presentation for productivity improvement

8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement

1/33

Case Study: Weld shop productivity improvement through elimination

of Process, Parts quality & Equipment down time.

Ahmedabad Plant

IMTMA-Siemens Productivity Championship Awards Competition 2014

Alok Bhavik Sanjay Devesh Bishnu Anand Nihar Sohan

1


2/33

2

About Us

The worlds most affordable car

Passenger Vehicle Business Unit

Commercial Vehicle Business Unit

Jaguar Land Rover


3/33

Vision:A brand most admired by our customers, employees, business partners

and shareholders for the experience and value they enjoy from being with us

3

About Us


4/33

FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13

10.2812.22 13.13

15.6917.68 18.88

23.97

29.4531.25 32.41

FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

InLacs

Capacity Utilization

Indian Passenger Car Market

Share of Market (SOM)Passenger Cars

Source: SIAM, ICRAs estimates.

Passenger Vehicle Density (per 1000 persons)Passenger Vehicle Sales (India)

13

45

85

158

188

246

445

1200

463

500

India

China

Turkey

Brazil

Russia

South Korea

Japan

U.S.A

U.K.

Germany

Potential Growth in

Passenger Car

Segment in India

Sustainable

car market

Capacity

utilization has

been at the

core of each

OEMs strategy

for the Indian

market

A1 & A2

Segment:

Hatchback,

78%

A3 Segment:

Mid Size

Sedan, 18%

A4 Segment:

Executive

Sedan, 3%

A5 Segment:

Premium

Sedan, 1%

4


5/33

5


6/33

Optimizing

productivity of

existing facility

through LaborProductivity

Cobb-Douglas Equation: Product ion output

is determined by the amount of labor

involv ed and the amoun t of capita l invested

Leveraging Labor Productivity

Capacity Enhancement

Facility addition or

enhancement

through CapitalInvestment

Leverage Labor

Productivity to

optimize Capacity

Utilization

Tata Motors Limited, Sanand Capacity Map

Total Area of plant = 725 Acres

250,000 cars per year

6


7/33

Weld Shop Flowchart

7ASP

6ASP5

Roof

Logistic Shed

POWER SUB

STATIONOFFICE(MAZZNINE) LOGISTIC AREA

Robot

Training

ASP 4 ASP 3

Body Side Inner Body Side Outer

Underbody Frame

Underbody Respot

Front Door LH Rear Door LH Tailgate

HoodFront Door RH Rear Door RH


8/33

Factors of under utilized capacity

Factor 1: Cycle Time > Takt Time

Pitch

Factor 2: Occurrence of Losses

Pitch

Resulting

Loss of JobsPer Hour

(JPH)

8

PitchPitchPitch Pitc

Cycle End Cycle Start Cycle End Cycle Start

SafetyQuality

CheckCTQ

Element

Location

Work while

WalkingWalk only

Return toStart

Time ForElement

on conveyor

HomePosition

PitchMarking

Start Point End Point

Q #

znano

z nano

z z z znano nano nano nano

Exceeds

the Pitch

BreakDown


9/339

Weld Shop Operation and Methodology Followed

Theme Selection based on bottlenecks

Grasping Current Situation and Target Setting

Make an activity plan

Analysing the factors

Developing and implementing Kaizen

Confirming effectiveness

Sustenance and Establishing controls

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Methodology Followed

7 Steps Problem Solving Approach


10/33

Grasping Current Situation and Set Target

20.9

35.3 37.4

62 62 62

May'12 Jun'12 Jul'12

Existing JPH Trend Actual Target

Better

Tools & Techniques to be used to understand current situation?

