Creative automation solutions to worker shortages and retailer demands are ushering in a golden age for robotics in food packaging.
 |
| Robotics for secondary packaging have removed a bottleneck at many food plants and helped optimize upstream equipment performance. Source: Bradman Lake Group. |
|
Compared to today’s systems, robotics technology was in the Stone Age of its development when, in the mid-1990s, Foster-Miller Inc. tackled case-packing challenges for Iowa Beef Products (IBP). Standardized computer codes didn’t exist, and complex logarithms had to be written; off-the-shelf grippers for variable shapes had yet to be created, forcing engineers to design and fabricate customized effectors; and reliable operation required run speeds that, by contemporary standards, were lethargic.
The IBP project was a stab by company executives to get ahead of looming labor shortages. They commissioned Foster-Miller to identify and execute automation projects that could eliminate the nastiest, most repetitive jobs. One solution was a four-axis bucket system that oriented and packed up to eight loins a minute in 100-lb. cases.
The system eventually was deployed to eight plants, but the drive to automate soon lost steam. Now, however, each US Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid on a meat plant reinvigorates the rationale for automation—a fact not lost on robotics suppliers, many of which anticipate a sharp increase in applications in meat, poultry and other industry segments.
For those who have not kept up with the technology, pleasant surprises await. Standardized solutions are not yet the norm, but the amount of custom engineering required is down significantly. Reliability at accelerated operating speeds is better than ever. And project costs are less likely to retard additional investment.
Suppliers of robotic arms have been the traditional market drivers, and they continue to fabricate entire welding and painting systems for automobile manufacturers. Those suppliers are improving their components to make them practical in extreme cold and in washdown environments, but for the most part, they defer to systems integrators and packaging machinery OEMs to drive innovation in food applications. Little distinguishes the arms themselves. “Our operating speeds are the same, our reliability is the same, our prices are the same,” acknowledges one robotics engineer, adding, “the C word (commodity) has come up.”
The evolution of Colborne Inc.’s bun-basket loading (BBL) system illustrates how value is being added in food-packaging robotics. Designed as an alternative to pattern formers and manual placement of bread and buns into baskets, BBL originally used SCARA robotic arms, sweeping product into the basket. Five years ago, BBL was coupled with a pack pattern optimization software developed by Colborne’s Foodbotics division. The program takes advantage of bread’s natural compressibility to calculate loading patterns based on up to 7% product compression. That led to end effectors that use vacuum cups and compression plates to get 25-50% more fresh product into a tray. As development continued, Foodbotics eventually standardized on articulated arms from Fanuc Robotics America Inc. to speed integration and lower costs for wholesale bakeries.
“We go end to end, unstacking the baskets, inspecting and rejecting defective baskets and automatically stacking the filled baskets,” says Rich Hoskins, president of Lake Forest, IL-based Colborne. “Most of the automation system now is standard, with that last 10% custom to the bakery’s basket.”
The first BBL was installed in 2003 at Pepperidge Farm’s Bloomfield, CT facility and is now used in 18 commercial bakeries. Removing people from the loading equation is only part of the return on a bakery’s investment: A recent analysis determined one firm wedged more than 400 additional trays on each 53-ft. trailer, improving distribution efficiency by 30%.
Robotics enablers
 |
| Applications Engineer Steve Holtschult (right) and a Foodbotics programmer apply pack pattern optimization software to a bread-handling project. The program generates alternatives that can boost tray capacities up to 50%. |
|
High-speed pick-and-place delta robots have been offered by ABB Robotics Inc. for a decade, but food applications were limited until a washdown version was introduced, says Richard Tallian, market development manager for the Auburn Hills, MI firm. Washdown compatibility was only one roadblock to use, however. “We can only supply the basic tools,” Tallian states. “The integrators make the rubber meet the road.”
One example is Charlotte, NC-based Bradman Lake Group, which standardized on ABB’s Flexpicker in 2002, according to president Nick Bishop. “There is a heavy emphasis on using standard components in a customized solution,” says Bishop, and arms lend themselves to standardization. The value-add in his view is the end-of-arm tooling and the package ingress and egress engineering the company provides.
Until recent years, many of Bradman Lake’s food clients saw their highly automated primary-packaging operations devolve into labor-intensive casepacking and cartoning. The introduction of flexpickers, increasingly coupled with vision systems, is removing a former bottleneck and allowing plants to crank up the speeds on primary wrapping and filling machines. “The introduction of robotic techniques has led to a revolution in thinking about what is possible,” Bishop insists, “and rendered electro-mechanical techniques and mechanical systems obsolete.”
