Automatic Dental Bur Loader

Automatic Dental Bur Automatic Dental Bur LoaderLoader

NCDADental Products Development Group

Final Design Final Design PresentationPresentationTeam 99.06:Team 99.06:

Jason Dickey, Greg Frantz,Jason Dickey, Greg Frantz,

Allison Martin, Nancy MeyerAllison Martin, Nancy Meyer

Sponsor:Sponsor:Dave Berezowski, Dave Berezowski,

Dentsply/CaulkDentsply/Caulk

Advisor:Advisor:Dr. Jim GlanceyDr. Jim Glancey

23 April 199923 April 1999

Mission & ApproachMission & Approach

MissionMission::To develop a cost effective dental bur automatic loading and unloading device, while fulfilling as many of the customer and team wants as possible, within the specified time and budget constraints.

ApproachApproach::Using the SSD process, we determined our customers, their wants and constraints, associated metrics, and benchmarks, which lead us into the conceptual design and prototyping of the automatic dental bur loader.

Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview

Project Description & BackgroundProject Description & Background Customers -- Constraints & WantsCustomers -- Constraints & Wants Wants -- Metrics -- Target ValuesWants -- Metrics -- Target Values Concept Generation & SelectionConcept Generation & Selection Prototype DevelopmentPrototype Development Final Design & BudgetFinal Design & Budget Testing & ResultsTesting & Results Recommendations for ImprovementsRecommendations for Improvements

Project Description & Project Description & BackgroundBackground Automate Unload / Load Cycle of Bur GrinderAutomate Unload / Load Cycle of Bur Grinder

Currently 3 Operators Per Shift to Manually Currently 3 Operators Per Shift to Manually

Unload / Load 27 Bur GrindersUnload / Load 27 Bur Grinders

Looking to Reduce Labor Costs Through Looking to Reduce Labor Costs Through

Complete Automation of GrindersComplete Automation of Grinders

Estimate Only One Operator Per Shift Will be Estimate Only One Operator Per Shift Will be

Required for the Automated ProcessRequired for the Automated Process

Economical if Firm Budget is MaintainedEconomical if Firm Budget is Maintained

CustomersCustomers Dave BerezowskiDave Berezowski

• Bur Area ManagerBur Area Manager Jim ForemanJim Foreman

• Facility / Production Facility / Production Engineering ManagerEngineering Manager

Brad HannahBrad Hannah• Machine Repair IIIMachine Repair III

Ray StachnichRay Stachnich• Machine Repair IIIMachine Repair III

Bill MartinBill Martin• MachinistMachinist

Cary DanielCary Daniel• Director of ManufacturingDirector of Manufacturing

Kevin BarkleyKevin Barkley• Grinder OperatorGrinder Operator

Brian HuntingtonBrian Huntington• Safety & HAZMAT OfficerSafety & HAZMAT Officer

James AgnewJames Agnew• ISO AuditorISO Auditor

Brian MelonakisBrian Melonakis• General ManagerGeneral Manager

Project ConstraintsProject Constraints

Must Be Under BudgetMust Be Under Budget Must Load 4 Bur FamiliesMust Load 4 Bur Families Quality of Burs Produced Must Not DecreaseQuality of Burs Produced Must Not Decrease Average Cycle Time Must Not IncreaseAverage Cycle Time Must Not Increase Must Have Operational InterlockMust Have Operational Interlock Must Perform Design & Equipment ValidationMust Perform Design & Equipment Validation Voltage and Air Pressure RequirementsVoltage and Air Pressure Requirements PLC Will Replace Mechanical CounterPLC Will Replace Mechanical Counter

Top Ten Wants & Related Top Ten Wants & Related MetricsMetrics

Minimize Per Unit CostMinimize Per Unit Cost

• Prototype CostPrototype Cost

• Per Unit Cost Per Unit Cost

Simplify Operation of GrinderSimplify Operation of Grinder• Number of Steps Needed by OperatorNumber of Steps Needed by Operator

Increase Consistency of OperationIncrease Consistency of Operation• Percentage of Incorrect LoadsPercentage of Incorrect Loads

• Ratio of Interlocks to PositionsRatio of Interlocks to Positions

Easy to Adjust, Diagnose, and Repair ProblemsEasy to Adjust, Diagnose, and Repair Problems• Number of Status Indicators (Amount of Feedback)Number of Status Indicators (Amount of Feedback)

