JPH0581291A - Method and device for planning manufacturing line - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To make it possible to form a line plan even in the way of product design/development by estimating assembly order or the like by in information system and determining an optimum assembly line or the like. CONSTITUTION:Data such as assembly evaluation information are inputted (step 1), the number of parts, the number of assembly evaluation points, etc., are checked (step 2) and a requested unit work time is calculated (step 3) based upon the required number of products. Then the temporary determination of a line format or the like is executed (step 4), the working estimation time of each part is calculated, work allocation is executed (step 5) based upon the calculated time and a carrying device and an assembly device are determined (steps 6, 7). Whether contradiction between the temporarily determined contents and the determined contents exists or not is checked (step 8), device performance is simulated by using the determined data and whether a plan satisfies a target value or not is checked (step 9). When necessary, correction is executed.

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a manufacturing line planning method and apparatus, and in order to construct a manufacturing line that reasonably manufactures products, it is possible to easily design products based on design information. Based on the result of qualitative or quantitative evaluation, and information on production conditions, management conditions, etc., a plan such as the configuration of the manufacturing line for manufacturing or assembling the product is automatically created. The present invention relates to a method and a manufacturing line automatic planning system for implementing the method.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, when developing a product, in order to plan in what kind of production line the product to be developed is manufactured, a person skilled in such planning work must
The method of making a proposal based on the information about the product has been generally used. As a second method, process planning is performed based on the design drawing, manufacturing equipment is assumed, estimated assembly and processing cost are calculated, and this value and the experience of experts such as design and manufacturing are added. It is known as another general method to modify and decide a plan by simulating the production capacity of a planned production line using a computer or a computer.

The third method is, for example, Boothroid's method or Makino's method. The third method estimates the optimum production method from the number of products produced, the number of parts, the number of models, and the expected number of design changes.

[0004]

The first method of the prior art described above is qualitative, and it is difficult to objectively and quantitatively grasp how good or bad the configuration of the target manufacturing line is. There is a drawback. Further, there is a drawback that it is necessary to have sufficient experience in production technology. Although the second method is more rational than the first method, it still has a problem that it is difficult to carry out without considerable experience and knowledge. Furthermore, with this method, it is difficult to carry out planning unless the design is completed, so there is a problem in that the planning of the line is delayed and thus the construction of the line itself is also delayed. The third method gives information that can be used as a reference for rough line shapes even if there is little experience, but it has a problem that the content is simple and detailed knowledge is not sufficient. It was

Summarizing the above problems, (1) the production line planning is empirical and subjective, and the objectivity is poor. (2) Only experienced people can plan. (3) Planning takes a lot of time or time. (4) The reference information output is insufficient. (5) After creating the line plan, after the product design is completed,
Or it cannot be done until the end is reached, and it is late in time. It turns out that.

An object of the present invention is to provide a manufacturing line planning method and apparatus for solving the above problems. That is, (1) it is a method that is objective and not empirical, and (2) it is possible to plan without special knowledge and extensive line construction experience, and (3) it is easy and easy. You can plan without calling, and (4) you can get enough detailed output,
(5) Line plans can be created even during product design.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a method for constructing such a production line and a method and system for automatically performing the method.

Still another object of the present invention is that the designer himself or the production engineer can easily estimate the scale of the assembly line and the like during the design of a new product. It is an object of the present invention to provide a manufacturing line planning method and an apparatus for the manufacturing line planning method capable of knowing problems in the production system in advance.

[0008]

In order to achieve the above object, the manufacturing line planning method according to the present invention has at least the basic structure of at least the manufacturability of parts constituting a product to be manufactured. A step of inputting any one of product design information including evaluation index information, production condition information such as the number of production, constraint conditions on the introduction of manufacturing equipment, etc., and a step of determining a configuration of a manufacturing line using the input information It consists of

In order to achieve the above object, a more specific configuration of the manufacturing line planning method according to the present invention is a parts information processing having a CAD processor for creating drawing data and a CAD database for storing drawing data. In the system, a step of reading product design information including at least shape information of parts constituting a product to be manufactured from the CAD database, and manufacturing the product based on the read product design information. A step of estimating a manufacturing method including at least one of an assembling method and a processing method, and a step of calculating an evaluation index indicating the manufacturability of each estimated manufacturing method,
It comprises the steps of determining the most desirable manufacturing method based on the evaluation index of the previous period and the step of determining a rational manufacturing line configuration that realizes the manufacturing method determined by the step of determining the manufacturing method.

