Posted on

Sensor Mounting Made Easy

So, you’ve figured out the best way to detect the product shuttle paddle in your cartoning/packaging machine needs a visible red laser distance sensor. It’s taken some time to validate that this is the right sensor and it will be a reliable, long-term solution.

But then you realize there are some mechanical issues involved with the sensor’s placement and positioning that will require a bit of customization to mount it in the optimal location. Now things may have just become complicated. If you can’t design the additional mounting parts yourself, you’ll have to find someone who can. And then you have to deal with the fabrication side. This all takes time and more effort than just buying the sensor.

Or does it?

Off-the-shelf solutions

It doesn’t have to be that complex. There are possible off-the-self solutions you can consider that will make this critical step of providing a reliable mounting solution – possibly as straightforward as choosing the right sensor. Multiple companies offer sensor mounting systems that accommodate standard sensor brackets. Over the years, companies have continued to develop new mounting brackets for many of their sensor products, from photoelectric sensors and reflectors to proximity sensors to even RFID heads and linear transducers.

So it’s only natural to take that one step further and create a mounting apparatus and system that not only provides a mounting bracket, but also a stable platform that incorporates the device’s mounting bracket with things like stand-off posts, adjustable connection joints, and mounting bases. Such a flexible and extensive system can solve mounting challenges with parts you can purchase, instead of having to fabricate.

Imagine in the example above you need to mount the laser distance sensor off the machine’s base and offset it in a way that doesn’t interfere with the other moving parts of the cartoner. Think of these mounting systems and parts as a kind of Erector Set for sensing devices. You can piece together the required mounting bracket with a set of brace or extension rods and a mounting base that raises the sensor up and off the machine base and even angles it to allow for pointing at the target in the most optimal way.

The following are some mounting solutions for a variety of sensors:

These represent only a small number of different ways to mix and match sensor device brackets and mounting components to find a solid, reliable and off-the-shelf mounting solution for your next mounting challenge. So before considering the customization route, next time take a look at what might already be out there for vendors. It could make your life a lot simpler.

Posted on

Control Meets IIoT, Providing Insights into a New World

In manufacturing and automation control, the programmable logic controller (PLC) is an essential tool. And since the PLC is integrated into the machine already, it’s understandable that you might see the PLC as all that you need to do anything in automation on the manufacturing floor.

Condition monitoring in machine automation

For example, process or condition monitoring is emerging as an important automation feature that can help ensure that machines are running smoothly. This can be done by monitoring motor or mechanical vibration, temperature or pressure. You can also add functionality for a machine or line configuration or setup by adding sensors to verify fixture locations for machine configuration at changeovers.

One way to do this is to wire these sensors to the PLC and modify its code and use it as an all-in-one device. After all, it’s on the machine already. But there’s a definite downside to using a PLC this way. Its processing power is limited, and there are limits to the number of additional processes and functions it can run. Why risk possible complications that could impact the reliability of your control systems? There are alternatives.

External monitoring and support processes

Consider using more flexible platforms, such as an edge gateway, Linux, and IO-Link. These external sources open a whole new world of alternatives that provide better reliability and more options for today and the future. It also makes it easier to access and integrate condition monitoring and configuration data into enterprise IT/OT (information technology/operational technology) systems, which PLCs are not well suited to interface with, if they can be integrated at all.

Here are some practical examples of this type of augmented or add-on/retrofit functionality:

      • Motor or pump vibration condition monitoring
      • Support-process related pressure, vibration and temperature monitoring
      • Monitoring of product or process flow
      • Portable battery based/cloud condition monitoring
      • Mold and Die cloud-based cycle/usage monitoring
      • Product changeover, operator guidance system
      • Automatic inventory monitoring warehouse system

Using external systems for these additional functions means you can readily take advantage of the ever-widening availability of more powerful computing systems and the simple connectivity and networking of smart sensors and transducers. Augmenting and improving your control systems with external monitoring and support processes is one of the notable benefits of employing Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) and Industry 4.0 tools.

The ease of with which you can integrate these systems into IT/OT systems, even including cloud-based access, can dramatically change what is now available for process information-gathering and monitoring and augment processes without touching or effecting the rudimentary control system of new or existing machines or lines. In many cases, external systems can even be added at lower price points than PLC modification, which means they can be more easily justified for their ROI and functionality.

Posted on

5 Steps to Make Troubleshooting Less Troublesome

There’s an old, not so funny joke about troubleshooting electrical devices with a punch line that ends with “is it plugged in?”

