Mechatronics and Economic Recovery
February 12, 2012 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Commentary, Design, Featured Mechatronic Articles, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Mechanical, Motion Control
Mechatronics is a major driver in economic recovery. That may sound like an extreme claim, but it is something I experience with some regularity. Every time someone comes up with a better solution for a process or new way to make a piece of machinery, there is economic recovery.
Mechatronics doesn’t get the attention of the President of the United States. Maybe it should. But the American economy is affected every time someone develops a new process or machine. It just doesn’t make the headlines every time.
When companies compete for and wind marketsthare based on sales of machinery that others use in manufacturing. The company that produces increased throughput or new features and benefits adds values to its customers’ operations. And to the extent that machinery suppliers can capture that value for their customer, they their market, revenue and employment.
Mechatronics is what drives low prices for your favorite can of beer or soda that costs only pennies. From the high impact can maker that runs a snappy 240 cans a minute, to the pallitizing machines that load 80 cases of your favorite beverage in less than two minutes ready to ship out on a truck. All that productivity comes from mechatronics.
As the discipline of mechatronic engineering matures, the cost of that technology continues to decline creating new opportunities to drive new improvement with that technology in many different industries. Better motion control technology means higher speed, higher accuracy, reduced waste, ongoing reduction in complexity and decreased commissioning cost. All of which leads to new products, markets and economies.
Recently several suppliers like National Instrument and Rockwell have developed the interface between the design phase of mechatronics and the deployment of hardware. This new frontier is the simulation realm where engineers can simulate and iterate their design ideas in software extensions of the solid model environment. This development, while relatively recent, integrates the mechanical design environment with the applied aspects of mechatronics. And in doing so, simulation gives engineers the tools to quickly perform complete design iterations in a few hours, without the need for expensive hardware iterations, lowering the cost of design and increasing the performance of the results.
More and better motion control means new opportunities to grow the economy. Growing the economy is what we do best. So keep those great mechatronic products coming. They are more important than ever.
American Entrepreneurship 101
February 5, 2012 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Commentary, Design, Green Engineering, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Mechanical, Motion Control
In my travels, I continue to find people hard at work doing something that has never been done before. With the hope of making a profit while doing it. Just such a situation came up recently when I met with the owner and founder of Transcon Steel.
Among the mainstays of an industrial economy is construction, housing and commercial in particular. While these industries are incredibly competitive, there is always room for innovation. Precisely because it is a mature, competitive industry, really ground breaking solutions are sometime hard to find.
Transcon Steel is a small startup company in Georgetown Texas that makes structural steel building systems. The innovation comes from the fact that Transcon roll forms flat sheet metal into structural shapes that are highly optimized to reduce weight and increase strength. The steel structural shapes are formed into large panels with compressed foam which results in structures that are super light weight and extremely high strength.
The new structural panels permit construction of buildings in a variety of applications. So called “temporary housing” for oilfield crews in remote area can be built in hours instead of days. Heating and cooling costs are a fraction of conventional structures. All of which leads to increased opportunities to serve unique construction applications with better solutions.
Transcon’s big challenge will be to create the manufacturing resources needed to produce the structural panels in very large numbers. The enabling technology of the manufacturing processes? Mechatronics. The roll forming of sheet metal is a classic application requiring high performance drives to de-reel the strip steel rolls and servo actuators to follow the roll throughout the various forming process that take place to make the final product.
The compressed foam requires unique tooling to form large rectangular panels that can be filled with foam, compressed with hydraulic actuators and cured with heat and pressure to form the final super dense structures. Amazingly, the cores are made from material that is similar to the conventional styrofoam cups we use for coffee, yet, when the basic material is processed correctly, it becomes strong enough to withstand blows from a sledgehammer. When it is bonded to an already strong steel frame, you have a complete building system that has incredible structural strength and insulation value.
Transon is negotiating enough new business that it will need a new facility 4 times the size of it’s present location and will hire CAD designers and plant personnel to support it’s manufacturing needs. If they are successful at marketing the technology in other countries, it will be more of the same. Lots of it.