Further, in order to achieve the above-mentioned object, the present invention qualitatively and quantitatively shows at least information such as size, weight, quantity, etc. of parts constituting a product to be manufactured and manufacturability. Calculate the evaluation index evaluated by the evaluation method, and based on the information such as the production conditions such as the number of units produced, the management conditions, etc., make a plan such as the configuration of the manufacturing line that processes or assembles the product. The feature is that it is created automatically.

It is effective that the product design information used for the above plan is further stored in the CAD device or the design information under design on the CAD device is used as it is for the line plan, and each of the above objects is effectively achieved. Therefore, it has a more specific structure as described below.

(1) To create the above objective plan,
Information on the size, weight, quantity, etc. of parts and products, as well as the parts assemblability score and product assemblability score that reflect the ease of assembly,
The specifications and specifications of the line are automatically determined using the parts machinability score, product machinability score, etc., as well as production volume and business conditions.

(2) In order not to require abundant experience in evaluation, the specifications of the line and specifications from the above-mentioned various information can be mechanically determined by a computer based on certain rules and data. deep.

(3) In order to create a plan without trouble, the design information of the product of the CAD device is used to automatically input the information for creating the plan. (4) In order to obtain a sufficiently detailed output, not only the basic configuration of the desired line but also abundant output such as the total number of stations, selection of equipment used in each process, and occupied area are provided. (5) Since a line plan can be created even during product design, a routine that can be used to create a plan using product information that is revealed relatively early in the design was adopted.

[0015]

[Function] An assembly evaluation system and a workability evaluation system
A line planner can easily and accurately plan a line without worrying about input / output of information by installing it in a system that uses the same computer as the system of the line plan or by combining it in information processing. You can

[0016]

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, each embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.
Will be described. FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a manufacturability automatic evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention, FIG.
3 is an explanatory view showing parts information of a CAD database in the CAD processing apparatus of FIG. 1, and FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing a processing flow of the automatic planning system according to the present invention.

In FIG. 1, the manufacturability automatic evaluation apparatus 30 is shown.
Was created by the CAD processor 21 or CAD
Automatically from the drawing data stored in the database 22,
Product and / or parts' ease of assembly (called assemblability) and / or workability (called as workability) are quantitatively evaluated, and the results are output to a display or printer, or an evaluation information database It is stored in 31.

CAD database 22 of CAD processor
2A and 2B, which are similar to those performed by a general CAD device, etc., and include the part name, part shape information, and part property. And features,
It has information such as so-called attributes such as purchase cost (hereinafter, these information are collectively referred to as product design information).

In the evaluation information database 31, as will be described later, symbols for each evaluation basic element and constant values associated with the symbols,
And the constant value of the correction evaluation element is stored. Also,
In the evaluation information database 31, the scores of products or / and parts evaluated by the present system, the conventional cost actual values, etc. are recorded.

Drawing data, that is, FIGS. 2 (a) and 2 (b)
The basic processing flow from the calculation of the evaluation results from the internal data structure shown in Fig. 2 to the creation of a plan for the specifications of the equipment to be manufactured using these is shown by taking the case of assembly work as an example. Is shown in FIG.

In the following, the equipment plan for this assembly is taken as an example.
The flow of processing will be described with reference to FIGS. 3 and 11 and 12. FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of facility information in the facility data table, and FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of output information by the system of this embodiment. First, at least one of all target part names and part numbers is the step 1 in FIG.
Is called from the CAD database 22 as shown in
In the next step, an assembling order of parts considered to be rational is set by a method described later based on this (steps 2 and 3). However, the assembly order may be set manually by the operator.

