FEM-9 222 Englisch PDF
FEM-9 222 Englisch PDF
FEM-9 222 Englisch PDF
Section IX
FEM·
SERIES LIFTING EQUIPMENT 9-.222
Standards of the acceptance and
availability of installations with storage/retrieval 06.1989 (E)
machines and other machinery
Table of contents
Page
2 Scope 3
3 Availability : : ;.. 3
3.1 , Fault 3
3.2 Malfunction 3
3.3 Reliability 3
3.4 Times 3
3.4.1 Unattended time {~) : 3
3.4.2 ,Standby time (tBer) 3
3.4.3 Operating time (tBtr) 4
3.4.4 'Time in service (te = tBer+tBlr) 4
3.4.5 Downtime (tA = tA1+tA2+tA3+tA4) 4
3.4.6 Maintenance time {tl ) 5
3.4.7 Influence of the Sub-periods 5
3.5 Availability , 5
3.6 Methods of achieving a high reliability 6
4 Acceptance te'sting 8
4.1 Preliminary inspections 8
4.2 Intermediate inspections 8
4.3 Partial hand-overs : 8
4.4 Official inspection 8
4.5 Acceptance of the installation 8
4.6 Proof of agreed characteristics ·.9
4.6.1 Function test 9
4.6.2 Performance test ; 10
4.6.3 Availability test ; 10
4.7 Outstanding work after acceptance 12
5 Operational·phase : 12
5.1 Running-in operation : 12
5.2 Measurement phase 12
5.3 Checking point 12
Continued page 2 to 22
A - Availability
k; - Weighting factor
tA min Downtime
t A1 min Period between the occurrence of a fault and start of the search for the fault
t
A4
- min Period needed to clear the fault for operational readiness or until resumption of
operations
t ABer min Downtime during the standby time
r:p % Reliability
TI % Availability
TlBIr
% Availability during the total operating time -
TIE
% Availability considering only the time in service
2 Scope
The following standard gives recommendations for the determination of the availability and for the
commissioning, hand-over and testing of installations with storage/retrieval machines, material-handling
facilities and other machinery and their controls.
3 Availability
3.1 Fault
A fault is the inadmissible deviation of a characteristic from a prescribed value.
3.2 Malfunction
A malfunction is the inadmissible impairment of a function:
In determining the reliability and availability, only those malfunctions are considered which actually impair the
operation.
3.3 Reliability
The reliability <p of a discontinuously loaded element of a system is equal to the probability of that element
carrying out its function under given boundary conditions correctly and without malfunctions. It is a measure
of the functional safety of an installation.
where
As systems consist of several elements, which are normally independent of each other, the appropriate model for
determining the reliability and the availability must be formulated. When Considering this the following applies:
If, for a system to function, it is necessary that every eiement functions, itfollows that the elements are arranged in
series, ie if an element fails the functioning of the system is disrupted.
If, for a system to function, it is adequate that only one of the elements functions, it follows that the elements are
arranged in parallel, Le. if an element fails the functioning of the system can be maintained due to redundancy (e.g.
by-pass).
The function under observation must be tested with an adequate statistical frequency.
The deviations to be rated as faults or malfunctions are to be defined for the particular application.
In general the term .Reliability" makes no statement about the characteristics of a system in the case of a malfunction,
but does give information about the susceptibility of a system to disruption.
3.4 Times
0 100%
tR tE t,
I· ~I· ~I· ~I
I I I I
I I. tBer
~I~
tBIr
~I I
I I I I
• •
Tt
I I
T
I
• •
tABer.&. tABIr 1
T
I I
•I tA
•I
It t I
eA••A3.
t tA2 A4 •
Figure 1: Possible time-proportions of an installation In the course of a day
t A1 = Period between the occurrence of the fault and start of the search for the fault by the responsible
personnel
t A2 = Period needed to find the cause of the fault
t A3 = Period to prepare and organize correction of the fault, making ready etc.
tM = Period needed to clear the fault for operational readiness or until resumption of operations (the actual
repair time). the operational readiness of the installation can be restored before the final completion
of the repair. It should be noted here that the downtime can lie in both the standby time and in the
operating time. Therefore the following applies:
~s a rule downtime during the operating time has the effect of reducing the availability, particularly when the
installation has no redundancy, stores, buffers etc. Downtime during the standby time does not have the
effect of reducing the availability. .
