Chris Stergiou’s Post

Manufacturing Automation – Latest Tech In Automation, at any point in time, the State of the Art, is the State of the Art, not Better! -- Since in our process we make, the same or similar products as the competition, perhaps we can do better than the "State of the Art", by focusing on OUR specific application as it fits withing OUR process, so that we can maximize OUR productivity! -- "Origin and history The concept of the "state of the art" originated at the beginning of the 20th century.[3] The earliest use of the term "state of the art" documented by the Oxford English Dictionary dates back to 1910, from an engineering manual by Henry Harrison Suplee (1856 – after 1943), an engineering graduate (University of Pennsylvania, 1876), titled The Gas Turbine: Progress in the Design and Construction of Turbines Operated by Gases of Combustion. The relevant passage reads: "In the present state of the art this is all that can be done".[4] The term "art" refers to technics, rather than performing or fine arts.[5] Over time, use of the term increased in all fields where this kind of art has a significant role.[6] In this relation it has been quoted by the author that "although eighteenth-century writers did not use the term, there was indeed in existence a collection of scientific and engineering knowledge and expertise that can be identified as the state of the art for that time".[6] Despite its actual meaning, which does not convey technology that is ahead of the industry, the phrase became so widely used in advertising that a 1985 article described it as "overused", stating that "[it] has no punch left and actually sounds like a lie".[7] A 1994 essay listed it among "the same old tired clichés" that should be avoided in advertising.[8]" https://lnkd.in/evjru9gj -- "Might the "Scatter Gun Approach" of technologies being deployed, most focused on “Automating the worker RATHER than Automating the Process”, be the true underlying cause of this Decline in Manufacturing Productivity whereby gains from one approach are thwarted by the impacts of another approach? OR is there some other key driver involved in the DECREASE of PRODUCTIVITY?" -- Is your automation, State of the Art or is it Better? Your thoughts are appreciated and please SHARE this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to COLLABORATE on your automation for increased productivity. Helping manufacturers with the What? and How? of Automation! https://lnkd.in/ejTfp9Ez #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics

Manufacturing Automation – Scope Creep In Automation, Scope Creep starts at the Architectural level! -- The decision to proceed with THIS or THAT architecture at the conceptual level sets in motion a series of problems to be solved for the particular application and those problems generally fall into two categories. 1. Problems presented by the APPLICATION itself, and 2. Problems presented by the ARCHITECTURE selected. Always and UNAVOIDABLY present in some mix, it's always a calculation of "which problems do we want to solve" and how does that decision impact PERFORMANCE and SIMPLICITY of the final design. As such, having a "GO-TO" solution which we then struggle to make FASTER, more PRECISE or meet the FOOTPRINT requirements is certainly making life "harder than it needs to be" and more expensive in the TOTAL PRICE paid. It may indeed be that we need 6 or 8 axes of motion but if they're all linked together in a monolithic structure, like a Robot Arm, they will be mechanically LARGER than needed, TIED up and waiting for every incremental step, TOO LARGE, TOO SLOW and needlessly COMPLEX with the HIGH PRECISION required, if any, will most likely be required in only a couple of the sequence steps ... but ... we will pay for that precision in ALL the steps. In effect, Solving Problems Created by the Solution. In Automation, Scope Creep starts at the Architectural level! -- "In Summary: Pick and Place applications abound in manufacturing operations and depending on our product volumes and industry, these applications may require varying levels of automation flexibility. While we increasingly see robot arms used in these applications, before we specify a robotic solution we might spend the time to evaluate more “mundane and boring” solutions which are based on time proven custom automation rubrics that call for fixed-location-orientation pick and place locations with short travel strokes. If that's achievable we will end up with simpler systems that are faster and offer lower complexity in terms of technology used such as the need for vision and variable travel paths of the product transfer function." -- Do you have a "go-to" Automation Architecture or do you evaluate Simpler Alternatives? Your thoughts are appreciated and please SHARE this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to COLLABORATE on your automation for increased productivity. Adding value on the WHY, WHAT and HOW of Automation! What are you working on that I can help with? https://lnkd.in/eFipTGdD #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics

