Nof S.Y. Springer Handbook of Automation

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Automation in Food Processing 60.6 Assembly of Food Products – Making a Sandwich 1055

perience and training and this increases the overall staff

costs.

At certain times of the year (Christmas, Valentines’

day, and Easter) the demand for cakes increases dramat-

ically and can mean production rates at the Park Cakes

factory can increase by as much as 300%. This presents

a signiﬁcant problem as additional labor is needed but

ﬁnding skilled staff is difﬁcult and additional training is

often required. This is costly and requires detailed plan-

ning to ensure labor levels are available at just the right

time.

A robot-based solution was proposed and devel-

oped [60.25] in which the messages were initially

produced in a computer-aided design (CAD) pack-

age which converted the written text into a series

of coordinate positions used to programme the robot.

A four-degree-of-freedom SCARA (selective compli-

ance assembly robot arm) design was sufﬁcient to

achieve the icing task. In addition to the basic motions

involved in writing, the appearance of the icing is also

dependent on the relative distance between the depos-

itor and the surface of the cake. To ensure knowledge

and maintenance of correct separation a laser range

ﬁnder was used to measure the distance to the cake’s

surface and allowed the robot’s height to be adjusted

to correspond to the individual proﬁle of each cake.

The robot carries the icing head, which was capable of

producing a steady stream of chocolate icing. It was es-

sential that the icing depositor could be switched off

with a clean cutoff (i.e., when stopped the icing ﬂow

would instantly cease without any stringing). This was

achieved using a stainless-steel 2200-245-Series KISS

Tip Seal Valve. Whilst the robot system operated as

intended there were some initial problems with the de-

positing system caused by the ﬂow characteristics of the

icing, and input from a chocolate technologist allowed

the icing to be produced more consistently resolving the

problems.

The quality of the ﬁnal products exceeded Park

Cakes’ expectations and the system removed some of

the pressures on the company to ﬁnd large numbers of

skilled laborers during periods of high demand.

60.6 Assembly of Food Products – Making a Sandwich

The instances already studied have shown uses of au-

tomation in applications involving containerized food

products and individual or discrete food product han-

dling. However, one of the major challenges in the

automation of food production is the assembly of food

products from a large number of discrete components.

The assembly of a sandwich is one such problem.

Until recently sandwich production has been per-

formed almost entirely manually with lines employing

up to 80 people. The little automation that is used typi-

cally takes the form of slicers or depositors. The high

level of labor means that there is a real incentive to

look to automation. However, the only successful exam-

ple of an automated sandwich line is that developed for

Uniq Plc. by Lieder [60.26]. This system uses industrial

robots and an indexing system to automate the entire

process from buttering to packing but operates most

successfully for products with paste ﬁllings. Due to the

use of robots there are signiﬁcant safety issues and as

such the line must be enclosed by guarding. This means

it cannot operate alongside humans and also leads to

a large machine footprint.

An alternative approach was described by Davis

et al. based on simpler dedicated yet more ﬂexible

concepts [60.27, 28]. In this system the ingredients in-

cluded: two slices of bread, butter, mayonnaise, chicken

(diced), lettuce (shreaded), four slices of tomato, and

four slices of cucumber. This is considered by the

industry to represent the most difﬁcult sandwich han-

dling scenario and does not beneﬁt from the binding

effects found in the pastes used on the Lieder line.

The automated system consisted of a continuously run-

ning corded conveyor which transports the bread slices

and sandwich assemblies between workstations. This

conveyor is separated into two lanes with each lane

handling half of the sandwich (top and bottom slice).

A piece of bread is placed in each lane and as they

progress along the line additional ingredients are added

to the bottom(supporting) slice. Afterall theingredients

are added the second slice must be lifted, inverted, and

then placed on the top of the ﬁrst slice. Studies of cur-

rent production lines identiﬁed a number of individual

processes needed to construct the sandwich:

1. Ingredient placement – individual ingredients are

placed onto a single slice of bread.

2. Topping – a second slice of bread is placed on top

of the ﬁrst.

3. Cutting – the sandwich is positioned and cut once

diagonally to form two triangular sandwiches.