The reality is that it is easy to overlook basic or simple issues, especially when troubleshooting mechanical, electrical or software problems isn’t part of your regular routine. But following the basic troubleshooting steps listed below can prevent much frustration and lost time. (To be suggestive, many of these steps can be applied to our everyday lives, not just at work.)

There is a scientific and philosophical rule known more commonly as Occam’s razor that states that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. In layman’s terms, the simplest explanation is usually the best one. Occam’s razor is often stated as an injunction not to make more assumptions than you absolutely need to. In other words, do not over complicate things. This is especially important when beginning the troubleshooting process.

Here are five general steps to consider when troubleshooting in manufacturing (and in general):

  1. Identify the problem
    • Take the time to understand the malfunction. Look at the problem from where you believe it starts, not necessarily from the end effect you may be witnessing. Sometimes what you observe is a symptom of the problem but not the problem itself. This is the first critical step and usually dramatically reduces the steps required to diagnose the culprit causing the problem. This may also require checking even the simplest things like whether you have power. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
  2. Establish a theory of probable cause
    • This is where Occam’s razor should come in. Start by considering the most obvious things first, whether it be a power supply, a sensor, a cable(s) or even a connector, (especially field attachables). Then work your way to the more complex if needed, from network wiring in networks like Ethernet/IP or Profinet, to network traffic or ladder code sequencing. You shouldn’t start examining the more complex until you have eliminated the most obvious. Sometimes a poor performing sensor cable can mimic code problems. Be sure to make a list so you can easily remember your thoughts and probable causes to prevent covering things twice; that is a huge time waster.
  3. Establish an action plan and execute the plan
    • Start testing probable cause theories to try to determine the actual cause or root cause of the problem. Remember to always consider what you understand as the problem and your theories, then start executing your testing from the simplest possible cause to the more complex (if needed). Be careful not to get distracted by issues you find along the way, like something unrelated you remembered you wanted to take care of but is not related to the current problem. (This is where your written list really comes in handy.) Start examining methodically, don’t jump around and don’t repeat steps you’ve already eliminated.
      Hints: Try swapping components when possible and see if the problem corrects itself. And check that someone didn’t change something recently from the original design. This can many times manifest itself as the proverbial “ghost in the machine” syndrome. Consider this process a ladder you are climbing from the simple lower steps to the higher more complex steps. Using this analogy, why climb higher if you don’t need too.
  4. Verify full system functionality
    • Once you have found what you think may be the problem and corrected it, be sure to validate the system after the repair or replacement and make sure it is functioning as it should. In some rare cases, one root cause can cause other problems or damage, so it is important to ensure the system is functioning as it should before returning it back to service. This may lead to some pushback because of the additional time needed, but it could take the system off-line again even longer if unresolved problems are overlooked.
  5. Document the process.
    • Finally, be sure to document what you found and maybe even how you found it in a log or service documentation system. This is especially important if the problem was caused by a part wearing out from normal wear, as it is likely to happen again. If you can categorize the problem, this will make it easier for you and other staff to detect and remedy if it arises again. You may want to consider reviewing your findings at intervals to see if there are possible improvements or changes, like routine maintenance or more reliable components, that could minimize these problems in the future.

Establishing a good process like this will help you more quickly troubleshoot your application or machine, and even help with home projects. Critical thinking like this helps eliminated wasted time, frustration and most importantly, unplanned down time.

 

Posted on

Injection Molding: Ignore the Mold, Pay the Price

Are you using a contract molding company to make your parts? Or are you doing it in house, but with little true oversight and management reporting on your molds? As a manufacturer, you can spend as much on a mold as you might for an economy, luxury or even a high-performance car. The disappointing difference is that YOU get to drive the car, while your molder or mold shop gets to drive your mold. How do you know if your mold is being taken care of as a true tooling investment and not being used as though it were disposable, or like the car analogy, like the Dukes of Hazzard used the General Lee?

What steps can you take in regard to using and maintaining a mold in production that can help guarantee your company’s ROI? How can you ensure your mold is going to produce the needed parts and provide or exceed the longevity required?

It is important for any manufacturer to understand the need for the cleaning and repair required for proper tool maintenance. The condition of your injection mold affects the quality of the plastic components produced. To keep a mold in the best working order, maintenance is critical not only when issues arise, but also routinely over time.

In the case of injection molds specifically, there are certain checks and procedures that should be performed regularly. An example being that mold cavities and gating should be routinely inspected for wear or damage. This is as important as keeping the injection system inspected and lubricated, and ensuring all surfaces are cleaned and sprayed with a rust preventative.

Figure 1 An example of the mold usage process.