In the next step, the degree of ease of assembly is quantitatively and appropriately evaluated for the set assembling order by the method described with reference to FIGS. 5 to 10 (step 4).
At the same time, if necessary, the assembly work cost and the like are calculated.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a computer system equipped with an automatic manufacturability evaluation system (automatic assembly line plan creation system) according to an embodiment of the present invention. The assembly line plan automatic creation system of the present invention is
As shown in FIG. 4, in a general computing system, it can be connected to a CAD processing device, or can be separated and independently executed, and a microcomputer or a dedicated processing component may be used for each processing function. .. 4, an arithmetic unit 1 for performing calculation and planning operations, a storage unit 2 for storing programs and basic data, input data and arithmetic operation results, a display unit 3 for displaying input data and processing results by CAD or manpower, a keyboard , A manual input device 4 for data such as a mouse, a printer 5 for outputting processing results (line planning results), and the like.

Although each of these devices is described as an independent device in FIG. 4, a part or all of them is a CA.
D shared with equipment that makes up the processor, or partially C
Various modifications are possible, such as those connected to the AD processing device via a cable. And in any case, the system of assemblability evaluation method is built in the same system,
Alternatively, it is assumed that it is connected as an information processing system (not shown in this case).

Next, the software configuration of the assembly line automatic planning system installed in such a hardware system will be described. FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of basic elements necessary for evaluation of the assemblability evaluation system and their contents, and FIG.
FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an example of a correction element and its contents, FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing the contents of an evaluation process, FIG. 8 is a front view showing an example of the shape of a keyboard of a computer system, and FIG.
FIG. 10 is a flowchart showing an example of a processing procedure inside a computer that performs assembling performance evaluation, and FIG.

First, as basic data to be stored in the storage device, a set of information necessary for evaluation of the assemblability evaluation system,
Information (including catalog data, etc.) about the conveying device, the assembling device, the parts supplying device, etc. that compose the assembly line, and FIG.
, The basic symbol X representing the same, the basic deduction value ε given thereto, the correction element described with reference to FIG. 6, the symbol χ representing the same, and the correction coefficient value given thereto. Etc. are given.

Furthermore, this software executes each process of the evaluation process described with reference to FIG. 7, that is, the input process of the basic element data Xi for each part i, the number Ni, etc., and the part assembling operation order j. Correction calculation of the basic deduction εij by the correction coefficient α, calculation of the component assemblability score E ₁ using the corrected deduction sum, and product assemblability score E, assembling time T, or assembly cost C using all the component assemblability scores Is a program for displaying the results on the display unit and outputting the results by the printer. For specific calculation, the prior application and the Japanese Patent Application No.
The details are described in No. 31583 and No. 2-181393, and the main points are shown below.

The basic demerit ε shown in FIG. 5 is set to 0 for the basic deduction εx given to the "reference element X ₀ " which is the most easy assembly operation, and the other "basic deduction" for the other basic elements X. Assembling becomes more difficult than the "element X ₀ ", in other words, "assembling for each basic element X" when "conditions such as the number of production and production means, for example, types of assembling devices to be used, that is, production environment conditions are aligned" The cost Cx is the reference element X _0.
The functional relation εx = f such that the basic demerit εx becomes larger than _{0 as} the assembling cost Cx ₀ becomes larger than 0.
Given as ₁ (Cx).

Similarly, as shown in FIG. 5, instead of the assembly cost Cx, the assembly time Tx, the index Ix thereof, or the product of the assembly workplace allocation A and Tx can be taken. That is, these relationships are shown by the following equation.

