JP2016076010A - Production method evaluation system and production method evaluation method - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a production method evaluation system capable of appropriately evaluating a production method in advance.SOLUTION: A production method evaluation system 1 for evaluating the production method of a product includes: an information storage part 10 for storing various data; an operation analysis part 11; an assembly time estimation part 12; a quality estimation part 13; a safety estimation part 14; an assembly work environment estimation part 15; a work area estimation part 16; and an evaluation result output part 17. The production method evaluation system 1 is configured to analyze the assembly work of the product following a work sequence by the operation analysis part 11 to generate operation analysis information, and to acquire component related information related to the types and characteristics of components to be used in the assembly work, and to acquire assembly work environment information related to the environment of the assembly work of the product, and to evaluate the production method of the product from a predetermined point of view on the basis of the operation analysis information and the component related information and the assembly work environment information.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

  The present invention relates to a production method evaluation system and a production method evaluation method.

  Conventionally, the production system is evaluated based on experience values such as actual defective phenomena and actual working time. For this reason, in the prior art, it is difficult to change the design after the product is put into the assembly line. For this reason, it is desired to quantitatively evaluate the product before putting it into the assembly line.

  As a method capable of quantitative evaluation in advance, there is JP-A-2006-73014 (Patent Document 1). This gazette states, “From the workplace evaluation database, a failure occurrence index corresponding to the workplace level level for each workplace condition failure impact item in the input manufacturing workplace is extracted, and this is extracted as desired multiple workplace condition failure impacts. By using the workplace evaluation process to estimate the likelihood of occurrence of defects for the standard manufacturing work in the manufacturing workplace and store it in the product evaluation database as a workplace index, and the workplace index in the manufacturing workplace. And a product evaluation process for evaluating and estimating the quality indicating the work defect rate as a product manufactured by the manufacturing operation.

  As another conventional technique, there is JP-A-2001-273025 (Patent Document 2). This publication states that “acquisition of obtaining an index indicating ease of work based on information on a relative positional relationship between a work object to be evaluated and a worker performing work on the work object. And an evaluation process for evaluating the degree of occurrence of defects of work performed on the work object by the worker using an index indicating ease of work acquired in the acquisition process. "Technology" is described.

JP 2006-73014 A JP 2001-273025 A

  Since the prior art mainly calculates the ease of assembly work and the occurrence rate of defective products based on the production design structure in advance, it does not consider the work environment in which the assembly work is actually performed. Therefore, when a new production line is constructed, the new production line cannot be appropriately evaluated in advance, and the usability is low.

  The present invention has been made in view of the above problems, and an object thereof is to provide a production method evaluation system and a production method evaluation method capable of appropriately evaluating a production method in advance.

  In order to solve the above problems, the production method evaluation system according to the present invention is a production method evaluation system for evaluating a production method of a product, and analyzes the assembly work of the product along a work sequence to generate operation analysis information. , Acquire parts related information on the types and characteristics of parts used in assembly work, acquire assembly work environment information on the environment of product assembly work, and based on motion analysis information, parts related information and assembly work environment information The production method of products is evaluated from a predetermined viewpoint.

  An evaluation result may be output. The assembly work environment information may include work instruction method information related to an instruction method for the worker. The assembly work environment information may further include component supply method information regarding a component supply method. The assembly work environment information may further include tool information related to the tool used for the assembly work. The assembly work environment information may further include work area information indicating the relationship between the worker and the work area of the worker.

  According to the present invention, a product production system can be evaluated from a predetermined viewpoint based on motion analysis information, component-related information, and assembly work environment information.

Explanatory drawing which shows the whole outline | summary of a production system evaluation system. An example of the hardware and software configuration of the production system evaluation system is shown. The flowchart which shows the example of a production process. The flowchart of the process which evaluates a production system. A table showing an example of quantifying work contents. An analytical evaluation sheet that summarizes quantified work. Explanatory drawing which shows the example of an evaluation result. Explanatory drawing which shows the definition of a work area.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. The production method evaluation system according to the present embodiment can be used when, for example, a production engineer considers improvement of a production line before starting production. The production method evaluation system according to the present embodiment supports examination work and evaluation work for evaluating the overall quality, safety and hygiene, and assembly work time of the production line.

