and the vibrations from
  the motor will force the blanks to align
• The hopper will align the bits
• Hopper serves as a place for the blanks to build
  up if the coning machine stops

24
MechanismsVibratory Hopper
25
Mechanisms

• Chute
• Provides channels for the blanks todown
• Provide further alignment of the blanks
• The optimized angle of the chute was
  experimentally determined to be 30

26
MechanismsChute
27
Mechanisms

• Coning Hopper
• Aligns blanks for feeding to the coning machine
• When blanks enter the hopper they need to be
  aligned by pneumatic actuator and rake.
• Allows for full range of blanks without any
  insert in the hopper
• Gates on bottom regulated by the PLCopen
  and shut

28
MechanismsConing Hopper
29
Procedures

• Setup procedures for when
• Both coner and cut-off are off
• Cut-off machine is running
• Both coner and cut-off are running
• Cut-off machine has completed coil
• Both machines have completed coil

30
Procedures

• Programmable Logic Controller Procedure
• Sensors in the system check the system for out of
  control circumstances
• Ensure that the hoppers never overflow with
  material
• Determine the operation of ther plates

31
PLC Flowchart
32
Testing Procedure

• Build the physical components one at a time
  starting with the coning hopper
• Test the coning hopper
• Build the chute and the vibratory hopper
• Send blanks through the system

33
Testing Procedure

• Attach the system to the coning machine itself
• Test the feeding of the blanks into the coning
  machine
• Connect the PLC and the sensors to the system
• Check that the correct timings occur
• Check that Out of boundary conditions do not
  occur

34
Implementation Procedure

• Build all support structures for the system
• Make modifications to the coning machine
• Remove all connections to the coning machine
• Move coning machine to its new location

35
Implementation Procedure

• Reestablish all connections to the coning machine
• New system should be attached and powered up for
  use
• All elements should be tested for proper running
  conditions and for proper safety precautions

36
Setup Improvements

• A standard process for setup would be very
  beneficial to process flow
• Identify external operations
• Identify internal operations

37
Acknowledgments

• We would like to thank Matt Mattson for
  contacting the University of Minnesota Duluth
  with a senior design project and for
  accommodating all of the needs of the group in a
  respectful and timely manner
• We would like to thank Scott Allison for giving
  Matt Mattson the capabilities to go to the
  University and finance the project
• Finally we would like to thank our professors
  Dave Keranen and Bill Pedersen for all of their
  help and advice in the development of the project
  and for guiding us to not only get the project to
  completion but also in a manner to help us learn
  new skills on our own

38
MN Twist Drill

• Questions
• Comments