Greenleaf Enterprises. Ovine Robotic Brisket Cutter, Ex-post Review

Transcription

1 final report Project Code: P.PSH.0579 (Milestone 5) Prepared by: P. Green Greenleaf Enterprises Date published: September 2013 PUBLISHED BY Meat and Livestock Australia Limited Locked Bag 991 NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2059 Ovine Robotic Brisket Cutter, Ex-post Review This is an MLA Donor Company funded project Meat & Livestock Australia and the MLA Donor Company acknowledge the matching funds provided by the Australian Government to support the research and development detailed in this publication. This publication is published by Meat & Livestock Australia Limited ABN (MLA). Care is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this publication. However MLA cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information or opinions contained in the publication. You should make your own enquiries before making decisions concerning your interests. Reproduction in whole or in part of this publication is prohibited without prior written consent of MLA.

2 Executive Summary Machinery Automation and Robotics (MAR) in conjunction in with MLA have developed a fully automated lamb brisket cutter. This report is an ex-post review of the commercial viability of the system. The Robotic Brisket Cutter has been developed to split the brisket post slaughter. This system identifies the navel end of the breast bone and with a circular saw cuts the breast bone down the centre of the carcase. Table 1 and Figure 1 summarises where the savings can be achieved. Table 1: Summary of benefits Figure 1: Summary of magnitude of benefits delivered by the Robotic Brisket Cutter. 2

3 P.PSH Cost benefit analysis for MAR automation, Ovine brisket cutter - Final Report Based on the data analysis and trials conducted on site the system has shown to have between a 7.5 year and a 3.0 year payback. Table 2: Return on investment analysis Table 3: Plant drivers for analysis. Note some plants will operate a much faster line speed. 3

4 Glossary Term Brisket cut CBA MAR MLA NPV OH & S OTH (Over-thehooks) Description Cut through the middle of the sternum bone: A long flat bone, articulating with the cartilages of the first seven ribs and with the clavicle, forming the middle part of the anterior wall of the thorax, and consisting of the corpus, manubrium, and xiphoid process. Also called breastbone. Cost Benefit Analysis Machinery Automation and Robotics Meat & Livestock Australia Net Present Value Occupational Health & Safety Over-The-Hooks sales are when the transfer of ownership of an animal takes place as a carcase at the slaughter scale. Value is determined based on an agreed price per kilogram of carcase weight and may include bonuses or deductions for fat or quality parameters. 4

5 Contents Executive Summary... 2 Glossary... 4 Contents Introduction Project objectives Technology Description Methodology Carcase size Location of brisket cutting Future benefits of Multiple Robot Integration Offal Damage Brisket Cutting Accuracy Inaccuracy of Cut Hygiene and Food Safety Robot effect on down time Maintenance General Maintenance Robot Covers Positioning Guide Springs Spare Parts Maintenance Staff Training Service Provider Support Results & Discussion Labour Savings Reduced Training and Recruitment Reduced OH&S Costs Equipment Costs Hygiene Cost benefit analysis Plant Drivers CBA Drivers CBA Financial Analysis

6 7 Impact on Meat and Livestock Industry Conclusions Appendices List of Tables List of Figures Detailed maintenance requirements Recommended spare parts list

7 1 Introduction Machinery Automation and Robotics (MAR) have developed a suite of automated processing systems in conjunction with Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) to replace manual operations for a number of tasks on the lamb & beef processing floors in Australian abattoirs. The systems provide a range of benefits such as labour savings, increased safety for employees, yield benefits and increased throughput. One of the systems automatically conducts the brisket cut in small stock abattoirs. This process removes labour which was previously required to complete the job. The purpose of this report is to summarise the benefits observed in a commercial installation and to provide a guide to installation of similar systems across the wider Australian lamb industry. 2 Project objectives The objectives of this study were to review the MAR automated brisket cutter under commercial conditions at a lamb processing plant where the equipment had been operating for over 12 months in order to: 1. Measure the real value opportunity demonstrated by the equipment when compared against manual cutting systems for each area of benefit that exists 2. Summarise the value benefit (financial and non-financial) and main drivers for adoption of the equipment for Australian lamb processing plants 3. Identify any other opportunities that may exist for refinement of the technology or for alternative application The objectives of this project were successfully completed within the following activities: Developed assessment methodology Sourced and contacted equipment providers Arranged process plants to review equipment and manual removal techniques Defined and set up method for data collection and developed model framework that was used to collect, analyse and report the findings of the trial outputs 7

