Assembly process Components

While successbil and economical system designs can be devised by experienced process engineers, the competent technical aid available from equipment supphers has led to a growing trend toward the purchase of complete systems, even on small jobs, rather than iu-plaut assembly from components on the basis of in-house designs. An idea of the change in capital investment for typical pneumatic-conveyor systems as a function of increasing transfer rates is given in Table 21-12. 

Each product is derived from individual pieces of material, individual components and individual assembly processes. The properties of these individual elements have a probability of deviating from the ideal or target value. In turn, the designer defines allowable tolerances on component characteristics in anticipation of the manufacturing variations, but more often than not, with limited knowledge of the cost... 

For example, the characteristic dimension A on the cover support leg was critical to the success of the automated assembly process, the potential failure mode being a major disruption to the production line. An FMEA Severity Rating (S) = 8 is allocated. See a Process FMEA Severity Ratings table as provided in Chrysler Corporation et al. (1995) for guidance on process orientated failures. The component cost, Pc = 5.93 and the number planned to be produced per annum, N = 50000. 

E S i c - ai it O Component/ assembly process description 9 e M a Failure Mode Description and FMEA Severity Rating (S) ... 

It is even possible that the system configuration is such that protecnon furnished by devices on one process component can protect others. That is, devices that may be required to provide adequate protection for a component standing alone may be redundant once all components are assembled in a system. This procedure is outlined below ... 

Assemble the components into the process system and apply FMEA techniques to determine if protection devices on some components provide redundant protection to other components. For example, if there are two separators in series, and they are both designed for the same pressure, the devices protecting one from overpressure will also protect the other. Therefore, there may be no need for two sets of high pressure sensors. 

In addition to material variables, as reviewed in Chapter 6, there are a number of factors in equipment hardware and controls that cause processing variabilities. They include factors such as accuracy of machining component products, method and degree of accuracy during the assembly of component products, temperature and pressure control capability particularly when interrelated with time and heat transfer uniformity in metal components such as those used in molds and dies. 

In the synthesis of a macrolide 17A, known as latrunculin A, the intermediate 17B was assembled from components 17C, 17D, and 17E in a one-pot tandem process. By a retrosynthetic analysis, show how the synthesis could occur and identify a sequence of reactions and corresponding reagents. 

The value of EM for a cooperative self-assembled structure provides a measure of the monomer concentration at which trivial polymeric structures start to compete, and therefore EM represents the upper limit of the concentration range within which the cooperative structure is stable (Scheme 2). The lower limit of this range is called the critical self-assembly concentration (csac) and is determined by the stoichiometry of the assembly and the strength of the non-covalent binding interactions weaker interactions and larger numbers of components raise the csac and narrow the stability window of the assembly (8). Theoretical treatments of the thermodynamics of the self-assembly process have been reported by Hunter (8), Sanders (9), and Mandolini (10). The value of EM is lowered by enthalpic contributions associated with... 

---