Time Study

Standard

Work

Combination

Sheet

Spaghetti

ChartLoad Chart Losses Pareto

Better

10

3753

Before (Jul'12) After (Jan'13)

Target : JPH 85%Capacity

For Factor 1 For Factor 2

100%

Capacity

60 %Capacity


11/33

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

46 49 48 48 45 49 49 47

48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48

51 49 51 52 53 50 54 51

99 97 99 100 101 98 102 99

46 49 45 45 47 47 46 45

145 146 144 145 148 145 148 144

STEP OPERATION ELEMENTObserved readings (In Seconds) Task

Time

(Seconds

1 Main Framing Line - 10 48



Ma nua l Au to Wa lk Wait

1 2

2 2

3 14

4 48

Step

No

Work Content DescriptionObserved Time Work Content Graph : (Scale : 1 Div = 1 sec)

5 10 15 20 25 30

Take out the key before reach the body

at 130 and wait for reach the body at

130

35 40 45 50 65 70 75

Check station=140 in home position in

home position in HMI Panel

Insert key in panel select body take in

55 60

Waiting for droplift returning at home

position

164Stations

303Operators

134

Robots

106Parts

11

Time

Study

SWCS

Spaghetti

Time Study, SWCS and Spaghetti Chart


12/33

586169

63

83

62

7

4

5961

54

5456

54 5

656 5

857

54

61

BC20

BC40

BC60

BC140

BC160

BC230

BC260

BSI-LH

BSO-LH

MR-10

MR-30

MR-50

MR-70

MR-90

MR-110

MF-10

MF-30

MF-50

MF-70

MF-90

MF-110

MF-130

MF-150

MF-170

MF-190

UBF-10

UBF-30

UBF-50

UBF-70

UBF-90

UBF-110_

1

UBC-20

UBC-40

UBC-60

UBC-80

UBC-100

UBC-120

UBC-140

UBC-160

UBC-180

FE-010

C

ycleTime(seconds)

Station Number

Station Wise Load Chart:

Takt Time-53 Sec to meet additional

requirements like Spare parts production

9 Stations > 58 Sec

What : Major Bottleneck Stations

Where : BIW Shop

When : In All shifts

Who : Team Members of those stations

Why : Cycle time > Takt time of next customer

shop demand

How much: 9 Stations

Problem Definition: Imbalanced Load Chart

9

0

Before (Jul'12) Target (Oct'12)12

Takt Time-58 Sec to meet other shops demand

Target: Major Bottleneck Stations

1 243

5 76

8 9

Load Chart, Problem Definition and Target Setting

Takt time58 Sec

Takt time

53 Sec

Requirement


13/3313

Activity Responsibility Status Aug12 Sep12 Oct12 Nov12 Dec12

1Grasping Current Situation (All Lines) :

Preparation Process at a Glance

Sanjay, AlokPlan

Actual

2 Time study & preparation of load chart Devesh, NiharPlan

Actual

3 Identify bottleneck areas / processes SohanPlan

Actual

4Understanding last three month breakdown &

other losses issueBhavik

Plan

Actual

5a) Analysis of major factors

b) Identification of MURI & MUDA from SWCSTeam

Plan

Actual

6 Root cause analysis (C&E Diagram & Why WhyAnalysis)

Team PlanActual

7 Kaizen proposals identification TeamPlan

Actual

8 Kaizen implementation TeamPlan

Actual

9 Result Validation & Tracking Sanjay, AlokPlan

Actual

10 After time study & load chart preparation Devesh, BishnuPlan

Actual

11 Updation of Process at a Glance if any Devesh, BhavikPlan

Actual

12Standardization of results & Sustenance of

Kaizen implementedAnand, Sohan

Plan

Actual

13 Horizontal Deployment Sanjay, AlokPlan

Actual

14 Final presentation to Sr. Management Sanjay, AlokPlan

Actual

Activity Plan


14/3314

Analyzing the Factors

6169 63

83

6274

59 61 61

BC 30 BC 40 BC 50 BC 60 BC 150 BC 190-220 BSO-LH BSO-RH UBC - 170CycleTime(seconds)

Station Number

Load Chart of Bottleneck Stations:Takt Time: 58 Sec

Robotics

Operation: 03

Manual

Operation: 06

CorrectionOver Production

Inventory

Movement

Processing WaitingTransportation

Defects

Overburden

Find out Muri & Muda


15/33

Muri (Overburden) & Muda (Wastage) identification

and analysis

Over Burden

High cycle time for thumb sealant

application

No. of spot more in IR-25 (12 no.)

No. of spot more.(14 no.) in IR-11

Over

Production

Inventory

Motion

Takes 2 step extra to complete the

work.