  The production method evaluation system according to the present embodiment is suitably used when a designer considers design improvement and when a production engineer considers process design and work environment before manufacturing. . For example, the designer can use product information to determine overall quality, including design quality and manufacturing quality, assembly time, including net assembly time and incidental assembly time, and safety, including human load due to overall quality and structure, and environmental load or reduction. Hygiene can be predicted and design improvements (structure improvements) can be considered.

  The production system evaluation system according to the present embodiment estimates the operation for each work unit along the work sequence when estimating the total quality when the product is manufactured by working on the part. Then, the production system evaluation system estimates the operation type of the worker according to the work environment, the type of action and characteristics of the part based on the work operation to be estimated, the part information in the work, and the assembly work environment information. The overall quality.

  In order to establish a reasonable manufacturing system in terms of cost, delivery date, and quality, such as evaluation of assembly performance that depends on the structure of the product from the design stage, it is essential to study technology for pre-evaluation of products by concurrent engineering. Here, concurrent engineering can be defined as optimization of quality schedules, costs, and customer requirements in the entire life cycle from the initial stage. By sending post-process (manufacturing) information to the pre-process (design), This is a design technology aiming at overall optimization.

  The production method evaluation system 1 will be described with reference to FIGS. FIG. 1 shows an overall outline of a production system evaluation system 1.

  As will be described later, the production system evaluation system 1 includes an information storage unit 10, an operation analysis unit 11, an assembly time estimation unit 12, a quality estimation unit 13, a safety estimation unit 14, an assembly work environment estimation unit 15, and a work area estimation. Unit 16 and evaluation result output unit 17.

  A production site where the production method to be evaluated is performed is shown on the lower side of FIG. Production sites include a line production method and a cell production method (a stand method), and any production method can be evaluated.

  The worker 2 performs assembly work while moving the work space 3. Around the work space 3, a work table 4, a parts arrangement shelf 5, and a tool place 6 are arranged. A product 7 is placed on the work table 4. Further, the work table 4 is provided with a work instruction device 41 for instructing the worker 2 about work contents. On the component arrangement rack 5, a component 51 of the product 7 and a screw 52 for assembling the component 51 to the product 7 are placed. Various jigs 61 used for assembling the part 51 to the product 7 are placed in the jig place 6. An illumination 8 is provided above the work space 3. In addition, although an air conditioner etc. may be provided in the vicinity of the work space 3, it is abbreviate | omitted in FIG.

  When the worker 2 visually confirms the work content instruction displayed on the work instruction device 41, the worker 2 takes out the predetermined component 51 and the screw 52 from the component arrangement shelf 5. Then, the worker 2 assembles the part 51 to the product 7 placed on the work table 4 using a predetermined jig tool 61. The worker 2 performs a predetermined inspection after the assembly is completed.

  In the present embodiment, the production site where the production method is realized is evaluated based on various indices. The first index is A1 indicating the result of the motion analysis of the worker 2. The second index is product evaluation A2 such as ease of product production and defect occurrence rate. The third index is a workplace evaluation A3 such as a defect occurrence rate as a workplace such as lighting and a system. The fourth index is a workbench strike zone evaluation A4 for determining whether the range of the assembly work performed on the product 7 is in an appropriate work area. The fifth evaluation is a work content instruction method A5 for the worker 2. The sixth index is the jig tool environment A6 such as how to prepare the jig 61. The seventh index is a method for supplying the component 51 and a method A7 for supplying the screw 52. When the component supply method and the screw supply method are described separately, they can also be referred to as a component supply method A7a and a screw supply method A7b.

  The information storage unit 10 of the production method evaluation system 1 includes, for example, design data related to the product 7, design data related to the parts 51 and screws 52, data related to the tool 61, information related to each of the above-described indices A1 to A7, and attributes of the worker 2. Store information.

  The motion analysis unit 11 analyzes the operation of the assembly work along the work sequence. The assembly time estimation unit 12 estimates the required time for each estimated work. The quality estimation unit 13 estimates the quality (for example, defect occurrence rate) for each work. The safety estimation unit 14 estimates the safety during the assembly work. The assembly work environment estimation unit 15 estimates the state of the assembly work environment. The work area estimation unit 16 estimates the state of the work area used by the worker for the assembly work. The evaluation result output unit 17 outputs the evaluation result to the external devices 9A and 9B.