Manufacturing Automation – the Objective Good Automation delivers the NEEDS and ignores the WANTS! -- You Can't Always Get What You Want (Song by The Rolling Stones) "No, you can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want But if you try sometime you'll find You get what you need" Perhaps not what the song had in mind but applicable, AUTOMATION is a distillation of Assumptions, User Requirements, Technology and a bit of Creativity to design/build a TRANSFER FUNCTION which converts INPUTS to OUTPUTS at a performance level and meeting ECONOMIC criteria for increased PRODUCTIVITY. Quite a few planets have to line up and even the best mitigation practices of requirement definiton, incorporating stakeholder inputs and "thinking it through", can still leave misalignments, which may be caused by: - Unknown or misunderstood inputs variations - Undocumented tribal knowledge - Wrong priorities, mixing "gotta haves" with "nice to haves" - Other attributes characteristic of a not well defined process A clear OBJECTIVE, answering the WHY, serves to anchor the path by consistently answering the question: "Does this feature, requirement, or attribute align with the WHY?" Good Automation delivers the NEEDS and ignores the WANTS! -- "Summary: In the process of solving a challenging automation problem, we often encounter an unforeseen obstacle that perhaps we could have better defined or understood up front with more thorough vetting or technical due diligence … but as they say, “stuff happens”! 😊 While there are often alternatives to solve the problem before “we throw in the towel” by negotiating a lower-level deliverable, we most often overlook the opportunity to redefine the deliverable to an equivalent that doesn’t necessarily mean getting 100% of our original intended goals, in exactly the intended manner but yields a more reliable solution in a different configuration, with essentially the same outcomes AND with higher reliability. In this example, settling for a single operator servicing three machines with greater ease and safety than the previous three operators servicing one machine each with high inherent safety concerns and high fatigue levels leading to lost production capacity, was successful because there was clear communication and alignment between the “letter of the objective” and the “spirit of the objective.”" -- Is your Automation delivering the NEEDS? Your thoughts are appreciated and please SHARE this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to COLLABORATE on your automation for increased productivity. Adding value on the WHY, WHAT and HOW of Automation! What are you working on that I can help with? https://lnkd.in/e2pqYKj2 #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics #innovation

A Stellar Example of Industrial Automation Design Empowered by AI Technology Introduction Industrial automation, coupled with AI technology, has rapidly transformed manufacturing processes, revolutionizing efficiency, productivity, and quality. The integration of AI into industrial automation design has opened up new possibilities for optimizing operations and achieving unprecedented levels of performance. This article explore a remarkable example of industrial automation design that harnesses the power of AI to deliver exceptional results. AI-Driven Robotic Assembly Line One exemplary use of AI in industrial automation design is an AI-driven robotic assembly line developed by XYZ Manufacturing Company. This company specializes in producing complex electronic devices, and works to enhance the efficiency and precision of their assembly processes. By incorporating AI technology, they achieved remarkable improvements in their production line. Intelligent Vision Systems The AI-driven robotic assembly line employed advanced vision systems equipped with AI algorithms. These systems possessed the capability to analyze visual data in real-time and make intelligent decisions. The vision systems could identify and locate components accurately, detect defects or anomalies, and guide the robots in performing precise assembly tasks. The integration of AI algorithms with vision systems significantly improved the speed and accuracy of the assembly process, minimizing errors and reducing rework. Adaptive Learning and Optimization The AI technology utilized in the robotic assembly line was equipped with adaptive learning capabilities. Through continuous data analysis and machine learning algorithms, the system learned from past-experiences and optimized its performance over time. For instance, the AI algorithms recognized patterns in the assembly process, enabling them to predict potential bottlenecks or issues. Predictive Maintenance The AI-driven robotic assembly line implemented predictive maintenance techniques. By leveraging AI algorithms, the system monitored the performance of robotic arms, sensors, and other critical components. Real-time data analysis enabled the detection of anomalies, signs of wear, or potential failures. This proactive approach facilitated timely maintenance and replacement of components, minimizing unplanned downtime and optimizing the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). Collaboration and Human-Machine Interaction The AI-enabled robotic assembly line fostered collaboration between humans and machines. The AI algorithms understand and adapt to human input, allowing operators to interact seamlessly with the robotic systems. This collaborative approach improved the flexibility and versatility of the assembly line, as operators could easily reconfigure the system or introduce new product variants without extensive reprogramming.

