Hall 54

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hall 54

The Hall 54 is a production hall of Volkswagen AG in the Volkswagen plant in Wolfsburg based on maximum automation was designed taken in the summer of 1982 in operation.

With the introduction of the VW Golf II (and Jetta II ), new production methods (e.g. the use of industrial robots ) were introduced. Hall 54, for example, was designed according to the latest CIM ( computer-integrated manufacturing ) principles, which meant that around a quarter of the final assembly could be automated. Later, however, the principle was abandoned again in many points, as it turned out that a production based on unconditional automation (catchphrase "deserted hall") did not work. Among other things, the maintenance costs, downtime and motivation problems of the remaining employees nullified the savings from fewer staff. The massive investment in a manufacturing plant that was ultimately too inflexible did not appear economically justified.

Objectives

Improved productivity

In the early 1980s, most of the robots in the West German automotive industry were used for welding work. Further work steps that could typically also be carried out by robots were painting , pressing or the shell construction . Automobile production in the sense of final assembly, on the other hand, was mostly done by hand. The automation of this production step was definitely in the interest of the industry, as it was characterized by various problems and, as a result, high costs: reduced effectiveness due to different speeds of sub-processes, lack of flexibility in employing the workforce, quality defects, high staff turnover and sick leave, lack of motivation the employee. Up to 20 percent of the workforce in final assembly in the West German automotive industry was employed in quality control and troubleshooting - a higher proportion than in any other part of production. Humans were seen as a disruptive factor and source of errors, which is why they should be removed from the immediate manufacturing process.

From computer-integrated manufacturing (CIM) and a flexible automation lived up to expectations on the part of business consultancy especially a reduction in labor costs . However, there were also warning voices (especially from the engineering sector ) who drew attention to possible problems with regard to susceptibility to failure and insufficient capacity utilization.

Improved working conditions

The work on the assembly line was considered boring and unchallenging, but also harmful to health as strenuous (for example by heavy parts or overhead work) or even as. Due to the increased level of automation, the simple assembly line worker was to be replaced by the “production skilled worker” who had the task of monitoring the machines and maintaining the production process.

introduction

Golf I.
Jetta II

Series production of the Golf began on July 26, 1982 in Hall 54. The first vehicle was a 2-door Golf I in Gambiarot.

Production design

The Golf II was already designed for automated final assembly. For this purpose, particularly low tolerances had to be adhered to in all production steps and with all suppliers . For example, the chassis had to be completely free of tension . All screw connections presented a special challenge, as more than 300 screw connections had to be made during the final assembly of a Golf II or Jetta II and every incorrect screw connection due to a faulty screw or incorrect application of the screw led to a standstill of the assembly process, which was only possible by hand of a person could be restarted. The incorrect screw connection as such should be recognized by the assembly system itself. The screws had to be redesigned to be suitable for feeding and assembly.

The main automation efforts were on the main assembly line, where the wheels, batteries , fuel and brake lines, exhaust system, and drivetrain were assembled. This main assembly line was supported by a total of 14 pre-assembly areas in which modules and assemblies were pre-assembled. The production process was designed in such a way that the front of the vehicle remained open until the front and drive group consisting of subframe, engine , transmission and front axle were brought in and screwed together (en bloc) .

The number of assembly workers in Hall 54 fell by around 1,000 from 5,000 to 4,000 as a result of the introduction of the CIM. Although it was often referred to as the “deserted hall”, Hall 54 was by no means empty. A part of the workforce at VW was trained and educated in terms of plant management and maintenance. Another part, however, was "disqualified" for laying and feeding work. Volkswagen invested a total of around 2.1 billion German marks in the production facility.

Contemporary assessment

At that time, Hall 54 was considered to be the biggest step on the way to automated production. The degree of automation in final assembly was increased from 5 to 25 percent, a further increase to 33 percent would have been possible according to the group, but was ultimately never achieved.

In Europe it was not until the late 1980s that FIAT achieved a higher degree of automation with (at least the planned) 40 percent in its plant near Cassino . Due to pronounced technical problems, this level was never reached here either. Also Opel tried with its production plant K 130 ( Opel Omega to surpass) Volkswagen.

In the reporting, hall 54 ran under catchphrases such as “ ghost shifts ”, “deserted hall” or “deserted factory”.

The employees of the time experienced the general trend towards automation and the increased use of technology in production as a threat to jobs. Trade unions and works councils tried to minimize the consequences for employees through company agreements.

Problems

Sick leave and communication problems

After the introduction of CIM production, the sickness rate among employees initially increased significantly. Piwinger and Zerfaß attribute this to inadequate internal communication, since "the employees could not cope with the irritation in dealing with the information offered to them about storage and semi-finished product production in the course of island production , so they no longer accepted the information as valid, but believed, Having to keep checking that this information is correct and that it was not launched with strategic intent. ”The introduction of discussion groups and transparent walls between the production sections was ultimately able to help overcome the communication problems.

Kropik reports reduced unit numbers due to the complexity of the facility, which has created tension between manufacturing workers and problems with management. For example, while the electricians identified themselves strongly with their respective parts of the system, the degree of identification with the production team fell. This group was subjected to social pressure from the workers and hierarchical pressure from the masters . The group of "maintenance workers" was only able to react to changes in the work process to a very limited extent. In the end, the concept of “unconditional automation” could not prevail.

