Search results

The paper aims to describe how BMW in the UK has increased the number of industrial robots at Plant Oxford in the UK; this plant is part of a production “triangle” that brings together three of its four manufacturing plants in the UK to produce the latest version of the Mini passenger car – the Mini Clubman.

The paper describes the major production line techniques that are used in the manufacture of the body‐in‐white (BIW) structure as well as the functions of painting and final assembly of the vehicle. The BIW techniques include spot‐welding and ultrasonic weld inspection for parts assembly.

Over the space of the last three or four years, the management of BMW Group has increased significantly the stature of its UK manufacturing units with the aim of increasing the diversity of models produced, while at the same time achieving greater utilization of its existing capacity, and improving productivity.

The BMW Group continually assesses all of the functions involved in the manufacture of a motor vehicle, and in this context is working both with its own plants and with suppliers of equipment and components to enhance production and quality processes. This includes all of the processes of joining steel and other materials using spot welding and adhesives. There is also much to be gained from the interchange of information between the various plants in the group world‐wide with a view to implementing continuous improvement. The benefits achieved from one process in one particular plant are quickly communicated to other facilities, again with the object of improving quality and productivity. A typical example here is the paint shop.

It is likely that, arising out of greater plant integration and utilization, the management of BMW Group will be able to further increase the capacity of its Mini production units to be in a position to move to the next stage of expansion, namely to reach a target of 300,000 units a year.

BMW continues to rationalise its UK plants in Oxford, Swindon and Hams Hall, further integrating these production facilities with those of major component suppliers to produce a finished vehicle. There is a heavy concentration of KUKA robots within the BIW and sub‐assembly manufacturing facilities.

Introduction Steelwork has been painted since its introduction as a structural material, and until recent years it was accepted that rusting would take place. A rough first painting, followed by regular maintenance was accepted as normal practice. For many structures it will still be economically correct to use the traditional methods, and these are well known, i.e. wire brush followed by two coats of red lead and one of a good quality finishing coat, and my paper will make no comment. It deals on broad lines with some of the problems encountered by the fabricator which are associated with higher quality systems.

This paper seeks to describe how GM Manufacturing Luton in the UK is examining the case for raising the number of installed robots as a means of increasing van assembly for when the next generation vehicle is launched. Also describes some operational experience associated with a variety of industrial robots in body‐in‐white and spray painting environments.

Describes the major production line techniques that are used in the manufacture of compact van body‐in‐white (BIW) steel structures; as well as the functions of robotized painting. BIW techniques include spot‐welding and sealants.

Over the space of the last four years or so, the management of GM Manufacturing Luton has been tackling constraints in the bodyshop using General Motors' through‐put improvement process (TIP) to achieve greater utilization of its existing capacity, and improving productivity.

General motors has a system of continuous improvement, which it uses in most of the functions involved in the assembly of a motor vehicle. As part of this process engineers are continually looking at ways of removing constraints from equipment in the bodyshop and working closely with equipment suppliers to reduce the number of hours required to build a van body. But as proposals to build the next generation of vans are being considered so too is the requirement to increase the number of robots in the bodyshop. There is also much to be gained from the interchange of information between the various plants within General Motors worldwide with a view to implementing continuous improvement. In this connection, benchmarking is one of the techniques employed to ensure that the Luton facility is not only in step with sister GM plants to improve quality and productivity, but also is best placed for winning the next generation vehicle programme.

It is likely that, arising out of greater plant integration and utilization, the management of GM Manufacturing Luton Ltd (GMM Luton) will be able to further increase the capacity of its van production units to be in a position to move to the next stage of expansion, namely to edge towards a target of 100,000 units a year.

This is the first time in the UK that Comau Smart H4 robots have been used on a significant scale. The introduction of these robots created a steep learning curve both for those installing the machines and for those operating them. The plant as a whole makes use of various makes of robot including Comau in the bodyshop and KUKA, Fanuc and Durr machines in the paint shop. The company is also preparing the ground for the introduction of the next generation of robot, the Comau NH4.

The question of health and safety at work is a central issue for trade unions. In Britain it is an area of concern where there were important legislative initiatives in the 1970s and 1980s, although surprisingly this has received relatively little attention in the debates about trade unionism. This neglect results in an aspect of union activity about which little is known. Explores through a detailed longitudinal study of a middle‐range engineering firm, from the late 1970s into the 1990s, the ways in which trade unions organize and act on health and safety questions. Argues that it is almost “routine” that workers face dangers and hazards at work, a central feature of the work and employment experience of most workers. However, this is often difficult to deal with as individual issues, or as matters which are subject to collective consideration. On the one hand, workers often appear to accept the dangers and hazards they face. On the other hand, managements are preoccupied with questions relating to production and finance, rather than the day‐to‐day problems faced by workers. This tension suggests that the future wellbeing of workers in unionized workplaces lies not so much with legislative provisions and rights at work, but in education and the organizing ability of workplace unions, raising and addressing what often seem like individualistic problems in collective ways.

Reviews new automotive assembly plants in Europe. Outlines the lean production techniques Daimler‐Benz is using for the new Mercedes A‐Class. Describes the flexible NedCar facility which makes Volvos and Mitsubishis on the same production line. Explains the benefits Skoda has obtained by integrating suppliers into its new assembly facility for the Octavia.

Reviews new applications of robots in the automotive industry. Describes new compact robot designs which can fit into very small spaces and provide greater flexibility in the body shop. Outlines how paint shop technology is evolving to make greater use of robots. Highlights pioneering applications of robots for machining and laser welding.

1989 has been the year of the top model launches in the French car industry. Anna Kochan looks at two new major investments by Citroen and Peugeot.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.