Waiting

Body take in take out

T/C fault

Body setting fault

Transportation

Defect/

Rework

Door gap not OK

Sash Profile not OK

Sash joint Crack

Over

Processing

Hammering in backlight cross

member in each cycle

Hammering in front floor in each

cycle to remove the gape

Excess work load on

operators

Operators Work load

was not balanced

Analyzed work contents

in details and rebalanced

the line

Operator bending in

each cycle for

sealant application

Platform height wasmore

Platform height

reduced

All Work contents

were not well

analyzed

High Cycle time for Thumb sealant application

Variation in No. of

sealant application

points

Operator fatigue

Kaizen Kaizen

15


16/33

Operation Problem Measure Taken Results

Thumb sealant

application on Body

Joints

8 points per person

were applied & after

half days of working,

cycle time was

increasing due to

Ergonomic Issues.

Operation distributed

zone-wise and platform

modified as per height of

application to avoid

bending.

- Operators bending

eliminated

- 10 points per operator

achieved.

Before Kaizen After Kaizen

Name of employee: Mukesh, Sanjay Date: 07/09/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: BC-30, 40

Kaizen 1Elimination of Operator Fatigue

16Tools Used for root cause analysis: Seven Ways and Why-Why


17/33


Door Assembly by

Spot Welding

Door Gap

Inconsistency

Intermediate quality check

at D-Sash Assembly Level

by incorporating D-Sash

Checking Fixture

Confirmation of Gap &

consistency at D-Level and

the same is reflected at

Door Level.


Name of employee: Sanjay, Bishnu, Anand Date: 10.09.12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: BC-50, 60, 150

Kaizen 2Elimination of Door Gap Inconsistency

17Tools Used for root cause analysis: Cause & Effect diagram and Why-Why


18/33


Body Side Outer

Assembly

Robot is waiting until

turn table is rotated

and locked.

Bottleneck robot is now

pre-started while turn

table is rotating

Cycle Time improved by 2

sec per cycle


Name of employee: Nihar, Devesh Date: 10/10/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: BSO LH/RH

Kaizen 3Elimination of BSO robot waiting time

18Tools Used for root cause analysis: Seven Ways and Why-Why


19/33


Material Handling &

Spot Welding

Dent & Ding due to

Gun Handling & Parts

Loading

Manual spots are

eliminated on 18 points by

implementing 3 Poka Yoke

and 1 individual Kaizen

1. Cycle Time improved

from 74 sec to 53 sec at

Station Nos. BC 190220

2. Body Touch point

reduced w.r.t Metal Finish


Name of employee: Sohan, Bishnu, Anand Date: 14/10/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: BC 190-220

Kaizen 4Poka Yoke implementation in BC Line

19

Inner Panel and Bottom

hinge not matching

Dent & Ding due to Gun

hitting with panel

Dent between Sash &

Inner PanelResting Myler Surface

contact area found less

At

Caparo

At

Vendor

Vendor

Poka Yoke provided for

new Spot Location

Spot Locator provided for

Gun

Copper Plate provided to

ensure no damage at Sash Area

New Myler provided with

more surface contact

MR

At

Caparo

At

Vendor

Vendor

MR

Tools Used for root cause analysis: Cause & Effect diagram, Seven Ways & and Why-Why 19


20/33


Spot welding Spot weld burrs and

off location spot

welding.

Gun guide provided at 6

different location / Weld

parameter and gun

alignment fine tune at 8

different spot gun.

1. Cycle Time improved

from 61 sec to 53 sec at

UBC 170

2. Quality Rate improved


Name of employee: Bishnu, Nihar Date: 18/10/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: In-house UB Line

Kaizen 5Cycle time Reduction at UBC 170

20

Spot Burrs

Spot Burrs

Spot Burrs

Off location Spot

No Spot Burrs

No Spot burrs

No Spot burrs

Gun guide for fix location Spot

1 2

3 4

1 2

3 4

20Tools Used for root cause analysis: Why-Why


21/33

Results Achieved: Factor 1

9

0 0

Before (Jul'12) After (Oct'12) Target (Oct'12)

