Stefan Enjem – ISEJoe Van Hofwegen - ISE

Young Lee - ISEJoe Pecht - ME

Walter Freitag - MEJason Zion - MELuis Garcia - EE

Introduction

ProductGoals

Increase QPH 4 to 6% 2 year paybackSafety and Quality

Production Line Layout

EOLT

90

Continuous Counterclockwise LoopVariable Staffing

Areas of Improvement

DowntimeEnd of Line TesterLeak and Snap Ring Test

Process TimePCV Assembly Station

ProceduresProduction BoardPreventive Maintenance

Work FlowPallet Flow Control and Failure ResponseAlternative Configurations

Downtime

Micro-stop - Downtime of less than 5 minutes

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

EOLT Station210

Station140

Station230

Station200

Station170

# of

Mic

ro-s

tops

/mon

th

Downtime: End of Line Tester

Purpose Final Station before

leaving clean room Fully tests all motors

Problems Downtime Micro-stops

Causes Existing Technology

Assembly Cell Design

Downtime: End of Line Tester

Downtime: End of Line Tester

Solution Original

system specs

Modifications required

Design New

connector

Finite Element Analysis

Benefits Reduced downtime Decreased operator

interaction Increased potential

motor output by 7%

Downtime: End of Line Tester

Rubber Connectors

Leak TestProblemSolutionPM

Downtime: Leak and Snap Ring Test (210)

Optical Test Problem

False Failures / Glare Solution

Mirror Assembly [Nerlite Doal-50-led]

Station Improvement Benefits

1% increase in total motor output

Downtime: Leak and Snap Ring Test (210)

Process Improvement

Histogram shows major sources of backup

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

90

110A

120A 13

0

140B

150B

170A 18

0

200A 20

5

230A

EO

L

Station

Pro

ce

ss

Tim

e (

se

co

nd

s)

Direction of Assembly

Manual

Automated

Process Time: PCV Assembly (90)

Problems: Process time, bin layout

Solution: Move part bins, Modify Program

Benefits: Reduction in assembly time (5 seconds), Ergonomically designed set up

Before After

Procedures: Preventive Maintenance

Creation of a Preventive Maintenance Schedule

List of tasks to be completed on a weekly basis Complete inspection of the line

Benefits Increased reliability of stations Reduction in catastrophic failures Less disruption of production time Similar PM programs show a 4%

improvement

Production Board

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

630-730 730-830 830-930 930-1030 1030-1130 12-100 100-200 200-300

Time

Par

ts Day 1

Day 2

Procedures: Visual Production Board Performance Assessment Communications Hub Date Score QPH Motor Count

4/29/2004 2/8 37.75 3025/1/2004 4/8 38.75 310

Work Flow Improvements

Pallet Flow Control Inhibiting Release Logic

Failure Response Time Minimizes blocking Increases motor output

EOLT

90

Arena Simulation

Arena Model created to analyze system Mimics the behavior of the real system Interface for user created Analyze potential system changes

Arena Model: Background

Arena Model: Set-up

Arena Model

Work Flow: Alternatives

Arena Model used to analyze system Optimal configurations

and results

Based on improvements made to the line: Optimal Pallets is 47

Operators Speed Parts Motors

1 1 15 210

2 1 25 381

3 1 30 530

4 1 10 538

5 1.1 -- 558

  Station Improvements Optimal System

% Improvement 8.0% 9.5%

Cost Analysis of Total System

Improvement Cost OT Saved (After 2yrs)

EOLT $ 12,000 $ 12,000

Preventive Maintenance (4% output increase) $ 50,000 $ 144,000

Station 210 $ 1,500 $ 1,500

Procedures $ 100  

Station 90 $ 7,000 Agreed to w/o Payback

Total $ 70,600 $ 157,500

• Estimated Cost Analysis

• Net Present ValueInterest Rate 10%Total Cost (70,600)$ Return After 1 Year 79,000$ Return After 2 Years 158,000$ Net Present Value 60,000$

Conclusions

All Deliverables were met Standardized Procedures Preventative Maintenance Set Production Guidelines Fix Problematic Stations End of Line Tester Efficiency Identify improved system configurations

9.5% improvement and met 2-year payback.

Acknowledgements

Thank you:Mentor, Dr. Michael Kuhl Coordinator, Dr. Paul Stiebitz The entire Valeo Staff including Richard

Guerin, Paul Vandeursen, James Ely.

Arena Model

Data Slides

PM Schedule

Industrial Standards

Clean RoomCertified Class 100,000

QS 9000Quality standard TS 16949

Valeo Union Standard423 minutes per shift

Ergonomic Guidelines

Bill of Materials Bill of Materials*

Station Part # Quantity Unit Description Production

Board 518936 1 Each 3' by 5" Dry erase Board

1 Each 1foot of stock aluminum 2 Each Machined steel block to hold marker cap Station 160 3 Each Bracket Hardware to support cap holder

INRD-50 1 Each DVT Doal light source, 50mm

INOO-S12 1 Each DVT Doal light source Power Supply Station 210 1 Each Rubber connector

- - Required Mounting Hardware

EOLT FO-501.500 4 Each Bimba Pnuematic Air Cylinder 2 Each Custom Motor Mounting Plate 2 Each Custom 1/2" Motor Mounting Bracket 2 Each Custom 3/4" Motor Mounting Bracket 2 Each Custom 1" Motor Mounting Bracket

MM-C

6498K266 6 Each Spring-Return Pivot-Mount Cylinder --------- 2 Each Press Fit Connector Assembly 2 Each Custom Connector Base Plate 2 Each Custom Connector Plate - - Required Hydraulic/Pneumatic Plumbing - - Require Mounting Hardware

5 Each EDI Digital counters Timer

5 Each EDI Mounting brackets for timer * Tentative Bill of Material Station 90: Cavalry Automation Systems has been awarded the contract to implement The improvements being made to this system at a cost of $6,910.

Motor Count

Motor Count Log

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1/30

/2004

2/6/

2004

2/13

/2004

2/20

/2004

2/27

/2004

3/5/

2004

3/12

/2004

3/19

/2004

3/26

/2004

4/2/

2004

4/9/

2004

4/16

/2004

4/23

/2004

4/30

/2004

Date

Mo

tor

Co

un

t

Counter Data

Motor Count Log

Date Shift Motors

Out

Motors Back

In Total Manpower QPPH

1/26/03 B 54 4 50 2 3.55 1/27/03 A 237 0 237 7 4.80 1/27/03 B 246 1 245 2 17.38 1/28/03 A 280 2 278 7 5.63 1/28/03 B No Info No Info 1/29/03 A 172 3 169 6 4.00 1/29/03 B 210 2 208 2 14.75 1/30/03 A 310 3 307 5 8.71 1/30/04 B 234 1 233 2 16.52 1/31/04 A 121 1 120 4 4.26 2/1/04 A 94 1 93 4 3.30 2/1/04 B No Info No Info 2/2/04 A 245 3 242 7 4.90 2/2/04 B 90 2 88 1 12.48 2/3/04 A 322 5 317 7 6.42 2/3/04 B 138 5 133 2 9.43 2/4/04 A 400 4 396 7 8.02 2/4/04 B 163 3 160 2 11.35 2/5/04 A 432 3 429 7 8.69 2/5/04 B 151 5 146 2 10.35

Average 216.61 2.67 213.94 4.22 8.59

Micro-Stops

Station 90 Time Study

Type Time SavingsBody Turn TBC1 0.67

Reach Bin A C 0.44

Reach Bin B C 0.44

Body Turn TBC1 0.67

Reach Bin C C 0.41

Reach Bin D C 0.41

Body Turn TBC1 0.67

Reach Bin E C 0.39

Reach Bin F C 0.39

     

Seconds Saved 4.4928s

Avg. Process Time 20.48s

Percentage Savings 21.94%

RegressionManpower vs. Motors Out

y = -10.49x2 + 107.09x + 35.586R2 = 0.4265

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Manpower

Mo

tors

Ou

t

Manpower vs. QPH y = 1.8564x2 - 30.104x + 160.97

R2 = 0.5938

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

160.00

180.00

200.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Manpower

QP

H

Process TimeBottleneck Ranks

Rank Station Avg Cycle Time

1 EOL 44.07

2 90 36.93

3 160 35.48

4 100 22.18

5 170A 21.17

6 140A 20.85

7 200B 20.80

8 110B 20.50

9 120B 19.66

10 210 17.71

11 140B 17.20

12 180 16.85

13 205 16.69

14 120A 15.86

15 150B 15.07

16 190 15.01

17 200A 14.94

18 110A 14.88

19 150A 12.95

20 170B 11.65

21 230B 11.48

22 230A 10.78

23 130 6.29

WBS