MarineNews-2017-02

(Darren Dugan) #1

ity. Additional fi nancial savings not addressed in this busi-
ness case include benefi ts derived from reduced welder ergo-
nomic issues. Costs associated with over-welding, including
additional man-hours, the increased ship weight, increased
hours of material grinding in the case of rejected welds, and
other variables were not considered in the calculation.
In the end, says Fanguy, the project team demonstrated
core competency with key technologies and the capability to
execute a complex, multidisciplinary development roadmap.
He added, “Signifi cant progress has been made in Phase 1
toward realization of a fl exible, effi cient, high-productivity
robotic welding solution for the U.S. shipbuilding indus-
try. Opportunities to transfer this technology to additional
shipbuilding and, broader defense applications continue to
emerge. It is incumbent upon the Navy, shipbuilding indus-
try, and U.S.-based suppliers of these technologies to provide
a solution that will continue to place the United States at the
forefront of innovation and manufacturing capability.”


Looking Back, Forging Ahead
Asked where the technology and robotic welding would
provide the most value, Fanguy replied, “We believe that
certainly it is better suited for series build, but the intention
at Bollinger is to use this technology for part families that
may not require a series build contract to exploit the savings
from this technology. And, he adds, “Based on the high
level of commonality between the part families and weld
types among both Bollinger and other Shipyards, it appears
that there are signifi cant technology transfer opportunities
for technologies outlined in this assessment report.”
Pat David also thinks that the robotic approach has legs.
In fact, he insists, “One of the issues prior to this project
when using robots for manufacturing that had high vari-
ability was the amount of time that it took to program
the robot to do the weld. Our ability to quickly generate
that path – that information – is where the savings lie. So
those past problems aren’t as valid as they once were. A lot
of folks are going to reconsider this possibility now. Auto-
mated welding is nothing new. But, the barrier to entry has
been signifi cantly lowered with and due to this project.”
David continues, “The biggest obstacle, hands down, is
the upfront capital investment.” And he agrees with Fanguy,
saying, “This isn’t just limited to series-build hulls – one-off
projects can signifi cantly benefi t as well. What used to take
many hours for the programmer or the robot to generate
a path for the welding now is exponentially faster than it
used to be.” That’s good news for boatbuilders. As NSRP
continues to lead, and shipyards and other stakeholders col-
laborate, everyone wins. That reality has never been clearer.
*All images courtesy of SSI
http://www.marinelink.com

Free download pdf