ANALYSIS OF A PAINTING FACILITY FOR TRUCK FRAMES USING PLANT SIMULATION

Transcription

1 ANALYSIS OF A PAINTING FACILITY FOR TRUCK FRAMES USING PLANT SIMULATION Tiago Vacaro, Eisenmann Brazil Eisenmann AG 2014

2 Agenda Eisenmann Endosul Automotive Painting Analysis of the problem Simulation model Results Conclusions 2

3 1 Eisenmann Eisenmann is a leading global provider of industrial solutions and services for surface finishing, material flow automation, thermal process technology and environmental engineering. Headquarters in Germany, at the cities of Böblingen and Holzgerlingen. 3

4 1 Eisenmann Products and Services AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS Surface finishing, body shell conveyor systems, final assembly lines GENERAL FINISHING Paint shops for metal parts, paint shops for plastic parts, paint shops for wooden parts, new materials ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY Exhaust air purification, waste water treatment, waste disposal, ammunition disposal, biogas plants PROCESS & HIGH TEMPERATURE TECHNOLOGY Pretreatment and coating systems, high-temperature technology, firing lines for ceramics, heat treatment, carbon fiber ovens CONVEYOR SYSTEMS Electrified monorail systems, inverted electrified conveyors, Power & Free conveyors, peripheral conveyor systems SERVICE Customer service, spare parts management, plant renewal, advisory services, full-service & BOT models 4

5 1 Eisenmann Locations Crystal Lake Puebla Moscow Göttingen (Ruhstrat) Böblingen Holzgerlingen Erftstadt (intec) Stafford Saronno Barcelona Paris Changchun Shanghai Kunshan Fuzhou Sao Paulo Cruzeiro Thane Chennai Delhi Country with Eisenmann location Country with Eisenmann sales representatives Resende Caxias do Sul Pune BOT Models (Build, Operate and Transfer) 5

6 1 Eisenmann Brazil Headquarters Eisenmann Brazil (Sao Paulo) Manufacturing Plant (Cruzeiro) 6

7 1 Eisenmann Brazil Carese BOT Model MAN / Volkswagen 7

8 1 Eisenmann Brazil Endosul BOT Model Randon Group One paintshop for small parts One paintshop for parts and frames 8

9 2 Endosul Automotive Painting Final product of the costumer Analyzed plant Paintshop for parts and frames 9

10 2 Endosul Production flow Entrance buffer Loading Preparation for top-coat painting Shotblasting Rotate machine cleaning and rotation Pre-treatment E-coat painting Curing oven Powder Oven Top-coat painting Unloading delivery of the frame to the costumer Liquid Oven Conveying by automatic hoists and transfer bridges Cooler 10

11 2 Endosul Production flow 11

12 2 Endosul Production flow Level 0 Blasting cleaning Lift 12 Rotate machine Top-coat coolers 8 Transfer bridge 5 4 Powder painting Transfer bridge 10 Top-coat ovens Entrance buffer Transfer bridge Shotblasting Transfer bridge Loading of frames 9 13 Return of empty load bars Transfer bridge Lift Unloading of frames Transfer bridge Liquid painting Buffers Plant Simulation Worldwide User Conference 2014 Top-coat audit Buffers 20-21/05/

13 2 Endosul Production flow Level -1 Transfer bridge Entrance at tanks for bars with parts 4 3 E-coat coolers Pre-treatment tanks Hoist E-coat ovens Hoist 2 1 UF Cleaning Loading of parts Transfer bridge 2 1 Unloading of parts 2 1 Frames preparation Shotblasting Return of empty load bars 3 Frames preparation Blasting cleaning Lift Lift Hoist Buffers Transfer bridge Plant Simulation Worldwide User Conference 2014 Buffers 20-21/05/

14 2 Endosul Production flow 14

15 2 Endosul Production flow 15

16 2 Endosul Production flow 16

17 2 Endosul Production flow 17

18 2 Endosul Production flow 18

19 2 Endosul Production flow 19

20 2 Endosul Production flow 20

21 2 Endosul Production flow 21

22 2 Endosul Production flow 22

23 3 Analysis of the problem Demand scenarios Demand (Frames) Capacity (Frames) Utilization (%) Available capacity (%) Current Future How the computer simulation could help in the decision making of modifications of the production process 23

24 3 Analysis of the problem Change Description Investment (millions of ) 1 Increase of the speed of the powder painting line Reduction of processing times of the tanks for surface pre-treatment and e-coat painting Reduction of the processing times of ovens and coolers One additional hoist at the tanks area (with five variants regarding the configuration of the hoists) A second workstation at the exit of the tanks area (Cleaning UF) A second workstation at the exit of the tanks area + the replacement of one e-coat oven by a cooler Replacement of two e-coat ovens by coolers One additional transfer bridge for the area of e-coat ovens and coolers

25 4 Simulation model 25

26 5 Results Dozens of indicators : times of workstations; occupation of ovens, coolers and buffers; indicators for the tanks area; general process indicators : throughput work in process mix frames/parts cycle time Main indicator set for the comparison of results average cycle time of frames 26