Lack of flexibility

Despite the use of around 50 robots (40 or 70 robots according to other information) and around 250 programmable machines, the production facility was relatively rigidly geared towards the production of the Golf II and Jetta II. The risk of the high investment volume for Hall 54 could only be shouldered for the "bread and butter" model Golf as a mass product (2,700 vehicles per day) with a relatively long production period. “More modern” car production with a broader range of products and a shorter production cycle, such as that of Japanese car manufacturers, would not have been profitable in the early 1980s and was only started there in the early 1990s.

Lack of fault and fault tolerance

Too often, the assembled parts were not within the range of the necessary tolerances, so that the system was often shut down. The robots could not react flexibly to such problems or evaluate malfunction situations. Often, human intervention was necessary to remove interference. However, disruptions in the production process could hardly be cushioned by the specialists who specialized in the maintenance of the system.

To a certain extent, VW secured itself against the risk of a complete breakdown of the system due to technical problems by operating a second production line with conventional, manual production.

aftermath

The assessments of Hall 54 and the underlying concept of maximized automation range from “legendary”, “revolutionary” and “prestige object” to “miserably failed” and “evolutionary dead end”. The concept even turned out to be a "dinosaur of a technological narrowing of rationalization / modernization, in which the organizations were also interpreted as 'technology'."

The attempt to eliminate human labor, of all things, showed the importance of humans in production particularly clearly ("Irony of Automation", Bainbridge 1987). Unplanned situations in the production process made human action indispensable. Knowledge from experience and perception (sensual knowledge) were again rated higher.

In the 1990s, other principles prevailed in the automobile industry, under the headings " lean production " (lean production) or " Group Production " have become known. Automation should now be used to support people, not to displace them.

The limit to automation arises in artificial intelligence research and the associated philosophical debate about what computers cannot achieve from the limits of the algorithmic ability of complex everyday actions and unforeseen situations. Both limits of automatability and algorithmisability are still constantly being pushed.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d e f g h Thomas Malsch, Knuth Dohse: Breaking from Taylorism: Changing Forms of Work in the Automobile Industry. Cambridge University Press, 1993 pp. 70–72 limited preview in Google book search ISBN 978-0-521-40544-7
  2. ↑ a b c d e f Martina Heßler: Cultural history of technology. Campus Verlag, 2012 pp. 63–64 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-593-39740-5 ; Martina Heßler, Hall 54 at Volkswagen and the limits of automation. Considerations on the human-machine relationship in industrial production in the 1980s , in: Zeithistorische Forschungen / Studies in Contemporary History 11 (2014), pp. 56–76.
  3. ↑ a b c d e f Markus Kropik: Production control systems in automobile manufacturing. Springer, 2009 p. 26 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-540-88990-8
  4. ↑ a b c d Ulrich Widmaier: German mechanical engineering in the nineties. Campus Verlag, 2000 pp. 211–2012 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-593-36507-7
  5. ^ Richard Vahrenkamp : From Taylor to Toyota: Rationalization Debates in the 20th Century. Books on Demand, 2013 p. 124 limited preview in Google book search ISBN 978-3-8441-0237-6
  6. ↑ a b Sebastian Dworatschek: Basics of data processing. Walter de Gruyter, 1989 p. 455 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-11-087816-5
  7. ^ Richard van Basshuysen, Fred Schäfer: Handbook internal combustion engine. Springer, 2010 p. 319 restricted preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-8348-0699-4
  8. ^ Maryann Keller: Collision: GM, Toyota, Volkswagen and the race to own the 21st century. Currency Doubleday, 1993 limited preview in Google Book Search ISBN 978-0-385-46777-3
  9. ^ Wirtschaftswoche 1986 limited preview in the Google book search
  10. ^ A b c Susan Geideck, Wolf-Andreas Liebert: Formulas of meaning: linguistic and sociological analyzes of models, metaphors and other collective orientation patterns. Verlag Walter de Gruyter , 2003 p. 107 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-11-017883-8
  11. ^ A b Heinz-Josef Bontrup, Ralf-Michael Marquardt: Critical Handbook of the German Electricity Industry. Hans-Böckler-Stiftung , edition sigma, 2010 p. 264 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-8360-8712-4
  12. ↑ Manfred Piwinger, Ansgar Zerfaß: Handbuch Unternehmenskommunikation. Springer DE, 2007 p. 181 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-8349-9164-5
  13. ↑ Heribert Kohl, Bernd Schütt: New technologies and the world of work: what can employees expect? Bund-Verlag, 1984 p. 154 restricted preview in the Google book search ISBN 3-7663-0893-9
  14. ^ Bulletin, Association of Libraries of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia, 1984 limited preview in the Google book search
  15. ↑ Hermann Kocyba, Uwe Vormbusch: Participation as a management strategy: group work and flexible control in the automotive industry and mechanical engineering. Campus Verlag, 2000 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-593-36489-6
  16. ^ Lothar Hack: Industrial Sociology. In: H. Kerber, A. Schnieder: Special sociologies. Rowohlt, 1994, and Peter Brödner: From Taylorism to competence-based production. In: AI & Society. 21 (4) pp. 497-514, 2007; quoted from Fritz Böhle, G. Günter Voss, Günther Wachtler: Handbuch Arbeitsoziologie. Springer, 2010 p. 248 restricted preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-531-92247-8
  17. ^ Fritz Klocke, Günter Pritschow: Autonomous Production. Springer 2004, p. 22 limited preview in the Google book search ISBN 978-3-642-18523-6