Demand from retailers for pallets with mixed loads is a one-step-backward challenge for manufacturers and distributors alike. Two-step-forward solutions are appearing in the form of end-of-line robotic palletizing systems. One provider is Aidco International, a Cincinnati palletizing specialist. The firm engineered a system using suction grippers and a reciprocating table to layer mixed assortments of milk for a dairy. “They had built a conventional machine, and it was a headache,” recalls Salh F. Khan, Aidco’s president. “They knew the solution had to be a robot.” The dairy’s square containers allow the palletizer to form two layers before a tearsheet has to be inserted. The completed pallet is then stretch-wrapped.
The software that interfaces with the order system to determine how many units of whole, 2% and fat-free milk to put on the pallet and the “smart gripper technology” are the system’s points of distinction. “A robot arm is a commodity,” agrees Khan. “The end-of-arm tool and the user-friendly HMI and software is where the value lies.” Aidco’s dairy palletizer now runs in three locations.
In fairness, commodity may be too harsh a word for the most iconic component in robotics. True, competitors quickly duplicate the advances each supplier achieves, but robotic-arm suppliers continue to introduce refinements that make possible new applications in food and beverage.
A recent example is the HE series from Staübli Robotics USA, Duncan, SC. Engineered to withstand high-pressure washdown and other moist environments, the arms are fabricated from stainless steel and aluminum impregnated with corrosion-resistant alloys. Special seals to resist moisture are used, and positive pressure inside the arm keeps water vapor out.
Two versions of the arm provide a payload range of 11-44 lbs. with six axes of movement. Besides the washdown version, the firm has introduced the Stericlean robot for vapor hydrogen peroxide (VHP) environments. A powerful antimicrobial dry vapor, VHP is used extensively in medical aseptic processing, though the FDA has yet to approve its use on food-contact surfaces. On the other hand, Tetra Pak is working on an aseptic filling system with VHP specialist Steris Corp., opening the possibility of Stericlean applications in food production.
In the meantime, HE robots provide “a nice, sleek, smooth profile for food applications, with no contamination points and no external cables,” says David Arceneaux, Staübli Robotics’ business development and marketing manager. Early feedback from systems integrators is positive, he adds.
Automation on ice
 |
| SCARA robots pick and stack cookies for packaging. Similar automation was among the earliest robotic applications in food, though pick speeds have increased substantially. Source: Bosch Rexroth Corp. |
|
Extreme cold is a challenge for robots, and while equipment suppliers maintain their machines are up to -20˚F operating conditions, plant engineers remain skeptical. Reliability and maintenance concerns have caused some plants to postpone installation of robotic palletizers in ice cream freezers, for example.
“There are simple precautions that will keep a robot running reliably in the cold,” insists Dick Motley, national account manager for Rochester Hills, MI-based Fanuc, which has developed components to withstand extreme conditions. Adds ABB’s Tallian: “The reliability of components like flexible cables and bearing seals is getting better, but there’s still some skepticism that the technology works.” Robotics’ Achilles heel are the servo motors, he adds, which are susceptible to electrical signal distortion in cold temperatures.
Specialty applications aside, where and how products are palletized is changing. “A lot of people are rethinking sending product on a free ride for 450 feet” to be palletized in a warehouse, says Tallian. Instead, they want to palletize at the end of the packaging line. Modest-speed robotic palletizers with relatively small footprints fill the bill. For complex mixed-load pallets, a different solution is necessary. “Retailers don’t want a pallet of tomato soup; they want customized, half-height pallets that can be placed in a store aisle,” he points out. That will necessitate more pick-and-place solutions.
As in many areas of automation, machine control in robotics is in flux. In the past, proprietary controls in the robot itself controlled motion and logic. Today, the robot may work in slave mode, with a PLC or network controlling it and other activities. In Aidco’s mixed-pallet solution, for example, “the PLC runs the whole system,” says Khan. Similarly, Rockwell’s ControlLogix handles logic while ABB Pickmaster 5 software controls motion in a robotic palletizing cell from Greenville, WI-based Qcomp Technologies Inc. Coordinating motion and logic usually is accomplished with drag-and-drop programming rather than custom coding. “The days of charging $20,000 for a software license are long gone,” says Tallian.
