logo
Cases
Home > Cases > Dongguan Qiaosen Machinery Co., Ltd. Latest company case about AI On‑line Visual Inspection Project Implementation for Automotive Chassis Stamping Workpieces
EVENTS
CONTACT US
86-0769-26626853
Contact Now

AI On‑line Visual Inspection Project Implementation for Automotive Chassis Stamping Workpieces

2026-08-20

latest company news about AI On‑line Visual Inspection Project Implementation for Automotive Chassis Stamping Workpieces
Case Study: AI On‑line Visual Inspection Project Implementation for Automotive Chassis Stamping Workpieces

Case Cycle: September 2025‑August 2026

Enterprise Background: The enterprise is a tier‑2 auto‑chassis stamping supplier in South China, operating 9 automatic stamping lines, mainly producing chassis bracket and reinforcing plate components. Before transformation, full finished‑products relied on manual offline inspection. Frequent staff turnover and night‑shift fatigue caused occasional defect outflow, leading to customer returns and re‑inspection costs. The enterprise decided to implement on‑line AI visual retrofitting for two core high‑volume stamping lines.

Case Before‑Transformation Real Baseline Data (Sep 2025)
  • Finished‑product defect outflow rate: 5.12%
  • Average daily manual QC staff for two lines: 8 persons
  • Monthly customer return quantity: 216 pcs
  • Monthly cost for re‑inspection & rework: USD 4,120
  • Overtime‑work proportion of QC team: 32%
  • Defect missing mainly: tiny surface indentation, micro‑crack at bending corner
Core Technical Transformation Measures
  1. Deploy multi‑angle high‑resolution industrial cameras and customized diffuse light‑source beside press discharge port, eliminate reflection interference on metal stamping surfaces;
  2. Collect more than 12 000 real‑defect image samples from production site to train AI segmentation model, continuously add new‑found defect samples for iterative optimization;
  3. Link visual system with conveyor‑line rejecting actuator; once defects are identified, trigger automatic rejection to isolate non‑conforming parts;
  4. Realize data interface between vision platform and factory MES, record defect type, quantity and time‑stamp for every inspected workpiece;
  5. Optimize SOP: re‑position manual inspectors from full‑piece screening to spot‑checking and model‑maintenance work, reduce repetitive visual labour.
11‑Month Real‑Operation Data Comparison Before & After Transformation
Quality & Operation Indicators Before AI Visual Upgrade After On‑line AI Inspection Deployment Actual Comprehensive Benefit
Finished‑product defect outflow rate 5.12% 0.37% -92.8% outflow reduction
Required QC manpower for two production lines 8 persons 3 persons ‑62.5% QC‑labour reduction
Monthly customer return quantity 216 pcs 17 pcs -92.1% return volume drop
Monthly re‑inspection & rework cost USD 4,120 USD 680 -83.5% rework‑cost saving
QC‑team overtime‑work ratio 32% 7% Greatly ease labour pressure
Monthly valid defect‑data statistics available Manual paper record, incomplete Full digital traceable record Support equipment‑quality correlation analysis
Case Professional Q&A Analysis
Q1: After introducing AI vision, can manual inspection be completely cancelled?
A1: In this real case, manual full‑inspection was cancelled, but spot‑check and model maintenance still need operators. New‑type unknown defects which are not included in training sample library may occasionally escape. Manual spot‑check serves as second safety barrier and provides new‑defect samples for continuous model improvement. Complete removal of human participation is not recommended in current mass‑production practice.
Q2: What major difficulties did the project meet in commissioning phase?
A2: Metal surface reflection brought unstable imaging at the beginning. After repeated light‑source angle adjustment and adding diffuse‑reflective cover, image stability was greatly improved. In early running period, false‑alarm rate was relatively high; the engineering team continuously supplemented on‑site samples and optimized algorithm threshold for 6 weeks before reaching stable production‑ready accuracy.
Q3: What is the payback period of this AI visual inspection investment?
A3: Total project investment for two lines is USD 34 800. Annual saving on labour, rework and return‑loss reaches USD 51 600. The calculated actual investment payback period is 8.1 months.
Case Conclusion & Outlook

This real‑production case proves that AI on‑line visual inspection can effectively solve long‑standing pain points of manual‑inspection fatigue and unstable judgement in stamping workshops. It significantly reduces defect outflow, cuts re‑work cost and lowers dependence on large‑scale QC labour. Meanwhile enterprises must be aware that visual system needs continuous sample iteration and on‑site debugging rather than one‑time installation. In next phase, the factory will push defect‑data linkage to press equipment, realizing early warning of mold wear according to rising crack‑defect frequency and moving toward predictive quality control.

Send your inquiry directly to us

Privacy Policy China Good Quality Press Punching Machine Supplier. Copyright © 2026 Dongguan Qiaosen Machinery Co., Ltd. . All Rights Reserved.