27 5 Results Data: 15/03/2013 Tempo de simulação: 100 dias (24 horas por dia) Tanques Ocupação estufas e resfriadores e-coat WIP Quantidades processadas Tempo de ciclo Throughput Mix Modelo Tempo de atravessamento nos tanques Ocupação média dos tanques Tempo de ciclo Ocupação Tempo médio médio limpeza média estufas e- estufas e-coat UF coat Ocupação média resfriadores e-coat Tempo médio resfriadores e-coat WIP médio de chassis WIP médio de jobs de peças Quantidade de chassis processados Quantidade de Tempo de ciclo Tempo de ciclo jobs de peças de chassis de peças processados Taxa de produção de chassis Taxa de produção de peças Taxa de produção total Mix chassis/peças _PEC_Present_status 0:57:31 6,08 0:07:13 10,17 1:23:18 3,81 0:31:13 32,35 10, :12: :24: ,859 2,449 7,308 1, _PEC_Change_1 0:57:29 6,07 0:07:12 9,94 1:21:24 3,81 0:31:13 32,23 10, :12: :24: ,865 2,449 7,314 1, _PEC_Change_2 0:57:30 6,08 0:07:12 10,34 1:24:42 3,81 0:31:13 32,35 10, :12: :24: ,863 2,449 7,312 1, _PEC_Change_3 0:57:50 6,09 0:07:15 5,80 0:47:44 3,62 0:29:47 30,62 9, :12: :24: ,832 2,450 7,282 1, _PEC_Change_4.1 0:58:56 6,25 0:07:12 10,20 1:23:29 3,81 0:31:13 32,37 10, :12: :24: ,864 2,449 7,313 1, _PEC_Change_4.2 0:57:34 6,09 0:06:57 11,22 1:31:49 3,81 0:31:12 32,50 10, :12: :24: ,870 2,450 7,320 1, _PEC_Change_4.3 0:52:42 5,33 0:07:08 6,56 0:55:22 3,74 0:31:35 30,59 9, :12: :24: ,650 2,450 7,100 1, _PEC_Change_5.1 0:54:46 5,70 0:07:11 9,59 1:19:11 3,80 0:31:21 32,33 10, :12: :24: ,819 2,438 7,257 1, _PEC_Change_5.2 0:39:09 4,19 0:03:38 6,75 0:50:30 4,30 0:32:09 31,86 8, :10: :24: ,553 2,451 8,004 2, _PEC_Change_6 0:55:58 6,01 0:07:03 6,17 0:49:31 4,10 0:32:53 31,11 9, :11: :24: ,013 2,451 7,464 2,045 Mudança 1: Linha pintura pó (chassis) mais rápida Mudança 5: Uma segunda estação de trabalho na saída dos tanques (limpeza UF) Mudança 2: Redução de tempos de processo nos tanques 5.1: Somente inclusão da segunda estação de trabalho Mudança 3: Redução de tempos de processo de estufas e resfriadores 5.2: Inclusão da segunda estação, mais substituição de uma estufa e-coat por um resfriador Mudança 4: Uma quarta TTB (ponte rolante) no pré-tratamento Mudança 6: Duas estufas e-coat substituídas por resfriadores 4.1: Primeira distribuição de pontes 4.2: Primeira distribuição de pontes mais redução do tempo de processo na estação ST4 4.3: Segunda distribuição de pontes 27

28 5 Results Model Average cycle time [min:s.ss] Investment (millions of ) Model Average cycle time [min:s.ss] Investment (millions of ) Current_status 12: Changes_ :11: Change_1 12: Changes_ :11: Change_2 12: Changes_ :11: Change_3 12: Changes_ :11: Change_4.1 12: Changes_ :11: Change_4.2 12: Changes_ :11: Change_4.4 12: Change_4.5 12: Changes_ :11: Change_5.1 12: Changes_ :11: Changes_1+3 12: Changes_2+3 12: Change_5.2 0:10: Changes_ : Changes_ :10: Changes_ : Changes_ : Changes_ :10: Changes_ : Changes_ :10: Changes_ : Changes_ :10: Changes_ :10: Change_4.3 12: Changes_ :10: Changes_ :10: Change_6 11: Changes_ :10:

29 Average cycle time of frames [min:s.ss] 5 Results 13: : : : : : : : : : : : : :00.0 Current status and changes applied separately 29

30 Average cycle time of frames [min:s.ss] 5 Results 13: : : : : : : : : : : : : :00.0 Reduction of processing times of ovens and coolers, and inclusion of a second workstation for UF cleaning 30

31 Average cycle time of frames [min:s.ss] 5 Results 13: : : : : : : : : : : : : :00.0 Inclusion of a second workstation for UF cleaning, and the substitution of one e-coat oven by a cooler 31

32 Average cycle time of frames [min:s.ss] 5 Results 13: : : : : : : : : : : : : :00.0 Inclusion of a second workstation for UF cleaning, the substitution of one e-coat oven by a cooler, and the reduction of processing times on the tanks for surface pre-treatment and e-coat painting 32

33 5 Results Model Description Cycle time reduction Increase of throughput Investment (millions of ) Changes_3+5.1 reduction of processing times of ovens and coolers, and inclusion of a second workstation for UF cleaning 78 s 12% 0.20 Changes_5.2 inclusion of a second workstation for UF cleaning, and the substitution of one e-coat oven by a cooler 91 s 14% 0.33 Changes_2+5.2 inclusion of a second workstation for UF cleaning, the substitution of one e-coat oven by a cooler, and the reduction of processing times on the tanks for surface pre-treatment and e-coat painting 114 s 18%

34 5 Results Proposal Changes Investment (millions of ) Increase of capacity Before simulation Changes_ % After simulation Changes_ % Investment saving

35 6 Conclusions The changes could be analyzed separately and in combination, giving security for the decision making; Saving of 64% on the resources to be applied to obtain the necessary increase of capacity; In monetary values, reduction of the necessary investment from 1.87 to 0.67 Million of Euros; Increase of capacity in 18% with only 2 modifications, against 6 initially defined. 35

36 Thank you! TIAGO VACARO Eisenmann AG 2014