Page 20 - MetalForming August 2016

Smart
Part Nesting
The process is increasingly automated, freeing operators for other tasks while significantly boosting productivity and material utilization.
Many believe that efficient part nesting requires a human, but this no longer is true. In fact, humans cannot make the rapid multi- factored decisions needed to optimally nest material in a modern fabrication facility. In such an environment, vari- ables to be considered include JIT, part association across multiple dissimilar materials (kitting), hot parts in the next machine cycle, response to schedule changes with each machine cycle, machine breakdowns, continuous part flow, engineering design changes, shop-floor flow optimization, setup optimization, common cutting and common punching.
Simply put, with so many variables, it is impossible for a human to respond in time using interactive tools. Fortu- nately, nesting has advanced to auto- matically and optimally tackle these variables, reducing operator involve- ment in day-to-day nesting and part programming tasks. This leaves time for operators to perform other tasks and upgrades those tasks to enable continuous improvement.
The latest automatic-nesting tech- nology, referred to as the new para- digm, can result in material efficiency improvement from 8 to 16 percent and may bring productivity gains of 150 to 250 percent. Such nesting is integrated, with connections to company CAD and ERP systems cutting human effort and transit time.
Knowledge Base
Key to Automated Nesting
The latest nesting technology uses a knowledge base that can consider variables that impact the final results, replicating the value system used by humans. The main advantage of such a system over a human is its ability to consistently and rapidly consider all values that impact the final results.
For example, the knowledge base is configured with a fabricator’s JIT policy, its material efficiency goals and all kit- ting requirements. The system uses this information along with additional mis- sion-critical data to find the best alter- native. In a short period of time it can select the best alternative that optimizes all of the criteria in the knowledge base.
Speed is what transforms such a
Nesting Costs: Old Versus New Paradigm
Process
Old Paradigm Transit Time and Cost
New Paradigm Transit Time and Cost
Cost Savings from Using New Paradigm*
CAD through Part Programming
• Transit Time: 1 to 5 days
• Cost: 1 to 3
programmers at $50,000 each/yr.
• Transit Time: 1 min./part
• Cost: 2 percent of one programmer at $1000/yr.
$49,000-$149,000
Order Entry and Nesting
• Transit Time: 1 day • Cost: 1 to 3
programmers at $50,000 each/yr.
• Transit Time:
1 machine cycle
• Cost: $0
$50,000-$150,000
Operator Shop-Floor Productivity
• Transit Time: 1 Day • Cost: 3 operators at
$40,000 each/yr.
• Transit Time:
1 machine cycle
• Cost: 1.5 to 2.4 operators at $40,000 each/yr.
$24,000-$60,000
Material Efficiency
• Transit Time: 1 day • Cost: Excess scrap 8 to 16 percent of
$5,000,000/yr.
• Transit Time:
1 machine cycle
• Cost: $0, no excess scrap
$400,000-$800,000 per year
Total
$523,000-$1,159,000
18 MetalForming/August 2016
www.metalformingmagazine.com
*Many factors influence cost savings, so actual savings will vary.