Manufacturing Automation – Asymmetric Speed If you want to go fast, GO ALONE, if you want to go far, GO TOGETHER! With outcomes being either a SPECTACULAR success or a COLOSSAL failure, this African proverb usually holds in the timeline to execute any project and with the 3rd option being MEDIOCRITY … well, it doesn’t matter how long that one takes. Contextualized to a any project and IF speed is important, this generally means that a small(er) team will reach the end point QUICKER and at LOWER costs than a large team of “stakeholders” which can bring the development process to a crawl and even into a GRIDLOCK of constraints that even if real, can be bypassed by DIKTAT … solving the problem by avoiding it! Having witnessed this dynamic in environments including, development of a new computer workstation, development of a next generation medical instrument and many one off, automated systems, the advantages of GOING ALONE include: -         NO analysis paralysis. -        Clear vision of the end goal. -         Coherent understanding of how all the pieces fit together. -         Consistent “Test Quickly” mentality. -         Fast iterative building and refinement -         CALCULATED RISK taking. Without implying that consensus inputs are to be ignored OR that a scramble of random activities will yield a good outcome ... whether called the RUNWAY in “stealth” development or the BUDGET in single project execution, SUCCESS or FAILURE is determined at the outset with the system architecture and COSTS associated with realizing that outcome are determined by SPEED of execution …. AND …. In the case of a large teams, the costs go UP and significantly so as the process gets thwarted by serial gates caused by: -         Misaligned vision from each function. -         Divergent views as to “how” to sequence the steps. -         Artificial gates and delays by support or service functions. -         In short, “too many cooks in the kitchen.” Through INTUITION, EXPERIENCE or BOTH, a small team with a FREE hand to act independently, will always yield a faster answer to the question, ARE WE HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION? … If Not, everyone can move on, Life’s too short! If you want to go fast, GO ALONE, if you want to go far, GO TOGETHER! -- “Without that experience, a particular automation project can easily turn into a Science Project!” -- How large is your automation development team? Your thoughts are appreciated and please share this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to collaborate on automation for enhanced productivity in your process. https://lnkd.in/e8puzewS #industry40 #automation #productivity #robots

Manufacturing Automation – the Support You can outsource the work, NOT the responsibility! Any well designed, built and deployed automated assembly or test system, becomes part of the value stream of the process which relies on it’s uptime and full functionality to convert inputs into value-added outputs. Delivering PRODUCTIVITY it was developed for. Maintaining UPTIME is ultimately the responsibility of the end user, as it’s much more important to him than to anyone else and as enticing as having good, reliable and responsible external support sounds, it’s not ENOUGH! Here’s why: -         Running the system during FAT or SAT testing is not the same as the system operating in the real environment of CONTINUOUS production. -         Inputs variations that may occur over time or were missed initially will ALWAYS make the automation “gag” as automation hates variation. -         Whether across town, or across the globe, 24/7 REMOTE support is NOT a substitute for competent EYEBALLS on the system on the floor in real time. -         Training operators & maintenance personnel is not OPTIONAL but REQUIRED in order to both report system issues and understand them, as well as prevent them by understanding WHAT the system does and HOW. -         The COSTS and LOSSES associated with any downtime quickly grow and multiply and make every incident a FIRE, as inevitably production either stops or is significantly diminished. -         Someday, IoT data reporting will enable any system to report any condition, and a humanoid robot will walk over …. Wearing a tool-belt … and correct the problem … SOMEDAY! No matter how many standard platform or component elements a particular design incorporates, at the end it’s inevitably a ONE OFF, custom deployment, tailored to the unique conditions of a particular process. As such, the day to day users and beneficiaries of the PRODUCTIVITY the system delivers are RESPONSIBLE for it timely maintenance, troubleshooting and Inputs-Outputs control. MOST IMPORTANT, the engaged end user will be able to improve the systems performance, reliability and up-time beyond the initial specification as a much longer run time exposes WEAKNESSES and OPPORTUNITIES. You can outsource the work, NOT the responsibility! -- “Without the engaged and full participation of this true owner, the system has diminished chances of succeeding in meeting the intended goals in the long term and further, may even become a burden rather than the competitive advantage envisioned.” -- How do you maximize the uptime of your automation? Your thoughts are appreciated and please SHARE this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to discuss how to collaborate and plan your automation for increased productivity. https://lnkd.in/eKWFwVNh #industry40 #automation #productivity #robots    

