1. Overview

Corrugated hoses and their metal fittings connect lines and carry coolant in a liquid-cooling system. This project focuses on the rigid metal fittings that require CNC machining: pallet-based blank feeding, robot loading and unloading, transfer between machines and finished-part recovery form one flow from blank to completed part. For cylindrical or short-shaft fittings the feed pallet has to control rolling, hold orientation and leave enough room for the gripper, so parts do not shift during pick and place.

2. Production background and retrofit need

• Cylindrical fittings roll, so a stable pallet locating structure is required.
• Different specifications vary in length, outside diameter and grip position.
• Threads, end faces and sealing areas must not be damaged by collision or by inappropriate clamping.
• If a fitting needs re-fixturing or machining at both ends, the flip and transfer method must be defined.
• The flexible corrugated body and the rigid metal fitting cannot share the same gripping method by default.

The source material does not describe how the part was produced before automation; that still requires a site record. The proposal also notes that if the actual object were the flexible corrugated body rather than a metal end fitting, clamping, orientation and anti-deformation would have to be reassessed.

3. Workpiece and operation characteristics

What the source material records about the workpiece:

• The automation object is the metal fitting / end connection that needs CNC machining, a rigid cylindrical or short-shaft part.
• Fittings may differ in diameter, length, step and thread structure.
• The corrugated body itself may be stainless steel, PTFE or FEP, but the flexible body is outside the scope of this proposal, which states that a hose or flexible body cannot use the gripping method designed for rigid metal parts.

4. Automation challenges

• Preventing rolling, slipping and orientation drift on cylindrical and slender parts.
• Matching the grip position to the machining datum while keeping clear of threads and sealing faces.
• Pallet zoning, program matching and anti-mix control across specifications.
• Gripper and robot protection in a coolant and swarf environment.
• Flipping and second clamping when both ends are machined.

5. System design

• Pallet locating feed — fitting blanks are placed in a fixed orientation; location slots or stops reduce rolling and positional drift.
• Robot pick — the gripper or dedicated fixture is selected from the fitting geometry, weight and grip area.
• Automatic clamping — the blank is loaded into the machine fixture and confirmed by part-present and clamp signals.
• Unloading — the part is removed only when the machine state permits unloading.
• Operation transfer — parts needing a second clamping or a later operation follow the actual routing; single-operation parts go straight to finished recovery.
• Finished-part sorting — completed fittings are stored by specification and orientation to protect threads, end faces and sealing areas.

6. Loading and unloading sequence

1. Pallet loaded → part located → robot picks
2. Machine clamped → machining → machining-complete signal
3. Robot unloads → finished parts stored by specification → store status updated → next cycle

7. Machine, robot and storage coordination

What the proposal requires of the cell — design requirements, not measured behaviour:

• The robot picks, loads and unloads according to machine state and never acts while the machine is not in a safe state.
• For multi-specification fittings, dedicated pallets, zoned storage and program management reduce the risk of mixing.
• If a flexible body or an assembly operation is involved, the conveying, support and gripping method must be evaluated separately.

8. Key selection basis

The proposal refers only to a “robot” and leaves the gantry-versus-6-axis choice open. For cylindrical parts it stresses that the gripper must be chosen from the geometry, weight and available grip area, and that pallet location and gripper contact faces must be designed around the actual workpiece.

9. Machine make and model fit

10. Part storage and automatic feeding

What the proposal records about feeding:

• Pallet-based blank feeding, with location slots or stops holding orientation.
• For multi-specification fittings, zoned pallets and zoned storage reduce the risk of mixing.
• Planning condition: 300 blanks with a target of 8 hours of continuous running (a planning condition, not an acceptance result).

Note: the proposal quotes 300 blanks while the confirmed store holds 256 positions; the two figures are not on the same basis and still need to be reconciled.

11. Multi-machine line (where applicable)

Both the title and the body organise the project around multi-machine operation, but the number of machines is not recorded. The proposal states that “if the actual process contains several operations or transfer between machines, the transfer sequence must follow the real process route”.

12. Control, safety and exception handling

Control and safety requirements stated in the proposal:

• Part-present and clamp signals participate in the loading decision.
• Parts are removed only when the machine permits unloading.
• Coordination across machines and recovery after an abnormal stop must be handled.

13. Commissioning and verification

Verification items listed in the proposal — proposed at concept stage; no acceptance record exists:

1. Location and pick stability across specifications
2. Rolling and slip prevention on cylindrical and slender parts
3. Match between grip position and machining datum
4. Protection of finished parts during storage
5. Coordination across machines and recovery after an abnormal stop
6. Changeover, anti-mix verification and measured uninterrupted runtime

The proposal states that measured cycle time and continuous-run data are still to be supplied; no measured value is given in this section.

14. Results and data scope

The proposal gives 300 blanks over a target of 8 continuous hours, i.e. an average blank consumption rate of 37.5 parts per hour, or about 96 s per part. It states explicitly that this is a planning calculation, that it does not represent the machining cycle time, and that an 8-hour unattended run has not been validated.

Single-part machining cycle time is 68 s (business confirmation). The line output interval is not provided. Specifications and operations differ, so the ~96 s planning interval below must not be read as a lathe cycle time.

15. Scope and limitations

• The concept stabilises pick and place for metal fittings, reduces the risk of cylindrical blanks rolling and colliding, routes parts between machines by a defined sequence, and standardises finished-part sorting.
• Delivered, but without a written record: pick stability across specifications, anti-roll performance, finished-part protection, machine coordination, changeover and anti-mix performance, uninterrupted runtime.
• Not provided in the source material: customer name, acceptance records, cycle time, first-pass yield, operator reductions.

16. FAQ

Q: Can one system tend both the corrugated hose and the metal fitting?
A: If they are machined as separate parts, feeding and gripping should be designed separately. The gripping requirements for a flexible body and a rigid fitting are not the same and should not share one mechanism by default.

Q: How are cylindrical fittings fed reliably?
A: Location slots, stops or a dedicated pallet can be designed around the part size and grip direction; the structure has to match the real workpiece and be proven on site.

Q: Can robot handling avoid thread damage?
A: A suitable grip position, gripper contact faces and segregated finished-part placement reduce the risk, but the result still has to be verified on site.

Q: Can several fitting specifications run on one line?
A: Part identification, fixture compatibility, program switching and finished-part sorting all have to be confirmed. Different specifications should not share one process configuration without verification.

Q: What is the machining cycle time?
A: 68 s per part for a single machining cycle, confirmed by the business. The line output interval depends on the number of machines and the operation split, which are still to be confirmed.

Reference images

The two images below show comparable automation lines and equipment forms (including our own assembly workshop). They are not photographs of this project’s customer site; the actual configuration is subject to project assessment.

Source and verification status

Facts on this page are graded in the table below. No figure, customer name or acceptance conclusion appears without a stated origin.

Business-confirmed values come from a verbal confirmation on 21 October 2026. Machine models, machine count, material grades and dimensions are still to be confirmed from written records, and none of them has been estimated here.

Related pages

To discuss automation for a similar fitting, send us the diameter and length range, material, lathe model and target output.

This page follows the same 19-block structure as the Chinese version. All facts and data-scope statements from the original proposal and case manuscript are retained. Items with no record remain marked “to be confirmed”; business-confirmed values are shown separately and were not mixed into the document-derived text.