Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 4 – uploaded by danang danang

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
that regulate the speed limit and affects the “TCP” line. This experiment expects them to follow the same program and overlook the other programming characteristics for integrity. The analogous speed of cobots to mechanical robots is the focus of data investigation from speed to performance. It is simulated that the attached joint for the speed of the mechanical robot will be the same as that of the cobot, which means mechanical robots set a normal speed for Overall Equipment Effectiveness performance and cobots always operate at a high loss. able o Fertormance or “Overall Kkquipment Eifectiveness”’ Overall Equipment Effectiveness performance value for mechanical robots is one hundred percent even in the future it can be treated by other robots programmed in the same environment by each programming structure. The particular stuff is can’t play an important aspect in this study because the innovation will be continual among 2 robots. The performance challenge has to appear from mechanical robots. The Cobot Overall Equipment Effectiveness value for Performance is fifty-five point twenty-five percent. This amount of value is necessarily fewer than the industry performance level. That 2- values will influence the overall effectiveness of the equipment.

Table 4 that regulate the speed limit and affects the “TCP” line. This experiment expects them to follow the same program and overlook the other programming characteristics for integrity. The analogous speed of cobots to mechanical robots is the focus of data investigation from speed to performance. It is simulated that the attached joint for the speed of the mechanical robot will be the same as that of the cobot, which means mechanical robots set a normal speed for Overall Equipment Effectiveness performance and cobots always operate at a high loss. able o Fertormance or “Overall Kkquipment Eifectiveness”’ Overall Equipment Effectiveness performance value for mechanical robots is one hundred percent even in the future it can be treated by other robots programmed in the same environment by each programming structure. The particular stuff is can’t play an important aspect in this study because the innovation will be continual among 2 robots. The performance challenge has to appear from mechanical robots. The Cobot Overall Equipment Effectiveness value for Performance is fifty-five point twenty-five percent. This amount of value is necessarily fewer than the industry performance level. That 2- values will influence the overall effectiveness of the equipment.

Related Figures (14)

4th the fee of the different cells will be determined. This will combine the robot's financial fees and security considerations. In addition, other unit items including Computer Numeri cal Control machines and Coordinate Measuring Machines are set as constant values for creating machining cells and values as reference points for robot assimilation fees. expensive as that Hypothetically, if the different fee of the symbiotic robot was 2x of a mechanical robot, it seem significant. Nonetheless, if neither is significant comparative to other fees, this will matter less in the overall decision of which robot to use. This is an example and will be calculated in the fee section. Finally, the analysis will be adopted to recognize the outcomes of different actions summing up the strength of different robots. The 3 main estimate factors are fee, authenticity, and safety. In addition, hazard assessment is taken into account to consider security issues. The unity of all above actions will be combined with all factors of the development and will help all estimate. An ex manufacturing ind significant. ecutive survey was also conducted in the Computer Numerical Control ustry to approve the expectation about which factors are the most Figure 1. Concept Map
4th the fee of the different cells will be determined. This will combine the robot's financial fees and security considerations. In addition, other unit items including Computer Numeri cal Control machines and Coordinate Measuring Machines are set as constant values for creating machining cells and values as reference points for robot assimilation fees. expensive as that Hypothetically, if the different fee of the symbiotic robot was 2x of a mechanical robot, it seem significant. Nonetheless, if neither is significant comparative to other fees, this will matter less in the overall decision of which robot to use. This is an example and will be calculated in the fee section. Finally, the analysis will be adopted to recognize the outcomes of different actions summing up the strength of different robots. The 3 main estimate factors are fee, authenticity, and safety. In addition, hazard assessment is taken into account to consider security issues. The unity of all above actions will be combined with all factors of the development and will help all estimate. An ex manufacturing ind significant. ecutive survey was also conducted in the Computer Numerical Control ustry to approve the expectation about which factors are the most Figure 1. Concept Map
Table 1. Unit Data List The item of manufacturing activity for this study is a simple calculation and will be fabricated by adopting the subtractive method of perpendicular crushing centers. Table 1 is a brief adaptation of the full list of the data contain the values for robotic auto- machining cells. Combined in the table are the specialized specifications for the items in the cell. One big deviation of it is shown in the table 2, the difference in weight and max linear speed of the 2 different types of robots. Mechanical robots have an estimated maximum speed that is 3x faster than cooperative robots. These unit data sheets will be adopted later in unit architecture to exhaustive an exposure estimate.