  Examples of the external device include a computer 9A used in a design department and a computer 9B used in a manufacturing department. In the design department, product design and the like can be improved based on the evaluation result of the production system evaluation system 1. In the manufacturing department, the assembly work environment can be improved based on the evaluation result of the production system evaluation system 1. Hereinafter, the external device 9 is referred to unless otherwise distinguished.

  Here, the characteristics of the present embodiment will be described. In this embodiment, a quantitative evaluation technique (assembly reliability evaluation method (AREM) (Assembly Reliability Evaluation Method)) as a first evaluation method and a MOST method (Maynard Operation Sequence Technique) as a second evaluation method are combined. Product design and manufacturing environment can be divided for parallel evaluation or comprehensive evaluation.

  In this embodiment, the MOST method is expanded, and new operation steps and evaluation items characteristic to this embodiment are added. The new step is an operation step (A5) in which an operator looks at the operation instruction screen to read out the operation instruction contents, an operation step (A7) in which the operator searches for a part at the part arrangement place, and an operation step (A7) by a screw supply method ).

  The characteristics of the evaluation method according to this example are as follows. The product 7 assembled in the present embodiment is, for example, a control panel. It may be other than the control panel.

  (1) In this embodiment, the factors that determine the work cost and work quality of the assembly wiring work of the product are large, and the product design elements (A2, A3) and the manufacturing environment elements (A1, A4, A5, A6, A7) Points to be analyzed separately. In the following description, the assembly work environment may be referred to as a manufacturing environment.

  (2) An analysis evaluation sheet for visualizing which work step of the work sequence affects to what extent and how much of those elements is constructed (FIGS. 6 and 7). Thereby, in the present embodiment, the prospect of the improvement effect can be set as a numerical target.

  (3) In the present embodiment, the overall evaluation model is based on the work description method based on the basic MOST method normal movement sequence and tool use sequence, and the work steps (A5, A7) that cannot be expressed by this are added.

  (4) In this embodiment, by quantifying each work step, it is possible to perform evaluation suitable for the characteristics of the product structure and the characteristics of the manufacturing environment. In the present embodiment, by quantifying them, it is possible to suppress variation by the analyst and to ensure accuracy. Moreover, the time required for learning the evaluation technique and the time required for analysis can be shortened, and the evaluation can be performed efficiently.

  (5) In this embodiment, the manufacturing environment (assembly work environment) is scored to achieve so-called “visualization of the manufacturing environment”. In addition, in this embodiment, it is possible to improve the evaluation of quality potential for each assembly work environment.

  FIG. 2 shows an example of the hardware configuration and software configuration of the production method evaluation system 1. The production method evaluation system 1 can be configured as a computer having a microprocessor (CPU in the figure) 110, a storage device 120, a memory 130, an input device 140, an output device 150, and a communication device 160, for example.

  The microprocessor 110 implements each function described in FIG. 1 by appropriately reading and executing the computer programs P11 to P17 stored in the storage device 120. The microprocessor 110 uses the data D11 to D19 when executing the computer programs P11 to P17.

  The memory 130 is, for example, a RAM (Random Access Memory) or a ROM (Read Only Memory). The microprocessor 110 can be executed after reading the computer programs P11 to P17 into the memory 130. The memory 130 also provides a working storage area for the microprocessor 110.

  The input device 140 is a device used by a person who uses the production method evaluation system 1 (hereinafter referred to as a user) to input instructions and information. Examples of the input device 140 include a keyboard, a pointing device such as a mouse, and a voice input device. An interface unit for inputting / outputting data to / from an external memory medium may be included in the input device 140.

  The output device 150 is a device for presenting information from the production method evaluation system 1 to the user. Examples of the output device 150 include a display, a printer, and a voice synthesizer.

  The communication device 160 is a device for communicating via a communication network such as the Internet or a LAN (Local Area Network). The production method evaluation system 1 and the external device 9 are connected to each other via a communication device 160 so that bidirectional communication is possible.

  The storage device 120 is a storage device having a relatively large storage medium such as a flash memory or a hard disk. The storage device 120 stores computer programs P11 to P17 and data D11 to D19.

  The motion analysis processing program P11 is a computer program that estimates the work motion of the worker 2 along the work sequence, and implements the motion analysis unit 11. The assembly time estimation processing program P12 is a computer program that estimates the required time for each estimated work, and implements the assembly time estimation unit 12.