Lower programming costs make the technology more accessible, but how it is executed is variable. Technology companies such as Rockwell and Schneider Electric’s Elau division are partnering with integrators to offer total programming solutions. Bosch Group’s Rexroth division is going directly to packaging machine builders to provide open motion and logic controls for end-to-end automation systems. Rexroth’s controller can regulate up to 16 robotic arms as well as conveyors, vision systems and mechanical components in a line.
Vision integration “is a key evolution in the adoption of robotics in food processing,” suggests Fanuc’s Motley. Because food processes were designed around human activity, they took advantage of human senses, including sight. Replacing those functions with automation often demands machine vision, he adds, and plummeting camera costs are making vision a practical solution.
Bosch is a leader in robotics vision. The firm has divested its robo-arm operations, selling off its SCARA unit to Staübli and exiting delta-arm fabrication when patents expired. But robotics are integral to automation, and the new MLC platform exemplifies its commitment to the technology, explains Rami Al-Ashqar, product manager, electronic drives & controls, Bosch Rexroth, Hoffman Estates, IL. “Our customers are machine builders who can make their own robotic arms,” he says. “The robot is only one component, though. We can control the case packer, the infeed belts and everything else, using the same software language.”
Delta, SCARA, Cartesian and other robots all run off the same controller, “and you can drop in a Cognex camera and go with an Ethernet IPC network,” Al-Ashqar adds. Coupled with a SERCOS open digital interface, extremely fast signal processing occurs. “Speed depends on the object’s mass and other factors,” he qualifies, “but we have controllers running delta arms at 150-plus picks a minute in the field.”
Similar speeds are claimed by Livermore, CA-based Adept Technology Inc., which rolled out its Quatro delta-arm unit last year. Nesting pieces of chocolate in a box and picking sardines from a conveyor are some of the jobs being performed, according to Gary Bartlow, sales director. An end-of-arm washdown version is available.
Adept helped pioneer food robotics, beginning with SCARA arms a quarter-century ago. Canadian confectioner Rowntree Macintosh was the first installation, and those machines picked 47 pieces a minute. Another early adapter was Pepperidge Farm, and by then rates had increased to 72 picks a minute. “Today, the machines pick 120-plus a minute, and the price is two-thirds of the original,” Bartlow says.
Just as automakers turned to robotics to remove people from hazardous duty, food companies have used the technology to protect workers. Pepperidge Farm faced multi-million dollar OSHA fines tied to repetitive stress injuries to workers who picked cookies off a conveyor belt. While the company prevailed in its defense, the need to address the issue set the company on an adoption curve that continues with implementations such as the BBL system.
Whether they protect or replace workers, robots are playing a larger role in manufacturing. Machine interoperability and flexibility are advanced by standardized interfaces such as MTConnect, observes Dave Smith, manager of equipment engineering at Waltham, MA-based Foster-Miller. Great economies have been achieved in case packers of the type Foster-Miller executed a decade ago for IBP. Today’s challenge is creating integrated end-to-end solutions. “Sometimes you have to move upstream to make the robotic process more reliable and run faster,” says Smith. Up-front engineering still is required, though standardized interfaces could help drive down those costs.
Significant improvements have been made in end-of-arm tooling, vision integration and pick speeds, but as robotics transition from discreet to process manufacturing, many challenges remain. If the technology is to reach its full potential, food companies will have to ensure they are part of an integrated system and not standalone curiosities.
For more information:
Richard Tallian, ABB Robotics Inc., 720-889-4003, richard.tallian@us.abb.com
Gary Bartlow, Adept Technology Inc., 513-519-4985, gary.bartlow@adept.com
Salh F. Khan, Aidco International, 513-253-0375
Clay Cooper, Applied Robotics Inc., 518-384-1000, ccooper@arobotics.com
Rami Al-Ashqar, Bosch Rexroth Corp., 847-645-3746, rami.al-ashqar@boschrexroth-us.com
Nick Bishop, Bradman Lake Group, 704-588-3301
Rich Hoskins, Colborne/Foodbotics Inc., 847-371-0101, rich@colborne.com
Dick Motley, Fanuc Robotics America Inc., 248-377-7700, dick.motley@fanucrobotics.com
Dave Smith, Foster-Miller Inc., 781-684-4000
David Arceneaux, Staübli Robotics, 864-486-5416,darceneaux@staubli.com