8 3 Technology Description The brisket cutter consists of a standard ABB robot cell and specialised attachment that includes a rotary knife to cut through the sternum bone, a centring guide, line profiling sensors and sterilisation station. The following primary motions were observed in the brisket cutter depicted in Figure 2 to Figure 4 including: Line scanner generates a profile of the breast shape and height on the chain prior to cutting Insertion of the rotating knife into the upper carcase cavity entering through the front of the neck Placing the spring loaded guiding spacer arms down over the breast on both sides to position and centre the cut Cutting through the breast bone and retracting the cutter Sterilisation process between each carcase Figure 2: Presentation of the carcase to the rotating knife Figure 3: Cut entry between the front legs. White spring-loaded guide positions on both sides of the carcase to centre the knife 8

9 Figure 4: The Robotic Brisket Cutter exits the carcase as the cut through the sternum is completed 4 Methodology The following sections describe the considerations and data collections during the two days on site. 4.1 Carcase size A range of lamb carcase weights (~17-26kg) were processed while inspecting the system. The majority of lambs were processed for a retailer and were quite consistent within that weight range. Carcases were cut neatly and as consistently as the most accurate manual operation. 4.2 Location of brisket cutting Integrating the brisket cutter with other robotic solutions has an impact on where the brisket system must be located. It is common practice in Australian plants to manually cut the brisket after evisceration. Manual cuts are done either with a hydraulic scissor or with a rotating blade as in Figure 5 while the carcase is hanging neck down. However, the automated solution makes the cut in the inverted position while the viscera are still in the body cavity. Unlike a manual brisket cutter, the MAR automated solution cuts into the brisket on the gut side of the chain. 9

10 Figure 5: Manually operated brisket cutting methods (brisket shear and rotating knife) The automated cut fully separates the neck and sternum prior to evisceration which makes it easier for viscera to be removed. With manual brisket cutting the pluck has to be lifted up out of the rib cavity prior to evisceration. There is no labour saving in the evisceration process for the automated solution and although the job is less stressful on the operator, no benefit has been costed in this report. Figure 6: Offal removal is easier than manual as the chest cavity is opened, reducing lifting of offal s up and out of the cavity 10

11 4.3 Future benefits of Multiple Robot Integration MAR is developing an evisceration robot which pushes the viscera down through the cavity into the viscera pans. This evisceration robot requires the chest cavity to be fully opened so the automated brisket cutter is a prerequisite for the evisceration robot. 4.4 Offal Damage During manual brisket cutting in some plants the offal s have been removed so there is no risk of damage to offal s. A concern prior to observing the system was the potential to cut offal (lungs and heart). However, the inverted carcase position causes offal s to sit in the bottom of the abdominal cavity away from the tool entry and cut position. 4.5 Brisket Cutting Accuracy The brisket cutter was observed at full commercial production rates of six carcasses per minute over two full production days. The system was able to centre in the middle of the sternum with greater accuracy than that observed at different plants using a manual sheer method. The production manager also confirmed that the manual operation sometimes cuts into the brisket, making manual processes less consistent than the automated solution. The examples of yield accuracy below have a minimal value difference with reduction in primal damage due to the low value of the breast bones. Figure 7: Examples of cut accuracy on the external surface of the breast bone 11

12 Figure 8: Examples of cutting accuracy through the sternum bone Inaccuracy of Cut Over 200 carcasses were inspected in the chillers from the day s production. Figure 9 demonstrates the worst cutting accuracy observed during the trials. This is quite acceptable and more consistent than observed with manual systems in other plants. Figure 9: Examples of the worst cases of miss-splitting 4.6 Hygiene and Food Safety There were some concerns a rotating knife blade could cross contaminate by flinging material from the cut onto the carcase during cutting and potentially fling water from the sanitiser via the saw onto the carcase. This is not the case. The knife rotates at a high speed 12

13 prior to being presented to the carcase self-dries after the sterilizer. As it makes a clean knife cut there is no material removed from the cut as there is with a traditional band saw blade. The sanitisation process occurs effectively between every carcase. 4.7 Robot effect on down time The brisket cutting robot is positioned much earlier in the chain to the existing manual operation due to the need for the robot to cut through the brisket in an inverted position. The manual brisket shearing station is located immediately prior to this removal when the carcass is in the un-inverted hanging position. The manual sheer brisket station has been left on the slaughter floor in the case of stoppages to the automated system. This means the line can continue if the brisket cutting robot fails for some reason. A supervisor would man the manual brisket cutting station if this occurred. For this reason no impact of downtime has been costed against the brisket cutter. However the manual system still needs to be maintained on the floor on a daily basis and as such no hardware and maintenance savings from the manual brisket cutter have been counted. Figure 10: Evisceration process 4.8 Maintenance The robot was installed in October 2010 and had been in commercial operation for 12 months at the time of review. In the early stages after commissioning there were 7 days downtime while waiting for parts. A computer card to drive the robot had to be replaced along with a motor for the brisket cutter. As described in the section 4.7 this did not stop the line due to the backup manual system. This indicates the relatively new nature of these installations. A lot of understanding is still being gained about the maintenance of the systems and expected useful life of equipment and parts in the harsh abattoir environment General Maintenance Very little general maintenance is required for the robot. The key daily activity is removal of the rotary saw for cleaning and replacement at the start of the next day s shift. Each month the maintenance staff remove the robot cover bag and inspect the robot leads and cables. No greasing is required on these monthly services. A detailed list of maintenance activities experienced to date is included in section