And that is how job creation is done. Someone with an idea, willing to work hard, taking risks, finding people to come alongside and help, to deliver a solution. Making lives better by employing people, and by delivering a product that provides shelter at a lower cost than the traditional products in the building market.
American Entrepreneurship.
The Next Industrial Revolution
January 15, 2012 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Commentary, Design, Featured Mechatronic Articles, Green Energy, Green Engineering, Industry, Manufacturing Trends
Modern manufacturing is largely the result of Henry Ford’s innovation, assembly line mass production. The goal of which was primarily to make cars available to large numbers of people due to significantly lowered costs. No other single innovation has contributed as much to increase the quality of living conditions throughout the world. Mass production has made more goods available to more people in more places than any other system in the history of mankind.
The electric light, for example, which was coveted 100 years ago as the great solution to night time darkness, making obsolete the candle or gas lamp. Mass production has made the light bulb an inexpensive commodity on the verge of extinction at about 25 cents per bulb. The desire to reduce energy consumption is ushering in the age of the light emitting diode (LED) as the replacement technology for electric light. Every effort is under way to reduce LED costs by any means possible so that illumination will be available that is even cheaper than incandescent lighting when the energy cost over ten years is factored into the new technology.
Even generating and delivering electricity is the result of applying the principles of mass production. Large generating facilities are able to generate power cost effectively through economy of scale, selling the power profitably at 4.5 cents per kilowatt hour. Wire, cable, switching systems and other infrastructure are generally costed in at an additional 2 cents per kilowatt hour to deliver the power to your door. This is an incredible deal, trillion of dollars of resources at your disposal for pennies.
But mass production is not the answer for every aspect of modern society. Lowering the cost of mass-produced goods implies that there is a requirement for the sufficient numbers of a product to warrant the investment in the necessary processes and tooling to accomplish the task.
Enter 3D printing technology. Also known as “Maker bots”, this new class of tools is making fabrication a new American pastime at incredibly low cost. Where 3D printing equipment has recently been the domain of well-funded large corporations , selling at $10,000 to $20,000 each, 3D printer kits are available at less than $1000. And lest you think that these are only toys for boys, the additive manufacturing paradigm has taken hold in the metals industry producing high quality parts in various steel alloys and even in titanium.
Why does it matter? Because anything that lowers the barrier to market entry for new products creates the opportunity for people to enter a market that was previously inaccessible. The hidden relationship is financial, it is the cost of amortizing the manufacturing resources across a given number of products that makes startup of a new product impractical. So barriers to entry in new product development are primarily the result of amortization costs.
What happens when a new technology introduces a significant reduction in the amortization cost? You get the opportunity to experiment with things because the cost of iterating the design is low. New products can be test marketed and improvements made because there is no major investment in tooling that would have to be modified in order to change the design. You don’t have to get it right the first time.
And that means that anything is possible.
Next Generation Manufacturing
January 8, 2012 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Commentary, Design, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Motion Control, Technology
As a follow on to the last post, I have been investigating the cost of manufacturing equipment. The classic machine tool is the most widely used piece of equipment for fabricating just about anything made out of metal. The machine tool has been quietly undergoing it’s own revolution since it’s inception in the 1950′s.
The traditional metal cutting machine tool has been around since the 1800′s and was entirely manually operated. Since the machines were manually operated, the dexterity of the operator became a major factor in accuracy and repeatability of part manufacturing. Because of the skill required, we still have the term “master machinist” in circulation, even though most machining today is automated.
During the Second World War, the Air Force was confronting the difficulty of manufacturing airplane parts. Through the work of John Parsons and MIT, the first “punch card” controlled machine tool was built. Parsons’ company was using early punch card computers to generate a larger number of points along the curve of a wing brace. The numerical information was then used directly by machinists as a look up table for manually positioning a milling tool. Parsons realized that if they could motorized the manual process, it could greatly increase the speed of the machining process, lowering costs dramatically and increasing accuracy at the same time.
