Online Class Notes (Jesse)

Pronunciation

thermometer – ther MOM met er
temperature – TEM preh chur

quarantine – KWOR ren teen

requested – soft “r” 

the other – uth thehhh

stay at home – hoeeemm

brought – “b raw t”

bring – no “g” sound, just move “in” to the back of your throat

in
ing

running 

bringing 

grammar – soft “r” 

details – DEE taylz

operations – “op per RAY shehnz” 

Grammar

no any risk in Shanghai – there isn’t any risk in Shanghai / there is no risk in Shanghai / There is not any risk in Shanghai 

Is this an apple?
No it isn’t / No it is not
No, it is a pear

any = 0 (maybe some)
anymore = not now, but there was before

raise – the act of making sth go up
rise – the result of sth going up
rice – food

Hello Rocky,
Thank you to share with me your project to introduce cobot in the EVAP line.

Below my personal consideration based on my understanding, of course you and PGC can have different position.

OP20/25:
To be honest with you, here I don’t see the right fit for a cobot due to the operations that needs to be carried out.
I mean, there are too many operations and materials (3) to be handled that requires a complex gripper to be fixed to the cobot.
In this case, Complexity rises; Costs rise; risks rise; as you already said to me, there are doubts that the cycle time can be reduced.
It seems more a task for a standard robot with higher precision. Or keep it manual.

OP80 (soldering):
This is the best place where to easily introduce the Cobot, since (from my understanding) there is only 1 component that needs to be loaded and unloaded on the pallet and a standard gripper with a low level of customization is enough.

The cobot can easily programmed to replace the worker, including the start of the cycle, so that there are no any changes in the soldering machine.
Here, maybe you don’t need an external supplier to do the job but IE/maintenance can do it as internal project.
One more point here is that since the cobot introduction is fully reversible (it is possible to easily return to the manual operation), a cheaper cobot can be considered.

OP90/95/100:
I don’t remember how many components need to be manipulated here, sorry. But of course at least for leakage test and EOL test, since the operation is only load and unload, the cobot should be a suitable option that maybe PGC can develop internally. If this is the case (only load/unload of one single component), then the cobot is fully reversible and same comment as before (cheaper cobot can be considered).
If instead the operation requires to manage more components, personally I have doubt that the cobot is the right solution.

OP100/110:
This is also a good position to place cobot.
You can also consider to test a very cheap local cobot dedicated to the 4 screws tightening..