Table 1. Unit Data List The item of manufacturing activity for this study is a simple calculation and will be fabricated by adopting the subtractive method of perpendicular crushing centers. Table 1 is a brief adaptation of the full list of the data contain the values for robotic auto- machining cells. Combined in the table are the specialized specifications for the items in the cell. One big deviation of it is shown in the table 2, the difference in weight and max linear speed of the 2 different types of robots. Mechanical robots have an estimated maximum speed that is 3x faster than cooperative robots. These unit data sheets will be adopted later in unit architecture to exhaustive an exposure estimate.
The gap of computer numerical control machines is completely composed inside the oven. Its orientation is a key consideration when incorporating it into a floor plan. A Computer Numerical Control machine conceivably reflection of abake stuff, it has a door on the front and it has to be put in speculation of this port. Accordingly, a Computer Numerical Control machine will have the opposite direction on the rear edge of the unit as a microwave normally faces the kitchen wall. Part of the machines have exclusive directions but the Haas-VF-2 has a front center door. The Haas orientation provides a Visual of the Haas engine and dimensional directions (figure 3). I EE The focus of this study is to analyze which robot is most effective in completing machine maintenance tasks. The floor plan was advanced to establish the practicality of he factors functioning as a method. Adopting the 2D Solidworks, the different stuff is weary to scale and defined in a 2D floor plan. When assimilation factors into the system, heir reach and direction are the biggest attention. For different individual cells, the base joint range, J-1 as a full circle. This is important to recognize because once the robot goes around in a circle it will reach its limit. Another way of thinking is that the robot can ‘otate plus or minus half of circle degree from its center line. This rotation curb set up a Jead zone in the robot's counters.
The gap of computer numerical control machines is completely composed inside the oven. Its orientation is a key consideration when incorporating it into a floor plan. A Computer Numerical Control machine conceivably reflection of abake stuff, it has a door on the front and it has to be put in speculation of this port. Accordingly, a Computer Numerical Control machine will have the opposite direction on the rear edge of the unit as a microwave normally faces the kitchen wall. Part of the machines have exclusive directions but the Haas-VF-2 has a front center door. The Haas orientation provides a Visual of the Haas engine and dimensional directions (figure 3). I EE The focus of this study is to analyze which robot is most effective in completing machine maintenance tasks. The floor plan was advanced to establish the practicality of he factors functioning as a method. Adopting the 2D Solidworks, the different stuff is weary to scale and defined in a 2D floor plan. When assimilation factors into the system, heir reach and direction are the biggest attention. For different individual cells, the base joint range, J-1 as a full circle. This is important to recognize because once the robot goes around in a circle it will reach its limit. Another way of thinking is that the robot can ‘otate plus or minus half of circle degree from its center line. This rotation curb set up a Jead zone in the robot's counters.
a een RS Le a In additionthe correlation and comparable linear measure value of the different cells (table 2). The Collaborative unit has an opening box Record rate of 103 sqft but it is repeated because some of the space around it is not applicable to the another uses. The new Site size with more square and oval shapes has a total of 116 square feet. In each area consumed each unit was drastic, this is owing to the necessary weal fences around mechanical robots required to acept satisfy risk estimate value. Collaborative cells have a site that takes up thirty-nine percent of the modern unit site. This is an important diversity in a minor production facility. ee ——————e EEE Oe en renee Guardrails are the essential characteristic of collaborative and industrial unit designs. This results in a more linear floor plan to consume. In a manufacturing skill, the size of a quadratic is constant and has an advance value, so it will most likely be considered negative, representation of the guardrail is shown in figure 4.
a een RS Le a In additionthe correlation and comparable linear measure value of the different cells (table 2). The Collaborative unit has an opening box Record rate of 103 sqft but it is repeated because some of the space around it is not applicable to the another uses. The new Site size with more square and oval shapes has a total of 116 square feet. In each area consumed each unit was drastic, this is owing to the necessary weal fences around mechanical robots required to acept satisfy risk estimate value. Collaborative cells have a site that takes up thirty-nine percent of the modern unit site. This is an important diversity in a minor production facility. ee ——————e EEE Oe en renee Guardrails are the essential characteristic of collaborative and industrial unit designs. This results in a more linear floor plan to consume. In a manufacturing skill, the size of a quadratic is constant and has an advance value, so it will most likely be considered negative, representation of the guardrail is shown in figure 4.