Gordon Brown’s Servomechanisms group at MIT has recently been working on early forms of closed loop dc motor control for the gun turret on B-29 bombers. By combining these recent technologies to numerical punch card calculation approach the first Computer Numerical Controlled Machine Tool was demonstrated.
The rest, as they say, is history. The lessons learned in computer numerical control have been instrumental in every major field of manufacturing. Cars, electronics, robotics, would not be feasible or cost effective without the underlying control technology of CNC.
Which brings me to a 2 major points as we contemplate the next generation of manufacturing.
Additive manufacturing is maturing rapidly with a wide range of materials, steels and titanium are now available, and precision is improving at the same time. The surface finish requirements for a large number of parts cannot be achieved with a strictly additive process. The new wave of additive manufacturing requires a complementary subtractive technology at complementary prices.
Secondly, while there are an increasing number of machine tools at low cost, they are not CNC. This will likely be the next “breakout” technology. There are a number of technical hurdles that have to be addressed in terms of reducing the cost to a level comparable with the Makerbot. With the current generation of dedicated motion controller chips, lower cost step motors and low cost feedback technology, this should be a slam dunk.
Get your pencils out and get after it! There’s some serious money to be made here.
Innovation in Motors for Mechatronics
December 25, 2011 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Design, Green Energy, Green Engineering, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Materials, Motion Control
Innovation is the watchword of mechatronics. The pressure for solutions in alternative energy continue to push the boundaries of design in electromechanical systems.
In the wind energy arena the biggest change has been the shift to direct drive permanent magnet generators. By eliminating the gear “increaser” to convert the low RPM of the propeller system to a high RPM for a standard high power generator. This is crucial step in bringing the cost of wind power down. Current systems are weighing in at 100 tons and have to be suspended above water or land 165 feet in order to pick up sufficient wind currents to be economically practical.
There is no single solution that is ideal for wind applications. One supplier has a generator that is made up of 4 smaller units on a single large ring gear. This system seems to have significant advantages in reducing the size and weight of the generator and makes maintenance more simple in the event of a failure.
Among the major mechatronic challenges driving change in the motor industry, electric vehicle applications are continually pushing the boundary for energy density and efficiency. The performance demands of electric vehicles and other mobility applications make every percentage point of efficiency crucial to the range of the target vehicle. This has led to a rash of new motor and drivetrain designs with a variety performance capabilities.
Each new innovation seeks to organize the basic materials of the electric motor in a new way to improve some aspect of performance. Electric motors are copper conductors, “soft” magnetic steels and many times, permanent magnets. The basic costs for copper wire at $5-6 a pound, commodity strip steel is about $.50 per pound but has to be punched in precise shapes, coated with insulation and stacked into larger assemblies, and $16. per pound for permanent magnets. Complex processes associated with motor manufacturing make motor costs considerable.
In a recent development teams in academia in Australia and the US have developed simple low RPM motor structures based on polymer actuators referred to as “artificial muscle”. While this development is in its early phases, the simplicity and low cost are significant and very appealing. A demonstration of the new technology can be seen on YouTube at; www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcCPNJR5PCMand it is very much worth the watch.
The only sure thing is that we continue to meet the challenge of new market needs with innovation.
EV’s Everywhere, and More!
November 20, 2011 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Commentary, Design, Green Energy, Green Engineering, Mechanical, Technology
Alternative energy fans are getting good news this year end, 2012 will be the year of the electric car. No matter what flavor of technology, dual drive train hybrid, true hybrid, plug in electric, there will be something for everybody.
American buyers will be able to buy American hybrid cars. The Chevy Volt will be flanked by the Ford Fusion Electric scheduled to be released for sale in 19 US markets in March of 2012. The Nissan Leaf might be the first production electric, so most commentators will make comparisons regarding driving range, speed and recharge time based on the performance of the Leaf. At present, the claimed performance of the vehicles is very comparable.