  The quality estimation processing program P13 is a computer program that estimates the quality of each work, and implements the quality estimation unit 13. The safety estimation processing program P14 is a computer program that estimates safety during assembly work, and implements the safety estimation unit 14.

  The assembly work environment estimation processing program P15 is a computer program that estimates the state of the assembly work environment, and implements the assembly work environment estimation unit 15. The work area estimation processing program P16 is a computer program that estimates the state of the work area used by the worker 2 for the assembly work, and implements the work area estimation unit 16. The evaluation result output processing program P17 is a computer program that outputs the evaluation result to the external device 9, and realizes the evaluation result output unit 17.

  The 3D-CAD data D11 is three-dimensional design data of the product 7. The tool data D12 is data such as the type, characteristics, weight, and size of the tool 61. The assembly work environment data D13 is data related to the assembly work environment, and includes, for example, the position and brightness of the lighting 8, the presence or absence of specifications necessary for assembly work such as an elevator for raising or lowering heavy objects, and specifications. It is out. The component data D14 is data of the component 51 and the screw 52 used for assembling the product 7, and is data such as the type, characteristics, weight, and size, for example.

  The motion type coefficient storage unit D15 stores a coefficient prepared for each motion type. The component characteristic coefficient storage unit D16 stores a coefficient prepared for each component characteristic. The worker characteristic coefficient storage unit D17 stores a coefficient prepared for each characteristic of the worker. The assembly work environment coefficient storage unit D18 stores the coefficient of the assembly work environment. The work area coefficient storage unit D19 stores a coefficient prepared for each zone of the work area.

  FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the production process. The product 7 is, for example, a control panel. First, a sheet metal member is processed into a predetermined shape (S1), and coating and plating are performed (S2). Thereafter, the control panel is transported to a place where assembly work is performed (S3). A control panel as the product 7 in progress is placed on the work table 4.

  While confirming the instruction content displayed by the work instruction device 41, the worker 2 attaches various parts 51 such as a power supply device, a push button switch, a display panel, and a controller to the control panel in a predetermined order. Fastened with the screw 52 (S4). The heavy parts are attached to the control panel with the help of a machine such as an elevator or in cooperation with a plurality of workers 2.

  After the assembly work is completed, the worker 2 checks whether the assembly work is properly performed (S5). For example, the worker 2 inspects whether or not the predetermined component 51 is attached to a predetermined location in the correct direction, and whether or not the tightening torque of the screw 52 is a predetermined value. The control panel that has been inspected is subjected to a quality evaluation test (S6). In the quality evaluation test, it is inspected for malfunctions.

  A pre-shipment preparatory work is performed on the control panel that has passed the quality evaluation test (S7), and is packed and shipped (S8).

  FIG. 4 is a flowchart of the production method evaluation process. The production system evaluation system 1 (hereinafter sometimes abbreviated as “system 1”) reads and acquires necessary data from each of the data D11 to D14 (S11), and the operation analysis unit 11 performs each work along the work sequence. Estimate (S12). For example, the contents of the work instruction are visually understood, moved to the parts distribution shelf 5 to find the designated part 51, the part 51 is picked up, the part 51 is moved to the tool place 6, and the part 51 is assembled. Find the necessary jig 61, pick up the jig 61, take the part 51 and the jig 61 to the work table 4, place the part 51 at a predetermined place of the product 7, and attach the part 51 to the product 7 Etc.

  Hereinafter, each estimation part 12-16 of the system 1 estimates by using suitably each data D11-D14 and the data which each memory | storage part D21-D25 memorize | stores. The assembly time estimation unit 12 of the system 1 estimates the required time for each work (S13). The assembly time includes both time derived from product design and time derived from the attributes of individual workers. For example, it takes time to attach a heavy object to a place that is difficult to attach, such as a recessed place. Further, for example, a skilled worker completes within a standard time, but an immature worker requires a longer time than the standard time.

  The quality estimation unit 13 of the system 1 estimates the quality of the product 7 (S14). The quality is largely derived from product design and quality derived from the assembly work environment. For example, if there is a part that can be mounted in a direction different from the normal direction because the mounting direction is not fixed due to the mechanical structure, the operator may mistake the mounting direction of the part. Further, for example, if the position of the illumination 8 is bad and the hand is dark, there is a possibility that the direction of the component is wrong.

