Shaping the Future
Fuel Cell Pick and Place Assembly
System Complexity
MEC Student Conference 17th December 2015
Mussawar ...
Fuel Cell Pick ‘n’ Place problem
1. Pick location and buffer
2. Component handling method
3. Component moving method
4. Pl...
Overview
 Problem background
 Aim
 Modelling overview
 Example
 Conclusion and further work
Problem background
Know-how
Fuel cells are great, but…
Lack of hydrogen
infrastructure
Costly compared to
incumbent techno...
More on costs
Electrode
33% (CoV = 0.39)
Membrane
12% (CoV = 0.36)
GDL
11% (CoV=0.46)
Plates
28% (CoV = 0.42)
Assembly
16%...
Variation in assembly costs
Assembly methods
Fuel cell design architecture
Quality and yield
Manual Automated
[9] Manual f...
Aim
1. Find out what approaches are used to assemble
fuel cells
2. Determine the suitability of a fuel cell assembly
syste...
Fuel Cell Assembly
Rotary, reel to reel
processes used to
manufacture CCMs,
MEAs, and even
cells!
Fully
automated/semi-
au...
Decomposition and Evaluation of current
assembly approaches
1. Pick location and buffer
2. Component handling method
3. Co...
Aim
1. Find out what approaches are used to assemble
fuel cells – General approaches have been
assessed
2. Determine the s...
Abstracting product and resource info
Fuel Cell
product info
Fuel Cell
assembly
system info
Abstraction of
information
MOD...
Example – Vacuum Gripper
Product
Assembly system
Resource component (2)
Product requirements and characteristics
The use of a complexity model to facilitate in the selection of a fuel cell assem...
Gripper
N.Contactpoints
Grippingmethod
Part
storage/buffering
considerations
Sensitivityto
handling
Componentcosts
Resourc...
Gripper – additional factors
N.Contactpoints
Grippingmethod
Sensitivityto
handling
Resource component (2)Actuation
Control
Assembly system
Assembly system
N.Contactpoints
Grippingmethod
Sensitivityto
handling
Resource component (2)
Actuation
Con...
Complexity
Manufacturing Resource
Component Complexity (MRCC)
Operational
Complexity (OC)
Structural
Complexity (SC)
Produ...
Conclusion and Further work
2. Determine the suitability of a fuel cell assembly
system to the:
– Product’s design
– Manuf...
Acknowledgement
Questions
Contact Details:
Mussawar Ahmad
mussawar.ahmad@warwick.ac.uk
Additional slides
Example – Vacuum Gripper
Surface
Integration
Internal Structure
Control
Alignment
Rationale
Cups are cheap, but provide no...
Abstracting product and resource info
 An experienced machine
builder knows what product
information is required to
desig...
Suitability? Preliminary Structure…
Product
Requirements Characteristics
Size
Weight
Geometry
Material
Tolerance
Volume
Pe...
Example - Product
Flexible
Characteristics
Size
Weight
Geometry
Material
Infer
Thin
Sensitive to
RH and T
CCM
Data
input
C...
Example – Resource (Grippers)
Characteristics Function
Sense
Grip
Move
Buffer
Fixing
Control
Alignment
DoF
Data
input
What...
Model Overview
Product
Design
Process
Design
Resource
Design
characteristics
components
performance
requirements
sequence
...
Fuel cell pick and place
Fuel Cell Assembly
Compression Pick ‘n’ Place Testing
Sealant
application
Pick location Place loc...
Example – Vacuum Gripper
# MRCC Description Value Max Value Normalised Value
1 Surface Cups – 1 1 5 1/5
Cups – 2- 5 2 2/5
...
Example – Vacuum Gripper
[11] C. Laskowski and S. Derby, "Fuel cell ASAP: Two iterations of an automated stack assembly pr...
of 29

PRES_Review_Pick_and_Place_Assembly_Systems_Mussawar_Ahmad_2015Dec_final

Published on: Mar 4, 2016
Source: www.slideshare.net


Transcripts - PRES_Review_Pick_and_Place_Assembly_Systems_Mussawar_Ahmad_2015Dec_final