14 4.8.2 Robot Covers The useful life of washable bags to cover robots was in consideration at the time of the site visit. Bag life was around 6 months but delaminating of the washable material was the biggest issue with new bags being trialled. High movement areas also cause localised wearing of the bags at those points. MAR was actively working with bags suppliers and the processor to find new materials that would be acceptable from both hygiene and a longevity point of view. This was an example of the relative newness of robotics to harsh processing plant environments. The solutions are in place in terms of the fundamental accuracy and quality of the manual job being replaced. However, the sourcing and management of spare parts, expected life spans for various parts, and sources of suitable materials involved in ongoing support of these installations is still very much in the research and development stages Positioning Guide Springs Springs support the positioning guides and help to apply pressure against the guides and the carcase for different sized carcases. These have an impact on the centring ability of the machine. When we observed the machine in operation the cut was consistently in the centre of the breast bone. Company staff reported that springs last about 3 months before they need replacing. As springs wear the centring ability reduces slightly but not less accurate than manual operation. This is the signal for maintenance to replace the springs in afternoon clean down. At the time of inspection MAR were trialling a different type of spring to increase useful life Spare Parts The spare parts inventory kept on site is minimal. A detailed table is included in section 9.4. Some of the parts have not needed to be replaced. Given these systems have not been in operation for a long time there is still testing required to determine how long parts will last. As time proves the system the recommended parts list will be adjusted Maintenance Staff Training During the installation process training was provided to the existing maintenance and production staff. A signoff process on training was conducted to ensure staff were competent. No additional skill sets were required at the plant to maintain the robots. The biggest challenge robots bring beyond the normal day to day maintenance of the mechanical parts of the system is the robot controls. Robot lockout due to torque overload or other factors is very infrequent. But in these situations it requires the robot to be brought back to the home position using the pendant controller. This is the area of least confidence for maintenance staff. Although MAR provided training to staff during installation and commissioning, there is no chance for maintenance staff to stay refreshed on the robot controller during production. When there is an issue during production it is usually quite easy to home the robot and rest. However, being confident with the controller would help maintenance staff. 14

15 4.8.6 Service Provider Support MAR have considered the idea of developing a mobile robot training cell that could be transported to plants for a period of time to enable maintenance staff to refresh and update their skills with the robotic control pendants. MAR have the ability to dial in remotely to support sites where there is a service fault. This was important in the early stages of commissioning while maintenance staff were gaining confidence with the machine but is very rarely required now. 5 Results & Discussion The main benefits associated with the installation of an Ovine Brisket Cutter are attributed to savings in the following areas: Decrease in labour requirements Reduction in work cover premiums Increase in labour productivity The cost savings will be discussed in detail in the following section. 5.1 Labour Savings The brisket cutter saves one labour unit per shift. The plant operates at 5.67 head per minute, 1 shift per day, processing between head per day. The labour saving per shift can be seen in Table 4. Table 4: Labour saving per shift attributed to the installation of the Robotic Brisket Cutter. The staff turnover and absenteeism is very low at the plant where this system has been installed. Normal absenteeism can be covered by supervisors filling in critical positions to keep the same line speed. People do not get pulled from offal room so there is no loss of value due to staff shortages. The company focuses on developing their labour pool. Labour peaks and troughs over a two year period and although there is a supply of labour at the moment it is not always the case. Management recognise the impact of a stable workforce over the longer term is considerable. Part of the driver for installation of robots is about managing labour shortage risks in future rather than addressing immediate staff shortages. The investment in robotics is a long term consideration by the plant. 15