[Equation 1]

Next, the correction factor χ and the correction coefficient α shown in FIG. 6 will be described. Examples of the correction factor χ include the material m of the part, the size l, the weight w, the accuracy a, the number of repetitions, and the like. For each of these correction elements (m, l, a ...), the state is divided into one or a plurality of n elements, and the correction criteria m ₀ , l ₀ , a
₀ ...) can be defined and extracted and specified from the information, products and parts shown in the drawings, etc., and items that affect the ease of assembly of parts other than the basic elements. Is. Although the correction coefficient α is described as a correction index indicating the degree of influence, this correction factor (χ) is the assembly cost (Cxχn) of each state divided into n pieces when the production environment conditions are aligned. Becomes larger than the assembly cost of the correction standard (Cxχ ₀ = Cx), the correction coefficient αn becomes 1
It is given as the following equation as a functional relationship that becomes larger in proportion.

[Equation 2]

Further, the assembling costs Cxχn, Cxχ ₀
Instead of assembling time Txχn, Txχ ₀ and their index I
xχn, Ixχ ₀ or assembly workplace allocation A and Txχn, T
Similar to the case of the basic deduction ε, the product of xχ ₀ can be taken. The first column of FIG. 5 shows an example of the basic element X in which the assembling operations are classified. The first example 10 is downward moving assembly, the 211st example is lateral moving assembly, and the third example 12 is soldering. Although omitted below, these basic elements can be extracted from the information described in the design drawing or the design information in the CAD device to which some interactive input information has been added. It is divided into several methods such as moving and joining methods.

The contents of the basic elements are described in the third column of FIG. The number of such basic elements can be several to several tens. The greater the number of basic elements, the higher the accuracy of analysis and evaluation, but the more difficult it is to use. Conversely, the smaller the number, the easier the evaluation process, but the worse the accuracy. In the case of manual analysis / evaluation, around 20 is empirically the best. However,
In the case of automatic evaluation from CAD information, it is sufficient for the user to understand the result, so that it is possible to process it without problems even if this number is increased.

In the second column of FIG. 5, basic symbols corresponding to each basic element are described. Here, the basic symbol is determined such that the downward movement is “↓” or the soldering (Soldering) is “S” so that the corresponding basic element can be easily imagined. An example of the value of the basic deduction assigned to each basic element is described in the fourth column of FIG. In the present embodiment, the downward movement that is most easy to assemble is set as the standard basic element, the basic deduction given to it is set to 0, and the other basic elements become more difficult to assemble than the standard basic element, in other words, as described above. “The basic demerit εx increases as the component assembly time Tx for each basic element increases, as shown in the sixth column when conditions such as the number of productions and production means, for example, automatic or manual, are aligned. It will be. Of course, as described above, εx may be determined by taking the assembling cost instead of the assembling time. Alternatively, as will be described later, when the robot is used for work planning or the like, the motion path length of the robot may be used instead of the component assembling time.

FIG. 6 shows an example of the correction element. The items of the correction element include the size of the component, the mounting accuracy, and the like as shown in the drawing, and various other items are possible. Basically, these correction elements can also be specified by extracting them only from the design information in the drawing or CAD (when necessary information may be given by interactive input), assembly of parts other than the basic elements Items that affect the ease of use are listed, and the degree of impact is quantified, but it does not change depending on the number of products produced and the means of production. The correction method is to calculate the component deduction by multiplying the basic deduction for each assembly operation of the component by the above-described correction coefficient (see step 3 in FIG. 7), and calculate the total deduction for each component from the reference point (full score). Various methods are possible such as multiplying the subtracted value by a correction coefficient (see step 4 in FIG. 7), but in any case, the finally calculated component assemblability score Ei is when the component is easy to assemble or the assembly time is long. It should be set so that it is always high when it is small (see steps 5 and 6 in FIG. 7).

As a result of the above, the component assemblability rating Ei is an index representing the quality of the ease of assembling the components. In addition, the component assemblability score Ei thus obtained is calculated as a set of the basic demerits εx obtained in relation to the assembling time Tx for each basic element for each component. It is a value that has a predetermined functional relationship with the attachment time Ti. This is expressed as Ei = f (Ti). Therefore, the assembly time Ti and the assembly cost Ci of the parts can be expressed as a function of Ei. This functional relationship is Ti = f ₁ (E
i) and Ci = f ₂ (Ei). From this relation,
Ti and Ci can be calculated.

