Session 3b Future Technologies Alex Wilson, Jeremy Hadall, Ross Trepleton Tuesday 17 th April 2018
Welcome to the future
The world of manufacturing is changing
The world of manufacturing is changing
The world of manufacturing is changing
The world of manufacturing is changing
The world of manufacturing is changing
The world of manufacturing is changing
Hazards and Risks changing
WHAT IS A ROBOT? A MECHANICAL OR VIRTUAL AGENT Can be autonomous or semi-autonomous The word was first termed by a Czech playwright in 1921 But there have been accounts of automata dating back to ancient civilisation Can take many forms from Honda s ASMIO to industrial robots to Big Dog Images: Honda/Boston Dynamics/Fanuc
DO THE HOUSEWORK Image: Dyson
MAKE YOU DINNER Image: Moley Robotics
OR SHAKE YOUR HAND! Image: Hadall Collection
BUT TODAY IS NOT ABOUT Image: KTH
ROBOTS IN MANUFACTURING TODAY Image: Paul Sakuma/Associated Press
A NEW GENERATION OF ROBOTS Images (from top left): Universal Robots/ABB/Kuka Robotics/Rethink Robotics/EPSRC CIM for Intelligent Automation
SAFETY STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL ROBOTS A-Level European Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC IEC 61508 Functional Safety ISO 12100 Risk Assessment B-Level EN ISO 13849-1:2008 IEC 62061:2005 ISO11161 Integrated Manufacturing Systems C-Level ISO10218-1 - Robot ISO 10218-2 Robot System/Cell Other C-level machinery standards that may be needed
SAFETY FUNCTIONS OF INDUSTRIAL ROBOTS E-Stop s Protective Stop s Operating Modes Automatic/Manual High Speed/Manual Pendant Controls Dead Man Handle Start/Restart Hold to Run Limit Switches Muting Functions ALL GOVERNED BY ISO 10218 Image: Comau
TYPES OF COLLABORATIVE OPERATION According to ISO 10218-1 ISO10218-1 Clause Type of Collaborative Operation Main Means of Risk Reduction Pictogram (ISO 10218-1) 5.10.2 Safety-rated monitored stop (Example: manual loading station) No robot motion when operator is in collaborative work space 5.10.3 Hand Guiding (Example: operation as assist device) Robot motion only through direct input of operator 5.10.4 Speed and separation monitoring (Example: replenishing parts containers) Robot motion only when separation distance above minimum separation distance 5.10.5 Power and force limiting by inherent design or control (Example: ABB YuMi, Kuka iiwa, Universal Robot URx) In contact events, robot can only impart limited static and dynamics forces
COLLABORATIVE ROBOTS Image: ABB & Kuka
COLLABORATIVE ROBOTS SO THIS POSES THE QUESTION Does this mean that robots no longer need guarding? Yes and No It all depends on the process the automation is carrying out and the risk assessment
BIOMECHANICAL LIMIT CRITERIA ISO/TS 15066 - Robots And Robotic Devices - Collaborative Robots ISO/TS 15066 Clause 5.44 Power & Force Limiting Free Impact/transient contact Contact event is short (<50ms) Human body part can recoil Constrained Impact/Quasi-Static Contact Contact duration is extended Human body part cannot recoil & is trapped Accessible Parameters in Design or Control Effective mass (robot pose, payload) Speed (relative) Accessible Parameters in Design or Control Force (joint torques, pose) Pain Threshold Minor Injury Threshold Pain Threshold Minor Injury Threshold Highest loading level accepted in design Highest loading level accepted in risk assessment in case of single failure Highest loading level accepted in design Highest loading level accepted in risk assessment in case of single failure
Threshold for touch sensation Threshold for pain sensation Threshold for lowlevel injury Threshold for sever reversible injury Threshold for nonreversible injury QUASI-STATIC CONTACT SEVERITY Pressure Forces Collaborative Collaborative Operation Operation??? Adapted from: Industrial Safety Requirements for Collaborative Robots and Applications - Matthias, B ABB Corporate R&D
PERCEIVED ADVANTAGES & CHALLENGES Human Robot Collaboration Productivity Flexibility Low Running Costs Image: MTC
ECONOMIC MOTIVATION DO YOU REALLY NEED COLLABORATION? Mass customisation Increasing product variants Shorter product lifetimes Competition from low cost economies Product flexibility Adapted from: Industrial Safety Requirements for Collaborative Robots and Applications - Matthias, B ABB Corporate R&D
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Image: Jaguar Land Rover
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Image: P&G
Occupational Health Considerations for AM Dr Ross Trepleton
WAYS OF MAKING OBJECTS Subtractive Material successively removed from a solid block until desired shape is reached (machining etc.) Formative Mechanical forces and/or heat applied to material to form it into the desired shape (forging) Liquid material takes shape of mould (casting) Source: DMG Mori Source: James Peniston sculpture Fabricative Material pieces are combined and joined (cutting, bending, assembling) Additive Process of joining materials to make parts from 3D model data, usually layer upon layer Source: www.thomasnet.com Source: www.3dindustry.ru 36
