Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Model 3' started by TeslaInvestors, May 6, 2018.
One example would be scrubbing the contractor labor.
Wow, I didn't even think we could use <> brackets here, because (I thought) the forum software would pick it up as an HTML tag!
And I really like your <good stuff> tag. I usually use <snippage> to indicate deleted parts of a post I'm responding to, but <good stuff> is much nicer.
I admit I don't understand why Tesla doesn't handle things this way, since it's trying to automate everything. It does make sense to do paint spraying on multiple cars of a given color in a row, as there will be some wastage of both time and paint in switching from one color to another. But otherwise, I don't see why doing batch processing would speed up the overall throughput. Certainly they have to use different bins/racks for different parts, but can't all the bins/racks for the various options be put within reach of any given robot arm?
Your comment about batch processing being an old-fashioned approach isn't the first comment along those lines, so perhaps there is some truth to it. Perhaps my lack of understanding of why Tesla uses so much batch processing is just an indication that I don't know that much about automobile assembly lines. (A visit to Tesla's Fremont assembly plant is on my "bucket list"!) Or perhaps it's one of several indications that Elon Musk is overly focused on -- or perhaps even obsessed with -- quarterly production/sales numbers, to the detriment of smooth work flow and predictable production numbers.
That's interesting, but wouldn't it be better to post that in the thread you created for discussion of breakthru supercapacitor tech?
Tesla seems to assign Vins for the Model 3 based on the color and wheel options. They will assign a series of vehicles with identical options all at once. Then they build them one after another in this way as well as far as I can tell.
Simplified hypothetical example: One Monday is all Red w/Aero. The next Monday is all Silver w/o Aero. etc.
Dunno how much it does or does not help with overall speed, however.
I always wondered how it works in the paint shop. Like, I imagine there needs to be a bit of time between colors to clean or swap nozzles and stuff. Would like to know how flexible they can be.
Seems like a bit of an overreaction by Bloomberg. Take a little bit of data and rush out a story instead of looking deeper into what really might be going on. If people commenting here can dig deeper when we have other jobs and responsibilities, why can't Bloomberg when it is their job.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Inside EVs mobile app
Production seems still to be well below target, but it looks like buttocks are being kicked, axes swung, heads sent rolling etc so perhaps we shall see a sudden leap to 5,000 a week after all!
I saw a fascinating documentary on how they avoid wastage during spray painting in industrial settings. The paint droplets are electrically charged, and the object being painted is given an opposite charge. This attracts the droplets to what is being painted, which greatly reduces overspray and wasted paint.
But exactly what process is used to switch from one paint color to another, I don't know. My guess is that switching colors is mostly or completely automated, controlled by valves in the feed lines, and that they just spray some of the new paint color out until the lines and nozzles are all clear of the previous color.
If they had to physically swap out nozzles and other parts by hand then that would take much longer and would be much messier. When I was working in a web press print shop, there would be an extended period of down time between print runs, to clean out the old ink, clean the printing press rollers, and put in new ink. That was a lot of time wasted, and I can't imagine an auto assembly plant putting up with a similar process for switching paint colors.
It's a trivial problem to solve anyway. You could also do it by multiple sprayers, one for each colour. Hardly an insurmountable problem is it.
And.. It's crashing again. May I dare say, it will crash again and again, to maintain same average production rate
Here is how I think tesla will hit 10k Model 3 per week.
What's the excuse this time?
You might consider the "Logistic function":
The reason is you can enter the existing data and draw a projected "S" curve to the expected, maximum rate. Then as time moves forward, adjust the factors.
They are doing a pre-announced shutdown to make changes to the line to allow for greater output.
Throwing out more 'smart' machinery and replacing it with humans I assume?
I don't believe so. Part of it is probably related to adding the front motor and related bits.
Also, at least some of the parts of the line that got humanized are supposed to be automated again in the future.
It will be interesting to see the May Model 3 sales, I guessed 6500 in the USA and 500 in Canada... I wonder how close I am. ~
You can say any silly and downright laughable thing you like (I literally could not stop myself from chuckling at your FUD as I wrote this) -- including insisting the moon really is made of green cheese and the Earth really is flat.
InsideEVs' Monthly Plug-in Scorecard for May will come out in just a day or two, and then you'll have to grasp for another straw, another equally silly bit of Tesla hater FUD, because this bit here will be shown to be wrong when that chart is published.
I don't know that Elon has specifically said so, but a lot of people think that's the case. That is, that using human labor is just a temporary fix until Tesla figures out a more practical way to automate that part of the production line.
However, as Elon noted when he talked about the "flufferbot" problem, some assembly procedures really do need a human touch and will be either too difficult or too expensive to automate with today's robotic tech. Eventually, of course, robots should exceed our own abilities in nearly everything, but that day is probably at least decades if not centuries away.
I'm not sure that's the function I was trying to show. My function is a discrete one. What I'm showing is a burst mode production.
The rate grows higher as time progresses, but the duration of each burst gets shorter. When we integrate it over time, it shows a linear plot, meaning average rate of production per unit time is a constant.