Part F 60.6

1056 Part F Industrial Automation

Ingredient placement

Into skillet

Clapping

Cutting

Topping

Lettuce

Tomato and

cucumber

Cubed

chicken

Butter

Slice A

Slice B

Fig. 60.13a,b Chicken salad sandwich production processes

4. Clapping – one triangular sandwich is placed on top

of another prior to top packing.

5. Packing – the two sandwiches are placed into a skil-

let.

Figure 60.13a shows these ﬁve individual opera-

tions, while Fig.60.13b shows the developed system.

An industry-standard programmable logic con-

troller (PLC) is used to control the basic functions of

the process. All sensors, variable-speed drives, step-

per drives, the vision system and pneumatic control

valves are connected to and controlled by this PLC.

A touchscreen human–machine interface (HMI)isused

to operate the machine and to give the operator feed-

back about the operating state. The HMI also has

an engineer mode that allows qualiﬁed personnel to

change conveyor speeds and perform basic sequencing

checks.

Stepper drives are used where controlled movement

of the sandwiches is required. A stepper drive is used

at the optimum cut station to precisely align the sand-

wich before the sandwich is cut. The clapping station

uses three stepper drives to place the two halves of the

cut sandwich precisely on top of each other prior to be-

ing packed. The packing station uses a stepper drive to

rotate the assembled sandwich through precisely 90

◦

before being dropped into the awaiting skillet. All the

stepper drives are controlled by the PLC and all the

sensors are connected to the PLC.

To establish the validity of each principle a series

of trials over a 10week period on 250 000 sandwiches

were conducted within a sandwich factory. The aim of

the trails was to analyze each process critically and

establish whether these principles worked with real

products and in a true factory environment. For each

of the individual results there were very satisfactory

outcomes with high levels of acceptance and reliability.

60.7 Discrete Event Simulation Example

With automation projects being expensive, and the cost

of lost production during the installation of equip-

ment being high, it is vital that any potential problems

with an automation project be identiﬁed as early as

possible. Discrete event simulation is a software tool

which allows machines, production lines or even en-

tire factories to be produced, tested, and assessed on

a computer before any real equipment is purchased or

installed.

The simulations provide accurate representations

of production processes and product ﬂow. This means

an appropriately constructed simulation can be used

to identify bottlenecks in existing or planned layouts

(Fig.60.14). This is particularly useful when installing

a discrete piece of automation onto a line as it allows

the effect of the machine on the remainder of the line to

be assessed.

Simulation can also be used to determine if labor is

being used efﬁciently. The example described below is

of a sandwich production line. From video footage of

the line it was determined how long each operator took

to performtheir particulartask. Thesimulation was then

created and sandwiches were input onto the line at the

appropriate rate. Analysis was then performed to deter-

mine what percentage of each operator’s time was spent

idle. Itwas shown that each ofthe three operators tasked

Part F 60.7

Automation in Food Processing 60.8 Totally Integrated Automation 1057

Fig. 60.14 Simulation of sandwich production line

with placing lettuce on the sandwiches was only busy

for 60% of their time. This meant that either one of the

operators could be removed or the line speed could be

increased. The simulation then showed that increasing

the line speed produced problems elsewhere as other

operators no longer had enough time to perform their

tasks.

This is just one example of how simulation can be

useful. More complex simulations allow the introduc-

tion of variation of task time, variability of product ﬂow,

and changes in shift patterns, to mention just three fac-

tors.

60.8 Totally Integrated Automation

While production hardware forms the most obvious

feature on the food factory landscape, it is only part

of a larger automation scheme which can ultimately

deliver a totally integrated form of automation encom-

passing management and strategic functions (logistics,

sales, orders,dispatch, traceability, energy, maintenance

etc.), production functions including SCADA, network-

ing, HMI, distributed process control (DPC), and (at the

machine level) PLC, sensors, actuators etc. A typical

format for this type of layout is shown in Fig.60.15,

HMI

Process automation Factory automation Machine automation

Business modeling factory

Enterprise asset management

Plant maintenance management

Dispatch

Trace and tracking

Networks

Sensors, actuators

CNC, PLC, DCS

ERP

Enterprise resource planning

MES

Manufacturing

execution system

Automation

Fig. 60.15 A totally integrated approach to factory and production automation

and the techniques used in the food sector vary little

from those in other sectors.

