The modern robot is based in large part on patents applied for in the 1950s by George C. Devol, a self-taught inventor who, at the age of 70, now heads Devol Research Associates, a robotics leasing and consulting firm in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. In 1961, Unimation installed its first Unimate in a General Motors plant, and AMF Inc. introduced its Versatran into a Ford facility. Since that time, more than 6,000 robots have been sold in the United States, most of them to the automobile and appliance industries. Of that number, approximately 4,100 remain in use today.
Currently, there are about 30 U.S. robot manufacturers, as well as robot vendors, robot systems companies, robot consultants, robot analysts, robot industry suppliers, and robot rental firms. Unimation is the largest manufacturer, with a 39% share of the market; other leaders are Cincinnati Milacron Inc., DeVilbiss Co., Prab Robots Inc., and ASEA Inc. Recently a number of large companies, including IBM, Bendix, General Electric, and Westinghouse, have entered the field. Sales by U.S. manufacturers have climbed from $35.5 million in 1978 to $155.5 million in 1981; this year, they are expected to hit $215 million, and, by 1990, should be in the $1-billion-to-$2-billion range.
At the Robots VI Conference and Exposition held in Detroit in March 1982, about 100 exhibitors demonstrated their products for nearly 28,000 businesspeople, bankers, engineers, and students. At one point the crowds grew so large that the fire marshal was forced to shut down the exposition; visitors offered to buy robots off the floor, and, at the end of the four-day affair, one salesperson was overheard to say, "It sure feels nice to be going home with 52 orders." Clearly, robots are generating a great deal of interest.
The reasons are numerous, but they all go to the bottom line: "The primary reason for using robots is economics," says Unimation's Engelberger.The savings and advantages accrue at virtually every step.Conventional machines, if they exist to perform a particular job, may cost three to five times as much as a robot; one aerospace firm, for example, is using an $85,000 robot for work that would otherwise require a $300,000 machine. And once installed, conventional machines resist change. In the past, automobile manufacturers had to shut down for months in order to retool assembly lines; now, because robots are easily reprogrammed, the same result can sometimes be achieved in days. Conventional machines may also require greater maintenance.
The costs of running a robot are equally attractive. "If you buy a $50,000 robot," says Engelberger, "pay for the loan, install the robot, depreciate it, maintain it, overhaul it, and give it an eight-year life, the total cost is about $6 an hour." The ordinary automobile worker, by contrast, now costs an employer about $19 an hour. "General Motors says that it's going to have 14,000 robots by 1990," Engelberger points out. "If they could do it just one year sooner, it would mean $728 million per year in savings."
The savings, generally calculated on the basis of a two-shift day, are less dramatic but equally important in the case of a small business. The rebuilt Unimates used at Newton-New Haven cost $4 less an hour than human operators. If the robots are run for three shifts, the savings go even higher. Payback on a purchased unit ranges from one to two and a half years, but robots don't have to be purchased -- they can be rented or leased.
"For $1,000 a month," says Walt Weisel, vice-president of Prab Robots Inc., in Kalamazoo, Mich., "you can lease a robot for three years and it will work for you shift after shift."
There are other savings that, though less easily calculated, demand consideration. Among these are reduced downtime (the average robot is "up" 98% of the time), less scrap, a higher quality product, and improved safety. (A robot also uses less energy than conventional machining, and doesn't need warmth, clean air, or even light.) The only thing wrong with robots, as far as many people are concerned, is that they are an underutilized resource.
"There's little in manufacturing that can't be done by robots," says Weisel, noting that Prab has placed units with Eastman Kodak, GE, Westinghouse, IBM, Deere & Co., International Harvester, GTE, and a host of smaller companies. The quality of robots continues to improve and, as more manufacturers have appeared, their cost has dropped. Prab recently chopped $10,000 from the price of some of its models. Why then have such a relatively small number of companies, particularly smaller ones, made use of the technology?
Even Engelberger admits that robots operate within certain constraints. He notes that they work best at repetitive tasks and are only cost-effective if these jobs would ordinarily be performed by high-priced labor; they require an organized work space (older plants may find it uneconomical to revamp their layout); they need an inventory of replacement parts and a person who knows how to use them; there are some jobs they are not yet "smart" enough to do. But the sociological hurdles seems to have played a larger role.
