Production maven Laurie Harbour-Flex has a guest column in Automotive News [sub] that could easily run as a Deathwatch editorial on any of The Big 2.8. Describing the tough conditions that automakers find themselves in, Harbour-Flex argues that flexible production lines will be key in determining who survives and who doesn’t. As the market for new cars swings from segment to segment, chasing volatile fuel prices, manufacturers who can shift production on the fly to meet changing demand will do well. The upshot? Japanese firms use flexible production, Detroit doesn’t. Sure, Chrysler (for example) can claim that its Belvedere, Ill plant is “fully flexible,” but the Patriot and Compass are built on identical platforms. True flexibility, argues Harbour-Flex, means the ability for a manufacturer to “produce any vehicle in their lineups within their body, paint and assembly shops.” And this actually happens. Honda’s Alliston, Ontario plant builds the Honda Civic and Ridgeline and the Acura CSX and MDX, while its East Liberty, Ohio plant produces the Honda CR-V, Civic and Element. Harbour-Flex identifies four key points that are necessary for truly flexible production.
— Common vehicle architecture: All vehicles and platforms must be designed to be assembled in the same order.
— Common assembly processing: Equipment and sequence of assembly operations must be the same in all plants.
— Training: Employees must be trained in common methods for design, engineering and manufacturing.
— Suppliers: They must be on board with common design and processing and must be able to react to volume and complexity.
Answering the question of what do you get when you cross Harbour Consulting with a failed Ford crossover…
I recall Mazda builds Miata’s and MPV’s (and other vehicles) on the same production line.
Nissan’s Smyrna Tennessee plant produces the Nissan Altima, Nissan Maxima, Nissan Xterra, Nissan Frontier and Nissan Pathfinder.
And is FULLY AIR CONDITIONED!
Gee, Harbour is touting plant flexibility and productivity? I wonder why. Could it be that they are the go-to experts on measuring this stuff and want companies to purchase their services?
BTW, dont’ think that just because one plant can build different vehicles there that it is fully flexible. Some plants may be “one plant” but in reality they might have 2 or more completely separate lines running completely different vehicles. Its two lines that are not interchangeable that just happen to be under 1 roof. I’d be interested to know if your Honda Ontario plant truly can run a Ridgeline right behind a CSX on the same line. I’m going to bet not, but Honda is definitely the most flexible, so I suppose its possible.
The UAW has attempted to, but seemingly failed at correcting the flexibility issue. This isn’t a management holdup at all. This is the UAW enforcing their 1950’s bullshit job descriptions upon the auto makers. The UAW, even to this day, has a it aint my god damn job mentality. If it isn’t in your job description, you don’t have to do shit.
^^^That is one of the main reasons why the Detroit automakers are lagging in North America. This is even a bigger culprit than poor management choices.
I’d like to add that you have to have a well-trained and educated workforce to perform various duties. I know that Nissan and Toyota both struggled to find the right people for their plants in the southern states. In Alabama, Toyota had to use specially designed pictures to teach borderline retarded workers how to do their jobs correctly. My cousin works at a certain Toyota plant (I won’t name) and he said the stupidity and mishaps happen on a daily occurrence more so than when he worked for Ford on the line.
How much were they paying that they could only get borderline retarded guys to work full time jobs w/ benefits? Hell, I’d move to Alabama to make 31/hour + benefits.
Jerome10:
Honda can run multiple vehicle types down the same line. I’ve read a couple good articles on it recently, and it sounds like they add dead time between the two vehicles so that necessary programming and logistic changes can occur. I think it’s only a couple vehicles worth of time that is added. So, exercising that flexibility is not free due to the reduction in the total number of vehicles that can run down the line, but it’s not so expensive that they won’t do it.
Honda engineers those vehicles to use common assembly sequences and techniques to maintain the flexibility. So, there’s another effective ‘cost’ in the system: you essentially loose some design freedom.
derm81 Your cousin must work at the Goergetown plant making Camry’s, it’s the only Toyota one kind of in the south not far from the Ford line in Louisville Kentucky.
I may not really like living in the south but the people here are not all stupid retards, some are yes but they exist up north also. Try touring the Ft Rucker Alabama Army Depot and watch those guys break down tanks and then re-build them with new hardware and electronics. Or assemble that new armored personnel carrier. Its very impressive to watch and I would say those guys aren’t stupid and sure aren’t slouches pulling in 6 figures making military hardware.
The guy running the show told me they have to compete with Honda not far away for the best of the best right out of high school and tech school.
Actually Red, while I won’t argue that Georgetown plant isn’t impressive, I believe his cousin works at the engine plant in Alabama.
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/operations/manufacturing/tmmal/index.html
Generally, Honda runs similar vehicles on the same line (small CUVs with Civics, Ridgeline/Pilot/Odyssey) but they can stretch a bit. East Liberty (nominally the Civic plant) has built Accords and the first gen CL.
Honda runs in lots, usually 30 or 60 identical vehicles (sometimes 3 or 5 for special export models). Usually the “odd sized” vehicles will be grouped together. Note that the entire lot is the same color same trim. For double (body AND options) flexibility check BMW. But they have a lot higher margin to play with.
Here’s an account of flexibility at Toyota’s 40k vehicles per month Kyushu plant.
“Sounds complex? It is. Add to it that the takt time, or how often a vehicle needs to come off the assembly line to meet demand, can range from 90 seconds down to less than 50 seconds. Seconds. That takt time is constantly changing to accommodate demand. Think about how the changes in demand blow back to supply chain requirements and supply chain flexibility.
“Now… think about this: the same assembly operation doesn’t just make a vehicle with different colors, or even a vehicle with different options, or even a vehicle with radically different technology (like conventional versus hybrid models), it makes completely different vehicles. Continually, constantly changing, units of one. Hundreds of permutations, many as radical as completely different vehicle chassis. Every sixty seconds. A car to an SUV to a hybrid version of that SUV back to a car… think about the material flows, line balancing, standard work required to keep such a line humming along. That should give pause to anyone believing that Toyota doesn’t do mixed model production, or that quick changeover is a pipe dream.”
So will we ever hit a point in the coming future where few if any humans will be needed to work on an assembly shift? Is it possible to make a totally automated system? Yes, stupid question but it could happen. By assembly shift, I mean the actual grunt work and not the technical area of it.
Is it possible to make a totally automated system?
In the article cited above, they say Toyota *prefers* human workers, because they make suggestions for improvement. In fact, it’s compulsory for workers to make at least one suggestion a month.
Robots are reserved for heavy, dangerous, or unhealthy tasks.