  The safety estimation unit 14 of the system 1 estimates the safety during assembly work (S15). The safety can be estimated mainly from the movement of the worker. Further, the assembly work environment estimation unit 15 of the system 1 estimates the score of the assembly work environment (S16).

  For example, when the parts 51 are automatically supplied to the operator 2 in the order in which they are assembled, the operator can grasp the parts and attach them to the product 7 without confirming them, so the score is high. Conversely, in the case of a method in which an operator moves to the parts distribution shelf 5 and looks for a desired part while looking at the tag, it takes time to find the part, and there is a possibility that the wrong part is picked up. Is low.

  For example, when the jig 61 and the screw 52 are supplied as a set, the possibility that the operator picks up the wrong screw 52 or the wrong jig 61 is reduced, so the score is high. Conversely, in the case of a method in which the operator searches for and picks up the jig 61 and the screw 52 separately, it takes time and there is a possibility that the wrong combination of the jig 61 and the screw 52 may be obtained. The score is low.

  In addition, for example, when a heavy object is included in the part 51, when an elevator for transporting the heavy object to the work table 4 or lifting it is prepared in advance, assembly work becomes easy. High score. Conversely, when a tool for moving a heavy object is not prepared, an excessive burden is placed on the operator and the work efficiency is lowered, so the score is low.

  Further, for example, when the instruction to be displayed by the work instruction device 41 is only a part of the drawing or characters, it takes time for the operator to understand the contents of the instruction and may cause misunderstandings, so the score is low. On the other hand, if the instruction is displayed in an easy-to-understand manner on a work content video or the like, the score is high because it can be accurately understood in a short time. Thus, the assembly work environment estimation unit 15 estimates the score of the assembly work environment.

  The work area estimation unit 16 of the system 1 estimates a work area to be used when the worker performs assembly work (S17). For example, it is estimated whether the assembling work can be performed at hand of the worker or whether the assembling work is performed at a position where the worker cannot reach unless the arm is extended. This is because workability differs depending on which zone of the work area set with the worker as the center, and affects the defect occurrence rate.

  FIG. 5 shows an example in which manufacturing environment elements are packaged. FIG. 5 shows the work time required for “tightening check and tightening check mark work” as work steps in terms of the MOST method.

  In this embodiment, as shown in FIG. 5, the working time is quantified in order to further simplify the analysis. By evaluating and quantifying the unique manufacturing environment and product-specific features in advance, it is possible to suppress variations in judgments by analysts (users) and to ensure accuracy. It also leads to a reduction in analysis time.

  As shown in FIG. 5, by quantifying the manufacturing environment element, it is possible to visualize which step in the work sequence is affected and to what extent. In this embodiment, as shown in FIG. 6, the quantified value is constructed as an analysis evaluation sheet. The analytical evaluation is a sheet that is analyzed and evaluated for each work. For example, the required standard time and the index are shown vertically in the analysis evaluation sheet shown in FIG. Next to the analysis evaluation sheet, for example, “work instruction method”, “action distance”, “cylinder movement”, “screw supply”, “part arrangement shelf”, “embedding heavy objects”, “put under control” Each item of “positioning” is shown.

  The phrases n1 to n32 in the analysis evaluation sheet of FIG. 6 are as follows, for example. FIG. 6 shows a part of the analysis evaluation sheet.

  n1: None (repetitive education), n2: (movement from the elbow), n3: automatic supply (follows the tool), n4: held in the hand, throwing lightly, n5: reachable by reaching out (from the shoulder to the end) (Whole arm), n6: fully automated, parts are supplied at hand (number, type, appearance confirmation not required), n7: light object, light object (simultaneous), n8: lay sideways, loose combination, n9: 1 to 2 steps, n10: crouch and stand up (incidence rate 50%), n11: supply of specified required number (no need to check the number, length, diameter, etc.), with witcher interlock, n12: picking function, lamp, etc. N13: Light object (not simultaneous), heavy or bulky, collect, waited because of obstacle, n14: adjust, press lightly, adjust twice, n15: actual product projection, n16 3 to 4 steps, n17: crouch and rise, n18: supply of necessary number (with confirmation work of length, diameter, etc.), arrangement work +, n19: arranged in work order (number, type confirmation not required), n20 : Attention, accurate, invisible, strongly pressed, movement in the middle, obstacle, n21: viewer by process, n22: 5-7 steps, n23: sit or stand, n24: supply of witcher (with confirmation work) , N25: Drawing instructions (by process), n26: 8 to 10 steps, n27: Passing through the door, climbing or descending, standing and crouching, crouching and sitting, n28: dedicated equipment, n29: collective supply, screw carriage, n30 : Arranged in the work order (confirmed), arrangement work +, n31: balancer, n32: 11-15 steps, 12 meters.