Figure 5: Collaborative unit Floor Plan ~~ The context of assessment of the level o selection of familiar risk levels. To comply with issessment hese items, he entire au an additiona omation sys — ee ee Ee eee hazard appraisal is t f hazard tangled in an he identified risks are adequate. The scheme described 4 if a 5-action >xecution as ‘What does for compressing risk is required, the well. The outlook must be detailed he project or system include?” or "Who will interact with him?" Referring first. The a he awareness, calculation, and area, an analogy with standards, and the he ISO, all single stuff exceed the process from the manufacturer. Nonetheless, when straightening through hazard assessment must be carried out to ensure the sa em. Risk estimate is a 4 to 5-step process depend uest to find ou hazard hazard fety of ing on whether actions required sequentially. process must be followed for the planned look consist of o the earlier outlook category, the details of this outlook have been “urthermore, it is necessary to identify the various potentia n completing autonomous machining unit support tas predetermined. risks that operators may face ks. Standard and redundant
Figure 5: Collaborative unit Floor Plan ~~ The context of assessment of the level o selection of familiar risk levels. To comply with issessment hese items, he entire au an additiona omation sys — ee ee Ee eee hazard appraisal is t f hazard tangled in an he identified risks are adequate. The scheme described 4 if a 5-action >xecution as ‘What does for compressing risk is required, the well. The outlook must be detailed he project or system include?” or "Who will interact with him?" Referring first. The a he awareness, calculation, and area, an analogy with standards, and the he ISO, all single stuff exceed the process from the manufacturer. Nonetheless, when straightening through hazard assessment must be carried out to ensure the sa em. Risk estimate is a 4 to 5-step process depend uest to find ou hazard hazard fety of ing on whether actions required sequentially. process must be followed for the planned look consist of o the earlier outlook category, the details of this outlook have been “urthermore, it is necessary to identify the various potentia n completing autonomous machining unit support tas predetermined. risks that operators may face ks. Standard and redundant
e- ISSN: 2809-8706; p-ISSN: 2810-0557, Hal 38-55 Journal of Engineering, Electrical and Informatics Vol.2, No.2 Juni 2022
e- ISSN: 2809-8706; p-ISSN: 2810-0557, Hal 38-55 Journal of Engineering, Electrical and Informatics Vol.2, No.2 Juni 2022
operating procedures Tight sa permanent injury. In Table 3: fety layers cut down sources of hazard t The 5 biggest risks identified for differe hat may result in nt cells were the files for more calculation. 1I is the Ist risk in a mechanical robot unit, and 1-C is the 1" risk in a cooperative robot cel . lL is a risk that is mainly impacted by t he operation of a Computer Numerical Control machine that is not related to robots. When a job is done in a Computer Numerical Contro plant. Because of the complexity establis h in productivity, diverse occupation can be made having a variety of raw material sizes and finished part geometries. The specifics associated with each unique job may require s pecially modeled jaws. This is an example of the function involved in a commutation engine. The different robots independently go through the same turnover as stated in twenty-one and 2C. If Parts vary in size, the gripper spokes can be isolated by the 2 screws on different side of Supplements for greatet gripper finger contours.
operating procedures Tight sa permanent injury. In Table 3: fety layers cut down sources of hazard t The 5 biggest risks identified for differe hat may result in nt cells were the files for more calculation. 1I is the Ist risk in a mechanical robot unit, and 1-C is the 1" risk in a cooperative robot cel . lL is a risk that is mainly impacted by t he operation of a Computer Numerical Control machine that is not related to robots. When a job is done in a Computer Numerical Contro plant. Because of the complexity establis h in productivity, diverse occupation can be made having a variety of raw material sizes and finished part geometries. The specifics associated with each unique job may require s pecially modeled jaws. This is an example of the function involved in a commutation engine. The different robots independently go through the same turnover as stated in twenty-one and 2C. If Parts vary in size, the gripper spokes can be isolated by the 2 screws on different side of Supplements for greatet gripper finger contours.