16 5.1.1 Reduced Training and Recruitment The cost of training and recruitment will depend on the staff turnover that a plant experiences for this role and the challenges associated with filling this role. For some Australian plants savings for this component may be limited, however for other plants facing the challenges of labour shortages or aging employees in these roles the benefits will be significantly higher than the dollar values in Table 5 and Table 6. This recruitment saving does not account for the increasing challenge to find suitable operators who can be trained for this role. Table 5: Recruiting cost per shift Table 6: Training cost per shift Reduced OH&S Costs Manual brisket cutting is a physical job but given the cutters are on counter weights, the job is not as likely to result in serious back injury as some. Evisceration for example in plants where the viscera trays are offset from the chain involves lifting and twisting of the worker 180 degrees with a full gut. In a lot of plants the benefit to team morale of creating a safe work environment and extending workers useful life in a job through reduced physical strain can be more valuable than the eliminated risk. It is difficult to quantify the cost of OH&S risk from this role. But for the purposes of this CBA the risk of back injury over a 10 year period has been considered half that of evisceration or 40% likelihood. A benefit has been estimated based on eliminating the likelihood of a major back injury over a 10 year period. Table 7: Potential OH&S savings over 10 years 16

17 5.2 Equipment Costs The manually operated system has not been replaced in this installation, so no equipment saving has been counted in Table 8. Estimated equipment capital and operational costs have been provided by the equipment manufacturer and are detailed in Table 9. Given a 15 year life expectancy of the equipment, capital costs (excluding opportunity costs) range from $0.03 to $0.05/hd. The operating costs of the automation equipment are estimated at a further $0.02/hd. This equates to a total operating cost of between $0.05 and $0.07/hd. Table 8: Saving on existing equipment Table 9: Expected commercial capital and operational costs of automating lamb brisket cutting 5.3 Hygiene The process of sterilising the robot between each carcase is similar to other robotic installations. There was no perceived difference between the manual or automated processes. 17

18 6 Cost benefit analysis The following section provides the results of the cost benefit analysis based on the results from the data collection phase. This data is collected from several shifts and provides broad estimates only. The financial figures provided should be considered against the unique variables for each site specific installation for which the automation technology is being considered. 6.1 Plant Drivers The drivers used in the cost benefit analysis are provided in Table 10. Useful working life is used to calculate the cost of capital depreciation of the equipment, and also drives the number of years used for the net present value (NPV) of the investment. For the analysis provided a discount rate of 7% is in the NPV calculation. Number of head processed per day and days of operation are used to calculate the total number of head processed per annum. All drivers are adjustable in the provided excel file. Table 10: Drivers used for estimating the value benefit 6.2 CBA Drivers Based on results from analysis work the following frame work for quantifying the value of automated brisket cutting is presented in Table 11. All figures have been calculated on a per head basis and then extrapolated by the number of head per year being processed to calculate total expected benefit per year. The technology has the capability to deliver a benefit of up to $0.11/hd at a cost of $0.07/hd for a small plant and $0.11/hd at a cost of $0.05/hd for a large plant delivering approximately $0.05 to $0.04/hd of net benefit. 18

19 Table 11: Costs and benefits summary Table 12 and Figure 11 communicate the type of benefits the automated brisket cutter delivers and its contribution to the total benefit. It is important to note that the value benefit identified is the result of cost reduction as opposed to increased value. There is a small yield improvement due to increased accuracy of brisket cutting. However, the value is not significant due to the low value of brisket bones. Table 12: Contribution of individual value drivers to total benefit 19

20 120% $ % $0.10 % of total value 80% 60% 40% $0.08 $0.06 $0.04 $/hd 20% $0.02 0% Increased product value Reduced Processor Costs $0.00 Figure 11: Contribution of benefit type, value add vs. cost saving opportunity 6.3 CBA Financial Analysis Based on the results outlined in the previous section the following cost benefit analysis is provided in Table 13. A gross return (including costs saved and value added) of $0.11/hd is identified as a potential benefit of the Automated Brisket Cutter. Based on the expected commercial value of the equipment of $171,228 and the operating costs estimated by the manufacturer, a total annual cost of between $0.07 and $0.05/hd is calculated based on processing between 524,000 and 1 million head per year. Overall this results in a net benefit of $0.04/hd to $0.05/hd and a total benefit to the plant of $22,600 to $56,000 per annum. This produces a payback period of between 7.56 and 3.02 years and a net present value of the investment between $161,000 and $567,000 based on 15 years of operation. Table 13: Financial analysis of cost benefit results 7 Impact on Meat and Livestock Industry The impact of this system to the industry is limited due to the excessive payback period but it has enabled the development of additional systems on the kill floor which together provide a tipping point to enable increases in throughput without inclusion of extra labour. This case 20

