PSI - Issue 8

F. Caputo et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 8 (2018) 297–308 F. Caputo/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2017) 000 – 000

304

8

Figure 4. Alfa Romeo MiTo central tunnel assembly: virtual simulation vs. real working.

Figure 5. Jeep renegade central tunnel assembly: virtual simulation vs. real working.

The same activity is carried out in two different ways for the two cars. Central tunnel needs to be assembled after the inserting of liquids into the engine, so the car cannot be rotated by means of Webb hook. Alfa Romeo MiTo is produced in an old plant and during the activity the car is moving on a 0 m high skillet. Central tunnel is assembled by one worker that needs to get in the car and working in crouching posture (Figure 4). Instead, Jeep Renegade is assembled in a modern plant, respecting the World Class Manufacturing (WCM) standards, and during the activity, carried out by two workers, the car is on a 0 m high skillet too but the workers work in a pit in standing posture (Figure 5). During the activity, the workers carry-out several sub-tasks, such as: pick and place object, pick and place screwdrivers, perform screwing, manual handling of loads, execute dovetails, etc. In order to test the goodness of the method proposed in this research, in particular the virtual workstation design validation, this paragraph proposes a comparison between numerical and experimental results based on EAWS checklist. The experimental data have been acquired by means of the inertial MoCap system, described in 2.4, directly on the assembly lines of Mirafiori and Melfi plants. The EAWS checklist, based on the experimental data, has been filled-in analysing posture angles trends and the exerted forces. 3. Results