Design, build, and test a device that has the capability of visually inspecting our zipper profiles on our production lines for start-ups or a device that can detect easy-open/weak zippers during regular production

Catafort-Silva, Margaux

Pearson, Kyle

Turner, Josh

English

Olivet Nazarene University

Olivet Nazarene University Digital Commons @ Olivet Student Scholarship – Engineering Engineering 4-15-2022 In-Line Profile/Easy Open Inspection Margaux Catafort-Silva Olivet Nazarene University, margaux.cs@hotmail.fr Kyle Pearson Olivet Nazarene University, raspberryky@gmail.com Josh Turner Olivet Nazarene University, josht408@gmail.com Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.olivet.edu/engn_stsc  Part of the Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Catafort-Silva, Margaux; Pearson, Kyle; and Turner, Josh, "In-Line Profile/Easy Open Inspection" (2022). Student Scholarship – Engineering. 11. https://digitalcommons.olivet.edu/engn_stsc/11 This Presentation is brought to you for free and open access by the Engineering at Digital Commons @ Olivet. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student Scholarship – Engineering by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Olivet. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@olivet.edu. Defect Zipper Detection SystemJOSH TURNER, KYLE PEARSON, AND MARGAUX CATAFORT--SILVAAcknowledgements ITW Zip-Pak - For supporting us with input and encouragement along the way. Colin Sheehan ONU Walker School of STEM - For academic instruction and preparing us for this point in our academic careers Dr. José Manjarrés2Agenda Sponsor Background Problem Background Need Statement Design Objectives, Functional Requirements, and Design Constraints Design Alternatives  Design Analysis Design Selection Final Design Description Design Analysis System Operation Testing and Validation Possible Improvements Conclusion3Sponsor Background Manufacturing plant owned by ITW (Illinois Tool Works) Based in Manteno, IL Manufacturer of re-closable plastic zipper Manufacturer of multiple zipper types Including the “Zip-Pak 3” zipper4Problem Background Extruded zipper is coming off the line with defects Defect zipper is getting shipped to customers A defect zipper will pop open when a finger is run along the opening “Pop-error” A solution is needed to detect when the zipper is defect An effective solution could be implemented in other plants around the globeZipper profile cross section5Need Statement"It is necessary to design a method to detect pop-errors and reduce the volume of faulty product that ITW Zip-Pak sells to its clientele. Zip-Pak must pay to return any faulty material, which drives up company spending. Implementation of a pop-error detection system could reduce company spending on return shipping costs."6Design Objectives, Functional Requirements, and Design ConstraintsDesign Objectives• Solution must be easy for operators to understand• Device must be simple in order to be easily repaired and modified• System should be precise in nature Functional Requirements• Identify when a defect comes through the line• Alert operator of defect• Display collection of defect information such as severity and frequency of occurrence• Autonomous operationDesign Constraints• Ability to operate under 240V AC• Ability to check zipper at least once every 1 inch of material• Must cost under $10,000 to build and implement7Design Alternatives Linear Position Sensor Linear position sensor attached to an opening device  Arduino board that reads any sudden movementLinear position sensor system concept8Design Alternatives Continued Camera-Based Solution   Detection camera (capture rate at least 60Hz) A macro lens  Camera placed on the line and connected to an I/O board such as an Arduino9Design Alternatives Continued Vibration Analysis Solution Need to be put on a mount  Mechanical deflection device to measure the amount of force required to separate the zipper Accelerometer or frequency sensor Arduino board 10Design Analysis & Selection Camera-based solution Expensive Heavyweight code Difficult to maintain/modify Imprecise Not robust 11Design Selection Continued Linear position sensor Inexpensive Easy to understand Easy to maintain, but parts wear out Easy to modify Must make custom parts Imprecise, cannot tell pop-error severity Difficult to tune12Design Selection Continued Vibration sensor solution Inexpensive Easy to understand Easy to maintain Easy to modify Can use pre-existing components Precise, can tell severity (Later) Adjusts to line speed13Design Matrix14Final Design Description2 sections: assembly line & components case Assembly line Splitting device: torpedo Sensor: ADXL-345 accelerometer15System Operation - Accelerometer Accelerometer samples as often as it is polled (checked). When it reads an acceleration significantly different from the norm, it “sees” a pop-error. Note the blue line, showing the acceleration parallel to the line. A pop was detected midway through this test run for our equipment.Actual system vibration response16Design Description Continued Components case 2 microcontrollers (Arduino UNO R3) 3 buttons 1 screen 2 10W power suppliesComponents box – screen, microcontrollers, buttons, power supplies17System Operation – UI Board Buttons operate on an interrupt-based system Hardware reacts immediately to each button press Screen communicates with the board via Serial Runtime not important, focus on accurate/readable data Control loop consists of setting values and displaying them to screen, values are global and update when the UI board receives communication from the detection board18User Interface19Testing & Validation Plan Initial testing – make-shift line with wooden prototype Needed to make pops artificially Final testing – Real-time assembly line Found pops on the line as they would normally appear20Testing & Validation Plan Sampling rate – design must react to pops as they occur At max line speed (300 ft/min) it must sample every 16 ms False discovery rate – what the design measures must match what is present Must minimize false readingsProcedure:1. Measure number of pops manually2. Measure number of pops using design (simultaneously)3. Compare results21Testing & Validation ResultsAccelerometer Open DetectorElectronics Housing & User Interface 20 trials, 1 speed False discovery rate Mean: 0.113 Standard deviation: 0.144 Response time results T = 2 * (cycle time) + (detection CT – regular CT) T <= 12ms (< 16 ms)22FDR Distribution Using MATLAB’s Distribution Fitting app, we find the exponential PDF that fits our FDR data Estimation for the mean (population) 95% C.I. (0.11051, 0.18378)23Final Design Analysis• Understandable• Easily repaired• Precise• Notifies the user• Keeps track of occurrences• Shows pop severity• *Not autonomousDesign objectives:• Under budget• Sufficient sampling rate• 20W power requirementFunctional Requirements:Constraints:24Possible Improvements Industrial accelerometer Use of Raspberry Pi Larger display Display current roll status Alarm system integration25Conclusion• Cost-efficient • Easy to understand and repair• Accurate enoughFulfills the design objectives • False discovery rate• Response timeTwo metrics:• Low false discovery rate• Pop errors detected at fast line speedHighlights of our system:26Q & AAppendix 28

In-Line Profile/Easy Open Inspection

https://digitalcommons.olivet.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=engn_stsc

In-Line Profile/Easy Open Inspection

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Olivet Nazarene University