Systems Level Design Review P 09711 AutomationImprovement of

Systems Level Design Review P 09711 - Automation/Improvement of Wegmans Cookie Line Packaging Project Team: Stephanie Rager (IE), Bruno Coelho (ME), Mark Voss (ME), Chukwuma Morah (IE), Brian Duffy (EE), Benjamin Powell (EE) EDGE™

Project Overview Objective: • Receive feedback from others about our design • Become more aware of other potential risks Project Description: Wegmans bakes and packages all of their mini cookies at their bakeshop located here in Rochester on Brookes Avenue. Currently the packaging is done by six or seven people who stand around a conveyor and pull the cookies into the clam-shell packages. This leads to the problem of packing more cookies than needed into a package. The mini-cookie package calls for 397 grams worth of cookies but employees sometimes package up to 450 grams. This is a loss for Wegmans because customers are receiving more cookies than they are paying for. This project will look into building an automated prototype that will separate the cookies into the correct amount by weight, which the employees can then package. EDGE™

Customer Needs Hierarchy Need 1: Separates Products by Weight Need 1. 1 Must separate Mini-Cookies by weight (9) Need 1. 2 Must separate Mini-Muffins by weight (5) Need 1. 3 Must separate Brownie Bites by weight (5) Need 2: Waste Reduction Need 2. 1 Must Reduce the amount of excess mini-cookies in package (9) Need 3: Separates Products by Count Need 3. 1 Must separate Cookie Chunks by count (3) Need 3. 2 Must separate other products by count that are packaged in that way on this line (3) Need 4: Long Term Solution Need 4. 1 Must be adjustable for other products (5) Need 4. 2 Must not substantially slow down the process (9) Need 5: Labor/Employee Use Need 5. 1 Must be simplistic for employees to use (9) Need 5. 2 Must not create a substantial amount of extra labor for employees (9) Need 5. 3 Must be repeatable for employees (9) Need 6: Food Environment Restrictions Need 6. 1 Must be stainless steel (if final product is permanent) (9) Need 6. 2 Must not be painted (9) Need 6. 3 Must be water tight (9) Need 6. 4 Must meet the NEMA 4 level (will take a light water hose spray) (9) Need 7: Budget/Cost Need 7. 1 Must not be considered a capital investment (> $10, 000) (9) EDGE™

Target Specifications Metric No. Need Nos. Metric Importance Units Marginal value Ideal Value 9 % 60% 0% 1 Need 1. 1, 1. 2, 1. 3, 2. 1 Percentage of packages with excess cookies (currently at 95%) 2 Need 6. 1, 6. 2, 6. 3, 6. 4 Follows Wegmans' sanitation standard 3 Y/N N Y 3 Need 4. 1, 5. 2, 5. 3 Requires training that takes X minutes 5 minutes 60 15 4 Need 4. 1, 4. 2, 5. 2 Changeover time 5 minutes 20 5 5 Need 1. 1, 1. 2, 1. 3, 3. 1, 3. 2 Accurately separates product for packaging 9 Y/N Y Y 1500 1700 < $10, 000 < $5, 000 6 Need 4. 2 Throughput 5 average packages per hour 7 Need 7. 1 Cost 9 $ Importance Scale: 9 = These metrics will be the main focus of this project. 5 = These metrics will be a secondary focus of the project if time allows. 3 = These metrics will not be focused on unless the main and secondary metrics have been addressed. EDGE™

Economic Analysis Summary Eliminating packages with 6 or more extra cookies: Assuming average volume all year (10 hours per week) Improved Hourly Throughput = 1500 + 67 + 27 + 3 = 1597 packages per hour Cost per package savings = $0. 08 per package $0. 08 * 1500 packages = $120 saved per hour $120 * 10 hours = $1200 saved per week $1200 * 52 weeks = $62, 400 saved per year Eliminating packages with 2 or more extra cookies: Assuming average volume all year (10 hours per week) Improved Hourly Throughput = 1500 + 18 + 81 + 67 + 27 + 3 = 1696 packages per hour Cost per package savings = $0. 16 per package $0. 16 * 1500 packages = $240 saved per hour $240 * 10 hours = $2400 saved per week $2400 * 52 weeks = $124, 800 saved per year EDGE™

Overall System Design Model EDGE™

Sectional Top View Models EDGE™

Board Design and Functionality Overview Flash Memory - Stores program Power Connector Power protection circuitry STOP Motor 5 - motor connector to lever arm on weight sensor 2 SDRAM - Stack Memory - Program Memory - I/O storage FPGA - Controls motors - Receives inputs from external signals - Sends signals to external signals - Runs Program RS 232 - I/O from weight sensor 1 RS 232 - I/O from weight sensor 2 Internal Safety Switch along with leads to external switch Motor 4 - motor connector to lever arm on weight sensor 1 Motor 3 - motor connector to chute device Motor 2 - motor connector to conveyer belt Motor 1 - motor connector to sifter bar EDGE™

Timing Diagram EDGE™

Failure Mode Analysis Failure Clog of cookies within the line chute section of assembly Severity Probability Overall Contingency Plan 3 4 3. 5 Sifter The incline gate causes a bottleneck and back-up the conveyor 3 3 3 Move to converyor closer, or make the incline gate longer The motor may not move fast enough from one weigh station to the other without dropping excess cookies into the weigh station 3 3 3 Stop door in chute, sensor The incline gate cannot actually come in contact with the conveyor that is already in place. 4 1 2. 5 Ratchet system to lock incline gate into place, wheels Response time on the scale is not quick enough 5 3 3 Better scales, more sensors, money Importance Scale: 1 through 5 1 = lowest 5 = highest EDGE™

Risk Assessment Risk Severity Probability Overall Contingency Plan Team won't have enough time to create to entire prototype 5 4 4. 5 Create only a third of the working prototype Long lead times on ordered parts may push prototype production back 4 3 3. 5 Order parts as early as possible Extensively research alternative weighing devices, spend more money on improved weighing device Create only a third of the working prototype, extensively research the best and most cost effective materials for prototype Be aware of the interface between the two, constant communication between electrical and mechanical engineers Weighing technology does not meet expectations 4 2 3 Insufficient funds to produce full design 5 3 4 Mechanical and Electrical systems don’t interface well with each other 5 3 4. 5 Cookies don’t get pulled by incline gate 3 3 3 Strong testing procedure Incline gate does not switch up 1 3 2 Strong testing procedure Cookies get stuck in funnel section 3 5 4 Use “shaking wheel” Weigh station doesn’t push out cookies quickly enough 3 3 3 Strong testing procedure Chutes don’t switch quickly enough 3 3 3 Strong testing procedure Settling time is too long 3 3 3 Strong testing procedure/part research Chute doors don’t open/close at right time 3 3 3 Strong testing procedure Conveyor failure 3 3 3 Create emergency stop switch Importance Scale: 1 through 5 1 = lowest 5 = highest EDGE™