• Completeness of Documentation and DrawingsCompleteness of Documentation and Drawings

Minimize Unscheduled Down TimeMinimize Unscheduled Down Time• Cycles Between FailureCycles Between Failure


• Ratio of Interlocks to PositionsRatio of Interlocks to Positions

Comply with RegulationsComply with Regulations• Noise LevelNoise Level


Reduce Bur Production CostReduce Bur Production Cost• Number of Steps Needed by OperatorNumber of Steps Needed by Operator

Complete DocumentationComplete Documentation• Completeness of Documentation and DrawingsCompleteness of Documentation and Drawings

Match Caulk Engineering PhilosophyMatch Caulk Engineering Philosophy• % of Parts from Standard Vendors or Made in House% of Parts from Standard Vendors or Made in House

Decrease Bur Unloading / Loading Cycle TimeDecrease Bur Unloading / Loading Cycle Time• Unload/Load Cycle TimeUnload/Load Cycle Time

Metrics & Target ValuesMetrics & Target Values Prototype Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $10,000Prototype Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $10,000

Per Unit Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $8,000 Per Unit Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $8,000

Number of Steps Needed by Operator. . . . . . . . . < 7Number of Steps Needed by Operator. . . . . . . . . < 7

Percentage of Incorrect Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . < 0.5%Percentage of Incorrect Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . < 0.5%

Ratio of Interlocks to Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1/1Ratio of Interlocks to Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1/1

Number of Status Indicators . . . = # of IndicatorsNumber of Status Indicators . . . = # of Indicators

Metrics & Target Values, Metrics & Target Values, cont .cont . Completeness of Documentation Completeness of Documentation

and Drawings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100%and Drawings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100%

Cycles Between Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > 250,000Cycles Between Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > 250,000

Noise Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 80 dBNoise Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 80 dB

% of Parts from Standard Vendors % of Parts from Standard Vendors

or Made in House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100%or Made in House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100%

Unload/Load Cycle Time . . . . . . . . . . . . < 13 secondsUnload/Load Cycle Time . . . . . . . . . . . . < 13 seconds

System BenchmarksSystem Benchmarks

Yamaha Automatic LoaderYamaha Automatic Loader Machine CentersMachine Centers Current Manual LoadingCurrent Manual Loading

ProcessProcess

Initial ConceptsInitial Concepts 1st 2nd1st 2nd

ConceptConcept IterationIteration IterationIteration Swing ArmSwing Arm 1616 11 11 Linear Screw DriveLinear Screw Drive 2020 15 15 Linear PistonLinear Piston 1717 18 18 Robotic ArmRobotic Arm 2929 --- --- Four-Bar MechanismFour-Bar Mechanism 2828 --- --- YamahaYamaha ------ 29 29 HumanHuman ------ 17 17

System FunctionsSystem Functions

Bur DeliveryBur Delivery• 2-Stage Release2-Stage Release

Collet ControlCollet Control• Pneumatic CylinderPneumatic Cylinder

Steady Rest ControlSteady Rest Control• Pneumatic CylinderPneumatic Cylinder

Bur TransferBur Transfer• Swing ArmSwing Arm

Type of GrippersType of Grippers• Pneumatic Pneumatic

GrippersGrippers Final Bur StorageFinal Bur Storage

• BasketBasket Control SystemsControl Systems

• PLCPLC

Advantages Of Swing ArmAdvantages Of Swing Arm

Bur Transfer has One Degree of FreedomBur Transfer has One Degree of Freedom

Easier to Diagnose and Repair Problems Easier to Diagnose and Repair Problems

Minimal Redesign of Current SystemMinimal Redesign of Current System

Fewer PartsFewer Parts

Lower Design & Implementation CostLower Design & Implementation Cost

Modified Collet ExtensionModified Collet Extension

Closed ColletClosed Collet Modified Extended Collet:Modified Extended Collet:Extension ~3/8”Extension ~3/8”

Modifications For Final Modifications For Final PrototypePrototype

Modified the Collet to Extend FurtherModified the Collet to Extend Further

Alignment (x,y,z) for the Bur Holding TrayAlignment (x,y,z) for the Bur Holding Tray