RAUIC “Fe. LEALGALU ASSUSSIMCIIL By adopting the values on Table 4, hazard assessment schema (Figure 8) is chased by the completion of the hazard assessment mode. On that schema, an operation for severe risk potential advantage to high risk, careless of likelihood. So, the mechanical robot unit needs a safety block to make it available for the operator to work at full speed in robotic proximity. Nonetheless, during performing a switch operation, the robot can ake into a protected teaching mode that bounds the speed and sensitivity with that the robot stops moving. This outcome is a devaluation in the severity of the injury. For a cooperative robot, the recognition, learning, agility, and awareness is continual meaning he robot does not pose a severe hazard of disagreement at different time. So, the Robot does not need a safety fence to get an acceptable hazard assessment rate. Value with P, S, and F labels is for 10 activities (table 10). The S values in all 10 activities are purposeful to be Lv-1 whereas in column F the values are all Lv-2. The reasons for Lv-2 for each activity are generally different. The regularity of having and being classified. Accordingly, a transition as II only can be done on opening but during it does occur the engineer can allocate a significant total of time to process the engine if a new part is being built. Whereas the 5I risk is adverse, this risk is more common when the engineer might remove part of the unit after a shift.
RAUIC “Fe. LEALGALU ASSUSSIMCIIL By adopting the values on Table 4, hazard assessment schema (Figure 8) is chased by the completion of the hazard assessment mode. On that schema, an operation for severe risk potential advantage to high risk, careless of likelihood. So, the mechanical robot unit needs a safety block to make it available for the operator to work at full speed in robotic proximity. Nonetheless, during performing a switch operation, the robot can ake into a protected teaching mode that bounds the speed and sensitivity with that the robot stops moving. This outcome is a devaluation in the severity of the injury. For a cooperative robot, the recognition, learning, agility, and awareness is continual meaning he robot does not pose a severe hazard of disagreement at different time. So, the Robot does not need a safety fence to get an acceptable hazard assessment rate. Value with P, S, and F labels is for 10 activities (table 10). The S values in all 10 activities are purposeful to be Lv-1 whereas in column F the values are all Lv-2. The reasons for Lv-2 for each activity are generally different. The regularity of having and being classified. Accordingly, a transition as II only can be done on opening but during it does occur the engineer can allocate a significant total of time to process the engine if a new part is being built. Whereas the 5I risk is adverse, this risk is more common when the engineer might remove part of the unit after a shift.
Table 5. Risk Value
Table 5. Risk Value
PISUIC 0. MlaZaldG AaSseOssmecnt PlOWCMAaArl UVIALICU, 2U10) The results of the hazard assessment are in Table 5. Adopting the capacity to analyze the operations that need to be maintained unit continued, the hazard are consisten in Table 3. Next, a hazard assessment table is made to establish and regulate the P, F, and S levels for different operations. By this data, the hazard assessment flowchart determines the level of hazard for different operations, totaling up the hazard from the mechanica system. The final action in the hazard assessment process is to set a threshold for wha level of hazard would be tolerable and match it to the assessment level of hazard. Table 5 shows all value risks are at a low level. A low level of hazard results in a safe level of satisfaction so that no iterations are carried out to reduce operating risk. Adopting these items equal guardrails for mechanical robots, momentum and strength limiters for cooperative robots allows operations to remain at a low level of hazard assessment.
