Presentation for Productivity improvement
-
Upload
sathyabalaraman -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of 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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
2/33
2
About Us
The worlds most affordable car
Passenger Vehicle Business Unit
Commercial Vehicle Business Unit
Jaguar Land Rover
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
5/33
5
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
2 Main Framing Line - 20 51
3 Main Framing Line - 30 46
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
17/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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.
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
18/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
19/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
20/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
23/33
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
24/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
25/33
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
26/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
27/33
Operation Problem Measure Taken Results
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
Before Kaizen After Kaizen
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
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
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
30/33
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
31/33
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
32/33
-
8/11/2019 Presentation for Productivity improvement
33/33