It’s all speculation until there are a few units out there and the actual life cycle of the batteries can be measured. 100′s to 1000′s of vehicles will have to be built and consumer experiences cataloged in order to get a handle on how the batteries really work. With all due respect to the development and testing efforts, it’s educated guesswork until there is real world experience.
Will the batteries be able to cycle enough times to make them cost effective? When will they require replacement? What will the price tag be for the battery pack? Hopefully less than the $13,000 Tesla battery pack.
EV’s are coming. But they are, like all the alternative energy technologies, still not cost competitive with Internal Combustion engines. Most vehicles carry a $39,995 starting price tag with a $7,500 Federal rebate. The basic purchase price puts EV’s out of the price range for many people, which fundamentally defeats the purpose. The point of alternative energy technology is that it must become widespread in order for any impact on the environment to take place. High prices are a major barrier to broad adoption.
Meanwhile the internal combustion engine is seeing some revival. New approaches are being built and tested that offer dramatic improvements in efficiency and engine weight. The EcoMotors opposing piston engine has been under DARPA development since 2007. EcoMotors technology has been demonstrated to 40% efficiency, more than double that of traditional ICE. In addition, it weighs less, takes up less space and gives of dramatically less heat.
Recently, the University of Michigan announced a new breakthrough called the wave engine that is expected to increase combustion efficiency to 60%. And the rotor only turns in one direction like a scroll compressor instead of a piston, so there are no reciprocating motions to deal with. This will also lower vehicle weight substantially, so the engine efficiency improvement leads to further overall efficiency in fuel required per transportation mile.
If these ICE improvements translate directly into miles-per gallon, then based on average 20 mpg cars today, we are talking about 53+ mile per gallon in town and possibly 70 mpg highway for EcoMotors solution. At these levels, the equivalent energy cost per transportation mile is at parity with electricity. If the wave engine proves successful, in town ratings of 80 mpg and 100 mpg highway become feasible, making electric options more expensive.
The future is what we make it. Let’s make it the best we can with choices that make sense economically and environmentally.
Unique Solutions in Material Handling
November 6, 2011 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Automation, Commentary, Design, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Materials, Mechanical, Pneumatics–Hydraulics, Semicon, Solar Power, Technology
Moving products around is mechanical work. When the work is done by a control system and actuators its mechatronics. Mechanical work, whether by humans, by horses, by hydraulics, electrics or whatever, is still work. Figuring out what technology approach will be the most cost effective way to get the work done is the challenge.
Many of the constraints of the work are environmental. If work is being done outdoors, then temperature and humidity are a factor. Felling trees and in the forest requires extremely high forces due to the work needed to cut through a tree and drag it to a truck to be hauled off for processing. Processing trees, even in a plant environment, requires some serious hardware, 125 horsepower band saws are not unusual.
Doing work on a ship or oil rig has additional constraints because of the presence of explosive fumes and fuels. Often the need to avoid any possibility of igniting a combustible atmosphere causes engineers to apply pneumatic control systems. Yes, there is still a compressor somewhere to generate the compressed air supply, but that is usually remote or contained to avoid exposure to the volatile atmosphere.
Environmental constraints come in many forms. Extremely high temperatures push the limits of what is possible. Making glass, semiconductors, and primary metal processing are all high temperature environments where engineers have developed whole technologies in order to bring us the materials we use in everyday life.
The simplest action of rolling or sliding becomes a real challenge when environmental constraints are added to the work statement. Sawdust becomes a potential abrasive in woodworking environments that can introduce severe wear in moving parts. Corrosive and explosion proof atmospheres as well as food industry applications introduce all sorts of chemical compatibility problems that require special materials and processes in order to meet strict guidelines for safety.
As always, resourceful engineers have worked out solutions for all of these difficult applications. One family of solutions to rolling applications is the use of all ceramic bearings. No steel, no lubrication. None is needed because the ceramics are extremely high purity to start with and have extremely high precision surfaces eliminating the need for lubrication. No outgassing or contamination to worry about.