If intolerable downtime tA1 - tA4 arises due to lack of readiness or qualification of the personnel, it can be
deducted proportionately.
3.5 Availability
In theory availability is described as the probability of finding a system at a given time in an operable
condition.
In practice the availability is the measure of the useful operating! service time of an installation and thus also
dependant on how quickly a fault, on average, can be cleared. The availability is calculated as
I Btr -IABtr
17Btr = 1 (2)
Btr
on condition that breakdowns during the standby time do not effectively impair the operation or
t E -tA
~= ~
tE
on condition that portions of downtime during the standby time should also count as reducing the availability
where
As the systems consist of several system elements, the appropriate availability model must be formulated:
- If, for a system to function, it is necessary that every element functions, it follows that the elements are
arranged in series:
- . If, for a system to function, it is adequate that one of the elements functions, it follows that the elements
are arranged in parallel:
- The elements can have not only the conditions. "functional" or· "failed" but also "diminished
performance", .
- Normally the elements are not independent of each other but are linked together ego by a control system,
- Downtimes of different elements can coincide.
It is recommended that the following adaptation of the formula (3) is used in practice:
(6)
where:
(7)
it can be deduced that to achieve a high availability there are principally two approaches:
personal as authorized
'-- Repairs are Carefully trained
started quickly f--and proficient
personnel
'-- Repair instructions Preventive
and documentation '--maintenance
NOTE The formiJlae for the availability TJ contain portions of time which can be measured experimentally during a
certain observation period. The formulae can thus be used as measurement instructions. In some cases the availability
is not regarded as a measurement instruction but as a property of the system.
Figure 2 shows clearly that the mean value of t E - t A and of t A correspond to the usual terms in the English speaking
world of MTBF and MTTR
A= MTBF
MTBF+MTTR
d ~
I
t.l\ I I
lA 21
ItE
I
Mean lE
J
~l,\
I
I
Mean lA
I I
I I I Flg.2 Relationship between
MTBF MTTR the availability definitions
Page 8
FEM 9.222 (06.1989)
4 Acceptance Testing
The customer and the contractor haVe to reach an agreement before the contract is signed on which
regulations are to complied with (customer's as well as statutary regulations and recommendations) and
which inspections are to be carried out.
The inspections and the hand-overs can be carried out in several intermediate steps described below. Some
of these can be omitted or combined.
The acceptance of the installation takes place in the presence of the customer and the contractor.
Insofar as it has not previously been shown the acceptance of the total installation covers:
- Completeness of the delivery
- Adherence to the promised characteristics
- Agreed situation at the interfaces
Page 9
FEM 9.222 (06.1989)
Outstanding work which has no essential influence on the overall function are not grounds for refusal of
acceptance.
Exclusions and reservations must be in writing. Outstanding work current at the time of acceptance is to be .
set down in writing. Outstanding work which becomes evident or occurs later come under the warranty
obligations of the contractor.
If the customer is unwilling to take over the installation a description of the situation is to be recorded by
. mutual agreement. Further acceptance conditions shall be negotiated.
After the acceptance has taken place the responsibility for the use and risk passes to the customer. In
particular the customer is responsible for seeing that the maintenance and service work is carried out in
accordance with the contractors guidelines. The customer is responsible for the holding of spare parts.
Adherence to the safety regulations and obtaining licences to operate is a matter for the customer. The
contractor has only a limited influence on the inspection by the authorities, therefore a delayed inspectiOn by
these authorities shall not delay the hand-over.
If the customer uses the installation before the acceptance the transfer of risk to the customer takes place at
the latest from the moment it is used, the warranty period beginning at the same time.
At the request of the contractor the customer will make available in the necessary quantities for all phases of
the test and hand-over:
- Qualified inspection, works and operating staff
- .Transport units
- Means of transport ( Reach trucks, trailors etc.)
