Parbake Mezzanine System Design Review

Clement Pin (ME)Graham Frasch (ME)Matthew Lynch (EE)

Samantha Phillips (ME)Simon Stam (ME)

Stefan Colegrove (EE)

October 7, 2011

Technical Review Agenda• Meeting Purpose

– Overview of the Project– Confirm Customer Needs and Specifications– Review Concepts and Propose a Design Approach– Get Customer Feedback

• Materials Covered– Customer Needs– Engineering Specifications– Potential Concepts– Concept Selection Pugh Chart– Proposed Design Approach– Risk Assessment – Project Plan

Project Background

• The process inside the Wegmans Bakery used to package breads in the par-bake mezzanine was determined to be an ergonomically challenging job. An operator lifts a box off the incoming upper level conveyor, and then fills the box with the product that comes from another conveyor. When full, the box is closed and pushed onto the outgoing lower level conveyor. The process is less than ergonomically friendly and can be improved through RIT Senior Design.

Problem Statement

• To improve the Parbake Mezzanine Bread Packaging process by eliminating the less than ideal ergonomic conditions, creating a safer work environment for operators.

Deliverables

– Fully functioning system that meets the par-bake mezzanine manufacturing requirements

– New design, mechanical and electrical system diagrams

– Documentation including user manual, maintenance procedures, and parts detail

Customer Needs

Customer Need # Importance Description

CN1 High Reduces Ergonomic Risk

CN2 High Fills Boxes Correctly

CN3 Med Is Durable

CN4 Med Can be Cleaned/Sterilized

CN5 High Can Maintain Production Rate

CN6 Med Can be Easily Repaired

CN7 High Meets Food Safety Requirements

CN8 High Handles High Ergonomic Risk Products

CN9 Med Meets Budget

CN10 High Safely Fits in Allotted Area

CN11 High Is Reliable

Project SpecificationsSpec. # Importance CN# Specification (metric) Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value

ErgonomicsS1 1 1 Effort Level Effort Rating Moderate LightS2 1 1 Time per Effort Seconds <6 <6S3 1 1 Efforts per Minute Effort/min 5-15 1-5S4 1 1 Task Duration Hours/day 8 8S5 1 1 Employees Performing Job # Emloyees 1-3 1-3S6 1 1 Recordable Strain/Sprain Injuries Injuries/2yrs 0 0

BudgetS7 1 9 Project Cost $ <5,000 <3,000S8 1 9 Return on Investment ROI <2 Years  

Box Packing S9 1 2,11 Case Boxing qty Accuracy % 95 100S10 1 2,11 Product Alignment Accuracy % 95 100

Food SafetyS11 1 7 Material Grade for Production Material Grade "Food Grade" "Food Grade"S12 1 7 Materials touching Food Qty Minimum  S13 1 7 Parts Above Food # Parts 0 0S14 1 3,4 Exposed Material Type Unit "Stainless Steel" "Stainless Steel"

System InformationS15 1 10 Total Area square feet TBD  S16 2 3 Voltage Volts 110 110S17 1 3,4 Enclosure Rating Rating "NEMA-4" "NEMA-4"

Maintenance/ReliabilityS18 2 6 System Part Quantity # parts Minimum  S19 2 11 Unplanned Repairs Frequency Repairs/Year <1 0S20 2 6 Minimum time needed for repairs Minutes <30 <15S21 2 3,4,7 Pressure without damage/parts cooming loose Psi >85 >130

Production RatesS22 2 5 Setup time between products Minutes <30 <15S23 1 5 Round PDC Brd Rate Cases/hr >230 >230S24 1 5 Apple Cider Bread Rate Cases/hr >220 >220S25 1 5 Red White and Blue Rate Cases/hr >220 >220S26 1 5 Cran Orange Brd Rate Cases/hr >220 >220S27 1 5 Cinn Rasion Bread Rate Cases/hr >220 >220S28 1 5 WW Loaf Rate Cases/hr >212 >212S29 1 5 Pane Italian WG Rate Cases/hr >200 >200S30 1 5 Tuscan Rate Cases/hr >190 >190S31 1 5 Panini Rolls Rate Cases/hr >180 >180S32 1 5 Ciabatta Rate Cases/hr >175 >175S33 1 5 WW Square Rolls Rate Cases/hr >162 >162S34 1 5 PDC Rolls Rate Cases/hr >150 >150S35 1 5 Batard Rate Cases/hr >140 >140S36 1 5 Multigrain Square Rolls Rate Cases/hr >143 >143S37 1 5 Baguette Rate Cases/hr >130 >130S38 1 5 Parm Peppercorn Rate Cases/hr >130 >130S39 1 5 French Rolls Rate Cases/hr >119 >119