The unfortunate reality is that some molders wait until part quality problems arise or the tool becomes damaged to do maintenance. One of the biggest challenges with injection molders is being certain that your molds are being run according to the maintenance requirements. Running a mold too long and waiting until problems arise to perform routine maintenance or refurbish a mold can result in added expense, supply/stock issues, longer time to market and even loss of the mold. However, when molders have a clear indication of maintenance and production timing, and follow the maintenance procedures in place, production times and overall costs can decrease.

Figure 2 Balluff add-on Mold ID monitoring and traceability system.

Creating visibility and accuracy into this maintenance timing is something today’s automation technology can now address. With todays modern, industrial automation technology, visibility and traceability can be added to any mold machine, regardless of machine age, manufacturer and manufacturing environment.

With the modern networked IIoT (industrial internet of things)-based monitoring and traceability system solutions available today, the mold can be monitored on the machine in real-time and every shot is recorded and kept on the mold itself using, for example, an assortment of industrial RFID tag options mounted directly on the mold. Mold shot count information can be tracked and kept on the mold and can be reported to operations or management using IIoT-based software running at the molder or even remotely using the internet at your own facility, giving complete visibility and insight into the mold’s status.

Figure 3 Balluff IIoT-based Connected Mold ID reporting and monitoring software screens.

Traceability systems record not only the shot count but can provide warning and alarm shot count statuses locally using visual indicators, such as a stack light, as the mold nears its maintenance time. Even the mold’s identification information and dynamic maintenance date (adjusted continuously based on current shot count) are recorded on the RFID tag for absolute tracability and can be reported in near real-time to the IIoT-based software package.

Advanced automation technology can bring new and needed insights into your mold shop or your molder’s treatment of your molds. It adds a whole new level of reliability and visibility into the molding process. And you can use this technology to improve production up-time and maximize your mold investments.

For more information, visit https://www.balluff.com/en/de/industries-and-solutions/solutions-and-technologies/mold-id/connected-mold-id/

Posted on

Reduce Packaging Downtime with Machine Vision

Packaging encompasses many different industries and typically has several stages in its process. Each industry uses packaging to accomplish specific tasks, well beyond just acting as a container for a product. The pharmaceutical industry for example, typically uses its packaging as a means of dispensing as well as containing. The food and beverage industry uses packaging as a means of preventing contamination and creating differentiation from similar products. Consumer goods typically require unique product containment methods and have a need for “eye-catching” differentiation.

The packaging process typically has several stages. For example, you have primary packaging where the product is first placed in a package, whether that is form-fill-seal bagging or bottle fill and capping. Then secondary packaging that the consumer may see on the shelf, like cereal boxes or display containers, and finally tertiary packaging or transport packaging where the primary or secondary packaging is put into shipping form. Each of these stages require verification or inspection to ensure the process is running properly, and products are properly packaged.

1

Discrete vs. Vision-Based Error Proofing

With the use of machine vision technology, greater flexibility and more reliable operation of the packaging process can be achieved. Typically, in the past and still today, discrete sensors have been used to look for errors and manage product change-over detection. But with these simple discrete sensing solutions come limitations in flexibility, time consuming fixture change-overs and more potential for errors, costing thousands of dollars in lost product and production time. This can translate to more expensive and less competitively priced products on the store selves.

There are two ways implementing machine vision can have a benefit toward improving the scheduled line time. The first is reducing planned downtime by reducing product change over and fixturing change time. The other is to decrease unplanned downtime by catching errors right away and dynamically rejecting them or bringing attention to line issues requiring correction and preventing waste. The greatest benefit vision can have for production line time is in reducing the planned downtime for things like product changeovers. This is a repeatable benefit that can dramatically reduce operating costs and increase the planned runtime. The opportunities for vision to reduce unplanned downtime could include the elimination of line jams due to incorrectly fed packaging materials, misaligned packages or undetected open flaps on cartons. Others include improperly capped bottles causing jams or spills and improper adjustments or low ink causing illegible labeling and barcodes.

Cost and reliability of any technology that improves the packaging process should always be proportional to the benefit it provides. Vision technologies today, like smart cameras, offer the advantages of lower costs and simpler operation, especially compared to the older, more expensive and typically purpose-built vision system counterparts. These new vision technologies can also replace entire sensor arrays, and, in many cases, most of the fixturing at or even below the same costs, while providing significantly greater flexibility. They can greatly reduce or eliminate manual labor costs for inspection and enable automated changeovers. This reduces planned and unplanned downtime, providing longer actual runtime production with less waste during scheduled operation for greater product throughput.