Errors and faults over which the contractor has no control are to be recorded, such as :
- Voltage interruption
- Voltage fluctuations
- Inadmissible ambient temperature
- Unsuitable loading aids
'- Unstable loads
- Operating errors
- Escape of liquids, granulates, loose paper, protruding foil or parts of the load
Page 10
·FEM 9.222 (06.1989)
Faults or malfunctions which do not impair the operational readiness of the installation are not taken into
consideration. Different functional areas in larger installations are often separated from each other by buffers.
Faults in sub areas do not, therefore, necessarily have an effect throughout the entire installation.
.The performance of the installation is composed of the performances of the individual elements. The
performance can be demonstrated separately for the individual elements of material handling and storage
equipment and for the entire installation.
For the demonstration of the performance of the individual elements of material handling equipment the
existing recommendations can be used e.g. FEM 9.851 "Performance data of SIR Machines - Cycle Times".
These recommendations can also be applied in whole or in part to narrow aisle stacker trucks.
The performance of the entire installation is only then demonstrated if the responsibility for it rests with the
contractor. The test procedure is to be clearly established between the customer and the contractor.
In doing so the problems which arise when several lines of conveyors are operated at the same time are to
be taken into consideration such as, for example, the build-up of accumulations, response times of the
higher-order computer. The customer has to fulfill the boundary conditions necessary for the performance
test in good time, above all providing the necessary unit loads as well as personnel and machinery for
placing the unit loads onto the conveyor system.
The duration of the fault rectification is dependant on human factors, which are to be considered.
If, in certain cases, an analysis is required of the faults which occur, then the analysis time is not added to
the downtime.
In the case of complex installations the time of the availability testing must be agreed between the customer
and the contractor.
Page 11
FEM 9.222 (06.1989) ... ,
Availability (%)
Upper envelope curve
'1n
100 roOC:::::==---~---+-----+---------+----""'-'--1------l
9S -------
90 r - - - - - t - - - - -.........t - -.........---l-----4------+----:..··~ld~eal value
as
·80
- - -.-~
--------
----
15 20 25 JS 45 00
Number of faults
A high availability is not generally achieved until after a sufficiently long period of running:-in operations. If,
after the first test, an installation does not fulfill the agreed values, the contractor is to be allowed, after a
period of time in which to effect improvements, further testing opportunities. During the acceptance test the
availability is considered reduced only if the faults in the functioning of the installation really impair the
operation; for example an automatic repeat of a positioning operation after a fault, without manual
intervention, is not to be taken into consideration.
The accuracy with which the availability of an element of a system can be demonstrated increases with the
duration of the observation.
Figure 4 serves as an example for the quantitative envelope curves which are to be expected for an·
availability of 90 .% of an individual element. The values determined in the practical test can lie in the area
between the envelope curves.
One can see that approximation to the underlying availability of 90% for the element does not come into
effect until there are a large number of faults.
Because of the significance of this behaviour the observation time should be laid down when the contract is
agreed.
Page 12
FEM 9.222 (06.1989)
5 Operational phase
In this phase it must be possible for t~e operator to use the installation as agreed, sacrifices in performance
and reduced availability may, though, occur.
The contract process chart (Figure 5) describes with an example the essential steps in the processing and
handling of a contract up to the end of the warranty period.
Functional check
System check
Acceptance testing
(Extent of supply, conformity of supply, I - - - -........---",.--_-............-r---r----,~'_"'l
functions )
c
0
;l
lU
U
ifif
~
:::J ...
ell
-
lU
u. E
0
en
:::J
u
ell
-
5
.c
i
~
c
~
-E
ell
~
en
C
0
;l
.!!!
....-
; ell
.c 19en
iii 0 .E
:::J ell
C
U ~
~
0
;l ...
,C
0
f!
ell
.e
0 c.
0 ~
ell :c
"~ "jjj
u:::J C
0
"C C.
e
D. 0::
en
ell
Installation considered
The installation includes 3 SIR machines and stationary material handling equipment in the front zone of the
warehouse. It is not possible to run the warehouse without the stationary materials handling equipment being
operative.