  FIG. 7 shows the result of analyzing the assembly work environment of the production site (here, cell). In this embodiment, the evaluation of the assembly work environment is defined as follows. For example, an assembly work environment of the cell production method includes an equipment position, a tool position, a part arrangement position, and the like.

  When the assembly work environment of a cell is analyzed using the analysis evaluation sheet, the cell environment is evaluated by expressing the average of the indexes. As a result, it is possible to clarify the standard work time, visualization of improvement points, effects after improvement, score of work environment, score of strike zone (allowing parts and tools), and quality creation rate.

  In the example of FIG. 7, in G (“screw” and “component”) in the fourth column from the left, the index value before improvement is as large as “20”, and it can be seen that these work steps take time. . Looking at the analysis evaluation sheet of FIG. 6 with the index value “20”, the supply method of “screws” before improvement is “collective supply, screw carriage” as described in n29. It can be seen that the supply method of “parts” is “allocated in work order (confirmed)” as described in n30.

  Therefore, the user or the system 1 proposes improvement measures so that the index value becomes “6”, for example. In other words, the “screw” supply method is changed to “necessary number supply (with confirmation of length, diameter, etc.)” as described in n18, and the “component” supply method is described in “n19”. It is proposed to change to “I am assigned to the work order (number, type confirmation not required)”. As a result, work efficiency is improved and time required for work is shortened.

  FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram for defining a work area. Zones M <b> 1 to M <b> 5 are set in order of increasing distance from the worker 2 heading toward the work surface of the work table 4. Here, a zone in which an operator can easily work is called a strike zone.

  In the present embodiment, the strike zone is evaluated as a condition variation expression of the movement of the upper body of the worker 2 (basic movement centering on the movement of the upper limb). This corresponds to “A0 to A1” of the MOST method. Zone M1 is a work area that only requires finger movement, and zone M2 is a work area that requires hand movement. Zone M3 is a work area that requires forearm movement, and zone M4 is a work area that requires upper arm movement. Zone M5 is a work area that requires the action of an extended arm.

  Next, quality potential evaluation of an assembly work environment (which can be called a cell environment in the case of a cell production method) will be described.

  First, defects are defined. There are two main types of defects: defects due to lack of operator skills and human errors. Defects due to lack of operator skills occur when the difficulty of work method is greater than the worker's ability. The human error is an error in the thinking stage, and occurs when the operator's thinking is required, for example, inspection, determination, work plan, and the like.

  Since defects due to lack of operator skills are based on the difficulty of work, attention is paid to the index value of the analysis evaluation sheet. The more the index value, the higher the work content. Therefore, the probability of failure due to the lack of skill of the operator is scored and defined by the index value of each parameter.

  Human error is determined by the ratio of the “T (thinking) (inspection)” index of the worker and the index of “D3: operation to determine and respond to the next action” with respect to the man-hours. . Since it is “think” and “inspection”, the number of items to be judged is read from the analysis result, and the probability of occurrence of defects due to human errors is scored and defined.

The definition of “T: Think” is as follows.
(A) Application Method and Examination of “T” of MOST Method This is for perceptual and mental processes, and is particularly applicable to visual observation and touching an object by hand.
Read: Read a character or group of characters. The read data is divided into the following two parts (1a) and (1b).

  (A1a) Numbers or words (10 TMU per unit = 0.36 seconds))

(A1b) Sentence (Speed of reading 330 words per minute. 5.05 TMU per word = 0.18 seconds)
In the assembly wiring work of the control panel, “T (think)” is applied to the time for reading the work instruction displayed by the viewer (work instruction device 41).

(A2) Application Criteria The time for reading numbers or words is T1 (10 TMU) = 0.36 seconds per item (one word) (considered to include the time for gaze). The time to understand by looking at the figure is equivalent to a word, and T1 (10 TMU) = 0.36 seconds per item.

  (A2a) When a sentence such as a note is read, (5 TMU) = 0.18 seconds per word included in the sentence.