Although the levels of uptake do vary across the in-

dustry, in general, at the managerial and administrative

level most food processing companies do make exten-

sive use of at least some aspect of control systems.

This is particularly important with regard to production

scheduling, logistics, and distribution as in the food sec-

tor the concept of just in time is taken to perhaps its

greatest extreme. In food product manufacture it is not

Part F 60.8

1058 Part F Industrial Automation

unusual that orders are placed at midnight for dispatch

in under 12h. These orders can amount to tens or even

hundreds of thousands of units. While the manufactur-

ers do try to predict demand it is not unknown for the

customer (supermarkets) to vary the orders by 50% or

more. Indeedit is not unknown for expected orders to be

canceled with only hours of warning. In these instances

efﬁcient and effective process control and management

is essential.

In terms of process automation there is use of

SCADA, DCS, PLC integrated networks, etc. In ar-

eas such as batch production, for the beverage sector

etc., the use of this technology is common, but in the

broader food sector dealing with discrete components

the use of process automation is more patchy. Cer-

tainly most of the hardware which is developed for

the food sector now comes with PLC, DCS, and net-

working capability and can be integrated into a full

SCADA system, however, a fully integrated and net-

worked operation is certainly not the normal practice,

although it does represent best practice. There are sev-

eral reasons for reduced uptake even when automation

machinery has been installed that has advanced control

functionality.

60.9 Conclusions

The food processing sector is the largest manufacturing

industry inmany countries, butto date it has been oneof

the least effective at using automation, and particularly

following the newer automation trends. This has been

driven by many factors that are both commercial and

technical and it is certainly true that in many instances

food products pose questions that are not present when

handling traditional materials. Yet those within the in-

dustry are acutely aware of the pressure to reduce food

costs while maintaining quality and it is also true that

when there is a genuine desire from the food processing

organization there are many ways in which automation

can be used to enhance the performance of the business.

It is particularly hoped that SMEs that have least expe-

rience (and conﬁdence) with advanced automation will

ﬁnd the necessary guidance to reap the beneﬁts.

60.10 Further Reading

•

R.G. Moreira: Automatic Control for Food Process-

ing Systems (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 2000)

•

L.M. Cheng: Food Machinery – For the Production

of Cereal Foods, Snack Foods And Confectionery

(Woodhead, Cambridge 1992)

•

M. Kutz: Handbook of Farm, Dairy, and Food Ma-

chinery (William Andrew, Norwich 2007)

•

G.D. Saravacos, A.E. Kostaropoulos (Eds.): Hand-

book of Food Processing Equipment (Kluwer Aca-

demic Plenum, Norwell 2003)

•

B. Siciliano, O. Khatib (Eds.): Springer Hand-

book of Robotics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

2008)

References

60.1 CIAA: Data and Trends of the European Food

and Drink Industry (Confederation of the

Food and Drink Industry of the EU, Brussels

2006)

60.2 P.Y. Chua, T. Ilschner, D.G. Caldwell: Robotic ma-

nipulation of food products – a review, Ind. Robot.

30(4), 345–354 (2003)

60.3 BRA/DTI Technology: Market Review of the Robotics

Sector, Final Report, 5th March (BRA/DTI, London

1997)

60.4 J. Taylor: HACCP Made Easy (Practical HACCP,

Manchester 2006)

60.5 J.M. Farber: Safe Handling of Foods (CRC, Boca

Raton 2000)

60.6 ISO: ISO 22000:2005, Food safety management sys-

tems – Requirements for any organization in the

food chain (ISO, Geneva 2007)

60.7 Materials of Construction Subgroup of the EHEDG:

Materials of construction for equipment in contact

with food, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 18(S1), S40–S50

(2007)

60.8 H.L.M. Lelieveld, M.A. Mostert, J. Holah, B. White

(Eds.): Hygiene in Food Processing (Woodhead,

Cambridge 2003)

Part F 60

Automation in Food Processing References 1059

60.9 C. Honess: Importance of surface ﬁnish in the

design of stainless steel. In: Stainless Steel Ind.

(British Stainless Steel Association, Shefﬁeld 2006)

pp. 14–15

60.10 FDA: Indirect food additives: Polymers, Code of

Federal Regulations, CFR Title 21, part 177 (FDA,

Rockville 2007), Available online from

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/˜lrd/FCF177.html

60.11 G. Midelet, B. Carpentier: Transfer of microor-

ganisms, including listeria monocytogenes, from

various materials to beef, Appl. Environ. Microbiol.