Other solutions take the form of air bearings and non-contact material handling devices. Air bearings have become more readily available for conventional applications, but are particularly compelling in large machinery applications where precision is required. Large flat screen display glass presents unique challenges that successfully addressed using a combination of air bearing regions and vacuum regions to move the glass without actual contact and with overall flatness measured in millionths of an inch.
A unique solution in pneumatic material handling takes compressed air driven into a funnel shaped recess and creates a vacuum in the center and an air cushion at the edges where the air is exiting. This creates a vacuum pickup that never quite comes in contact with the part, leaving no marks. Perfect for solar cell and some food and beverage applications.
Engineers continue to meet the unique challenges of industry and create commerce at the same time. And that’s what it should be about.
Energy Saving and Automation
October 30, 2011 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Commentary, Design, Electronics, Green Energy, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Mechanical, Motion Control, Technology
In an era where energy costs have become a focus of attention, many people have authored articles with reducing energy as their theme. Saving money is always a good thing. Perhaps we can gain a little clarity on where the real savings are.
Start with the big loads. Plant air handling, building HVAC and lighting are generally a lot more significant in total Watts or equivalent horsepower. 1 Horsepower is equal to 746 Watts. If you are located in the northern states, winter heating uses a lot more energy than summer air conditioning. In the southern states, it’s the opposite. There is one study that puts the northern thermal cycle at a much higher overall cost, so everybody needs to move their manufacturing to the south.
Check all the integral horsepower motors in the plant. A recent DOE study shows that over time, many motors get replaced with whatever is readily available in the next larger frame size. This is in reaction to plant failures where the exact replacement motor is not handy or on the shelf. The result is that the plant power and power factor can be very poor because there is a lot of excess capacity that is not being used efficiently.
Industrial plants also suffer from peak demand billing practices. The utility company agrees to provide power, but large users get billed extra when they have peaks above their average usage. Again, look at the large loads, and see if some or all can be put on soft starters or inverters with longer starting profiles. AC motors try to get to full running speed and spend several seconds at poor power factor and huge inrush currents during starting. Most motors require at least 4 seconds to get to speed. So, is there a savings opportunity if you can get by with a 6 to 10 second starting period? Yes, there absolutely is.
The smaller loads like individual plant floor machines are a little harder to regulate. Some production machines consist of dozens of individual motors and sub-systems. In large conveyor installations, newer control system turns off whole zones of equipment if there is no traffic for that section. Use the same strategy in production equipment. If there is nothing coming into the machine, turn off as much stuff as possible.
Again, look for the largest loads. In CNC machines, the spindle is usually the dominant load. Turning off a 10kW spindle motor will save lots more money than turning off 400 Watt positioning axes. However, don’t pass up an opportunity if one exists. If there are a large number of individual axes of motion that have low duty cycles, it may be cost effective to put brakes on the load and turn the motors off when they are not in use.
Prudent planning can be turned into real cash savings.
What is Control?
October 15, 2011 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Automation, Commentary, Design, Electronics, Industry, Manufacturing Trends, Motion Control, Technology
‘Control’ is a term for the use of binary calculation methods to execute a process or task. I suspect it is as ambiguous a term as ‘mechatronics’. I suspect that we cannot even agree on what control is, without getting into some depth on the all the possible definitions of the subject.
This is rather ironic considering the billions of dollars that are spent on control systems across all fields. Is control fundamentally any different if it is inside a car, automating lighting and HVAC in a large building, on an automotive manufacturing plant floor, in a biological resesearch laboratory, or in a giant refinery where chemical products are made. It’s all control. And the more we try to define it, the more inclusive we make the definition, the more vague and ambiguous the term becomes.
Efforts continue to increase the power of the PLC (programmable logic controller) across many vendors. By increasing processor speed, memory and capability PLC’s are becoming the universal platform of control as a discrete controller, process controller and motion controller.
