Assembly Line Test Scheduling for Incomplete Station Operations

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing assembly and testing systems for mass-produced articles, such as automotive parts, often experience delays due to incomplete testing or assembly steps, requiring manual intervention to pause the conveyor system, which negatively impacts productivity.

Innovation Solution

A system with a central controller that tracks and stores step completion information for each article, allowing it to continue moving through the assembly line even if some steps are not completed within predetermined time intervals, with the option to resume these steps at subsequent stations, thereby eliminating the need for manual interruptions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the conveyor assembly waits for all assembly/testing steps to complete before moving articles to the next station, then testing quality is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to line-wide delays

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting qualityVSAvoidassembly line throughput
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the assembly/testing process into independent station-level operations rather than requiring synchronized completion across all stations. Each station tracks its own step completion information independently, allowing the conveyor to move articles based on individual station progress rather than waiting for the slowest station to complete all steps. This segmentation enables parallel processing and eliminates line-wide bottlenecks.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts article movement decisions based on real-time step completion information from each station. Rather than using a fixed waiting rule for all stations, the controller evaluates completion status dynamically and determines whether to advance articles individually or hold them based on current station performance, optimizing both quality assurance and throughput continuously.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If operators manually stop the conveyor to complete delayed test/assembly steps, then testing completeness is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to frequent interruptions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting completenessVSAvoidassembly line continuity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements self-service by automatically tracking step completion information and determining when articles are ready to advance to the next station without operator intervention. The central controller monitors completion status at each station and autonomously decides whether to move articles forward or hold them for additional steps, eliminating the need for operators to manually stop the conveyor to assess completion status.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms where step completion information from each station is continuously reported back to the central controller. This feedback loop enables the system to automatically adjust article movement decisions based on real-time completion status, ensuring testing completeness while maintaining continuous conveyor operation without manual interruptions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Stability of the object's composition

If all stations must wait for the slowest station to finish, then process synchronization is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to idle time at faster stations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocess synchronizationVSAvoidstation utilization efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the synchronized process control into independent station-level decision-making. Rather than forcing all stations to wait for the slowest one, each station independently tracks its own step completion information and signals readiness to advance articles. This allows faster stations to continue processing while slower stations work through their backlog, maintaining overall process coherence without enforced synchronization delays.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the control parameter from fixed synchronization timing to dynamic completion-based advancement. Instead of using a predetermined wait time based on the slowest station, the controller adjusts article movement decisions based on actual step completion status at each station, allowing processing speed to vary by station needs while maintaining process integrity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS10928804B2System and method for assembling and/or testing articles
Publication Date: 2021.02.23 LM3 TECHNOLOGIES INC
  • US10928804B2 patent drawing
  • US10928804B2 patent drawing
  • US10928804B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The present invention relates to a method for testing articles. The method comprises providing a plurality of test stations, a conveyor assembly and a central controller; using a first test station to perform tests on an article under a first testing schedule; determining identification information of the article by a sensor device as the article enters the first station; storing test completion information in relation to the corresponding identification information at the controller; wherein, if the test completion information indicates that all tests were performed, then updating a second testing schedule to confirm that no additional testing is needed at a second station; and wherein if the test completion information indicates that a test was not completed, then updating the second testing schedule so that, when the article is in the second test station, a not completed test can be performed to prevent the conveyor from having to be stopped.