Virtual machine tools models in assembling systems material flow management.
Anghel, Florina ; Cazacu, Dragos Alexandru ; Dobrescu, Tiberiu 等
1. INTRODUCTION
Before starting a manufacturing process it is advisable to run a
simulation for the production cycle. In this way one can have valuable
information regarding productivity, the necessary number of machines,
the personal involved in the production cycle and both the manufacturer
and the beneficiary will know an approximate production cost.
The main purpose of this paper is to determine the necessary time
for assembling the main shaft with the pulley wheel. In order to obtain
the data necessary for simulating this assembly the first step was to
use the material flow simulation for the two parts, separately. Thus we
determined the production time and productivity for the shaft and the
pulley wheel.
We define diffused manufacturing systems as architectures based at
least 2 work points surrounded & assisted by transport, transfer
& deposit facilities (Sanchez, 2001).
When taking in consideration concentrated systems we can define
them as being a single assembling point, receiving parts from different
working points.
We agree here with the thesis that within the class of stochastic simulation models, one further distinction is necessary: simulations can
be either terminating (sometimes called finite) or non-terminating in
nature, with specific algorithms for each category.
In our case the simulation is finite; we considered a finite period
of time, a month, with 22 working days, 16 working hours a day.
2. VIRTUAL MACHINE TOOLS MODELS IN PARTS PRODUCTION
In figure 1 we can see how the optimized virtual model for the main
shaft production looks (Anghel et al., 2007).
The working points symbolized in the model represent the machines
used in the production cycle: debtor machine (D1), lathe machine (S1),
milling machine (F1), boring and grinding machine (MAR1), each of them
having an operator supervising the production cycle. After doing a
number of optimizations in order to eliminate the material flow
concentrators that appeared we obtained a productivity of 322 pieces per
month (these means a necessary production time of 65.4 minutes).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
In the same way we will build a virtual model describing the
manufacturing process for the pulley wheel. Taken in consideration the
operations required for manufacturing the pulley wheel we could
establish the machine-tools used. These are, as symbolised in figure 2:
a lathe machine (S2), milling machine (F2), boring and grinding machine
(MAR2). For each machine there is an operator present with the role of
supervising the operation. All parts are collected in a buffer.
For transporting blanks among working points we used conveyor
belts.
After running a material flow simulation in the preliminary
architecture we could see that the milling machine is a material flow
concentrator do to the big manufacturing time that the blank spends on
this working point. These is also do to the fact that the blank passes
on quickly from S2 (the manufacturing time on this machine is 7.6
minutes).
Because of these we started an optimization that consisted in
increasing the number of the working points. We decided to add another
conveyor belt and another milling machine.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
By adding another machine and transport belt the total cost will
increase and it is advisable to do a NPV analyses to see if the
investment is justified.
After doing a number of optimizations we obtained a productivity of
629 pulley wheels per month (these means a necessary production time of
33.6 minutes).
3. VIRTUAL WORKING POINT ASSEMBLY
In this chapter we will build the model for the assembly between
the two manufactured parts, the main shift and the pulley wheel.
In figure 3 we can see the preliminary architecture for the
assembly unit, symbolized M1. The two parts ready to be assembled are
symbolized P1 (shaft) and P2 (pulley wheel) and are deposited in B1 and
B2 buffers. From buffer the parts are transported by conveyor belts to
the assembly unit and from there to another buffer.
For the assembly process it is also possible to take the parts
directly from the buffers in which they are deposit after the
manufacturing process is finished. We choose not to do that, but to ship
them in different buffers from which conveyor belts will take one P1
part and P2 part in the same time. The reason for this is given by the
big difference between the manufacturing times of the two parts. The
main shaft take almost twice as much time compared to the pulley wheel
to be manufactured, so if we tried to assembly them directly from the
buffers that they were initially deposited we wouldn't obtain a
very good production site.
In this situation the assembly unit will be always waiting for
shafts (P1) and the conveyor transporting pulley wheels (P2) will be
continuously blocked with parts.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
In figure 4 we run a material flow simulation for the assembly
site.
4. CONCLUSION
Three manufacturing systems interconnected in order to obtain a
main shaft & pulley wheel assembly are acting like a virtual
enterprise nodes (Tichkiewitch et al., 2006). The first manufacturing
system is a diffused one and produces a main shaft from a milling
machine. The second manufacturing system is also a diffused one and
produces pulley wheel (Cotet, et al., 2007). The manufactured parts
provided by those production sites are assembled on a third concentrated
manufacturing system (Cotet et al., 2007).
The entire virtual manufacturing architecture where the 3
production sites are acting like partners in the same production network
represents our case study used to illustrate an algorithm for
integrating virtual machine tools models in manufacturing systems
material flow management.
The model integrates material flow and process simulation in order
to increase manufacturing system productivity. This kind of simulation
shows important aspect regarding the manufacturing process: eventual
material flow concentrators, how the presence of the operator affects
the production cycle (for example: if we have two milling machines we
will need two operators in order to operate these machines if we want to
obtain an increasing of the production).
Another important aspect of this simulation is that we can
determine the necessary number of machines for an optimum production
site.
After doing a number of optimizations in both manufacturing sites,
this consisted in adding machines in order to eliminate material flow
concentrators from we managed to obtain a productivity of 322 pieces per
month for the shaft's execution and 629 pieces for the pulley
wheel. This means 65.4 minutes for the shaft and 33.6 minutes for
obtaining the pulley wheel.
5. REFERENCES
Anghel, F., Cazacu, D. A., Bucur, C. C. & Cotet, C. E. (2007).
Classical versus numerical control machines in discrete material flow
simulation based manufacturing architectures optimization, 18th
International DAAAM Symposium DAAAM 2007, pag. 025-026, ISSN 1726-9679,
Zadar, Croatia.
Cotet, C. E., Dragoi, G. & Carutasu, G. (2007). Material Flow
& Process Synchronous Simulation In Concentrate Manufacturing
Systems, Annals of DAAAM for 2007 & Proceedings of The 18th
International DAAAM SYMPOSIUM, intelligent Manufacturing &
Automation: Focus on Creativity, Responsibility and Ethics of
Engineers", pag. 180-181, ISSN 1726-9679, ISBN 3-901509-58-5,
Zadar, Croatia
Cotet, C. E., Dragoi, G. & Abaza, B. F. (2007). Multipolar
Synchronous Material Flow & Process Simulation In Difussed
Manufacturing Systems, Annals of DAAAM for 2007 & Proceedings of The
18th International DAAAM SYMPOSIUM, intelligent Manufacturing &
Automation: Focus on Creativity, Responsibility and Ethics of
Engineers", 2007, pag. 179-180, ISSN 1726-9679, ISBN 3-901509-58-5,
Zadar, Croatia
Sanchez, S. M. (2001). ABC's of output analysis, Proceedings
of the 2001 Winter Simulation 2001, Peters, B.A., Smith, J.S., Medeiros
D.J. (Ed.), CD-ROM, Presses Association for Computing Machinery (ACM),
New York
Tichkiewitch, S.; Radulescu, B. & Dragoi, G. (2006). Knowledge
management for a cooperative design system, Advances in Design,
ElMaraghy & Hoda A. Eds., pp. 97-110, Springer Verlag, ISBN
1-84628-004-4
ANGHEL, F[lorina]; CAZACU, D[ragos] A[lexandru] & DOBRESCU,
T[iberiu] *
* Supervisor, Mentor