Shock to Dampen the Swing ArmShock to Dampen the Swing Arm

Brass Tubing in the Bur ReleaseBrass Tubing in the Bur Release

Changed Steady Rest & Bur Release Air Cylinders Changed Steady Rest & Bur Release Air Cylinders

Strengthened Support BracketStrengthened Support Bracket

Plug & Cover for TrayPlug & Cover for Tray

Final DesignFinal Design

Head Unit

Swing Arm

Grippers

Collet ControlPiston

Bur Tray & Feed Tube

Bur Release

Cabinet ModificationsCabinet Modifications

BeforeBefore AfterAfter

PLCMechanical Counter

Power Supply

Relay

Base Modifications - BeforeBase Modifications - Before

Original Wiring

Base Modifications - AfterBase Modifications - After

Pneumatic Solenoids Sensor Wiring

BudgetBudget

Parts………………………………………………………... $3,500Parts………………………………………………………... $3,500 Caulk Shop Time: Caulk Shop Time:

100 hours @ 30 $/hour ………….….. $3,000100 hours @ 30 $/hour ………….….. $3,000 Our Shop Time:Our Shop Time:

100 hours @ 0 $/hour ..………………. $0100 hours @ 0 $/hour ..………………. $0 Engineering Hours:Engineering Hours:

1600 hours @ 0 $/hour ……………… $01600 hours @ 0 $/hour ……………… $0

Total Cost ………………………………….. Total Cost ………………………………….. $6,500$6,500

Function TestingFunction Testing PLC LogicPLC Logic

GrippersGrippers

Collet Extension & RetractionCollet Extension & Retraction

Steady Rest MotionSteady Rest Motion

Tray MovementTray Movement

Swing Arm Range of MotionSwing Arm Range of Motion

Bur Ready MechanismBur Ready Mechanism

Function IntegrationFunction Integration

Position Bur Release to Deliver Bur to Position Bur Release to Deliver Bur to

TrayTray

Tray Alignment with GrippersTray Alignment with Grippers

Collet Alignment with GrippersCollet Alignment with Grippers

PLC Delays Optimized PLC Delays Optimized

System Level TestingSystem Level Testing

Calculate Cycle TimeCalculate Cycle Time

Determine Percentage of Incorrect Determine Percentage of Incorrect

LoadsLoads

Number of Steps RequiredNumber of Steps Required

Verify Consistency of Each FunctionVerify Consistency of Each Function

Testing ResultsTesting Results

Metric:Metric: Target Value:Target Value: Actual Value:Actual Value:

Prototype Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,500Prototype Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,500

Per Unit Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $8,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,500Per Unit Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < $8,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,500

Number of Steps by Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Number of Steps by Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Percentage of Incorrect Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 0.5 % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TBDPercentage of Incorrect Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 0.5 % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TBD

Ratio of Interlocks to Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1/1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/1Ratio of Interlocks to Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 1/1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/1

Number of Status Indicators . . . . . . . # of indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 47Number of Status Indicators . . . . . . . # of indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 47

Testing Results, cont .Testing Results, cont .

Metric:Metric: Target Value:Target Value: Actual Value:Actual Value:

Completeness of Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40% Completeness of Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40%

Number of Cycles Between Failure . . . . . . . . . > 250,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TBDNumber of Cycles Between Failure . . . . . . . . . > 250,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TBD

Noise Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 80 dB . . . . . . . . . . < 65 dBNoise Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < 80 dB . . . . . . . . . . < 65 dB

% of “Standard” or “In House” Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100% . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99%% of “Standard” or “In House” Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . = 100% . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99%

Unload/Load Cycle Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .< 13 seconds . . . . .< 6 secondsUnload/Load Cycle Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .< 13 seconds . . . . .< 6 seconds

Recommendations For Recommendations For ImprovementImprovement

Replace the Four Magnetic Reed Switches With Replace the Four Magnetic Reed Switches With

Hall Effect SwitchesHall Effect Switches

Power Indicators & Operator-Level Status LightsPower Indicators & Operator-Level Status Lights

Continuous Spindle Motor OperationContinuous Spindle Motor Operation

Redesign Bur Ready TrayRedesign Bur Ready Tray

• Make Easier to ManufactureMake Easier to Manufacture

• Adjustable Rubber Stop to Prevent BounceAdjustable Rubber Stop to Prevent Bounce

Documents

Automatic Dental Bur Loader