IS AM THE SAME AS 3D PRINTING? 3D printing: Fabrication of objects through the deposition of a material using a print head, nozzle, or another printer technology Term often used in a non-technical context synonymously with additive manufacturing Until present times this term has in particular been associated with machines that are low end in price and/or overall capability AM typically associated with production manufacturing technologies Source: www.pedalcarplanet.com Source: ISO/ASTM 52900:2015 Source: www.seriouswheels.com 37
WHAT DOES AM ENABLE? Increased geometric design freedom Optimal geometry less constrained by manufacture Increased material design freedom Graded/multi-material Production flexibility On demand, on location 38
SUBTRACTIVE vs. ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING 1.08kg metal Powder 0.31kg waste chips from machining 0.77kg finished part 4.08kg waste chips from machining 4.85kg material block from machining ADDITIVE MANUFACTURE SUBTRACTIVE MANUFACTURE Source: GKN Aerospace 39
MANUFACTURING READINESS OF AM Creators & Pioneers Early Adopters Primary Majority Secondary Majority Holdouts We are here TECHNOLOGY MATURATION AND ACCEPTANCE CURVES Source: GE 40 40
7 PROCESS CATEGORIES 1 VAT PHOTOPOLYMERISATION Liquid photopolymer in a vat is selectively cured by light-activated polymerisation 2 SHEET LAMINATION Sheets of material are bonded to form an object 3 MATERIAL EXTRUSION Material is selectively dispensed through a nozzle or orifice 4 MATERIAL JETTING Droplets of build material are selectively deposited 5 POWDER BED FUSION (PBF) Thermal energy selectively fuses regions of a powder bed 6 BINDER JETTING Liquid bonding agent is selectively deposited to join powder materials 7 DIRECTED ENERGY DEPOSITION (DED) Focused thermal energy used to fuse materials by melting as they are deposited 41
A REALITY CHECK Process not as simple as often portrayed 42
A REALITY CHECK (2) Entire process should be considered before successful deployment: 43
POWDER BED FUSION (PBF): ELECTRON BEAM MELTING Courtesy of Arcam and Oak Ridge National Labs 44
Perceived Challenges Metal Powder Bed Fusion Machines EBM X-Ray Exposure The electron beam generates ionising electromagnetic radiation as a by-product Powder Exposure Challenges around exposure to powder during loading/ unloading Laser Melting Systems Laser Exposure The laser source generates non-ionising radiation as a by-product Powder Exposure Challenges around exposure to powder during loading/ unloading Airborn weld vapours extracted through filtration systems 45
Perceived Challenges AM Material Health Hazard of AM Materials to consider:- Dust Inhalation, ingestion Respiratory tract irritation, asthma, scarring of the lungs, benign lung disease Adverse reproductive effects in animals have been reported Eye irritation Sensitizing agent, Skin irritation Cacogenic properties (Nickel, Cobalt, Chrome and other alloying elements) Safety Hazard of AM materials to consider:- Fire/Explosion (Aluminium/Titanium) Sources of ignition Sparks either through static discharge or as a consequence of an electric spark. Sparks generated through hot work processes such as grinding and fettling. Mechanical ignition generation of heat, friction. Spontaneous combustion Spillages and build up of dust 46
Current Status AM Material- Results from Project with HSL Process Chain Risk Areas for Powder: Powder Handling Decanting Blending Storage Sampling Powder Recovery Sieving/ decanting Post processing of parts Grinding/ deburring/ fettling Removal of supports and build plate Washing cleaning Transfer on clothes Findings: Low emissions/ contamination: Contained processes such as sieving or recycling Raised surfaces Peak Emissions: Loading and unloading machines with powder Pouring powder, Powder tests Cleaning activities. Good operating procedures- Need to make sure these are well communicated internally and with the wider AM community. All facilities visited working to high standard- However, over reliance of PPE/ RPE 47
Eliminating Contact with Powder Process Chain Equipment 2012 2014 2017 2018 48
Eliminating Inconsistencies- During Scale Up Process Control - SUPPLIER 1: DO NOT VACUUM. There are reports of titanium dust explosion even when using an explosion-proof vacuum. - SUPPLIER 2: Vacuum or sweep spill using spark proof tools and explosion proof equipment. 49
Eliminating Inconsistencies- During Scale Up Material Consistency in Polymer AM 50
AM- Improving Occupational Hygiene Mass Customisation & Embedded Sensors Bespoke PPE/ RPE Ear protection with built in sensors Novel Component Designs Shock resistant gloves Enhanced design of air cleaning filters Cortex Exoskeletal AM cast; light but strong Trainers will be designed using 3D scans on an individual feet. Bespoke trainer design is then 3D printed on demand. Trainers are tailored to individual needs. 51 51
With Thanks to:
Demonstrations
CHALLENGES Collaboration vs Risk Complicated Safety Cases Scaling Everything we ve seen so far is small Economic Costs Purchase & Ownership Achieving Productivity Making the most of humans & robots working together Application Design Ergonomics, ease of use, etc. Perception & Knowledge Particularly with H&S people!! Image: Kuka Systems
Challenges Early adopters are working safely (but with too much reliance of PPE/ RPE): What can we learn from other sectors to improve process controls? How do we effectively educate the primary majority? 55
Thank You For Listening