68(8), 4015–4024 (2002)

60.12 FDA:. Indirect food additives: Adhesives and com-

ponents of coatings. Code of Federal Regulations,

CFR Title 21, part 175 (FDA, Rockville 2007), Available

online from

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/˜lrd/FCF175.html

60.13 B.M.Y. Nouri, F. Al-Bender, J. Swevers, P. Vanherck,

H. Van Brussel: Modelling a pneumatic servo po-

sitioning system with friction, Proc. Am. Control

Conf., Vol. 2 (2000) pp. 1067–1071

60.14 R.B. van Varseveld, G.M. Bone: Accurate posi-

tion control of a pneumatic actuator using on/off

solenoid valves, Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and

Automation ICRA, Vol. 2 (1997) pp. 1196–1201

60.15 P.M. Taylor: Presentation and gripping of ﬂex-

ible materials, Assem. Autom. 15(3), 33–35

(1995)

60.16 J.N. Reed, S.J. Miles, J. Butler, M. Baldwin, R. No-

ble: Automatic mushroom harvester development,

J. Agric. Eng. Res. 78(1), 15–23 (2001)

60.17 K. Khodabandehloo: Robotics in food manufac-

turing. In: Advanced Robotics and Intelligent

Machines, ed. by J.O. Gray, D.G. Caldwell (IEE,

Stevenage 1996) pp. 220–223

60.18 IPL: Marel Food Systems (2008),

www.marel.com/company/brands/AEW-Delford/

60.19 T.B. Gjerstad, T.K. Lien: New gripper technology for

ﬂexible and efﬁcient ﬁsh processing, Proc. Food

Factory of the Future 3 (Gothenburg 2006)

60.20 S. Davis, J.O. Gray, D.G. Caldwell: An end effector

based on the Bernoulli principle for handling sliced

fruit and vegetables, Int. J. Robot. Comput. Integr.

Manuf. 24(2), 249–257 (2008)

60.21 F. Stephan, G. Seliger: Handling with ice – the

cryo-gripper, a new approach, Assem. Autom.

19(4), 332–337 (1999)

60.22 FRPERC: Food Refrigeration and Process Engi-

neering Research Centre, Univ. Bristol, UK (2008)

http://www.frperc.bris.ac.uk/

60.23 C. Connolly: Gripping developments at Silsoe, Ind.

Robot J. 30(4), 322–325 (2003)

60.24 R.J. Moreno-Masey, D.G. Caldwell: Design of an au-

tomated handling system for limp, ﬂexible sheet

lasagna pasta, IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. ICRA

(Rome 2007) pp. 1226–1231

60.25 B. Rooks: The man-machine interface get friendlier

at Manufacturing Week, Ind. Robot. J. 25(2), 112–116

(1998)

60.26 Robot Food Technologies Germany GmbH. Wietze

(2008) http://www.robotlieder.de/

60.27 S. Davis, M.G. King, J.W. Casson, J.O. Gray,

D.G. Caldwell: Automated handling, assembly and

packaging of highly variable compliant food prod-

ucts – Making a sandwich, IEEE Int. Conf. Robot.

Autom. ICRA (Rome 2007) pp. 1213–1218

60.28 S. Davis, M.G. King, J.W. Casson, J.O. Gray,

D.G. Caldwell: End effector development for au-

tomated sandwich assembly, Meas. Control. 40(7),

202–206 (2007)

Part F 60

“This page left intentionally blank.”