In this way, the component assemblability score Ei, the assembly time Tx, and the assembly cost Ci are obtained for all the parts in this way, and then these T, C, E for the entire product are obtained from their average values. .. That is,

[Equation 3] As a result, the product assemblability rating is as follows.

[Equation 4]

In this way, Ei was an index showing how easy it is to assemble the part i, while the product assembling rating E is an index showing how easy the whole product is to assemble.

FIG. 7 shows the operation of the computer system similar to the case where the evaluation work is manually performed (in the automatic evaluation system combined with CAD, these operations are mainly performed automatically). In FIG. 7, in step 1, "assembling operation of the evaluation target component is represented by symbols of a basic element and a correction element". If there is no element symbol that fits the task, the element symbol closest to this is selected.
In addition, the CAD coupling automatic evaluation system can automatically perform this. In step 2 of FIG. 7, the symbols of the basic element and the correction element for each part are input to the computer. In the CAD coupled automatic evaluation system, this is automatically transferred and input by the program.

If the above operation is carried out for all parts constituting the product, the computer automatically calculates all or a part of the assembling property score and the assembling time and the assembling cost of the product, and outputs the result. The result is displayed on the display unit and the result is printed by a printer as needed. In the CAD combined automatic evaluation system in the present embodiment, the result is printed and displayed or stored in the storage device. Then, it is used for manufacturing equipment planning (clarify what kind of equipment is required, what kind of layout is required, etc.) described later.

As input data, a basic element and a correction element are input for each part, but manual input or CA
In order to correct the automatic analysis result in the D coupling system, the symbols of the basic element and the correction element are assigned to each key of the keyboard. FIG. 8 shows an example of such a keyboard.
In this case, it is convenient if the symbols shown in FIG.
Elements that use letters of the alphabet are assigned the corresponding keys on the keyboard as they are, and elements that use symbols other than the letters are assigned function keys for easy operation.

An example of such a keyboard is described in Japanese Patent Application No. 2-
As disclosed in Japanese Patent No. 31583 and Japanese Patent Application No. 2-181393, a sheet called an overlay sheet is superposed on a keyboard, and a corresponding symbol is written on a sheet near each key. Displaying the element symbol represented by the key is also a convenient method. In addition, various methods such as displaying a list of element symbols on the display device, particularly on the screen of the CAD display device without using the keyboard, moving the cursor to select a desired element symbol, and inputting it. Various methods are possible. Numerical data may be entered using the numeric keypad on the keyboard. In the CAD coupling automatic evaluation system, these methods can be used when manually correcting the analysis result.

FIG. 9 shows an example of the processing procedure inside the computer for evaluating the assemblability using the above-mentioned basic elements and correction elements. In step 1, "input the assemblability evaluation data and evaluation result for the evaluation target part". This may be done by manually transferring the evaluation results manually or by a dedicated computer system and inputting them to this system. Alternatively, the result obtained by automatically processing the CAD design information and performing the evaluation may be used. In step 2, the basic element and the correction element for each part are input to the computer.

The following steps are internal processing of the computer as shown. In step 3, the data input from the keyboard is displayed on the display. Step 4
Then, "The basic elements used to express the evaluation target part,
Basic deductions, correction factors, etc. are read from the memory from the correction factors etc. " In step 5, "basic deduction read in the previous step is corrected by a correction coefficient, and the sum thereof is used as a component deduction". There are a plurality of items of the correction coefficient as shown in FIG. 5, and the product of the correction coefficients is calculated, and this is multiplied by the basic deduction point to make the correction. In step 6, "a component deduction is subtracted from a reference point (full score, usually 100 points) and this is used as a component assemblability score". The calculated parts assemblability score is stored in the memory.