Definitions
The breakdown time of one of the 3 SIR machines is multiplied by the weighting factor k; = 1/3. The
breakdown of the stationary material-handling equipment counts as a total breakdown of the system; ki = 1
tE = Time in service (affected with faults) here two days, e.g. two-shift working, tE = 32 h.
t Ai = The breakdown time for the part i of the installation
k; = Weighting factor of the element i of the installation; it characterizes the share of that part in the total
functioning of the installation.
4
2:tA; 'k; =0.8
;=1
Calculation
To compare the availability of the partial system ,,3 SIR machines· (i :':: 1....3)
Under these conditions every breakdown of a sub-system goes into the calculation of the availability only as
the percentage with which the part has a share in the overall function. In the case of 6 SIR machines for
example each SIR machine with 1/6.
Conditions AGV
If all 6 vehicles are required to produce the necessary throughput the breakdown of one AGV goes into the
calculation as 1/6. If the required throughput is achieved due to available reserves despite the breakdown of
a vehicle, then the breakdown time is omitted from the evaluation.
Conditions WMS
If the WMS breaks down then in general only emergency functions are possible. e g. single fast withdrawals
using the subordinate control system. The breakdown of the WMS goes into the availability calculation at
100%
Example:
Operating time: 8 hours = 480 minute
Computer breakdown: 3 min
Fault S/RM 1: 12 min.
Fault S/RM 3: 8 min.
Fault S/RM 6: 2 x 5 min. = 10 min.
Data concentrator S/RM breakdown:· 8 min.
Transport installation
3 Faults:
1. The input conveyor could not serve the aisles 5 and 6 during a period of 30 min.
2. The entire input system did not function for a period of 12 min. (Problems with the pallet checking device).
3. The control of the output conveyor was disrupted for 10 min. i.e. no withdrawals were possible.
AGVsystem
Evaluation:
With the formula (6) the availability of the installation can be calculated
480-38 =92.1%
480
This example shows the calculation procedure. In order to acbiev~ an adequate statistical accuracy of the
availability the observation time must be increased. Compare section 4.6.3. .
.System configuration
An SIR machine serves two assembly lines, two test stands for the parts are arranged on each of the
assembly lines.
Two further assembly lines follow before the removal of the parts takes place in common for both lines.
When laying out the system the performance of all parts of the installation was designed for the maximum
without regard to the losses due to availability. This resulted in parallel tracks. There was no
overdimensioning. The parallel tracks do not therefore represent any redundancy. The splitting only has the
function of dividing the throughput and does not increase redundancy.
Page 17
FEM 9.222 (06.1989)
TJ Str tAi kj
% hrs
SIR machine TJStr SRM 97 3 1.0 Whether the availability of the individual
Assembly line I TJ Str Ass. I 95 5 Y2 elements was estimated or measured
Test stand TJ Str Test 90 10 % against comparable elements is irrelevant
Assembly line 11 TJ Str Ass. 11 95 5 Y2 to this example:
Storage/
retrieval Assembly line Assembly line
machine
Figure 6: Variant A
1]Tot =1] Btr SRM '1] Btr Ass! • 1] Btr Test • 1] Btr Ass!!
_ 100 - 23 _ 770/
'lE - - 1'0
100
Page 18
FEM 9.222 (06.1989)
Variant A, Simulation
The simulated value for the total availability (with a user-specific simulation model) amounts to
" BIT.Tot. =82.9 %
This value is slightly higher than the values from formulae (5) and (7). The cause is that in the formulae no
consideration is given to the fact that the breakdown times of individual elements can coincide and that the
time which is affected with faults is shorter with reference to the installation.
Test stand
Figure 7: Variant B
Variant B
Provides three buffers with cross-distribution facilities. The buffers were dimensioned such that the capacity
comes to twice that of the parts which are conveyed through the installation in 4.5 min. (80 % of all the
downtimes are in this selected case smaller)
Variant B simulation
An empirical determination of the availability from existing installations which consist of intermeshed networks
with buffers is very difficult as the effects of faults on other areas, and thus also on the filling levels of the
buffers, must be observed at the same time.