Solve Today’s Packaging Challenges

Using machine vision in any stage of the packaging process can provide the flexibility to dramatically reduce planned downtime with a repeatable decrease in product changeover time, while also providing reliable and flexible error proofing that can significantly reduce unplanned downtime and waste with examples like in-line detection and rejection to eliminate jams and prevent product loss. This technology can also help reduce or eliminate product or shipment rejection by customers at delivery. In today’s competitive market with constant pressure to reduce operating costs, increase quality and minimize waste, look at your process today and see if machine vision can make that difference for your packaging process.

Posted on

Not All RFID is Created Equal: Is Yours Built for an Industrial Environment?

The retail environments where products are sold look nothing like the industrial environments where they are produced (think of the difference between a new car dealership and an automotive manufacturing plant). Yet the same RFID products developed for retail stores and their supply chain operations are still marketed to manufacturers for production operations. These products may work fine in warehouses, but that does not necessarily qualify them as industrial grade.

IO-Link_RFID

So what are the differences between retail and industrial RFID?

Production environments often require a level of ruggedness, performance, and connectivity that only purpose-built industrial equipment can reliably satisfy. For example, general-purpose RFID equipment may have the physical Ethernet port needed to connect to a PC or server, but will not support EtherNet/IP, Profinet or other industrial protocols that run on PLCs and other industrial automation control equipment. Many retail grade readers need to be supported with an additional protocol conversion, which can require external hardware and slow system performance, and adds to implementation time, difficulty, and expense.

When evaluating RFID equipment, it is essential to make the distinction between what is possible for use in the environment and what is optimal and, therefore, more reliable. There are three fundamental qualities to consider that can determine if RFID systems will perform reliably in demanding production environments:

  • Will the RFID system integrate seamlessly with industrial control systems?
  • Will it provide the reliability and speed that production and their information systems tied in require?
  • Can it maintain uptime and performance long term – will it last on the production line?

RFID is often marketed as a “solution,” however in manufacturing operations, it is almost always used as a supporting technology to provide data and visibility to the MES, ERP, e-Kanban, robotics, asset tracking, material handling, quality control and other systems that run in production facilities. Failure to accurately provide data to these systems at the reliability and speed levels they require eliminates the value of using RFID.

The physical environments in industrial and supply chain settings cause RFID technology to perform differently. Tag density can be a consideration for industrial RFID users like retail, but an industrial environment has much more challenging and powerful potential interference sources, for example, the presence of metal found in most industrial products and environments.

When determining whether RFID products are suitable for a specific environment, it is important to look beyond published marketing hype and misleading specifications. Consider the design and construction of the product and how it could be affected by various work processes. Whenever possible, you should test the products where they will be used rather than in a lab or demonstration area, because the actual work location has interference and environmental conditions that may be overlooked and impossible to duplicate elsewhere.

The key attributes that differentiate industrial RFID equipment from supply chain-oriented alternatives include:

  • Native support for industrial protocols;
  • High tag read reliability and the ability to continuously operate at speeds that won’t slow production systems;
  • Durable housing with secure connectors with IP65 or better rating and relevant certifications for shock, vibration and temperature resistance;
  • The ability to support multiple RFID technologies and supporting devices as needed, including sensors, PLCs, IO-Link, and other industrial automation equipment.

Compromising on any of these criteria will likely result in unnecessary implementation time, support, and replacement costs and increase the risk for system failure.

Posted on

“Team” Spells Success In Traceability

If you’ve ever considered a traceability project, like asset tracking for instance, you’ve probably also done some homework into the different technological ways to implement it, from barcoding to using RFID (radio frequency identification). And possibly, while doing that research, you may have seen some presentations or read some articles or whitepapers that have talked about the “team” of stakeholders required to implement these projects, especially if involving the scale required for a facility, or even multiple facilities. Well if you’re a manager reading this and involved with such an endeavor, I’m writing to tell you, take this stakeholder team thing seriously.

In many respects, there are rational fears in getting a stakeholder team together in the early stages of these projects, like the conceptualization stage for example. These fears include: Blowing the project out of proportion; Creating mission creep; Even derailing the project with the others self-interests. Again, all can be valid and even come true to a certain extent, but the reality is that most, if not all of the time, these same stakeholders will also identify the potential opportunities and pitfalls that will either help build the REAL ROI case, and/or help prevent the unseen wall that will prevent success.

These stakeholders can range from operational management (warehouse to manufacturing, depending on the target), IT, financial, quality, and engineering, just to get the ball rolling. You must always be careful of allowing the project to slip into “decision by committee”, so hold the reins and have the project lead firm in hand. But by bringing their input, you stand to satisfy not only your goal, but likely the shared goals they also have, validating and strengthening the real ROI that will likely exist if traceability is the requirement. You will also likely find that along the way you will bring improvements and efficiencies that will benefit the broader organization as a whole.