Simultaneously, motion control specialty companies continue to increase speed, processing power and I/O structures in an effort to expand the dedicated motion controller as a competitive platform to the PLC. This is a necessary migration to address control applications where an external PLC could be eliminated.
Is there an ideal mix of motion axes and I/O that will help resolve which hardware solution is best? Not really. The fact is that the majority of the market is made up of motion control using stand-alone axes that are triggered by logical conditions in the system. Coordinated axes require the sharing of pulse to pulse position feedback information. Stand-alone axes do not share data at that low a level in time. Most PLC controllers are well able to handle stand-alone axes, especially if an intelligent indexer is used. This off-loads the motion to the servoamplifier and only I/O handshakes are used.
Part of the ambiguity here is that control is the result of hardware and software together. ’Control’ seeks to generate complex behaviors using digital methods. The digital methods, processors, depend on programming techniques in order to implement the desired behavior. So when we talk about Control, we are talking about hardware and software simultaneously.
What matters most to users of automation technology is both logic control and motion control programming exist in a single environment. It doesn’t matter if the programming environment is a PLC with motion blocks inside it, or a motion controller with logic blocks inside it. What matters is that all aspects of a control system can be programmed using a single editor. Controllers from the major electrical companies like Rockwell Automation and others have opted for the logic-centric programming environment with motion blocks in the ladder diagram.
This approach eliminates the complexity of multi-processor solutions, each with their own programming language, that were commonplace a few years ago. Multiprocessors have their own unique programming environments and a significant amount of programming to create proper interaction between the various platforms.
Missing from this description is the hard wired control that is part of system start up, power management and safety. More on this in the next installment.
Motion, Measurement and Control
September 25, 2011 by Steve Meyer
Filed under Automation, Commentary, Design, Electronics, Mechanical, Motion Control, Robotics, Technology, Test & Measurement
Motion control is all about control. But you cannot control what you cannot measure. So there is an important measurement component to the control of moving systems. The difficulty lies in knowing what to measure, how to measure and what to do about things you can’t measure.
The obvious thing to measure is motor speed. That part is easy. Servo motors have built in feedback devices. In the old days, the preferred feedback device was a small generator that produced a voltage proportional to the speed. In the digital age feedback is by quadrature encoder that outputs a digital pulse that is primarily used for position control. Most control systems are able to easily integrate the pulse train to derive the speed of the motor.
Unfortunately, most applications require relatively low speed. Most motors are engineered for high speed. This is in an effort to package more work related power in a smaller physical package. Often, the motor is connected by pulleys or gear reducers to get the speed of the motor to more closely match the desired speed of the load.
Some of the important attributes of motion cannot be easily measured. In addition to speed, torque is extremely important to controlling motion. Torque can be measured directly from the drive electronics, but this is rarely used for control.
Torque and current are direct equivalents with a slight variation due to the temperature of the motor winding. As the temperature of the motor goes up, the resistance goes up and the current required goes up at the same time. Since high performance motors have fairly high internal temperatures, this swing can be in excess of 100 degrees centigrade, and should be considered in the control scheme.
Most of the emphasis on current control is in terms of protecting the motor and drive electronics. The first derivative of current over time is the limiting parameter of the power electronic devices and is an important boundary condition in safe operation of the electronics.
More important information can be derived by considering the region of the motion profile and the current or torque requirements that are presented. In order to accelerate a load, a lot of current is needed to overcome the mass of the load. But once the load is moving the torque requirement drops off. This creates an opportunity to profile the current requirement while using the conventional error detection scheme of the traditional control.
Other variable that are part of the mechanical system are things like momentum and center of mass. In multi-axis mechanisms, there is usually a dependency of one axis upon another. The idea that the mass of one axis is changing it’s center of mass and momentum with respect to the other axis is generally ignored. This too is an opportunity to gain increased stability in the control and possibly improve throughput by having a better model of the application from which to create the ideal control.
Looks to me like there is a lot of room for improvement. Let me know if you agree or disagree.