There is no known analytical procedure for determining the availability of planned installations which consist .
of intermeshed networks with buffers.
A determination of the availability of such installations is possible by means of simulation if realistic estimated
values on the availability of the individual elements are to hand.
The simulated value for the total availability (with a user-specific simulation model) amounts to
TJBtr.Tot. = 89.6%
The maximum possible value of 90 % (this is the minimum value of the individual elements, in this case the
value of the test stands) is barely reached. A value over 90 % would also not be possible even with further
buffers.
In the calculation of complex installations a precise check should be made on which formula it is possible to
work with.
In the case of intermeshed installations with buffers it is recommended that a simulation be carried out in the
planning phase, before the final commitment to the layout. In doing so the effects of intermeshings, buffers
and redundancies can be determined and compared with the appropriate costs.
References
Available from the above secretariat or from the following national committees of FEM:
Belgium Luxembourg
Comite National Beige de la FEM Comite National Luxembourgeois de la FEM
Fabdmetal Federation des Industriels Luxembourgeois
Rue des Drapiers 21 Groupement des Constructeurs et Fondeurs du
B-1050 Bruxelles Grande-Duche de Luxembourg
Tel: +32-2-706 7982 Boite Postale 1304
Fax: +32-2-706 7988 Rue A1cide de Gasperi 7
[email protected] L-1013 Luxembourg
wwwJabrimetal.be Tel:+35-2-435366-1
Fax:+35-2-43 2328
[email protected]
wwwJedil.lu
Finland Netherlands
Finnish National Committee of FEM Nederland Nationaal Comite bij de FEM
. Federation of Finnish Metal, Eng. and Electro- Vereniging FME
technical Industries (FIMET) Postbus 190, Boerhaavelaan 40
Etel~ranta 10 NL-2700 AD Zoetermeer
FIN-00130 Helsinki Tel: +31-79-353 11 00
Tel: +358-9-192 31 Fax: +31-79-3531365
Fax: +358-9-624 462 [email protected]
www.met.fi wwwJme.nl
France Norway
Comite National Franyais de la FEM Norwegian FEM Groups
Syndicat des industries de materiels Norsk Verkstedsindustris
de manutention (SIMMA) Standardiseringssentral NVS
39/41 rue Louis Blanc - F-92406 Courbevoie Box 7072 / Oscars Gate 20
cedex 72 - F-92038 Paris la Defense Majorstua
Tel: +33-1-4717 6321 N-0306 Oslo
Fax: +33-:1-4717 6260 Tel: +47-22-590-000
Mtps@wanadooJr Fax: +47-22-590-001
www.mtps.org www.tbl.no
Germany Portugal
Deutsches Nationalkomitee der FEM Comissao Nacional Portuguesa da FEM
·VDMA ANEMM
Fachverband Fordertechnik Estrada do Pac;o do Lumiar
Postfach 71 08 64 Polo Technologico de Lisboa
D-60498 Lote 13, P-1600 Lisboa
Lyoner Str. 18 Tel: +351-21-71521 27
D-60528 Frankfurt Fax: +351-21-7150403
Te:+49-69-6603 1508 [email protected]
Fax: +49-69-6603 1496 www.anemm.pt
[email protected]
www.vdma.org
Italy Sweden
Comitato Nazionale Italiano della FEM Swedish National Committee of FEM
Federazione delle Associazioni Nazionali Swedish Association of Suppliers of
dell'lndustria Mechanical Handling Equipment MHG
Meccanica Varia ed Affine (ANIMA) Sorgatan 5, P.O. Box 5510
Via L. Battistotti Sassi S-11485 Stockholm
Tel: +39-02-7397 356 Tel: +46-8-782 08 00
Fax: +39-02-7397 7845 Fax: +46-8-321-6977
1-20133 Milano www.vibab.se
[email protected]
www:anima.it.com
Switzerland
Schweizerisches Nationalkomitee der FEM
Verein Schweizerischer Maschinen-Industrieller (VSM)
Kirchenweg 4/Postfach 179
CH-8032 ZOrich
Tel: +41-1-38441 11.
Fax: +41-1-3844242
[email protected]
www.swissrnem.ch