Preliminary Detailed Design Review Phase I: Assembly Stations 1-5 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

P13458: Dresser-Rand Compressor Assembly Line

Team Members: Lauren Kraft –Project Manager, Nick Feng – IE Cole Bowden – ME, Shawn Moseley – ME Jordon Boggs – ME, Alex Peterson – ME

Preliminary Detailed Design Review

Phase I: Assembly Stations 1-5

Agenda

 Key Objectives of this Review  Problem Statement  Preliminary Detailed Design of Caster System:

 Caster Design  Cart Design  Universal Frame Interface  Frame and Caster Plate Stress Analysis  Design Risks Identified  Detailed Design Needs

 Ergonomic Justification  Process Layout Update  Economic Analysis  Project Outlook & Timeline

Key Objectives of this Review

Prototype type Desi sign gn Overall Process ss layout

 Catch mistakes  Improve design from

• perator feedback

 Specs (needs) are

addressed

 Risks are addressed  Decisions are made to

further design

 Receive feedback on

current layout

 Consider alternatives and

application of lean principles

 What are we missing?

Problem Statement

Design a flexible material handling system to incorporate 5,000 to 22,000 pounds that is easy to use and incorporates the safest design elements within cost and functionality

• constraints. This design fully supports

the new process layout in Dresser- Rand’s strategic project.

Caster Design

 Designing to 5000lbs/plate  Casters per plate: 4  Caster load: 1250lbs  Caster considerations

 Swivel lock  Low diameter  Non-Metal Construction  Cost

 Hamilton WH-4NYB

 4 inch diameter nylon wheel  2000lb load capacity

Model Total Weight Plates Weight per Plate HOSS 2 8,700 4 2175 HOSS 4 15,400 4 3850 HOSS 6 21,900 6 3650 HOS 2 5,200 4 1300 HOS 4 10,600 4 2650 HOS 6 15,400 4 3850 MOS 2 5,000 4 1250 MOS 4 8,800 4 2200 MOS 6 1,3200 4 3300

Swivel Lock Casters

 Locking casters allow for strict 2 directional motion  Each caster must be turned and locked by hand  4 unidirectional caster sets will over-constrain the

system

 Solves guidance issue  Creates a directional control issue  Creates an ergonomics issue

Preliminary Cart Design

Preliminary Cart Dimensions

Universal Frame Interface

 Single interface compatible with

all 3 compressor families

 Tapered pin on top face for ease

• f frame positioning

 Dual pin configuration on

bottom face for stability

 Ease of manufacture and

assembly

MOS HOS HOSS Unloaded Beam

Universal Frame Interface

Beam Model Output

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Beam Position (in) Von Mises Stress (psi) Von Mises Stress Along Beam Allowable Stress Calculated Stress 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

• 8
• 6
• 4
• 2

2 4 Beam Position (in.) Beam Deflection x 0.001 (in.) Deflection Along Beam

Frame Stress Analysis – On Casters

 Peak stress of

6850psi, n<4

 Agrees well with

initial calculation of 6930 psi, n<4

 Max deflection .01

inches

Frame Stress Analysis – On Jackstands

Caster Plate Stress Analysis

Design Risks

 Casters cannot support cylinder weights  Tugger integration not yet determined  Directional control issues with casters  Ergonomics of swivel-lock rotation  Tolerance stack-up  Weld joint stress analysis  Caster bolt pattern not standard  Manufacturability deadlines

Highest Risk Lowest Risk

Detailed Design Needs

 Dimensioned frame drawings with tolerance  Design safety standards (if applicable)  Finalized cylinder attach decisions  Finalized caster decisions  Casters or air bearings decision

Ergonomics

Male horizontal reach = 731 mm (95%) Female horizontal reach = 676 mm (95%) 10% of female = 641 mm Height of compressor (711.2 mm) + carts (457.2 mm) = 1168.4 mm Male vertical reach = 1732.5 mm (mean) 1844.04 mm (95%) Female V .R = 1602.7 mm (mean) 1711.96 mm (95%) 1518.9 mm (10%)

Ergonomics

 Horizontal Reach Envelope

Conceptual Assembly Process

Sub-assembly Main Assembly

Phase II Phase I

Source: Dresser-Rand

Process Layout

Economic Analysis

 AFE presented to team and reviewed

 Estimates apply only to MOS compressor product launch and

does not take into consideration the financial effects of the mixed model format of the line

 Inflow and Outflow data used to calculate several figures to

justify the pursuit of this project

Year Outflow - Initial Investment Outflows - Inventory Net Flows Discounted Cash Flow Cumulative Discounted Cash Flow

2,316,835

• (2,316,835)

(2,316,835) (2,316,835)

1

700,000 860,000 781,818 (1,535,017)

2

• 8,120,000

6,710,744 5,175,727

3

• 8,280,000

6,220,887 11,396,614

4

• 10,050,000

6,864,285 18,260,899 *inflows and outflows based off of AFE Payback = 1.30 IRR = 155%

• Discount Rate - assumed 10%

*material handling system is subset of initial investment

Outflows - Labor (20%) Outflows - Material (80%)

948,000 1,896,000 3,864,000 4,890,000 3,792,000 7,584,000 15,456,000 19,560,000 6,300,000 17,600,000 27,600,000 34,500,000

Inflows (sales)

• Need more

accurate # from Finance, if possible

Confidential

years

Project Outlook

Phase 1 (currently here)

• Assembly stations 1-5 of main line
• Proven prototype with detailed design for full scale system

Phase 2

• Test, Paint, Shipping of main line without the use of a crane
• Possible detailed design for full scale system

Integration

• Ensure Phase I and Phase II functionally support the process

flow and the physical flow in the assembly line

Project Timeline

①Completed:

• Systems Design

Review for Assembly Stations 1-5 (Phase I)

• Preliminary

Detailed Design of Caster System

②Current Work:

• Process Layout of

Assembly Line

• Concept

Development of Phase II – test, paint, shipping

③Future Work:

• Finish detailed

design of Phase I

• Review Phase II

concepts