In step 7, it is checked whether or not the above operation has been carried out for all the parts, and if it is not completed, it is executed until it is all completed and then completed. In step 8, "a value representative of the entire product is calculated by using the parts assemblability scores of all the parts forming the target product, obtaining an average value, or adding some correction to the average value, or obtaining a median value. , This is the product assembly score. "

In Step 9, "the estimated value of the assembly time or the assembly cost of the target product is calculated by using the assemblability score and the number of parts of the target product and the assemblability score and the number of parts of similar manufacturing, the assembly time, and the assembly cost. calculate". Alternatively, other factors that affect the assembly cost, such as the production quantity and the hourly cost of the workplace, may be input in advance as data, and the assembly cost calculation may be corrected using these as well.
As mentioned above, since the assemblability score is calculated based on the basic deductions originally associated with the assembly time and cost, the product assemblability score itself is also an average value for all parts. Value ". Therefore, the assembly cost can be obtained by obtaining the average value and the component value, or by making a slight correction. Factors to be corrected include production quantity and cost per hour at work. The assembly time can be obtained by dividing the assembly cost by the cost per unit time at the workplace.

At step 10, the result is displayed and output to finish the evaluation. FIG. 10 shows an example of the output in this case. In this example, the printer outputs the results independently,
In the case of automatic evaluation by CAD, all or part of this output information may be displayed or printed in the drawing drawn by CAD. The processing method for assembling has been explained above, but if there is also a need for workability evaluation or other inspectability (easiness of making), which is a factor of manufacturability (easiness of making), it is exactly the same. It is possible to evaluate. As described above, the assemblability evaluation system which provides a part of the information used for the line planning system has been described in detail. However, as described below, these can be used as an assemblability semi-automatic evaluation system or a CAD combination automatic evaluation system that involves manual work. good.

Now, the part of the system for carrying out the assembly line plan by using the result of the assemblability evaluation having the above-mentioned structure, procedure, property, etc. will be described. The planning of the assembly line is given as input the information about what the products and parts to be assembled look like, and under what constraints and requirements they have to be produced. In order to obtain the output such as line specifications, logical and numerical arithmetic expressions for creating rational specification information from the above information and various data to support this are required. is there.

Of the information given as input in this system, the evaluation information relating to the ease of assembling the product and the parts constituting the product is basically the information necessary for performing the above-mentioned assembling evaluation. The information input during the design improvement is used as it is, and the information necessary for line planning is used as the product assemblability score, estimated assembly time information for each part, and assembly operation analysis information obtained during the evaluation as the part Calculate or use all or part of the number and contents of evaluation basic elements required for assembly, size and weight of products and parts, or use as input.

In addition to this, the information as a constraint condition is information on the production scale of the product, such as the number of units produced per month, the number of models, the average lot size, the seasonal fluctuation of the production amount, and the planned line. Enter the scale and the number of design changes expected in the productivity design. In addition, the usable area of the factory and the growth trends of the market are also taken into consideration.

Using the above-described information, the desired assembly line configuration and specifications can be determined as follows. The usage of each factor in the planning work is as follows. The assemblability score is an index showing the ease of assembling parts and products, and it has been empirically revealed that there is a strong correlation between the high score and the ease of automation. Also, if the monthly production volume is large, the automation investment can be easily recovered, and a plan for a production line with a high degree of automation becomes appropriate. So, for example, if the rating is 70 points or more and the number of vehicles produced is 20,000 or more per month, it is appropriate to use a 100% automated line. If the score is 69 to 50 points and the number of vehicles produced is 20,000 or more per month, it is semi-automated. No., a manual assembly line with less than 50 points, data indicating desirable automation modes is stored in the storage device 2 in advance as a table for combinations of various levels of assemblability score and production amount. ..

