provided by: 
Not so long ago, the word "robot" was the scariest thing that shop-floor workers could hear.
But times have changed.
"Ten or 15 years ago, buying and implementing a robotic system was very different," says Geoff Lipnevicius, Cleveland-based engineering manager, automation, the Lincoln Electric Co. (www.lincolnelectric.com). "At that time there was still a mystique about robots. Every installation was a top-secret project involving only a few teams of select people. Management was always worried about possible reactions from employees and, especially, unions.
"Today, I sense that companies are ready to buy and implement a system. And to make it all work, they want to increase up-front participation involving more people and different types of people including welders, maintenance and other support workers.
"Unions no longer automatically oppose robots because they realize that they often can help keep their members employed at higher-paying jobs." For some, union resistance is non-existent. "I cannot recall a single recent case when a union has opposed bringing in robots," says Harley Jacobson, Milwaukee-based account manger—welding, KUKA Robotics Corp. (www.kukarobotics.com).
More important, the whole manufacturing landscape has changed. Producers are being squeezed at both ends. On the revenue side, they face daily pressure from low-cost imports that have hurt sales and slashed profits. On the cost side, prices for raw materials, labor, insurance and energy keep rising. And on top of that the labor pool is shrinking. Replacing experienced welders has become an impossible task.
To the rescue comes automation, often in the form of robots. They have established a solid track record of delivering higher productivity, consistent quality, increased flexibility and versatility while lowering costs.
"Embracing automation is very important for small- and medium-sized manufacturers," says KUKA Robotics' Harley Jacobson. "It enables them to operate and compete in North America. Otherwise, they won't be around in 10 years."
One true believer is Taylor Wings Inc., a Rancho Cordova Calif.-based truck equipment manufacturer. It has been fabricating truck wings, toolboxes, fuel tanks and other large truck accessories for nearly 30 years. In the late 1990s, it expanded into the light-duty truck and RV market with similar offerings. The family-owned company was running three shifts a day, nearly seven days a week in a 30,000-square-foot facility, just to keep up with customer orders.
"What we really needed was a second weld shop, but current space wouldn't allow for that, and we were more than a year away from being able to move into our new facility," says General Manager John Taylor. To meet the challenge, the company purchased and installed a Lincoln System 55, a dual-station, dual-servo-driven positioning robotic cell.
And it worked. Thanks to the system, Taylor Wings eliminated an entire shift. "With the robot, we're operating on one less shift and five days a week," says Taylor, "versus three shifts and often seven days a week previously. We're now able to take on more work and bigger projects when needed, without overworking our team."
While Taylor Wings' existing employees came out ahead with the new robotic welding system, there is not always a happy ending.
"A couple years ago," says Bud Fitzpatrick, vice president, Fitzpatrick Enterprises Inc., an automotive parts supplier in Columbus, Ohio, "we needed to boost our welding capacity to meet increasing orders. Our choices were to hire more welders or to automate."
When the company opted for the latter, Fitzpatrick found it impossible to persuade his existing welding crew of 12 to buy into the decision. "The foreman and the welders were all 'old school'," says Fitzpatrick, "and were unwilling to accept the new technology. Eventually we replaced them with three new employees with more of a 'can do' attitude."
The new welders who are in their 30s receive more pay than the ones they replaced. In the past three years, productivity has increased 30 percent. In addition, the new system provides the company with greater flexibility. "When we needed to produce 6,000 parts for Hummers in a hurry," says Fitzpatrick, "for a brief time we had to run three shifts. In fact, we had to hire temporary workers to feed parts into the robotic welder and take finished products away."
Such benefits result from maturing robotic technology that is simpler to program, easier to operate and takes up less space. Along the way, laser vision and other sensors have made robots smarter. Moreover, new attachments such as plasma-cutting devices have turned welding robots into multi-task tools. All this has boosted their value proposition since in recent years prices have remained relatively stable.
But dealing effectively with change management—potential resistance from rank-and-file workers—is crucial to a successful implementation because no matter how wonderful the tool is, if employees do not use the new system to its fullest, there are few benefits.
And to ensure a smooth installation, companies must provide a persuasive answer to the employees' inevitable question, WIFM—"what's in it for me."
Lincoln approaches the problem by asking potential buyers what specific "pain points" they want solved. "We take the 'tacked up' samples or parts—ones not set up in fixtures—and examine them in our research labs," says Lipnevicius. "One of the first things we do is to measure the tolerances between the parts. After comparing them with their blueprints, we often discover that they are greater variances than there should be. Then we show the company the results of how the welds would look when done by our robots."
More important, Lincoln also brings shop-floor people into the problem-solving process. "We ask companies to include welders and other production workers on their teams," he says, "so they can contribute suggestions on how to make their jobs easier and to achieve better results."
