development of flexible manufacturing system

Yamazaki, Y., Sugito, K., and Tsuchiya, S.

Review:

Development of Flexible Manufacturing SystemYasuhiko Yamazaki, Katsuhiko Sugito, and Sojiro Tsuchiya

DENSO Corporation1-1 Showa-cho, Kariya-shi, Aichi 448-8661, JapanE-mail: YASUHIKO A [email protected][Received May 24, 2014; accepted July 10, 2014]

Since Denso started its Flexible Manufacturing Sys-tem (FMS) in the mid-1970s, we have continued to de-velop it in order to stay competitive in the face of mar-ket fluctuations. In this paper, we present a typicalnew production system that was developed at the endof the 20th century. One characteristic of this systemis that it has a longer life and lower facility life cyclecost than do other production systems in existence. Wethink this system has high potential in terms of pro-duction innovations. Since one of the most importantdevices for FMS is the robot, we hope this paper willbe a guide for new production systems and new devicedevelopment.

Keywords: flexible manufacturing system, robot, life-cycle cost, module, plug and play

1. Introduction

Competition among companies is becoming tougherand more global, not only competition in the same fieldor same manufacturing environment but also between dif-ferent fields or in different manufacturing environmentsextending over various areas. Companies must surviveagainst this backdrop.

In the automobile industry, because of the emergenceand spread of low-cost automobiles in emerging coun-tries, the diversification of power trains, such as hy-brid engines, due to global environmental problems andthe emergence of various safety products in response tosafety-oriented demands in the advanced countries, au-tomobile product specifications have become extremelydiversified and complicated. As a result, it has becomemore difficult for automobile parts manufacturers to fore-cast the future of business.

In order to survive in an environment of severe compe-tition, not only the development of competitive productsbut also the development of flexible manufacturing sys-tems that can adjust to changes in products or markets areneeded. Denso has worked on the development of a flex-ible manufacturing system since the early 1970s. In thisreport, an idea and case examples of flexible manufactur-ing system development are described.

2. History of Denso’s Manufacturing SystemDevelopment and Problems of FlexibleManufacturing System Development

Denso has a machine and tool division in charge ofconstructing core facilities in its production system de-velopment. Since its establishment in 1949, Densohas conducted its manufacturing business under this ba-sic guideline: “Important technology should be self-manufactured.” It has a machine and tool division forconstructing important facilities, facilities being part ofthe core of its manufacturing system development. It hasthus stuck to self-manufacturing. As shown in Fig. 1,Denso began developing stand-alone automatic machinesin the 1950s and then went to stand-alone automatic lines.Denso also rationalized product production and sub-linesand has extended the scope of its production system de-velopment to rationalize other product production and theentire factory. With this in its history, it started the devel-opment of flexible manufacturing systems to respond tovarious types of products in the early 1970s. In 1976, itcompleted the development of an automation line for me-ter gauges [1] and introduced the world’s first high-speed,multi-product automation system in the world. Flexiblemanufacturing systems have since been developed to re-spond to variations in quantity or design and to cover sev-eral product generations.

In its manufacturing development history, Denso haschosen its systems based on parameters such as uncertain-ties of production volumes and product lifecycles for thebasic design of its production lines. However, this guide-line has not been able to cover various recent changes.An unexpected change in production could result in in-conformity with the selected production system. Also, aneed for a flexible response beyond the fourth quadrantin Fig. 2 may now arise, and meeting needs is one of themost important factors in making a profit.

Since the 1990s in particular, not only product type andquantity but also product life has become uncertain. Aspecific example is shown in Fig. 3. Automobile partsmanufacturers need to beat the competition by not onlymeeting various requirements from automobile manufac-turers but also by securing sales and profits. As a re-sult, they now frequently improve and remodel productsin order to enhance their competitiveness, as shown inFig. 3. Table 1 shows four major changes in products

426 Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.26 No.4, 2014

https://doi.org/10.20965/jrm.2014.p0426

© Fuji Technology Press Ltd. Creative Commons CC BY-ND: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/

Development of Flexible Manufacturing System

rationalization rationalization rationalization rationalization rationalization

Pro

duct

ion

syst

em le

vel

Fig. 1. History of Denso’s manufacturing system development.

Fig. 2. Selection of manufacturing system. Fig. 3. Change of production in industries.

Table 1. Four product changes that affect production.

Types of product’s changes Influences for production systemFrequency of changes

Before early 1990s After late 1990s1. Addition of parts variation Change parts kinds Always Always2. Parts improvement Change of processing conditions Once / 3 years Once / 0.5 year3. Production curtailment, model changes Change of process sequences Once / 8–12 years Once / 2–4 years4. Marketing price reduction Improvement of productivity constantly irregular

that could influence production and their frequency of oc-currence. The changes are the following: (1) the additionof part variations, (2) product improvement, (3) produc-tion curtailment and model changes, and (4) price reduc-tions (requests from automobile manufacturers for lowersales prices). The development of flexible manufactur-ing systems in and after the 70s focused on (1) the ad-dition of part variations, and FMS has been establishedto cover this change [2]. However, due to frequent prod-uct improvements and product generation changes in andafter the 90s, the automobile parts manufacturers had to

remodel products many times and invest in new produc-tion lines, and the FMS that they used could not solve thisproblem. In addition, they had only fixed facility capabil-ity and could not meet requests for sales price reductions,which were larger than expected. Therefore, the lifecy-cle cost was expected to increase, and significantly lowerprofits were feared. As a production system that could re-spond to the frequent changes to products, a manual worksystem called the “cellular manufacturing system” wasproposed in the 90s [3]. However, since that system reliedon people’s manual work, human error could lead to re-

Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.26 No.4, 2014 427


3. Conditions Necessary for New Manufacturing System

Flex

ibili

ty le

vel o

f pr

oduc

tion

syst

ems

Market price reduction,Curtailment, Model change,

Production volume fluctuation

Mono production

Parts variation

Productivity (Automation rate)

Flexible manual line

Cellular manufacturingsystem

Flexible manufacturing system(FMS)

Transfer lineManual conveyor line

Manual system

New production system

Automated system

Fig. 4. Position of the new production line.