Major Bottleneck Stations

Target Partially achieved

6169 63

83

6274

59 61 6155 54 57 58 53 53 54 58 58

BC 30 BC 40 BC 50 BC 60 BC 150 BC 190-220 BSO-LH BSO-RH UBC - 170CycleTime(sec

onds)

Station Number

Load Chart: After

21


22/33

Factor 2: Losses Pareto and Target Setting

What : Major losses during production

Where : BIW Shop

When : In All shifts

Who : Respective Functions

Why : Major contribution in OEE

How much: 42%

Problem Definition: Losses during manufacturing

42%

21%

Before (Oct'12) Target (Jan'13)

Target: Losses %age

9.56.2 5.1 4.2 3.5 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.5 1.5 0.4

2337

49 5968

7683 89

95 99 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

10

20

30

40

StandardLoss

Body TakeIn Take Out

BodySetting

fault

T/C Fault PartQualityIssue

LimitSwitchfault

D Net Fault EquipmentB/D

Stationwork delay

InternalBuffer

Full/Empty

Partshortage

Cumulative%

%LoadingTime

Losses

Losses Pareto: May to Oct12

22


23/33


24/33


Body setting fault at

UBC#30

Part positioning

sensor not sensing

due to part variation

Limit switch provided

instead of part positioning

sensor

Eliminated loss due to

body setting fault at

UBC#30


Name of employee: Nihar, Devesh Date: 30/10/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: UBF

24

Kaizen 6Modification of Part Positioning sensor

Tools Used for root cause analysis: Cause & Effect Diagram, Seven Ways and Why-Why


25/33


26/33


Robotic Tip Dressing Different robots were

going for tip dressing

at different time

according to their

individual tip dressing

counter.

All the tip dressing

counters made common

for a single line so that

every robot will go

simultaneously for tip

dressing.

Cycle time reduction


Name of employee: Sanjay, Nihar Date: 12/12/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: All Main Line

Kaizen 8Simultaneous Tip Dressing

26Tools Used for root cause analysis: Why-Why


27/33


Main Respot (MR)

Body take in take out

Body take-in take-

out takes more than

3 min per hour

during production.

Programme modified for

Body take in take out.

Single key selection for

take-in and take-out

Approximate 1.5 min for

take in & no time for take

out


Name of employee: Prem, Alok Date: 03/12/12 Shop: BIW Line/Station: MR-140

Kaizen 9Body Take In Take Out

27Tools Used for root cause analysis: Cause & Effect Diagram and Why-Why


28/33

Result

3.1 2.9 2.5 1.9 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.220

39 5168 77 85 90 92

99 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

10

20

3040

InternalBuffer

Full/Empty

EquipmentB/D

Partshortage

Part QualityIssue

Station workdelay

D Net Fault MES B/D StandardLoss

T/C Fault Body Setingfault

Cumulative%

%LoadingTimeLosses Pareto After(Jan'13)

42%

20% 21%

Before (Jun'12) After (Jan'13) Target (Jan'13)

Losses %age

9.5 6.2 5.1 4.2 3.5 3.4 3.1 2.7 2.5 1.5 0.423 37

4959 68

76 8389 95

99 100

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

10

20

30

40

StandardLoss

Body TakeIn Take Out

BodySetting

fault

T/C Fault PartQualityIssue

LimitSwitchfault

D Net Fault EquipmentB/D

Stationwork delay

InternalBuffer

Full/Empty

Partshortage

Cumulative%

%Loading

Time

Losses

Losses Pareto Before: May to Oct12

28


29/33

37

4551 52 53

55

Before

(Jul'12)

Sep'12 Oct'12 Nov'12 Dec'12 Jan'13

Overall Results

JPH Trend

56 56 57

Feb'13 Mar'13 Apr'13

Kaizen1 & 2

Kaizen

3,4,5,6

Kaizen

7

Kaizen

8 & 9

Target

53

Sustenance Trend

VCC (KWH/Car) First Shot OK (%)Cost Benefits:Rs. 32 LPA

OEE (%)

29

90~92% Capacity Utilization


30/33


31/33


32/33


33/33

presentation for productivity improvement

Documents