Getting employees onside early is crucial because there is a meaningful gap between being a manual welder and a robotic welding tool operator. According to KUKA Robotics' Harley Jacobson, depending on the complexity of the system, it only takes a few days to about a week of training to make an experienced welder comfortable operating a robot.
Programming takes a little longer. But that too has become much more straightforward. And most vendors have discovered that it is more effective to teach an experienced welder to program a robot than to teach an experienced computer programmer about welding. That's because welders understand what's involved in the process and know what a good weld should look like.
Although programming robots is no longer rocket science, Lincoln Electric's Geoff Lipnevicius cautions companies that they cannot simply bring in people off the street and have them quickly program a robot to carry out intricate moves.
"Some firms approach us about installing a robotic welding system in anticipation of winning a long-term contract," he says, "or having just won one and then hoping that by installing robot, it will start kicking out parts in a few weeks. It's not possible."
Welding robot systems come in different sizes, configurations and price points. Lincoln Electric has an entry-level, eCell robotic welder that sells for about $50,000. "Many companies get started with a basic system like that," says Lipnevicius, "when they recognize that it can solve a shop-floor bottlenecks by introducing a robotic welder."
But realistically, the cost of the robot itself is the getting-in price. "When it is all said and done," says Jacobson, "with additional support equipment, software and training, the total cost of a basic solution gets closer to six figures. However, the useful life of our welding systems is about 15 years."
Despite what many people think, robots do not weld too much faster than humans. But they can increase productivity by reducing "air time"—the time when the arm is moving between welds—and spending more time during a shift welding, with 90 percent or more arc-on time. Also, robots introduce greater discipline and control to create more optimized welds. And software can adjust the torch angle to the part and optimize the weld by taking greater advantage of gravity.
Robots also boost throughput by reducing downtime related to replenishing consumables. "Many manual welding systems are hooked up to a 30-pound spool of wire," says Fitzpatrick. "However, our robotic system has a 500-pound supply."
And modern robotic welders have become fast-changeover artists. Newer systems can switch end-of-arm tools faster and more easily weld different metals such as steel, stainless steel and aluminum. "Now it only takes a matter of seconds or minutes," says Jacobson, "so robots no longer need to be dedicated, single-function tools that have to push out thousands of parts to justify their existence." Such agility is perfect for firms handling high-mix, low-volume production.
For example, Taylor Wings is using its robotic system to weld both steel and aluminum products. In the first six months, the system tripled the production of steel products and doubled aluminum product output. The robot cell enables teams to switch between steel and aluminum applications. Before, dedicated welders had to do manual work on one material or the other.
"Prior to the robot," says John Taylor, "we often experienced a bottleneck at the weld stage. That is no longer the case. It's now one of the fastest, most efficient steps in our operations."
Overall, the new system has delivered major times savings. Before, welders spent 45 minutes tacking an entire toolbox. The robot has reduced that by 25 minutes. In addition, it has also raised hourly output for the larger toolboxes to four and up to nine for the smaller ones.
And for aluminum fuel tanks, with the robot, the welding run time is now 12 minutes, a dramatic improvement over the 75 minutes it took when they were done manually.
Recent technology breakthroughs have given robots more intelligence. For example, as a result of laser vision and touch sensors, welding robots can now make minor positional adjustments as it approaches a new task. In the past, the parts had to be perfectly aligned for a quality weld.
New software can provide an accurate count of daily output, identifying the number of faults, their location and indicating possible causes such gas shortages or lack of wire. Such features simplify managing and analyzing the overall welding process while also facilitating troubleshooting.
The future looks even brighter. According to Geoff Lipnevicius of Lincoln Electric, newer robots will be able lay down two wires at a time so that users will require fewer robots. He also cites developments that will enable a robot to carry a torch to the part instead of one carrying the part to a fixed torch. Other tooling and fixture changes involve multiple proximity sensors embedded in the fixture versus one vision camera checking part proximity on the fly.
As the technology curve continues to rise, so is the need to install robotic systems in production facilities. "The pressure from low-cost imports can only get worse," says Jacobson. "In 2004, when the U.S. welding sector was hit by a wire shortage, I tried unsuccessfully to source it from China. But I could not get any because all the ships coming over here were filled with other cargo.
"Right now, carriers are ordering huge numbers of newer, larger vessels. Once they all start coming on stream, it's quite possible we will be seeing bulldozers and buckets made in China arriving here. Now they are too expensive to ship, or there is no space for such large equipment. But that will likely change soon."
Those words may turn out to be even scarier than robots.
Editor's Note: Ken Mark is a freelance writer based in Toronto. Artwork courtesy of Lincoln Electric.
author: By Ken Mark