A Model for Assessment of Proactivity Potential in Technical Resources

  • Kerstin Dencker
  • Åsa Fasth
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing book series (AINSC, volume 66)

Abstract

The ultimate aim when designing an assembly system is to make it strategically and operationally competitive. Competitive systems for manufacturing, especially assembly systems, have to cope with frequent changes of demands. The aim to have a short response time to customer demand, e.i. mass customization, requires assembly systems that are reliable, have high availability and have ability to produce the right product correctly. This means a combination of short resetting time and ability to vary the systems output of products. A major challenge is to minimize the lead-time that directly has influence on order-to-delivery time, while maintaining product flexibility and robustness to absorb late market changes. Given that the assembly system is working the way it is supposed to do, the order-to-delivery time is directly dependant on the setup time and the operation time. The problem is that automated assembly systems have a low availability due to that technical equipment does not work, caused by lack of knowledge, breakdowns, limited ability to perform the operation etc. This often leeds to that when a company needs variant flexibility they keep the assembly system tasks manual. Totally manual assembly system is not the future for competitiveness. Therefore we need to develop assembly systems that are available and have product flexibility to absorb late market changes, and still have a short order-to delivery time. This paper focuses on the level of automation and is a contribution to future evaluation of how technical solutions either support or work counter to proactivity. The result is a model for evaluation of technical solutions contribution to proactivity. This paper describes a model for assessment of technology and assembly system solutions that fulfil requirements for a proactive assembly system. Criteria for proactivity in different technical solutions of assembly system are reviewed.

Keywords

Proactive Assembly System Measuring Level of Automation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Drucker, P.F.: Management Challenges for the 21st Century. Harper Business, USA (1999)Google Scholar
  2. Bley, H., Reinhart, G., Seliger, G., Bernardi, M., Korne, T.: Appropriate human involvement in assembly and disassembly, vol. 53(2), pp. 487–509. Elsevier, Oxford (2004)Google Scholar
  3. Bruch, J., Karltun, J., Dencker, K.: A proactive assembly work setting – Information requirements. In: The 41st CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems, Tokyo, Japan (2008)Google Scholar
  4. Dencker, K., Stahre, J., Fasth, Å., Gröndahl, P., Mårtensson, L., Lundholm, T.: Characteristic of a Proactive Assembly System. In: The 41st CIRP conference on manufacturing systems, Tokyo, Japan (2008)Google Scholar
  5. Dencker, K., Stahre, J., Mårtensson, L., Fasth, Å., Akillioglu, H.: Proactive Assembly Systems- Relaizing the potential of human collaboration with automation. Annual Reviews in Control, IFAC/Pergamon, vol 33(3), 1367–5788 (2009) ISSN: 1367-5788Google Scholar
  6. Drucker, P.F.: Management Challenges for the 21st Century. Harper Business, USA (1999)Google Scholar
  7. Hollnagel, E., Woods, D., Levenson, N., et al.: Resilience Engineering. Ashgate, Hampshire (2006)Google Scholar
  8. Endsley, M., Kaber, D.: Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics 42, 462–492 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Endsley, M., Kiris, E.: Out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Human Factors - Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37, 381–394 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Endsley, M.R., Kaber, D.: Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics 42, 462–492 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fasth, Å., Stahre, J., Dencker, K.: Measuring and analysing Levels of Automation in an assembly system. In: The 41st CIRP conference on manufacturing systems, Tokyo, Japan (2008)Google Scholar
  12. Fasth, Å., Stahre, J., Dencker, K.: Analysing changeability and time parameters due to levels of Automation in an assembly system. In: The 18th conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing - FAIM, Skövde, Sweden (2008)Google Scholar
  13. Onori, M.: Evolvable Assembly Systems – A New Paradigm? In: ISR 2002 – 33rd International Symposium on Robotics, pp. 617–621 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. Onori, M., Alsterman, H., Barata, J.: An Architecture Development Approach for Evolvable Assembly Systems. In: ISATP, Proc. IEEE International Symposium, pp. 19–24 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kerstin Dencker
    • 1
  • Åsa Fasth
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Design and Management of Machining SystemsRoyal Institute of Technology 
  2. 2.Division of Production SystemsChalmers University of Technology 

Personalised recommendations