In today’s ever-changing industrial landscape, flexibility and autonomy are essential to remain competitive. Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) offer a solution that combines adaptability and advanced automation, making them indispensable for modern production and quality control. To find out more about FMS, read our previous article here.
Hi Jon, could you remind us what a flexible manufacturing system is?
Jon Bryant : A flexible manufacturing system is a highly adaptable production configuration that uses automation technology. It comprises a centralized solution that controls various machines, handling systems and robots. The main advantage of an FMS is its ability to adapt quickly to changes in the type and quantity of products manufactured, making it ideal for industries with variable demand and customization needs. In essence, it enables manufacturers to be agile in times of uncertainty.
What impact do flexible manufacturing systems have on the inspection process?
Jon Bryant: Since agility is an essential aspect of FMS, the inspection process must adapt to this flexibility. Otherwise, it risks becoming a bottleneck. The last thing manufacturers want is production delays caused by parts waiting to be measured.
Manufacturers are putting a lot of effort into thinking about how parts will flow through their production facilities. The assembly line concept is gradually evolving towards a modular approach. The linear conveyor we’re used to is being replaced by AGVs that transport parts from one manufacturing stage to the next. In this scenario, the inspection cell must be integrated into the manufacturing system.
Today, there are several different configurations for inspection cells. Can you tell us more about them?
Jon Bryant: Of course. When designing an inspection system, there are many elements to consider.
Firstly, the number of parts to be inspected. This determines whether the inspection system will be in-line, near-line or off-line.
Next, the features to be measured and the level of accuracy required. This will determine the sensor used to measure the parts.
Finally, the process of programming the equipment to measure the part. This will determine the software required.
That’s interesting. Can you tell us a little more about how the software affects the equipment programming process?
Jon Bryant: If we take the example of robotic inspection cells, there are three key tasks to be performed:
- Generate robot trajectory – The robot transports the sensor, providing the flexibility to measure different parts and the speed required to do so efficiently.
- Trigger sensor and collect 3D measurement data – The choice of sensor influences the required robot trajectory.
- Analyze 3D data – This step enables you to check whether the part is within tolerance, and to determine the appropriate course of action. For example, if the part is out of tolerance, should it be reworked or scrapped?
In a multi-vendor scenario, each task is usually managed by a separate software program. Coordination is then required to integrate the various programs generated.
Another approach is to use an all-in-one software solution that generates the robot trajectory while taking into account the constraints of the measurement sensor, and immediately analyzes the 3D data during measurement. This integrated approach minimizes coordination challenges when programming the system for a new part, which is essential to remain agile in the manufacturing process.
Which one would you choose? Why or why not?
Jon Bryant: The obvious answer is that it depends on the circumstances.
If we look at the two options :
- Multi-vendor: this configuration involves the integration of components from different suppliers. It offers a high degree of customization, but can be complex to manage.
- All-in-one: this configuration combines all the necessary components in a single integrated system. It offers the highest level of coordination and ease of use.
In some cases, a multi-vendor approach may be the only possible option, due to the constraints associated with the use of specific software.
However, if agility is a priority, I’d opt for the all-in-one configuration, in particular Metrolog X4 i-Robot. This system offers several competitive advantages, including universality, which allows manufacturers to connect to the equipment of their choice. It also enables off-line programming, so there’s no need to interrupt manufacturing to generate the part program, as most of the work can be done from the office.
Ultimately, choosing an all-in-one solution like Metrolog X4 i-Robot reduces downtime, streamlines programming and improves manufacturing agility, all key factors in staying competitive.