21 demonstrates it is not always the financial drivers that govern adoption. The longer term view indicates a tipping point where additional value is achieved as multiple systems are installed. Extra costing s were done on the tipping point were leverage of multiple systems generates additional benefits beyond the benefits gained by single robot. These workings are beyond the scope of this project and developed as a separate activity. In the longer term these will provide the greatest benefit to the industry. 8 Conclusions The installation has gone well and reflects the commitment from the plant at all levels. There were a range of issues during the early stages of commissioning and for a period of time after the installation was completed. These reflect the limited history and commercial hours of operation for these types of systems in full production. However, it is clear the installation has been a success in the eyes of the customer. This positive result reflects the benefit of solid commitment from the plant at all levels. Plant capability and willingness to take on technical capability is important. 21

22 9 Appendices 9.1 List of Tables TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF BENEFITS... 2 TABLE 2: RETURN ON INVESTMENT ANALYSIS... 3 TABLE 3: PLANT DRIVERS FOR ANALYSIS. NOTE SOME PLANTS WILL OPERATE A MUCH FASTER LINE SPEED TABLE 4: LABOUR SAVING PER SHIFT ATTRIBUTED TO THE INSTALLATION OF THE ROBOTIC BRISKET CUTTER TABLE 5: RECRUITING COST PER SHIFT TABLE 6: TRAINING COST PER SHIFT TABLE 7: POTENTIAL OH&S SAVINGS OVER 10 YEARS TABLE 8: SAVING ON EXISTING EQUIPMENT TABLE 9: EXPECTED COMMERCIAL CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS OF AUTOMATING LAMB BRISKET CUTTING TABLE 10: DRIVERS USED FOR ESTIMATING THE VALUE BENEFIT TABLE 11: COSTS AND BENEFITS SUMMARY TABLE 12: CONTRIBUTION OF INDIVIDUAL VALUE DRIVERS TO TOTAL BENEFIT TABLE 13: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF COST BENEFIT RESULTS TABLE 14: MAINTENANCE COSTS OF THE ROBOTIC BRISKET CUTTER TABLE 15: DETAILS OF MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES REQUIRED FOR ROBOTIC BRISKET CUTTER TABLE 16: THE RECOMMENDED SPARE PARTS LIST FOR THE ROBOTIC BRISKET CUTTER List of Figures FIGURE 1: SUMMARY OF MAGNITUDE OF BENEFITS DELIVERED BY THE ROBOTIC BRISKET CUTTER FIGURE 2: PRESENTATION OF THE CARCASE TO THE ROTATING KNIFE... 8 FIGURE 3: CUT ENTRY BETWEEN THE FRONT LEGS. WHITE SPRING-LOADED GUIDE POSITIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CARCASE TO CENTRE THE KNIFE... 8 FIGURE 4: THE ROBOTIC BRISKET CUTTER EXITS THE CARCASE AS THE CUT THROUGH THE STERNUM IS COMPLETED... 9 FIGURE 5: MANUALLY OPERATED BRISKET CUTTING METHODS (BRISKET SHEAR AND ROTATING KNIFE) FIGURE 6: OFFAL REMOVAL IS EASIER THAN MANUAL AS THE CHEST CAVITY IS OPENED, REDUCING LIFTING OF OFFAL S UP AND OUT OF THE CAVITY FIGURE 7: EXAMPLES OF CUT ACCURACY ON THE EXTERNAL SURFACE OF THE BREAST BONE FIGURE 8: EXAMPLES OF CUTTING ACCURACY THROUGH THE STERNUM BONE FIGURE 9: EXAMPLES OF THE WORST CASES OF MISS-SPLITTING FIGURE 10: EVISCERATION PROCESS FIGURE 11: CONTRIBUTION OF BENEFIT TYPE, VALUE ADD VS. COST SAVING OPPORTUNITY

23 9.3 Detailed maintenance requirements The following table summarises the activities conducted to date in maintenance of the Robotic Brisket Cutter. As the system has been installed for less than 2 years there is no allowance in these figures for time for a major overhaul of the system. However, those costs have been factored into a separate table addressing major maintenance activities and costs. Table 14: Maintenance costs of the Robotic Brisket Cutter 23

24 Table 15: Details of maintenance activities required for Robotic Brisket Cutter Note in the table a negative amount for the manual brisket shear. Although the manual system remains on the slaughter floor in operating condition it is not normally used and does not incur the same breakdown support requirements it used to need from maintenance. So it is reflected here as a savings in maintenance time. 24

25 9.4 Recommended spare parts list Table 16: The recommended spare parts list for the Robotic Brisket Cutter 25