Picking robotic tooling for palletizing
Today’s manufacturers have started looking downstream more and more for automation opportunities. And when they do, more of them are choosing robotic systems.
Today’s manufacturers have started looking downstream more and more for automation opportunities. And when they do, more of them are choosing robotic systems. According to the Packaging Machinery Manufacturers Institute’s 2007 Packaging Machinery Shipments & Outlook Study, shipments of robotic palletizers rose by more than 16% in 2006 %%MDASSML%% and shipments of packaging machinery are projected to increase from $469 million to $530 million by 2009.
Designing a robotic palletizing cell has become more complicated as companies invest more in environmentally friendly and sustainable packaging. To reduce dunnage, standard corrugated cardboard cartons are being replaced with thinner-walled pressboard, shrink-wrapped bundles of product on corrugated pads and even loose product in trays. Add increased demand from club stores and marketing changes to the mix, and manufacturers need to account for an even wider range of packaging sizes, shapes and materials.
End-of-arm tooling is a highly project-specific component that represents a large percentage of the overall cost of the system. Choosing the correct end-of-arm tooling helps ensure that a new robotic palletizing or de-palletizing system can effectively handle a company’s full range of packaging types.
Tooling types for palletizing include vacuum, side clamp, fork style and layer handling. Asking the right questions and understanding the specifications of each type is essential to designing a system that will maximize performance, speed, uptime and return on investment.
Five simple questions
The first step in choosing robotic tooling is analyzing the full range of products and packaging types running on your line. What kinds of product or products are you handling? Take some time to determine how each item should be handled. For example, can the packaging support its own weight during transfer? Or will it need to be supported from underneath? Some important factors to consider are size, shape and weight of the package; stability and construction of the package; sealing, wrapping and/or taping; and secondary packaging.
The throughput capabilities of your robotic system vary greatly depending on which tool you use and the product you are palletizing. What rates are required on the packaging line? A good starting point is to determine an acceptable range of line speeds (cases per minute), which can help you better evaluate your tooling options.
Certain tooling types enable more pallet configurations than others, so ask how important are the aesthetics of the packaging? This flexibility may be needed to orient graphics for full-pallet displays and meet the demands of club stores. Some tools can cause dimpling in shrink wrap or marking on packaging, which may be unacceptable for items ending up on display.
Will the robot be handling slip or tier sheets or pallets? Don’t forget to take into account tooling for robots that handle tier sheets or pallets. Keep in mind that peripheral tooling may be required, and that handling tier sheets or pallets will reduce line palletizing rates. Reduction in secondary packaging around the product may necessitate sheets between layers to keep the palletized load stable.
Will the system be able to adapt to future packaging changes? Whenever possible, design flexibility into your system to handle changes in your current product line and the addition of new packaging types in the future. Partner with an experienced palletizing integrator to help you make informed choices and specify the equipment that is best suited for your application.
Vacuum tooling is the most popular %%MDASSML%% yet most misapplied %%MDASSML%% tooling type. It uses pneumatically actuated cups or foam, depending on the availability of the surface, to lift products. As only the top surface of the case comes in contact with the tooling, the vacuum option enables a large range of pallet patterns and is the most prevalent type used for de-palletizing.
Vacuum tooling is ideal for sturdy, traditional packaging, such as sealed corrugate cases that can bear the total weight of the product during transfer. This method is not recommended for many types of packaging, including tall cases with a low center of gravity. As the robot accelerates, inertia can cause the cases to “peel away” from the vacuum carrying surface. If not taken into consideration during the design phase, this issue can cause a lot of trouble when it is time to run production.
Side-clamp tooling is often used for packages that cannot be handled with a vacuum tool. A robotic palletizer equipped with side clamp tooling permits shrink-wrapped product in trays or on pads, for example, to be manipulated efficiently. This tooling type enables higher robotic arm speeds than vacuum tooling, and provides greater control and confidence in holding onto and transferring product.
Side-clamp tooling works well with thinner-walled sustainable packaging and can offer flexibility for packaging lines that run a variety of products. For example, a small beverage line is able to clamp a six-pack differently than a three-pound box of syrup. However, this type may not be suitable for palletizing fragile items or for packaging materials with less tear strength than breach strength.
Fork-style tooling uses a row of forks that comb through conveyor rollers to lift product from the bottom. Fork style tooling is useful for handling irregularly shaped cases and bags, cases with lids, fanfold cartons and packaging that cannot support its own product weight.
On the downside, fork style requires additional space for pattern formation. A large amount of mechanical motion makes this the slowest method, and it is not suitable for depalletizing.
Some operations may require complete layer handling for palletizing, which is expensive due to the ancillary material handling equipment needed to form each layer. This application is ideal for cases without sealed tops.
Sometimes, a combination of two separate robotic tooling types is used to help constrain motion along both the x and y axes during motion, or peripheral tooling is added to handle pallets or tier sheets.
Vacuum-assisted clamping or layer handling can be used when clamps cannot transfer force to the center of the layer due to overpopulation of product or varying patterns. In this case, vacuum tooling is used to hold the layer in place vertically. Vacuum-assisted layer handling is ideal for patterns that include voids for cooling purposes in pasteurization or heat-curing operations. With vacuum-assisted fork-style, forks support the packages from underneath, while vacuum tooling along the back row of the cases keeps them in place.
Clamping-assisted vacuum can be used for tall and light packages, where the vacuum tool is used to lift and move the product, while the clamps keep it from moving horizontally and peeling away from the vacuum. When handling tier sheets or pallets, cylinder-mounted vacuum cups can be used as a peripheral device to pick up tier sheets. A set of pick arms swings into position to pick the pallet and then swings back out of the way during the palletizing operation.
No matter the application, the right end-of-arm tooling can make a big impact on the efficiency and success of the product line. Manufacturers can ensure smooth operations and effective product movement with fewer lost assets by making the right choice, and that’s good for the bottom line
Earl Wohlrab is a palletizing product specialist at FKI Logistex, Manufacturing Systems, North America.
NA 2008 comes to Cleveland April 21-24
NA 2008 will bring the latest innovations in material handling and logistics equipment, systems and technologies to Cleveland’s I-X Center April 21-24, 2008.
NA 2008 will showcase more than 150,000 square feet of exhibits from more than 400 of the leading suppliers of material handling and logistics solutions for manufacturing, distribution and warehousing operations.
For more information, go to
Case Study Database
Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.
These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.
Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.
Annual Salary Survey
In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.
Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.