Suggest a Poka Yoke (Mistake Proof) Method for my Product

[DRAMMAN]

Adding counters is always a good thing. The challenges I have had in the past with counters is if you have times when the PEM's get stuck and don't feed. Regardless, adding a counting set-up is always a good approach. My experience is that these types of assembly scenarios require reduntant controlls. Good operator training, extra inspection, automated counters,etc.

 

[Wes Bucey]

This is a common problem in sheet metal shops so after posting my last idea I did some more investigation and think I have come up with a ?better? idea. My last suggestion was to check the parts on a CMM, but that adds an extra operation and time to the process. I am now working with our maintenance man to build a counter that can be programmed to count the number of strokes on our PEM Setter. It will have a red LED and a green LED. The setup man can program the number of strokes the PEM Setter is supposed to cycle based on the number of inserts in the part. The red light will remain on until the correct number of strokes is counted and then the red will go out and the green will come on. At this point the operator will know that the correct number of PEMs have been inserted. The operator will then grab a new part and hit the reset button turning out the green light and relighting the red light to start the cycle again. This will preclude having to handle the parts another time and thus cut down on the cost. Theoretically this should work.

Of all the foregoing suggestions, this one strikes my fancy as being the most economical and elegant solution.

It eliminates cost and time to design and build a jig. It eliminates programming optical inspection machine and then moving the assembly to a scale or optical inspection machine, positioning it, then moving it again.

The spaghetti diagram of some of the solutions offered would defeat me before I began.

 

[tori2432]

I would suggest a jig that doesn't release the part until it is full. But without seeing it firsthand, I can't really tell.

 

[Ronen E]

Of all the foregoing suggestions, this one strikes my fancy as being the most economical and elegant solution.

It eliminates cost and time to design and build a jig. It eliminates programming optical inspection machine and then moving the assembly to a scale or optical inspection machine, positioning it, then moving it again.

Problems?...

1. It doesn't address the OP's question (too specific).
2. It assumes a counter already installed.
3. It only addresses assembly of identical parts in a single operation (otherwise, multiple counters will be required)
4. I'm not sure how robust it is (need more details about the specific process). The post above yours discusses some vulnerability, and suggests that redundancy will be required.

 

[DRAMMAN]

Counters are great, but are usually not fool prof. What about misfeeds? Just want to make sure you have that covered. Regardless a stroke counting system can greatly reduce error rates. Also, check with your equipment supplier. They may already sell counters for your PEM setter. I look forward to pics of your counting system.