Car manufacturing plant layout
We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
WATCH RELATED VIDEO: General Motors Truck Production at the Fort Wayne Assembly PlantContent:
- Which of the following type of layout is suitable for automobile manufacturing concern?
- Lean Plant Layout
- Plan and design efficient manufacturing facilities with simulation
- The Difference Between Process and Product Layout Manufacturing
- Forging a future in Factory 56
- Toyota Production System
- Will Flexible-Cell Manufacturing Revolutionize Carmaking?
- Factory Layout, Line Design & Optimization
- Interactive map – Automobile assembly and production plants in Europe
Which of the following type of layout is suitable for automobile manufacturing concern?
Related Expertise: Automotive Industry , Industry 4. More than a century after the conveyor belt revolutionized manufacturing by ushering in mass production, it remains the dominant feature on most shop floors, especially in the automotive industry. This reality is leading automakers to consider replacing conventional fixed conveyor belts with flexible-cell manufacturing—an assembly setup in which automated guided vehicles AGVs transport car bodies individually only to those assembly workstations that are relevant to the specific model.
BCG and simulation specialist Ipolog recently conducted a flexible-cell manufacturing simulation, the results of which—described below—are the first results of such a simulation ever to be made public and show the enormous potential benefits for the automobile industry.
The history of industrial production can be told in terms of alternately increasing and decreasing complexity—that is, the number of product variants and the volume per variant.
As manufacturing evolved from the production of a small number of customized, mostly handmade products to the mass production of large volumes of standardized products, complexity decreased. And, beginning in the s, further strides in automation allowed manufacturers to satisfy customer demand with even higher volumes. But the constantly rising demand for customized products introduced more complexity to production, and today complexity continues to grow.
See Exhibit 1. That is especially true among automakers. Some large manufacturers, such as BMW and GM, produce more than 30 vehicle models, each of which can be configured in many different ways. According to Audi, there are theoretically 1. Four global trends will continue to intensify the demand for highly customized, low-volume vehicle models, creating more and more production complexity:. In a traditional conveyor belt setup, a key metric is takt time.
The average time between the start of production of one unit and the start of production of the next unit, with these production starts matching the rate of customer demand. In order for the conveyor belt to move efficiently, the process times per workstation should match the general takt time with a high degree of accuracy. But increasing complexity makes it difficult to balance process times across all workstations, because some workers will finish their assigned tasks before the conveyor belt moves on.
This imbalance in worker utilization results in unproductive time on the belt. See Exhibit 2. Complexity also means that workers must contend with constantly changing tasks while trying to maintain a high level of quality and productivity.
Moreover, the interconnectedness of conveyor belts limits opportunities to adjust the production sequence in order to reduce takt time losses. Complexity affects all areas of the automotive value chain, especially final assembly and logistics:. Flexible-cell manufacturing has intrigued manufacturers for decades. Now, recent advances in Industry 4. In flexible-cell manufacturing, workstations are not interconnected, as they are with traditional conveyor belts.
Instead, work takes place at modular stations, called flexible manufacturing cells FMCs. Rather than following a standardized direction of movement in a predefined takt, each product passes only through those workstations that are relevant to its specifications and is assembled according to an optimized process sequence. Industry 4. See Exhibit 3. On a conveyor belt, high product variance makes it difficult to execute various assembly tasks within the given takt time, leading to takt time losses.
With flexible-cell manufacturing, each FMC has an individual process time for each car passing through, so those losses are completely eliminated. However, each worker has to follow standard times for all processes in order to maintain productivity levels similar to those of conveyor belts. Because the tasks of each FMC are different and changeable, manufacturers can adapt a cell to take on more or fewer assembly tasks. And processes such as screwing can be combined in one cell.
These options help ensure that the car is always waiting for workers to become available rather than forcing workers to wait for the car to arrive, which is the case with conveyor belt assembly. Thus, utilization rates are higher. However, our simulation showed that the total number of FMCs necessary to produce a given model is slightly higher than the number of conveyor belt stations. While the latter usually have two workers each, most cells are designed with just one worker, since it is hard to fully utilize two workers at the same time at the same station.
Flexible-cell manufacturing has other positive effects on productivity. Since manufacturing cells are not interconnected, a single cell stoppage will not necessarily cause a full production breakdown, as it would in a conventional assembly line.
FMCs are designed to be flexible and capable of conducting more than one task, so in the event of a breakdown at one cell, an AGV carrying a car body can autonomously change direction and move to another cell. At worst, the loss of one cell will cause the output of the line to be slightly reduced. The same advantage applies to overhauling or rearranging single cells. Manufacturers can easily expand or contract production lines in response to changed requirements or demand without having to shut down the assembly line for reconstruction.
Instead, they simply add or remove FMCs as needed. For example, if one cell proves to be a bottleneck, it can quickly be duplicated to smooth production. The Industry 4. The shop floor gets smarter, which enables just-in-time deliveries. AGVs automatically unload incoming trucks and move parts to a commissioning area.
Smart mobile robots identify incoming goods by information tags and kit them for assembly at individual cells and for specific products. AGVs then transport the products on flexible delivery paths. A centralized control system tracks parts locations and reacts to disturbances immediately—redirecting parts to a new FMC if another FMC malfunctions, for example.
See Exhibit 4. The results of our simulation were dramatic and showed the enormous potential of flexible-cell manufacturing to improve automobile assembly.
We simulated and analyzed various production volumes using real data from the automotive industry. The results reflect a yearly volume of , cars—the center point between high-volume car manufacturing of popular, mass-market brands and lower-volume manufacturing of luxury cars.
We compared key metrics, including takt time losses and work in progress WIP. We kept all processes similar, with the degree of automation exactly the same. We also assumed that work would be 7. These differences, and the limited options for line balancing, meant that some workers were fairly unproductive because of waiting and walking between stations. The flexible-cell manufacturing setup had 84 cells, most assumed to have one worker each. The cells did not have a specific takt time.
Instead, process times could vary between 2 and 40 minutes according to the process and car model assembled in the cell. There were two types of cells: generalist cells combined general assembly tasks that required common tools such as screw drivers and tools for clipping and fitting ; specialized cells were equipped with highly specialized tools and equipment enabling complex processes like cockpit assembly. Specialized cells were designed to take over general assembly tasks for maximum utilization.
To ensure flexibility, only commodity parts were staged at the cells; product-specific parts were kitted and delivered to the appropriate assembly cells. The simulation integrated buffers—similar to waiting areas—between cells, so when a car exited one cell it could idle until workers in the next cell were ready. Thus, cars waited for workers instead of workers waiting for cars, which is what causes takt time losses on traditional conveyor belts.
As noted, there were 84 cells in the flexible-manufacturing simulation, 9 more stations than on the conveyor belt line. But because most cells had just one worker instead of two, the flexible-cell setup operated with only 97 workers, compared with in the line model.
Because cars passed only through those cells that were relevant to their specifications, less customized cars were generally completed faster than highly customized cars. With conventional conveyor belt assembly, in contrast, the first car in is always the first car out. Overall, however, the fact that cars in the flexible-cell manufacturing setup waited for workers caused throughput time to be significantly higher, at around six times that of the conventional assembly line.
Thus, a key metric, WIP, actually rose. Automakers therefore need to consider the tradeoff between WIP and greater worker efficiency. The bottom line is that the simulation showed that flexible-cell manufacturing is promising, although results will vary for different product lines and volumes. When there is very little product variance, flexible-cell assembly makes financial sense only if volumes are extremely low; just a slight increase in production numbers makes conveyor belt assembly a better option.
Conversely, when there is very high product variance, flexible-cell assembly almost always makes financial sense; only when production levels are extraordinarily high is conveyor belt assembly preferable. For many production lines, traditional conveyor belts have reached the limits of their capabilities, resulting in major efficiency and takt time losses. These challenges will intensify in the coming years as production complexity grows.
The costs of installing a new conveyor belt assembly line and a new flexible-cell setup are quite similar, so companies considering a new production line or greenfield project should give flexible-cell manufacturing a very close look.
The worker utilization rate and the WIP will play a crucial role in those assessments. Explore Ipolog Read more. Complexity Is Steadily Increasing The history of industrial production can be told in terms of alternately increasing and decreasing complexity—that is, the number of product variants and the volume per variant. Four global trends will continue to intensify the demand for highly customized, low-volume vehicle models, creating more and more production complexity: Fast Innovation Cycles.
The pace of innovation will accelerate over the next decade, and manufacturers will need to rapidly introduce new vehicle models into existing plants and production lines. Customers will want to configure their vehicles, track production in real time, and make last-minute changes. To accommodate these specifications, manufacturers will need to produce a significantly higher number of vehicle variations in a more flexible environment.
Automated Driving. The interior of these vehicles will be fully customizable, allowing for different seating configurations and entertainment systems.
Because the transition to electromobility will occur slowly, manufacturers will face the complexity of producing models with internal-combustion, electric, and hybrid engines for many years. Complexity affects all areas of the automotive value chain, especially final assembly and logistics: Final Assembly. High levels of customization mean that every vehicle must pass through every workstation on a conveyor belt, including stations where assembly of parts not required by a particular vehicle takes place.
For example, for models that come either with or without electrically adjustable car seats, the production line will have an assembly station for this optional equipment, which every vehicle must pass through. Many product variations require a high degree of coordination with suppliers, as well as more space and advanced capabilities for delivering parts to the production line.
As space restrictions make staging materials at the line more difficult, kitting —the process of preselecting and picking all the parts required to assemble an individual product—will become more important.
Moreover, the need to stage materials ergonomically for workers can involve costly and complex logistics. Production Control. Advances in IT systems and digital logistics enable real-time control of highly complex processes that occur on different shop floors in a single factory.
Lean Plant Layout
Best website for Mechanical Engineers with complete guidance about courses, universities, careers, education, projects and companies. Post a Comment. Facebook LinkedIn Youtube Twitter. Home Formulas. Header Background Header Background Image.
At the Mizushima Plant, we manufacture light motor vehicles and cars with assembly plant and a casting plant, where the entire car manufacturing process.
Plan and design efficient manufacturing facilities with simulation
This year, we proudly saw our nine-millionth vehicle rolling off the line in Alliston, Ontario. We cut the ribbon on our first Canadian plant inAt Plant 1 and 2, a new vehicle comes off the production line almost every minute. How many people does it take to build a Honda. More than 4, manufacturing associates call Honda home. About , Honda Civic vehicles are built in Canada each year. We build vehicles for Canadians right here in Canada. Plant 1 has been the home of the Honda Civic sinceCanadians have a special relationship with the Civic — how else could it be the top-selling car in the country for 23 straight years?
The Difference Between Process and Product Layout Manufacturing
Design Systems, Inc. DSI assisted a motor vehicle manufacturer with decisions on the production of a new vehicle in their new facility. In addition to the review, recommendations of defining the building requirements for the process were requested. DSI proposed an alternate layout to enhance the process and material flow through the facility on top of providing recommendations the current plan for the new facility.
For the first time Volvo Cars operates a complete manufacturing plant outside Europe. The plant is located in the Chengdu Economic and Technological Development Zone, south east of the Chengdu city centre, on a plot area of , square meters.
Forging a future in Factory 56
Toyota Production System
Kiichiro Toyoda expanded automobile manufacturing capacity in stages, as had been done for automatic looms. The process started with the construction of a prototype plant, followed by the production of prototypes of the Model A1 passenger car and the Model G1 truck, construction of an automobile assembly plant, and the expansion of passenger car and truck production. In order to expand automobile production facilities, Toyoda Automatic Loom Works increased its capital from three million yen to six million on July 9, , with Toyoda Boshoku Sho underwriting the entire increase. Toyoda Automatic Loom Works began expanding production facilities when the quality of the Model G1 truck stabilized and production targets of five units per day and units per month were set in JanuaryThe scale of production went beyond that of a prototype plant, and this marked the first step towards full-scale mass production. The automobile assembly plant was constructed in Kariya-cho, located about one kilometer to the northeast of Toyoda Automatic Loom Works. The plant included a body assembly shop, body painting shop, frame assembly shop, chassis and body assembly shop, plating shop, assembly part storage site, service part warehouse, and other facilities.
There are five basic types of layouts for manufacturing facilities ;process, cement factories, and automotive assembly plants, Auto manufacturing.
Will Flexible-Cell Manufacturing Revolutionize Carmaking?
Although Albert Kahn has garnered much deserved attention for his designs of Ford Motor Company and other factory buildings, it is important to recognize that he designed envelopes around an assembly layout that took precedence over the building and that Ford officials were in charge of factory layout and design. The various tasks-plant layout, architectural design, as well as site selection and construction supervision-were the responsibility of an organization called Power and Construction. In the s and the period during which the Richmond plant was designed and built, B. Brown was its head.
Factory Layout, Line Design & OptimizationRELATED VIDEO: Toyota Production in Japan
Over the next 30 years, the plant and its iconic flagship vehicle, the Accord, would lay the foundation for an unprecedented success story. The 2. This unique production mix makes East Liberty one of our most versatile operations. The plant annually produces more than 1 million four-cylinder, V-6 and turbo engines for Honda auto plants throughout North America. Combining human craftsmanship and technological innovation, the PMC utilizes new approaches to vehicle construction, paint, assembly and quality confirmation to deliver on the Acura brand DNA of Precision Crafted Performance. The Marysville team continues to redefine sophistication and efficiency with the Honda Accord.
The assembly line is one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century.
Interactive map – Automobile assembly and production plants in Europe
The generation of layout alternatives is a critical step in the facilities planning process since the layout selected will serve to establish the physical relationships between activities. This paper is concerned with the evaluation and analysis of the existing facility layout in Jordan Light Vehicle Manufacturing Company and investigating the possibility for improvement to cope with increased demand and better utilization of available resources. Five alternatives were proposed using systematic layout planning for a possible arrangement of different facilities within the plant. The proposed alternatives were compared and ranked using the analytic hierarchy process based on the total traveling distance of materials between production facilities, total space usage, and activity relationships. The alternatives were ranked using three criteria, and the overall consistency was determined 6.
Manage asset information and related documents throughout the lifecycle. Improve and optimize factory layout and design throughout the asset lifecycle. Plant design and analysis that improves design quality, data integrity, and handover into plant operations.