(A2b) When searching for and reading a cell in the table Time to search for a reading place by moving the line of sight in one direction = T5 (50 TMU) = 1.8 seconds. When moving the line of sight in two directions, vertical and horizontal, the total is considered to be T10 (100 TMU). Further reading time (T6 = 60 TMU) is added to this.

  Quantify the content of instructions per viewer

  Quantify how many elements should be read on average. Summarize the contents of the assembly mounting viewer screen and wiring viewer screen. When moving the line of sight largely, consider the line-of-sight movement time.

  (B) The definition of the inspection is as follows.

(B1) Application method and examination of visual inspection Used to easily determine the characteristics of an object in inspection work (used to easily determine pass / fail at the place of inspection).

  (Prerequisite) A clear understanding of the characteristics to be judged by the person performing the inspection. In other words, it is used for inspections that clearly show the presence of defects such as scratches and rust.

  (Caution) Except for checking the inspection object by hand, if there is an operation to handle the inspection object, it is evaluated separately and added.

  “T (Thinking)” is applied to the in-line visual inspection in the control panel assembly wiring work and the visual inspection time in the assembly inspection work.

(B2) Application Criteria T1 (10 TMU) = 0.36 seconds per visual inspection.

  When touching and inspecting, one inspection location: T6 (60 TMU = 2.16 seconds) + T2 (20 TMU = 0.72 seconds) for every additional location.

  According to this embodiment configured as described above, not only the product design element but also the manufacturing element (assembly work environment) is taken into consideration, the safety of the assembly work, the ease of work, the occurrence rate of defective products, etc. Can be evaluated in advance. Therefore, the evaluation result can be fed back to the design process to improve the design, or the evaluation result can be communicated to the manufacturing department to improve the assembly work environment, improving usability.

  In addition, this invention is not limited to embodiment mentioned above. A person skilled in the art can make various additions and changes within the scope of the present invention. For example, the present invention can be applied not only to the control panel but also to various product production methods.

  1: Production system evaluation system, 4: Work table, 5: Parts arrangement shelf, 6: Tool place, 7: Product, 9: External device, 10: Information storage unit, 11: Motion analysis unit, 12: Estimated assembly time Part: 13: quality estimation part, 14: safety estimation part, 15: assembly work environment estimation part, 16: work area estimation part, evaluation result output part 17

Claims (8)

A production method evaluation system for evaluating a production method of a product,
Analyzing the assembly work of the product along the work sequence to generate operation analysis information,
Obtaining part-related information regarding the type and characteristics of parts used in the assembly work,
Obtaining assembly work environment information related to the environment of the assembly work of the product;
A production system evaluation system that evaluates the production system of the product from a predetermined viewpoint based on the motion analysis information, the component-related information, and the assembly work environment information.
The evaluation result can be output.
The production system evaluation system according to claim 1.
The assembly work environment information includes work instruction method information related to an instruction method to an operator.
The production method evaluation system according to claim 2.
The assembly work environment information further includes component supply method information related to a component supply method.
The production method evaluation system according to claim 3.
The assembly work environment information further includes tool information related to a tool used for the assembly work.
The production method evaluation system according to claim 4.
The assembly work environment information further includes work area information indicating a relationship between a worker and a work area by the worker.
The production method evaluation system according to claim 5.
The predetermined viewpoint includes assembly time required for the assembly work of the product, quality of the product, and safety of the assembly work.
The production system evaluation system according to claim 6.
A production method evaluation method for evaluating a product production method using a computer,
The computer
A first evaluation method for evaluating the production design structure of the product from assembly time and assembly quality;
A second evaluation method for calculating a work standard time by analyzing an assembly work content of the product according to a work sequence;
Can run,
In the second evaluation method, as the work sequence, in addition to the work steps based on the walking action and the jig tool use action, the worker looks at the work instruction screen and reads the work instruction content, and searches for necessary parts. Working steps,
The computer
Analyzing the assembly work of the product along the work sequence to generate operation analysis information,
Obtaining part-related information regarding the type and characteristics of parts used in the assembly work,
Obtaining assembly work environment information related to the environment of the assembly work of the product;
A production method for evaluating the production method of the product from a predetermined viewpoint by using the first evaluation method and the second evaluation method based on the motion analysis information, the component-related information, and the assembly work environment information. Evaluation method.

Images