Manufacturing Automation – the Distraction Solving problems caused by the design concept ISN'T solving the problem! Any automation project is defined by the REQUIREMENT as expressed through an increase in PRODUCTIVITY and contextualized to the end user’s specific PROCESS as it has evolved over time and the direction in which it will be taken. The FUTURE STATE! As such, the design ARCHITECTURE or concept to be pursued presents technical and financial OPPORTUNITIES while simultaneously presenting the unique CHALLENGES to be solved, IF the fruit of that solution are to be harvested. Like selecting the BEST path from point A to point B, the architecture of the solution may be thought of as the simplest PATH and while selecting it is as much art as science, at all times we have FULL CONTROL of which path to take and consequently which problems we want to solve along the way. A bit like CHEATING, and following the dictum that "the best solution to a problem is to AVOID it", this means that selecting the fundamental architecture simultaneously defines the problems to be solved and generally defined by: -         Product workflow -         Product assembly & test sequence -         Mix of manual & automated operations -         Inherent specifications of performance, rate and yield goals -         System footprint & operating environment -         Other, top-level constraints of the application With the guiding principle of SIMPLICITY of design, yet differentiated for our application, SUCCESS is not measured by the absence of challenges along the way, but by the corresponding BENEFITS delivered by solving a particular set of challenges for the particular solution. We will know we have achieved success AFTER deployment as measured by: -         Increased productivity -         Robust operational reliability -         Ease of use and maintenance, and -         perhaps, Having the task or process that has been automated “disappear” from the Monday morning operational status meeting. Solving problems caused by the design concept ISN'T solving the problem! -- “Whereas the in-house tooling and equipment development group was indeed generally overgrown and “wasteful” on the surface, the innovations and process differentiators it produced were not only unique to the in-house process, but they were also the basis of proprietary development of a competitive advantage that can only come from an in-house team that has daily and constant contact with the process. “ -- How do you maintain focus on the problem in your automation? Your thoughts are appreciated and please SHARE this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to discuss how to collaborate and work on your automation for increased productivity. https://lnkd.in/eyQjBqyM #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics

Manufacturing Automation – Subtle Innovation Rework the entire architecture if needed! Every now and then in system development, a NEW approach to solving a design problem is REVEALED and this may come from: -         Fresh eyes on the problem. -         Accidental discovery while debugging/prototyping. -         Cross-pollination of a tried-and-true method used in another industry. -         Part of solving some extreme constraint in a particular application. -         Other, hard to predict and seemingly random, discoveries. Since this approach is presumably NEW, it’s probably incongruent with the original architecture for the system as presumably it was neither envisioned nor anticipated and while it’s immediate BENEFITS to the project at hand may be minimal or marginal, as it may not quite fit NATURALLY into the original design, .... ... IF we step back and re-envision the entire system architecture around this INNOVATION, we might find that we end up with much more TRANSFORMATIVE benefits as: -         Simpler system -         More responsive system -         An adaptable system -         A more operator friendly/ergonomic system -         Some other significant benefit(s) Whether we focus on the development being the AXLE or the OUTER DIAMETER, each incremental discovery made during our design process has the potential to DISRUPT the way we solve that particular problem and in manufacturing automation, this can mean: -         Easier parts handling -         Smaller system footprint -         Shorter strokes and transfers -         Better integration to upstream-downstream processes All leading to systems that increase total PRODUCTIVITY. Rework the entire architecture if needed! -- “A better Way! Avoid general-purpose robots and use custom robotics.   At the core, what we like about “robotics” is that we can use a motor, a driver, an encoder, and a guide system to create a continuous or intermittent axis of motion. Fully controllable as to speed and position with all components sized to the loads and accelerations that axis will experience throughout it’s stroke and at the required cycle time for a particular application. Integrate multiple axes and coordinate their motion path to meet the requirement, attach some tooling and we have a Robotic System, with each variable of speed and position within out control without having to consider load or stroke as those will have been pre-engineered for the specific application.” -- Have you experienced a subtle discovery forcing a change to the entire automation architecture? Your thoughts are appreciated and please share this post if you think your network will find it of interest. Comment, follow or connect to discuss how to collaborate and plan automation for enhanced productivity. https://lnkd.in/eiZQ2y23 #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics

Manufacturing Automation – the flawed URS Automation is not about meeting previous standards! The User Requirements Specification, (URS), is a MUST HAVE 1st step to designing/building an automated system that takes the current state process to a more PRODUCTIVE future state in a technically and financially efficient manner. Generating the URS implies we have reviewed and understood our current process, warts and all, and have defined the control points we seek to leverage in the design. Whether communicated to an external machine builder or used by our in-house automation group, a well written URS is an aseptic, agnostic description of WHAT the system will accomplish. The URS is composed of the NON-NEGOTIABLE functional, performance and form-factor attributes of the system so that it can be integrated into the process with minimized disruption BUT is not a prescription of HOW to achieve the outcome. Very often a long URS is composed of a few pages which deliver the “meat” of WHAT but proceeds to a larger section of “Cut and Paste” addressing the HOW with definitions of hardware, software, approved components,  structural specifications, and other constraints that change the requirement from: “I want a system that does this!” TO “Here’s a parts and tools kit, make me something that does this!” Not a “blank sheet of paper” and often leading to back and forth negotiations that consume time/energy that would be more profitably spent on the solution itself. The reasons for this are many and can include: -         Writing an objective URS is hard. -         The ability to cut and paste from previous specifications is easier. -         The belief that by standardizing on this PLC, that safety circuit, this robot model, that component will in the long run minimize the TCO. (Over time, rarely the case.) -         Preferences of the person writing the URS without regard for the efficacy of the mandate or the impact on design decisions. -         Other legacy factors, irrelevant to the project. The impact is that COSTS GO UP without incremental benefits to the design and innovative approaches need to be “fought for” by the machine builder …. Hardly worth the battle and an opportunity for INNOVATION is lost. Automation is not about meeting previous standards! -- “What the URS is NOT! The URS is NOT any level of construction detail specificity so that a competent machine design group can have a free “blank sheet” of paper in order to determine the best embodiment  …” -- What’s the funniest text you’ve seen in a URS? Your thoughts are appreciated and please share this post if you think your network will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to discuss how to collaborate and plan automation for enhanced productivity. https://lnkd.in/ekuyjXER #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics

Manufacturing Automation – Simpler Machines In Automation, the Complexity is built on Unconscious Biases! -- The reply to the RFP included a CONCEPT / PROPOSAL, detailing the solution, down to the specific hardware, physical architecture, footprint and many other attributes that the Client now expects in the system. If we do get awarded this project, the probability of a Simple and Innovative solution is NOW approximately = 0! and by extension ... the complexity and costs will remain high. In Automation, the Complexity is built on Unconscious Biases! -- "There are many ways to skin a cat! Since it is possible the several if not all of the possible concept architectures can yield a fully functional, reliable if not efficient system for a particular application some other selection criteria is needed to help guide us towards the more efficient one and by extension the simplest! An alternative, tried and proven approach is to start with the footprint constraints and then test-layout the product path, informed by the form factor of the inputs and outputs, moving through the sequential assembly and testing steps with the required cycle time. Moving in some simple selected trajectories such as: -         Circular, -         Oval, -         Linear, -         Rectilinear, -         Other and Further, this product travel though space trajectory should also be informed with good machine design practices such as: -         Short strokes -         Minimized cantilevers -         Ease of assembly-service -         Ergonomic inputs and outputs, and -         Safety considerations The overall optimal architecture of the machine should now be able to become “visible” to the experienced systems architect who can then proceed to fill in the blanks without any consideration for any of the external constraints of: -         Design to the shop. -         Start with this or that architecture. -         Have we used this hardware before? -         Other sentimental or imaginary constraints. If we are able to accomplish this on any particular system requirement, we will have converged on an efficient machine design ... that will not look identical to the system previously completed ... and we will have delivered a Hardware Agnostic Solution ... which is not only fully functional and very reliable but also very Efficient! Is the final system design efficient?" -- How do you design SIMPLER Automation? Your thoughts are appreciated and please SHARE this post if you think your connections will find it of interest. 👉 Comment, follow or connect to COLLABORATE on your automation for increased productivity. Helping manufacturers with the WHY, WHAT and HOW of Automation! Reach out if I can help with your Automation or Funded Project! https://lnkd.in/eHEvyX62 #industry40 #automation #productivity #robotics #innovation