  • 1. Shaping the Future Fuel Cell Pick and Place Assembly System Complexity MEC Student Conference 17th December 2015 Mussawar Ahmad mussawar.ahmad@warwick.ac.uk
  • 2. Fuel Cell Pick ‘n’ Place problem 1. Pick location and buffer 2. Component handling method 3. Component moving method 4. Place position Manual Semi-Auto Fully Auto • Is there a ‘right’ approach? • What should be considered in order to determine the ‘right’ approach? • How should fuel cell components be handled? • What is the component buffering mechanism that should be used? • What to do if the product design changes?
  • 3. Overview  Problem background  Aim  Modelling overview  Example  Conclusion and further work
  • 4. Problem background Know-how Fuel cells are great, but… Lack of hydrogen infrastructure Costly compared to incumbent technologies Material costs Manufacturing costs Assembly Component manufactureTypical assembly costs: • 10-30% [1] of labour • Up to 50% of total manufacturing [2, 3] Equipment Processes Methods Control Criticality Tolerances Sequence [1] J. L. Nevins and D. E. Whitney, “Concurrent design of product and processes,” McGraw-Hill, New York, 1989 [2] U. Rembold, C. Blume, and R. Dillmann, “Computer- integrated manufacturing technology and systems,” Mar-cel Dekker, New York, 1985 [3] S. S. F. Smith, “Using multiple genetic operators to re-duce premature convergence in genetic assembly plan-ning,” Computers in Industry, Vol. 54, Iss. 1, pp. 35–49, May 2004.
  • 5. More on costs Electrode 33% (CoV = 0.39) Membrane 12% (CoV = 0.36) GDL 11% (CoV=0.46) Plates 28% (CoV = 0.42) Assembly 16% (CoV = 0.66) Component cost breakdown for PEM fuel cells (%) [4-8] [4] Bar-On, R. Kirchain, and R. Roth, "Technical cost analysis for PEM fuel cells," Journal of Power Sources, vol. 109, pp. 71-75, 2002 [5] H. Tsuchiya, "Mass production cost of PEM fuel cell by learning curve," International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 29, pp. 985-990, 2004. [6] "Manufacturing Fuel Cell Manhattan Project," ACI Technologies2011. [7] S. K. Kamarudin, W. R. W. Daud, A. Md.Som, M. S. Takriff, and A. W. Mohammad, "Technical design and economic evaluation of a PEM fuel cell system," Journal of Power Sources, vol. 157, pp. 641-649, 2006. [8] D. Little, "Cost Analysis of Fuel Cell System for Transportation - Baseline System Cost Estimate," ed, 2000. • Most significant CONTRIBUTION of absolute fuel cell cost comes from the MEA (electrodes + membranes + GDL) • Most significant VARIATION in cost estimates comes from assembly • Also, much greater than TYPICAL values presented in literature • Why? • and Why is this a problem? 𝐶𝑜𝑉 = 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠
  • 6. Variation in assembly costs Assembly methods Fuel cell design architecture Quality and yield Manual Automated [9] Manual fuel cell assembly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-vcRR4mC6w [10] Automated fuel cell assembly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcbrHAPmoh8 [11] C. Laskowski and S. Derby, "Fuel cell ASAP: Two iterations of an automated stack assembly process and ramifications for fuel cell design-for-manufacture considerations," Journal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology, vol. 8, p. 031004, 2011. [9] [10] [11] Product Design Process Design Resource Design Product Design Process Design Resource Design
  • 7. Aim 1. Find out what approaches are used to assemble fuel cells 2. Determine the suitability of a fuel cell assembly system to the: – Product’s design – Manufacturing strategy and system i.e. high volume vs. high variety vs. scalability
  • 8. Fuel Cell Assembly Rotary, reel to reel processes used to manufacture CCMs, MEAs, and even cells! Fully automated/semi- automated pick and place systems Lab based approaches are entirely manual Increasing volume All of these approaches can be represented and categorised
  • 9. Decomposition and Evaluation of current assembly approaches 1. Pick location and buffer 2. Component handling method 3. Component moving method 4. Place position Manual Semi-Auto Fully Auto Fuel Cell Assembly – A review of industrial best practice, HSSMI, Ahmad et al. 2015
  • 10. Aim 1. Find out what approaches are used to assemble fuel cells – General approaches have been assessed 2. Determine the suitability of a fuel cell assembly system to the: – Product’s design – Manufacturing strategy and system i.e. high volume vs. high variety vs. scalability
  • 11. Abstracting product and resource info Fuel Cell product info Fuel Cell assembly system info Abstraction of information MODEL Model testing - Is a system design suitable for a product - How well does a system accommodate change? Ontology – domain mapping for a systemic approach with “important” empirical data A knowledge-based approach for the selection of assembly equipment based on fuel cell component characteristics, Ahmad et al., IECON 2015
  • 12. Example – Vacuum Gripper Product Assembly system Resource component (2)
  • 13. Product requirements and characteristics The use of a complexity model to facilitate in the selection of a fuel cell assembly sequence, Ahmad et al., 6th CIRP Conference on Assembly Technologies and Systems (CATS), 2016, in review • Parameters originally designed for determining sequence complexity • Now being used to assess material handling requirements based on component characteristicsN.Contactpoints Grippingmethod Part storage/buffering considerations Sensitivityto handling Componentcosts
