Robotic Vehicle Microfactory Cells for Low-Volume Custom Assembly

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The conventional vehicle design and manufacturing paradigm is inflexible and costly, making it challenging to produce low-volume, customised zero-emission vehicles that meet specific customer needs, as it requires large factories, high initial investments, and is slow to adapt to environmental and urban transportation challenges.

Innovation Solution

The Arrival system employs a robotic production environment with modular, reconfigurable cells and autonomous mobile robots, eliminating the need for traditional production lines and paint shops, allowing for the rapid assembly of various vehicle types in smaller, flexible microfactories using composite panels and modular components.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If conventional vehicle manufacturing paradigm is used, then production stability and quality are maintained, but adaptability to customised low-volume production deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to customised productionVSAvoidfactory infrastructure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The production system is divided into modular robotic cells that can be independently configured and reconfigured. Each cell performs specific assembly tasks and can be adapted to different vehicle types without requiring changes to the entire production line, enabling customised low-volume production while maintaining manageable system complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The robotic cells are designed with universal capabilities to handle multiple vehicle types and assembly configurations. The same cellular infrastructure can produce different vehicle models through software reconfiguration and tooling changes, providing adaptability without requiring separate dedicated facilities for each product type

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Productivity

If conventional production lines are used, then manufacturing precision is maintained, but productivity for low-volume production deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduction efficiencyVSAvoidsetup and reconfiguration time
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The production system transitions from static dedicated assembly lines to dynamic reconfigurable robotic cells. The robotic cells can rapidly change their configuration through software updates and tooling swaps, minimizing setup time between different production runs while maintaining manufacturing precision through automated control

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses parameter changes in the form of software configurations, robot programming, and tooling specifications to adapt production quickly. By changing control parameters rather than physical infrastructure, the system achieves rapid reconfiguration for different vehicle types, improving productivity for low-volume customised production

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of manufacture

If traditional stamping equipment is used, then manufacturing precision is maintained, but ease of manufacture deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing flexibilityVSAvoidpanel formation precision
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces traditional mechanical stamping presses with robotic assembly cells that work with pre-formed panels. This substitution eliminates the need for heavy stamping equipment and associated precision requirements, while maintaining panel formation quality through alternative manufacturing processes that are more flexible and easier to reconfigure

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Device complexity

If conventional paint shops are used, then surface finish quality is maintained, but device complexity deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepaint shop infrastructureVSAvoidsurface finish quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The paint shop infrastructure is completely extracted from the production system. Instead of incorporating traditional e-coating and painting equipment, the system uses robotic cells that assemble vehicles from pre-finished components, eliminating the complex paint shop infrastructure while maintaining surface finish quality through alternative finishing processes applied to individual components before assembly

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Data Source

PatentUS20220089237A1Robotic production environment for vehicles
Publication Date: 2022.03.24 BARKER ROAD TECHNOLOGY LTD
  • US20220089237A1 patent drawing
  • US20220089237A1 patent drawing
  • US20220089237A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A vehicle robotic production environment, in which the environment hosts robotic agents that are organised as groups of cells, each cell with no more than 10 robots. One group of robotic cells transforms fabric into vehicle composite panels and other parts, eliminating the need for steel panel pressing equipment. Other robotic cells assemble at least portions of a vehicle together from modular components, such as aluminium extrusions. Each cell is served by AMRs (autonomous mobile robots), eliminating the need for a costly moving production line. The robotic production environment can be implemented or installed in a factory that is less than 25,000 square meters in area, with a conventional flat concrete floor that has not been strengthened for a vehicle body panel stamping press. Conventional vehicle production plants are typically over 1M square meters in area, with specially strengthened concrete floors.