1061

Infrastruc

Part G

Part G Infrastructure and Service Automation

61 Construction Automation

Daniel Castro-Lacouture, Atlanta, USA

62 The Smart Building

Timothy I. Salsbury, Milwaukee, USA

63 Automation in Agriculture

Yael Edan, Beer Sheva, Israel

Shufeng Han, Urbandale, USA

Naoshi Kondo, Kyoto, Japan

64 Control System for Automated Feed Plant

Nick A. Ivanescu, Bucharest, Romania

65 Securing Electrical Power System Operation

Petr Horacek, Prague, Czech Republic

66 Vehicle and Road Automation

Yuko J. Nakanishi, New York, USA

67 Air Transportation System Automation

Satish C. Mohleji, McLean, USA

Dean F. Lamiano, McLean, USA

Sebastian V. Massimini, McLean, USA

68 Flight Deck Automation

Steven J. Landry, West Lafayette, USA

69 Space and Exploration Automation

Edward Tunstel, Laurel, USA

70 Cleaning Automation

Norbert Elkmann, Magdeburg, Germany

Justus Hortig, Magdeburg, Germany

Markus Fritzsche, Magdeburg, Germany

71 Automating Information

and Technology Services

Parasuram

Balasubramanian, Bangalore, India

72 Library Automation

Michael Kaplan, Newton, USA

73 Automating Serious Games

Gyula Vastag, Budapest, Hungary

Moshe Yerushalmy, Petach Tikva, Israel

74 Automation in Sports and Entertainment

PeterKopacek,Vienna,Austria

1062

Infrastructure and Service Automation. Part G Without automation, certain infrastructure and services could

not even be imagined, as in space exploration and secure electric power distribution. In others, automation is

essential in improving them so fundamentally, that their beneﬁt inﬂuences tremendous social and economic trans-

formation and even revolution, as with transportation, agriculture and entertainment. Chapters in this part explain

howautomation isdesigned, selected, integrated,justiﬁed andapplied, itschallenges andemerging trends in those

areas and in the construction of structures, roads and bridges; of smart buildings, smart roads and intelligent ve-

hicles; cleaning of surfaces, tunnels and sewers; land, air, and space transportation; information, knowledge,

learning, training, and library services; and in sports and entertainment. With the enormous increase in the im-

portance of the service sector in the global economy, this infrastructure and service automation part clariﬁes not

only how it has evolved and is being enabled, but also how automation will inﬂuence future growth and further

innovations in these domains.

1063

Construction

61. Construction Automation

Daniel Castro-Lacouture

The construction industry is labor intensive, project

based, and slow to adopt emerging technologies.

Combined, these factors make the construction

industry not only one of the most dangerous

industries worldwide, but also prone to low pro-

ductivity and cost overruns due to shortages of

skilled labor, unexpected site conditions, design

changes, communication problems, constructabil-

ity challenges, and unsuitability of construction

means and techniques. Construction automation

emerged to overcome these issues, since it has the

potential to capitalize on increasing quality expec-

tations from customers, tighter safety regulations,

greater attention to computerized project control,

and technological breakthroughs led by equip-

ment manufacturers. Today, many construction

operations have incorporated automated equip-

ment, means, and methods into their regular

practices.

The Introduction to this chapter provides an

overview of construction automation, highlighting

the contribution from robotics. Several motivations

for automating construction operations are dis-

cussed in Sect. 61.1, and a historical background is

included in Sect. 61.2. A description of automation

in horizontal construction is included in Sect. 61.3,

followed by an overview of building construction

automation in Sect. 61.4. Some techniques and

guidelines for construction management automa-

tionarediscussedinSect.61.5, which also presents

several emerging trends. Section 61.6 shows some

typical application examples in today’s construc-

61.1 Motivations

for Automating Construction Operations. 1064

61.2 Background .........................................1065

61.3 Horizontal Construction Automation.......1066

61.4 Building Construction Automation .........1068

61.5 Techniques and Guidelines

for Construction Management

Automation..........................................1070

61.5.1 Planning and Scheduling

Automation .................................1070

61.5.2 Construction Cost Management

Automation .................................1071

61.5.3 Construction Performance

Management Automation..............1071

61.5.4 Design–Construction Coordination

Automation .................................1073

61.6 Application Examples............................1073

61.6.1 Grade Control System for Dozers.....1073

61.6.2 Planning and Scheduling

Automation .................................1074

61.6.3 Construction Cost Estimating

Automation .................................1074

61.6.4 Construction Progress Monitoring

Automation .................................1075

61.7 Conclusions and Challenges...................1076

References ..................................................1076

tion environment. Finally, Sect. 61.7 brieﬂy draws

conclusions and points out challenges for the

adoption of construction automation.

Construction automation has been continuously re-

deﬁned throughout the past two decades. In 1988,

construction automation was deﬁned as “the work to

increase the contribution of machines or tools while

decreasing the human input” [61.1]. Another deﬁni-

tion states that it is “the technology concerned with

the application of electronic, mechanical and computer-

based systems to operate and control construction

production” [61.2]. Construction automation was fur-

ther characterized as [61.3]:

Part G 61

1064 Part G Infrastructure and Service Automation

the work using construction techniques including

equipment to operate and control construction pro-

duction in order to reduce labor, reduce duration,

increase productivity, improve the working environ-

ment of labor and decrease the injury of labor

during construction process.

From a systemic perspective, construction automa-

tion is the technology-driven method of streamlining

construction processes with the intention of improving

safety, productivity, constructability, scheduling or con-

trol, while providing project stakeholders with a tool

for prompt and accurate decision making. This method

must not be limited to replicating skilled labor or

conventional equipment performance. The latter is the

purpose of single-task robots, which have been an im-

portant component of construction automation. In the

year 2000, robotics applications in the construction

industry completed 20years of research, exploration,

and prototyping, as documented in the ﬁrst book on

robotics in civil engineering [61.4]. These applica-

tions made important contributions to replicating single

tasks, which could be completed faster and safer, since

no laborers were operating equipment. However, ini-

tial and operating costs have been a problem for the

massive deployment of construction robots [61.5, 6].

Later, the distinction between single-task robots and

construction automation became more evident. Single-

task robots perform a speciﬁc job, whereas construction

automation uses principles of industrial automation to

streamline repetitive tasks, such as just-in-time de-

livery systems, coded components or computerized

information management systems [61.7]. Automation

has been associated with repetitive processes, while

robotics has targeted single tasks or jobs, imitating

skilled labor. Nevertheless, construction processes may

not be repetitive as a whole, due to the planning,

design, and assembly requirements that must be ad-

dressed prior to initiating construction. In addition, site

layout and logistics constraints may pose another ob-

stacle so that a theoretical repetitive process must be

decomposed into simpler tasks. These simpler tasks

may be treated as repetitive in nature. Some exam-

ples of repetitive tasks are digging a trench, placing

a pipe, backﬁlling, placing masonry tiles, hauling top-

soil, etc.

61.1 Motivations for Automating Construction Operations

Based on a market research questionnaire conducted

in 1998 to construction industry respondents from

24 countries, the strongest reasons for robotic con-

struction automation were: productivity improvement,

quality and reliability, safety, enhancement of working

conditions, savings in labor costs, standardization of

components, life cycle cost savings, and simpliﬁcation

of the workforce [61.8].

The project-based nature of the construction in-

dustry implies the periodic mobilization of construc-

tion equipment, materials, supplies, personnel, and

temporary facilities at the start of every construc-

tion project. Recent hires, especially ﬁeld laborers,

may not be familiar with the construction practices

adopted by the ﬁrm on a particular project, making

it difﬁcult to engage them in technologically ad-

vanced processes from the beginning of the project.

Shortages of skilled labor, due to economic ﬂuctu-

ations, immigration policies, or geographic consider-

ations, make the adaptation to project-based means

and techniques even more challenging. Therefore,

the possibility of automating construction processes

would constitute a great opportunity for overcom-

ing the transition to project-based demands. Difﬁ-

culties in the delivery of supplies and the assembly

of materials on site have been alleviated by the

adoption of off-site assemblies, manufacturing automa-

tion principles, and procurement of premanufactured

components.

Another motivation for automating construction

tasks is safety in the workplace. Research has found

that the causes of accidents can be attributed to fac-

tors such as human error, unsafe behavior, and the

interaction of humans with materials, tools, and en-

vironmental factors [61.9]. Some of the incidents

leading to construction injuries and fatalities can be at-

tributed to collisions between workers and equipment,

or from workers falling from roofs, scaffolds or trench

edges [61.10]. In the USA in 2006, there were 1226 fa-

talities associated with the construction industry. This

accounts for almost 24% of all fatalities in the private

sector [61.11]. However, the construction industry ac-

counts for only 5% of the US workforce [61.12]. This

high proportion of construction injuries and fatalities

may indicate that the industry needs new approaches

in order to improve safety environments for workers

on construction sites. Some efforts have focused on

using machines to complete repetitive tasks that were

Part G 61.1