Then, an automation plan is created by referring to the input conditions and this table. However, this is a principle, and if special conditions are added, the usage can be appropriately modified by a method such as dialogue. In the dialogue method, a so-called expert system is prepared, and "if the number of parts is 20 or more, a line type system is preferable.""If the number of parts and the configuration differ greatly for each model, an asynchronous system Desirable, "or" Because the future is uncertain, it will be semi-automated for the time being, and it will be an asynchronous system that aims for full automation as it grows. "

The estimated assembly time information for each part creates basic data for performing work and equipment settings (referred to as line balancing) so as to equalize the work time for each work station. When the estimated assembly time of a part is significantly longer than the average, the assembly line configuration is set to divide the work into appropriate lengths.
If the estimated assembly time of a part is significantly shorter than the average, select the parts that can be added next to the part that are close to the average value, and combine them. Plan to work.

As the assembly operation analysis information obtained during the evaluation, if the number of evaluation basic elements required for assembly for each part is, for example, one basic element representing movement for each part and "↓" , The simplest assembling device called "Pick and Place Unit", a robot with 3 degrees of freedom and 2 basic elements if the number of basic elements that represent movement is 1 and "other than ↓" etc. From 3 to 4 from 6
A robot with a degree of freedom, and if it is more than that, it is determined to be manually assembled. Then, by using information such as the weight of the parts,
Select the most suitable equipment available from the data table as shown in.

The weight of products and parts is used to determine the capacity of the carrier and assembly equipment used therein. In determining each device, the types and performances of commercially available facilities are collected in advance in a database and stored in the storage device 2, and an appropriate device is selected and output according to the required specifications. At this time, the conditions such as monthly production volume are
The work speed and transport speed of the equipment are basically determined and taken into consideration when selecting equipment.

As described above, using the information, the desired assembly line specifications are actually determined by the following procedure shown in FIG. 3, for example. FIG. 3 shows an example of a processing procedure inside a computer for making an assembly line plan by using the above-described assembly property evaluation result. In step 1, data such as assemblability evaluation information, product information, and production conditions are input. In step 2, the number of parts, the assemblability score, the number of productions, the number of models, etc. are checked. In step 3, the required takt time is calculated based on the required production number. In step 4, the line type, that is, automatic line, semi-automatic, manual assembly, line type, rotary type, shop type, etc., is tentatively determined. Here, the data that serves as the rules of the procedure described above and the guidelines for the determination are prepared and used as a data table.

In step 5, the estimated work time is calculated for each part and the work is allocated based on this. In step 6, the conveying device is determined, and in step 7, the assembling device and the component supplying device are determined based on the data in the device data table. In step 8, it is checked whether the assumptions and the determined contents are consistent. In step 9, the device performance simulation is performed using the determined data, and it is confirmed that the plan satisfies the target value. Make corrections as needed. FIG. 12 shows an example of output by this system.

In this embodiment, the assemblability evaluation system is CA.
Even if the automatic evaluation system is connected to D, a person may analyze the assemblability and input necessary data. In addition to the evaluation information given in this embodiment, the assemblability evaluation system used in the present system may be, for example, easy to grasp, easy to convey, easy to supply, or not for each part but for each work process. There is no problem even if it has a function of performing evaluation or a method of calculating an evaluation index empirically or intuitively. Further, in the present embodiment, the assembly has been described, but a similar system can be applied to the processing.

[0058]

As described above in detail, according to the present invention, the planning work such as the specification production of the assembly line is automated or semi-automated, the labor for the production is greatly simplified, and the individual planning is also possible. Variations and dropouts are eliminated. That is, (1) it is a method that is objective and not empirical, and (2) it is possible to plan without special knowledge and extensive line construction experience, and (3) it is easy and easy. Providing a manufacturing line construction method and an automatic method and system that enable planning without the need for (4) sufficiently detailed output and (5) line planning even during product design can do.

Further, the designer himself or the production engineer
Provides a manufacturing line planning method and its equipment that enables you to easily estimate the scale of the assembly line during the design of a new product, and to know the problems in cost estimation and the production system in advance. can do. The above description is centered on assembly, but the same applies to processing, inspection, and other elements.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a manufacturability automatic evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing part information of a CAD database in the CAD processing apparatus of FIG.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing a processing flow of the automatic planning system according to the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing the configuration of a computer system equipped with an automatic manufacturability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of basic elements necessary for the evaluation of the assemblability evaluation system and their contents.

FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of correction elements and their contents.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing the contents of an evaluation process.

FIG. 8 is a front view showing an example of the shape of a keyboard of a computer system.

FIG. 9 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a processing procedure inside a computer that performs assembly property evaluation.

FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of output of evaluation results.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of equipment information in an equipment data table.

FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of output information by the system of the present embodiment.

[Explanation of symbols]

 1 arithmetic unit 2 storage device 3 display device 4 keyboard 5 printer 10 example of basic element: downward moving assembly 11 example of basic element: lateral moving assembly 12 example of basic element: soldering 21 CAD processor 22 CAD database 30 manufacturing Automatic evaluation device 31 Evaluation information database

 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continuation of the front page (72) Inventor Saya Taniguchi 292 Yoshida-cho, Totsuka-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa Inside the Hitachi, Ltd. Institute of Industrial Science (72) Inventor Hideyuki Parki 292 Yoshida-cho, Totsuka-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa Banchi Co., Ltd. Hitachi, Ltd. Production Technology Laboratory

Claims (9)

[Claims] 1. Of the parts that make up the product to be manufactured,
At least one of the steps of inputting product design information including evaluation index information of ease of manufacturing, production condition information such as the number of production units, and constraints on the introduction of manufacturing equipment, and using the input information of the manufacturing line A manufacturing line planning method comprising: a step of determining a configuration. 2. The manufacturing line planning method according to claim 1, wherein the manufacturing method in the manufacturing line includes at least one of an assembly method and a processing method of parts. 3. The product design information is stored in a storage device in advance, and the storage device belongs to a CAD system connected to a system for implementing the line planning method or is connected to the CAD system. The manufacturing line planning method according to claim 1, which is characterized in that. 4. A part information processing system having a CAD processing device for creating drawing data and a CAD database for storing drawing data, wherein product design information including at least shape information of parts constituting a product to be manufactured, A step of reading from the CAD database, a step of estimating a manufacturing method including at least one of an assembly method and a processing method for manufacturing the product based on the read product design information, and the estimation A step of calculating an evaluation index showing the ease of manufacturing for each manufacturing method, a step of determining the most desirable manufacturing method based on the evaluation index of the previous period, and a step of deciding the manufacturing method to realize the manufacturing method determined And a step of deciding a typical production line configuration. Concrete line planning method. 5. A step of reading product design information including shape and size information of the parts held in a CAD processing device, and in what order and operation the parts are assembled based on the design information, A step of automatically generating information indicating whether or not to be processed by a predetermined combination of element motions, and an assemblability evaluation point or a given to each of the element motions depending on the difficulty of the assembly or processing operation. A method for automatically evaluating manufacturability, comprising the steps of: assembling a part and an entire assembly and automatically calculating a quantitative index indicating the difficulty of processing by using the workability evaluation point. 6. A step of reading product design information including shape and size information of the parts held in a CAD processor, and in what order and operation the parts are assembled based on the design information, or A step of automatically generating information indicating whether or not to be processed by a predetermined combination of element motions, and an assemblability evaluation point or a given to each of the element motions depending on the difficulty of the assembly or processing operation. A method for automatically evaluating manufacturability, comprising the step of automatically calculating a quantitative index indicating the difficulty of assembling or machining the parts and the entire assembly by using the workability evaluation point. 7. A manufacturing facility planning method, which comprises planning a facility for manufacturing a product to be manufactured by the manufacturing method according to claim 1. 8. A manufacturing line planning system and an assemblability evaluation system or a machinability evaluation system are installed in the same computer, and a line plan is made using output information of the assemblability evaluation or machinability evaluation. A production line planning device characterized by the above. 9. The manufacturing line planning apparatus according to claim 8, further comprising a CAD processing apparatus that stores product design information in advance.