We have been operating in the collaborative robot market for many years. We have seen more than one, talked to hundreds of entrepreneurs and executives managing production, maintenance and development. We’ve had our fair share of implementations and sleepless nights. So we can share our experience with individuals and companies that are looking for automation solutions in their businesses. In this text you will read about what influences success and what influences failure when implementing cobots.
Here is the second part of the article that appeared on Control Engineering Poland. So if you want to know the first 6 tips (we encourage you) – read the first part.
Moving on – here are the second “six” of our practical tips for implementing collaborative robots in manufacturing plants:
7 Devices that will replace your cobot
Cobot can be a small center for further automation.
This is due to a number of integrated functions. The collaborative robot will replace the PLC, safety relay – independently controlling (managing) the operated machine, conveyor, receiving signals from safety curtains or other sensors.
This significantly reduces the cost without losing functionality.
8 Choose simplicity
As a rule of thumb, assume that: the more functions of a robotic workstation, the more process elements, the less stable the process – the:
more difficult to implement the workstation;
longer implementation;
more expensive implementation, and that’s a longer payback time, and that’s the risk that the investment will never pay off because the process will change, for example;
more downtime and jams in later work;
greater difficulty of changeovers and adaptation to the new product mix.
- don’t delay and pick the “low-hanging fruit”
Faster implementation of a robotic application is better implementation. The investment will pay for itself faster by allowing for quicker next steps (new investments), easier adaptation of employees to the new category of machines, faster reaping of organizational and production benefits, easier implementation of improvements and modifications (rather than predicting everything in advance).
- mobility – in theory possible, in practice cumbersome
Reject the possibility of moving or transporting the cobot from place to place (especially if this would happen several times a day). It is very cumbersome because:
the robot weighs its own,
requires undoing and short-circuiting electrics, pneumatics, safety, etc…;
requires proper basing or calibration – for repeatable production.
There are solutions that effectively solve these problems, but their cost calls into question the whole idea (then it is easier and cheaper to just have more complete stations.
11 Proper communication within the team
Show that the cobot is an ally of people; that it will not take away anyone’s work, that it can relieve line workers from the most disliked activities (tedious, repetitive and tiring – for example, for the spine).
- nothing by force 🙂
Unless you have a specific goal-an idea for robotization and a team of automation/robotics people willing to learn and having excess time-don’t buy a “robot in a box” under any circumstances. That’s the shortest way to make a robot lie in that cardboard box in the brush compartment.
Nothing by force. Just because your neighbor has one doesn’t mean anything. The cobot must fit into your processes and help you,
If you would like to talk about the potential of implementing collaborative robots in your factory’s ongoing processes, please contact us.
At Beboq Robotics, we advise on cobotization – we do it sincerely. If we think a task is not for cobots – we say so directly.