PISUIC 0. MlaZaldG AaSseOssmecnt PlOWCMAaArl UVIALICU, 2U10) The results of the hazard assessment are in Table 5. Adopting the capacity to analyze the operations that need to be maintained unit continued, the hazard are consisten in Table 3. Next, a hazard assessment table is made to establish and regulate the P, F, and S levels for different operations. By this data, the hazard assessment flowchart determines the level of hazard for different operations, totaling up the hazard from the mechanica system. The final action in the hazard assessment process is to set a threshold for wha level of hazard would be tolerable and match it to the assessment level of hazard. Table 5 shows all value risks are at a low level. A low level of hazard results in a safe level of satisfaction so that no iterations are carried out to reduce operating risk. Adopting these items equal guardrails for mechanical robots, momentum and strength limiters for cooperative robots allows operations to remain at a low level of hazard assessment.
Overall Equipment Effectiveness here is enabled to see the persuasiveness lin unified method. A fair contrast must be made between capability and persuasiveness to understand the full value of the Overall Equipment Effectiveness standard. The effectivenes things that considering (Q)). All ca Availability The things Overall Equ s is determined by turning at what are produced. Overall Equipment Effectiveness provides a method indicates the available total time o ike change over disturb the exix ipment Effectiveness equalization he various impacts essentially produced on the system. Overall | Effectiveness consists of 3 groups (“availabili egories carry equal density in the overall effectiveness of the estimation. f the machine that runs the applicable job. ence of a method. The 2™ factor in is performance, it will pay attention to use of time o regulate even if the engine is sti ] processing at a highest level. The las possibly can be generated correlated to the for Equipment y” (A), “performance” (P), and “quality” he he is quality, where the relationship between the part composed and the part produced contains good dimensions and exterior finish values. The variables for different determining values are B and A, where both variables have the same units, namely time so that Overall Equipment Effectiveness becomes a measureless rate which is often explicit as a advantage. Figure 9. Overall Equipment Effectiveness Paul, (2017) Availability of “Overall Equipment Effectiveness”
Overall Equipment Effectiveness here is enabled to see the persuasiveness lin unified method. A fair contrast must be made between capability and persuasiveness to understand the full value of the Overall Equipment Effectiveness standard. The effectivenes things that considering (Q)). All ca Availability The things Overall Equ s is determined by turning at what are produced. Overall Equipment Effectiveness provides a method indicates the available total time o ike change over disturb the exix ipment Effectiveness equalization he various impacts essentially produced on the system. Overall | Effectiveness consists of 3 groups (“availabili egories carry equal density in the overall effectiveness of the estimation. f the machine that runs the applicable job. ence of a method. The 2™ factor in is performance, it will pay attention to use of time o regulate even if the engine is sti ] processing at a highest level. The las possibly can be generated correlated to the for Equipment y” (A), “performance” (P), and “quality” he he is quality, where the relationship between the part composed and the part produced contains good dimensions and exterior finish values. The variables for different determining values are B and A, where both variables have the same units, namely time so that Overall Equipment Effectiveness becomes a measureless rate which is often explicit as a advantage. Figure 9. Overall Equipment Effectiveness Paul, (2017) Availability of “Overall Equipment Effectiveness”
e- ISSN: 2809-8706; p-ISSN: 2810-0557, Hal 38-55 a ne jee jor common tinear measure in the mManujacturing Jacitily Rely on the easiness, the area can costly. The contrast in square feet for each unit comes from the safety fences needful to have mechanical robots. This fee is crucial to specify in fee terms. The data shows the mechanical robot unit is sixty-one percent bigger than the collaborative unit for this machine maintenance scenario. This must be weighed by a facility wishing to automate VF-2 engines to determine the impact. Journal of Engineering, Electrical and Informatics Vol.2, No.2 Juni 2022
e- ISSN: 2809-8706; p-ISSN: 2810-0557, Hal 38-55 a ne jee jor common tinear measure in the mManujacturing Jacitily Rely on the easiness, the area can costly. The contrast in square feet for each unit comes from the safety fences needful to have mechanical robots. This fee is crucial to specify in fee terms. The data shows the mechanical robot unit is sixty-one percent bigger than the collaborative unit for this machine maintenance scenario. This must be weighed by a facility wishing to automate VF-2 engines to determine the impact. Journal of Engineering, Electrical and Informatics Vol.2, No.2 Juni 2022
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved