A World of Ideas
Automotive
companies in the U.S. and Europe share ideas on the best material handling
techniques.
by
Leslie Langnau, senior technical editor
For
U.S. automakers, and their suppliers, the cost squeeze is on. Even though this
year is shaping up to be the third best year in sales revenue the automakers
have ever had, profits are down. Thus, shaving even a few cents off assembly
and material handling costs adds up to big savings. For example, a recent
edition of the Wall Street Journal noted that manufacturing processes cost Ford
Motor Co. about $20 billion annually. Reducing that cost by just 4 percent will
save about $800 million.
Trimming costs and driving up profits for shareholders has
leveled the automotive playing field. As U.S. car-makers build plants in
Europe, they find cost-cutting solutions to problems occurring in the States.
Likewise, European automakers see interesting techniques in their U.S.
satellites. The newest competitive edge is how much cost you can cut out, and
all information exchange that helps reduce those costs is fair game in the
global automotive industry.
DaimlerChrysler,
for example, found expertise on container handling in Europe.
“We’ve looked at the container management system of our Mercedes
Benz counterparts,” said Jim Terry, senior manager, corporate material
handling engineering. “We’ve not grown up with returnable
containers like European companies. But with our change to small lot
containers, we learned how they handled them and improved our system.”
Europe,
on the other hand, is looking closely at the U.S. models on fast delivery.
“The U.S. goal of delivering a car in a few days has recently become
relevant to Europe,” said Uwe Eckart, president, Swisslog Automotive.
“Part of the reason it took a while to reach here is because the variety
of individual equipment within each car is high, whereas ‘standard
equipped’ cars are more common in North America and Asia.
“We
expect the individuality of car equipment to grow in North America and delivery
times to shrink in Europe,” continued Eckart. “This means —
for both continents — that the improvement in supply chain management has
to be tremendous.”
Other
areas of common interest include lean manufacturing, improving forecasting and
inventory control, simplifying material handling equipment and processes, and
developing “supplier parks.”
The skinny on lean manufacturing
Toyota
developed a highly disciplined approach to production that requires strict
scheduling, assembly of small-batches and the use of low-cost flexible
machines. To meet the goal of “producing vehicles with one-third the
defects of mass-produced cars using half the factory space, half the capital
and half the engineering time,” companies must find the most efficient
way to do a task. Reasoning such as “We’ve always done it this
way,” and “I want to do it that way,” no longer count when it
comes to finding this efficiency.
As can
be expected, this approach often causes friction with U.S. employees. Thus,
each of the U.S. automakers is at a different stage in implementing lean
manufacturing. Work still needs to be done in forecasting, inventory control
and supplier relationships.
Contributing
to the forecasting and inventory problems, though, is the current
consumer-buying slump. Sales were down about seven percent in April, plus, U.S.
consumers were buying more foreign cars, forcing automakers to offer heavy
discounts to move cars off dealer lots. “Which,” says John
Costanza, an expert in demand-based manufacturing, “can be attributed
directly to antiquated methods of forecasting and fixed-volume
manufacturing.”
Costanza
went on to say that automakers must revamp production methods to be responsive
to actual customer demand. They must stop looking too far into the future,
which results in the assembly of unwanted products and large finished goods
inventories. Today, automakers have all the manufacturing technology and
communications tools they need to build cars closer to customer demand.
“Europe
doesn’t have the same problem with buffer stocks that the U.S.
has,” added Rick Diefenderfer, senior director of customer development,
Exel. “U.S. logistics often forces buffer stock, but that is changing as
logistics improves.”
Simple is in
“There’s
a new set of customer directives with the auto companies, now that money has
gotten tight,” said Tony Rosati, vice president, Dearborn Mid-West
Conveyor. The auto companies are examining every component in material handling
systems, looking for ways to cut costs.
“Mercedes,
for example, recently wanted to know the price of each individual conveyor
component,” he added. “This is relatively new. But everyone is
trying to figure out the best way to buy things. As the economy gets tighter,
people try to control the bucks more.”
The
cost of material handling systems has risen over the last five years, much of
it due to more stringent specifications for safety and ergonomic concerns.
“For our customers,” continued Rosati, “we’re looking
at the conveyor safety equipment, the on-site safety requirements needed when
we install systems, the conveyor controls, the factory information systems now
integrated into the conveyor systems and training requirements. These features
are nice to have but are they really needed now that they’ve driven up
the costs? These are issues the automotive companies are exploring.”
Many of
these added features were mandated by the government; others were required by
labor unions. But the automakers’ decisions on whether they will still
need these features will have a tremendous impact on material handling OEMs.
Inside changes
Several
U.S. automakers are taking advantage of the methods European companies use to
move material. “Historically, we’ve done a good job of pulling
parts from our suppliers to our plants,” said Terry. “But
we’ve needed to work on handling parts once they were in our facilities.
So we’re minimizing non-value added activities within an operator’s
scope. For example, we’re reducing or eliminating walk time to get parts,
opening, emptying and stacking boxes, having an operator move material into or
out of his area, and so on. We’ve also shrunk the size of the
workstation. Anything that doesn’t facilitate putting a part on a
vehicle, we tried to eliminate.
“Because
of the shrunken workstation, we bring in smaller packages and quantities of
parts,” continued Terry. “We’ve introduced the small-lot
containerization process, which lets us bring in just hours’ worth of
material. We now use a line-feed roller rack setup where material slides down to
the station. All of this has allowed us to increase production at our
facilities without adding square footage. Our new facility in Toledo, Ohio, for
example, is one of the smallest plants we have. We’re producing 800 units
a day there.”
European
practices are also influencing the selection of material handling equipment.
“We look for simpler ways to perform,” continued Terry. “For
example, we’ll let gravity do the work rather than use an electronic or
air-driven system to move material. We also plan to standardize on the type of
equipment that’s in all DaimlerChrysler facilities.”
Terry
also has plans to reduce the use of lift trucks to deliver parts to operators.
“One of our biggest concerns with lift trucks is safety,” he said.
“They are 13,000-pound pieces of equipment moving around human beings,
and it’s too easy for someone to just step in front of one. So,
we’re working on delivering parts with AGVs, carts and tuggers, and using
lift trucks for unloading and perimeter storage functions. Plus, since we use
small-lot containers, we don’t really need lift trucks to deliver parts
to operators.”
Newer hardware
Conveyor
equipment that uses belt technology is popular in Europe and is finding its way
to the States. “In some applications, it can reduce material handling
costs by 20 percent to 30 percent,” said Al Betz, vice president,
Eisenmann. And electric monorail systems continue to find more application in
the U.S., based on their success overseas. The latest trend in Europe is to
combine EMS with skillet conveyors.
One of
the more interesting trends in Europe, which may find its way here, is the use
of “supplier parks.” Several automotive companies have their
suppliers build plants right on the automaker’s premises. Eisenmann, for
example, has been involved in such an endeavor. “We’ve built a
‘supplier bridge,’” continued Betz. “We take our
conveyors into the satellite factory and bring the parts directly into the
assembly line.”
The
bridge is like an elevated tunnel. The benefits include reduced work in process
and storage because certain key components are made right next door. MHM