  • 14. Gripper N.Contactpoints Grippingmethod Part storage/buffering considerations Sensitivityto handling Componentcosts Resource component (2) Pick location(1) Could be used as a weighting factor
  • 15. Gripper – additional factors N.Contactpoints Grippingmethod Sensitivityto handling Resource component (2)Actuation Control
  • 16. Assembly system Assembly system N.Contactpoints Grippingmethod Sensitivityto handling Resource component (2) Actuation Control Integration
  • 17. Complexity Manufacturing Resource Component Complexity (MRCC) Operational Complexity (OC) Structural Complexity (SC) Product requirements Evaluates the system structure Cost Modularity Integrability Weight Size Sensitivity Tolerance How well suited is the system to assembling Product A? How compliant is the system to making Product A and/or Product B? IMPORTANT : Complexity is a relative measure – it must be compared with something else Product component info N. Contact points Gripping method Sensitivity to handling Actuation Control Integration
  • 18. Conclusion and Further work 2. Determine the suitability of a fuel cell assembly system to the: – Product’s design – Manufacturing strategy and system i.e. high volume vs. high variety vs. scalability • Beginning to build a picture of what the requirements and characteristics of fuel cell components are • All components of the pick and place system need to be brought into the model and mapped • Testing then needs to be carried out to begin the introduction of rules and axioms that build upon this approach • Eventually see this in an industrial setting to support concurrent engineering
  • 19. Acknowledgement Questions Contact Details: Mussawar Ahmad mussawar.ahmad@warwick.ac.uk
  • 20. Additional slides
  • 21. Example – Vacuum Gripper Surface Integration Internal Structure Control Alignment Rationale Cups are cheap, but provide non-uniform support Gripper segmentation allows large windowed components i.e. gaskets to be gripped Additional considerations regarding integration need to be made should the gripper be used on automated systems MRCC OC/SC Rationale OC SC SC Rapid changeover to alternative gripper heads allows more components to be handled, however this requires additional design considerations OC OC/SC Set point control supports the picking of porous components such as the GDL The more sophisticated the alignment method, the better the quality of the fuel cell Actuation OC/SC Additional internal DoF to allow more components to be gripped and reduce the load on the moving mechanism
  • 22. Abstracting product and resource info  An experienced machine builder knows what product information is required to design a machine for a given application i.e. pick and place Product Requirements Characteristics Size Weight Geometry Material Tolerance Volume Performance Component This information is fairly easy to obtain i.e. CAD, current designs, business strategy
  • 23. Suitability? Preliminary Structure… Product Requirements Characteristics Size Weight Geometry Material Tolerance Volume Performance Resource Characteristics Function Sense Grip Move Buffer Fixing Control Alignment DoF Mapping in a knowledge- based system (ontology) Design of systemic knowledge-based system, enriched using empirical data for a specific case Component Component
  • 24. Example - Product Flexible Characteristics Size Weight Geometry Material Infer Thin Sensitive to RH and T CCM Data input Characteristics Size Weight Geometry Material Infer BrittlePorous GDL Data input LightLight
  • 25. Example – Resource (Grippers) Characteristics Function Sense Grip Move Buffer Fixing Control Alignment DoF Data input What data is important? How can it be captured in a systemic way?
  • 26. Model Overview Product Design Process Design Resource Design characteristics components performance requirements sequence bill of process tasks equipment safety layout . . . . . . . . . This work: -Review how fuel cell components are mated to resource components -Define rules and relationships REASON: To identify what considerations needs to be made when designing a fuel cell assembly system IMPACT: Reduce costs because rules become a design aid & facilitate design of flexible, reconfigurable systems
  • 27. Fuel cell pick and place Fuel Cell Assembly Compression Pick ‘n’ Place Testing Sealant application Pick location Place location Moving mechanismGripping mechanism AlignmentBuffer Auto Semi-Auto Manual Evaluate Complexity Edit this slide
  • 28. Example – Vacuum Gripper # MRCC Description Value Max Value Normalised Value 1 Surface Cups – 1 1 5 1/5 Cups – 2- 5 2 2/5 Cups – 5+ 3 3/5 Flat - Unsegmented 4 4/5 Flat - Segmented 5 5/5 2 Integration Manual 1 3 1/3 Semi-automated 2 2/3 Automated 3 3/3 3 Internal Structure Fixed 1 3 1/3 Modular 2 2/3 Changeable 3 3/3 4 Control Binary 1 2 1/2 Set-point 2 2/2 5 Alignment None 1 4 1/4 Holes 2 2/4 Pins 3 3/4 Vision 4 4/4 6 Actuation None 1 3 1/3 1 DoF 2 2/3 2 DoF 3 3/3 Complexity Table Knowledge Capture
  • 29. Example – Vacuum Gripper [11] C. Laskowski and S. Derby, "Fuel cell ASAP: Two iterations of an automated stack assembly process and ramifications for fuel cell design-for-manufacture considerations," Journal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology, vol. 8, p. 031004, 2011. [12] Gripper design https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoH7_22LN6I [11] [12] Surface = 2/5 Integration = 3/3 Internal Structure = 1/3 Control = 1/2 Alignment = 1/4 Actuation = 1/3 SUM = 2.48 Normalised = 0.41 Surface = 2/5 + 4/5 Integration = 3/3 Internal Structure = 1/3 Control = 1/2 Alignment = 4/4 Actuation = 2/3 SUM = 4.7 Normalised = 0.78

Related Documents