Once you’ve established the goal and the real ROI, reinforced by the stakeholder’s inputs, that is the time to bring in the technology pieces to see what best will solve that goal. This is many times were the first mistake can be made. The technology suppliers are brought in too soon and the project becomes technology weighted and a direction assumed before a true understanding of the benefits and goals of the organization are understood. Considering a project manager before bringing in the technology piece is also a great way to be ready when this time comes. When you’re ready for this stage, this will typically involve bringing in the vendors, integrators and so forth. And guess what, I’m certain you’ll find this part so much easier and faster to deal with, and with greater clarity. If you have that clear picture from your team when you bring in your solution providers, you will find the choices and their costs more realistic, and have a better picture of the feasibility of what your organization can implement and support.

Not to kill the thought with a sports analogy, but a team united and pulling for the same goal in the same direction will always win the game, versus each player looking out for just their own goals. So get your team together and enjoy the sweet taste of ROI success all around.

For more information on Traceability visit www.balluff.us/traceability.

Posted on

RFID ROI – Don’t forget the payback!

traceability_1Just recently, while visiting a customer wanting to implement an RFID asset tracking solution, it occurred to me that ROI (return-on-investment) should always be the ultimate goal for most uses of RFID. What brought this to mind? It was because we were discussing technology before understanding what the ultimate ROI goal was. I’m sure you could say this was failure from a sales perspective, but I’m sure at some point you have also found yourself caught up in the technology seeming so promising and exciting in terms of its benefits, that you lost track of why you were there in the first place. Also, many times, the technology stage is where equipment suppliers and/or integrators are brought in.

As with most projects of this nature, they get started because someone says something like “why don’t we do XXX, it will save us money, time, trouble, loss or get us in compliance” or all of the above and likely more. But this same thought can get lost going through execution. RFID projects are no exception. Many successful RFID implementations show it can bring large benefits in short and long-term ROI not just in asset tracking, but manufacturing, warehousing, supply chain and so on. But the implementor must always keep track of the ROI goal and be willing to share this with their internal stakeholders, supplier and integration partners to be sure everything stays on track and technology does not take over for technologies sake.

Unfortunately the ROI is not always calculated the same for applications. Typically ROI can simply be measured in time period until the investment is paid back or the money saved over a given period of time. The most simplistic way of calculating payback or ROI is: Cost of Project (calculated at the beginning) / Annual Cash Revenues (expected savings) = Payback Period. Unfortunately the rub comes in when calculating the detail in the two factors. This can be because the cost of the project is not totally encompassing and/or revenue does not take into consideration factors like interest costs or variations in production, for example. As this will ultimately become the measure of successful projects, really understanding ROI is critical.

Factors in Annual Cash Revenues are factors the implementer needs to understand and grasp as the reasons for undertaking a project. These factors will typically involve several aspects of their business, including savings from greater efficiency, lower cost in storage or inventory, less scrap, higher quality standards (less failure returns), compliance benefits, etc. In fact, this part is difficult to encompass here in this forum. But Cost of Project has some factors I can point out. In the example I raised in the beginning, the customer needed to not only address the read/write equipment and tags (including handheld’s), but also the cost of installing all the possible variations in tag types used during manufacture, common database/software needed, bringing distributors and field service on board, integration providers costs (internal also), training needs, software licensing, start-up and support cost, and so on. So in a manufacturing line, it starts with the new equipment, but must include the PLC/database programming, pallet modifications, station installation, spare parts, start-up and training for example. In warehousing, it might include new equipment, loss of facility equipment like forklifts or warehouse area, facility modification like electrical for example, ERP and WMS implementation or integration, commissioning and training.

One thing to consider toward understanding these factors before implementing a total enterprise solution, whether in warehousing, supply chain or manufacturing is to consider a pilot or test/trail program to determine as many factors as possible and test the results before committing to the full investment of the complete project.

So in your next project, remember to include your stakeholders and partners in your end goals, try to encompass all the factors and don’t forget the payback!

To learn more about RFID visit us at www.balluff.us/rfid.

Posted on

UHF RFID, One Size Fits All! – Really?

With the proliferation of UHF (ultra-high frequency) based RFID in the commercial and consumer markets, UHF has been seen as the mainstay now for many low-cost, long-range RFID applications. And in recent years with the desire for longer range application flexibility in the industrial sector, naturally users want to gravitate toward technologies and products with a proven track record. But can you really take the same products developed and used for the commercial and consumer logistics markets and apply them reliably to industrial applications like asset tracking, EKanban, general manufacturing or logistics?
Continue reading “UHF RFID, One Size Fits All! – Really?”