Mezzanine Functional Decomposition

Potential Concepts

Empty Box

TransmissionAlign

ProductCount

ProductCosmetic

InspectionPut Product in

BoxOrient Product

in BoxStop when

Full Close BoxMove Box to

Lower

Concept 1 Machine Human Human Human Machine Human Human Human Human

Concept 2 Machine Machine Machine Human Machine Machine Machine Machine Machine

Concept 3 Machine Human Human Human Machine Machine Machine Machine Machine

Concept 4 Machine Machine Human Human Machine Machine Human Human Human

Concept 5 Machine Human Machine Human Machine Human Human Human Human

Concept 6 Machine Human Human Human Machine Human Human Human Machine

Datum Human Human Human Human Human Human Human Human Human

Concept Sketch

Concept Selection Pugh Chart

Critera Value Datum Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4 Concept 5 Concept 6

Inexpensive repair costs 1   - - - - - -

Reduces Ergonomic Risk 3   + + + + + +*

Fills Boxes Correctly 2   S + + S S S

Is Durable 2   - - - - - -

Can be Cleaned/sterilized 1   S S S S S S

Can Maintain Production Rate 3   + + + + + +

Can be Easily Repaired 2   - - - - - -

Meets Food Safety Requirements 3   S - - - S S

Can be completed in time 1   + - - - + +

Handles High Ergonomic Risk Products 3   + + + + + +

Meets ROI 2   + - - - S +

Safely Fits in Allotted Area 3   S - - S S S

Is Reliable 3   S - - - S S

User friendly system 2   + + + + + +

Total + 6 5 5 4 6 6

Total - 3 8 8 7 3 3

Total Combined 3 -3 -3 -3 3 3

Weighted Total 9 -4 -4 -3 7 9*

Risk Assessment

ID Risk Item Effect Cause Likelihood Severity Importance Mitigation

1 Team runs out of time Customer's needs are not met Improper planning 1 3 3 Proper planning to ensure effective use of time

Scope of project too large 1 3 3 Communication with customer to ensure project is not too large

2 Individual work incomplete Delay in project schedule Non-committed team member 2 2 4 Constant Communication with team members on progress

Too much work for individual 2 1 2Communication between team members to keep work load balanced

4 Individual work sub-par Delay in project schedule Non-committed team member 2 3 6Communication between team members to keep work load balanced

Too much work for individual 1 3 3Communication between team members to keep work load balanced

5 Individual illness Delay in project schedule Poor hygiene 2 2 4 Everyone will have a "buddy" who is aware of his tasks

6 Lack of team communication Delay in project schedule Norms/Values not followed 1 3 3 Follow norms/values sheet to ensure communication

7 Lack of communication with Customer Customer's needs are not met Priorities with unrelated projects 2 3 6 Ensure regular project updates

8 Unreliable parts supplierDelay in prototype/finished product

Lack of communication with parts supplier 2 3 6 Constant communication with supplier/multiple suppliers

9 Budget exceeded Customer's needs are not met Improper planning/budgeting 2 2 4 Proper planning to ensure budget is not overshot

10 Customer needs change Change in scope of project Customer needs something different 1 3 3 Constant communication with customer

11 Bakery employees resist change Fear of obsoletion 2 3 6 Ask opperators/managers for feed back for design

12 Not enough floor space for design Redesign of project Poor planning 1 1 1 Test design mock ups

13Throughput reduced after plan implemented Redesign of project Poor planning 2 3 6 Functional testing

14High number of iterations during prototyping Delay in project schedule Lack of attention to detail 1 2 2 Concept design reviews

15 Member of team drops out of MSD Team realignment Sickness/death 1 3 3 Make sure to exchange all knowledge with team

16Catastrophic failure of design near end term Customer's needs are not met Unforeseen circumstance 1 3 3 Out of team control

17Wegmans cuts funding of project midway End of project. The economy 1 3 3 Out of team control

18 Contaminate food Rethink product handling strategy Failure to follow safety regulations WSR 1 3 3 Work with Quality/Safety Team at Wegmans

19 Increased employee injury rates Customer's needs are not met Not following the WERA 1 3 3 Work with Wegam's Ergonomists

20 Conflict between MSD group members Delay in project schedule Stress 2 2 4 Open team communication

21Process doesn't improve upon any metrics Customer's needs are not met Poor design 1 3 3 Concept design reviews

22Member of Wegmans team becomes unavailable 1 3 3 Make sure to always have back up

23 Customer priority changes 1 3 3 Out of team control

Project Plan

Project Plan Timeline

Questions? Comments?