Table 2. Requirement of adaptability to changes for new production system.

3. Conditions Necessary for New Manufacturing System

4. Marketing price

reduction

3. Production curtailment, model changes

2. Parts improvement

1. Addition of parts variation

Types of changes

Continuous improvement of

productivity

Change of the number of associates,

and reuse of the surplus machines

Swift rearrangement taken several days

Human skill

Manual production system

Continuous improvementof productivity

Change of the number of machines, and reuse of the

surplus machines

Swift reconstructiontaken several days

Versatility given in advance

New Production System

High productivity from the beginning

Disposition and new construction

Reconstructiontaken several months


Existing FMS

4. Marketing price reduction

3. Production curtailment, model changes

2. Parts improvement

1. Addition of parts variation

Types of changes

Continuous improvement of

productivity

Change of the number of associates,

and reuse of the surplus machines

Swift rearrangement taken several days

Human skill

Manual production system

Continuous improvementof productivity

Change of the number of machines, and reuse of the

surplus machines

Swift reconstructiontaken several days


New Production System

High productivity from the beginning

Disposition and new construction

Reconstructiontaken several months


Existing FMS

duced productivity and degradation of quality. Also, witha production system that focuses mostly on labor costs, amanual work system would be exposed to fiercer compe-tition with foreign manufacturers that take advantage oflower labor costs, and it is obvious that this situation willresult in the hollowing out of domestic industry. And, incountries with low labor costs, we estimated the produc-tivity increase could not cover the labor cost increase, andneeds for automation suitable to the labor cost must havegrown. Therefore, we believed needs for flexible automa-tion were growing high.

We worked on the development of a new manufacturingsystem based on highly productive automation systems tosuccessfully respond to a change in the assembly lines,where 40% of our employees work.

Figure 4 shows the position of the developed system.In the past, manual tasks were re-emphasized, despite lowproductivity, in order to achieve more flexible responsesto changes. However, the present development aims torealize a flexible manufacturing system with emphasis onhighly productive automation.

3. Conditions Necessary for New Manufactur-ing System

To make a necessary response to changes, the advan-tages and disadvantages of the past FMS were analyzed.Then, the manual work system’s methods [4–6] of re-sponding to change that were considered to be appro-priate were analyzed. The results of both analyses were

extracted as necessary conditions for a new productionsystem, and these results are shown hereinafter. Table 2shows the detailed relationship between these results.

(1) Addition of parts variations

Condition: Versatility given in advance (as in FMS)

(2) Product improvement

Condition: Quick and efficient modification

(3) Production curtailment, model changes

Condition: Increase/decrease in the number of facil-ity units in accordance with facility load (reflectingmanual production)

(4) Marketing price reductions

Condition: Productivity improvement during opera-tion (reflecting manual production)

We proposed many concepts for new manufacturingsystems that meet these conditions. In this paper, the“protean production system,” newly developed from theviewpoint of automated facilities, is explained as a typi-cal system.

4. Development of Protean Production Method

4.1. Concept of New Manufacturing SystemFigure 5 shows a concept for the new production

system that we aimed to develop in the present study.



4. Development of Protean Production Method 4.1 Concept of New Manufacturing System

Swift reconstructions to adapt product changes

Reuse of surplus machines

New Robot

New CPU

Kaizen idea

Enhancement

CurtailmentArrange the number of machines to adapt the change of production

volumeProductivity upgrade by adopting

Kaizen ideas and new equipments

Swift reconstructions to adapt product changes


New Robot

New CPU

Kaizen idea

Enhancement

CurtailmentArrange the number of machines to adapt the change of production

volumeProductivity upgrade by adopting

Kaizen ideas and new equipments

Fig. 5. Concept of the new protean production system (PPS).

The system has automation facility technology that canquickly respond to product changes and utilizes on-siteimprovement of the facilities so that the facilities can beused for a long time. As a result, the lifecycle cost ofproduction can be reduced significantly. This system wasnamed the Protean Production System because the systemfacilities can be used for a long time by changing theirform to keep up with change.

4.2. Component Technologies of Protean Produc-tion System

Major development technologies that constitute theprotean production system are described below.

4.2.1. Lot Circulation Flow SystemFigure 6 shows typical production systems, including

(1) transfer line (TR), (2) flexible manufacturing system(FMS), and (3) assembly center (AC), in terms of the pro-duction volume and process aggregation rate (number ofprocesses that a single facility handles). The past way ofresponding to a change in product quantity is indicatedby the horizontal arrows in the upper figure where multi-ple AC or FMS are aligned depending on the load. Thismethod can add or delete independent AC or FMS affect-ing other AC or FMS, so it is easy to change the form ofthe system. However, in mass production, multiple facili-ties implement the same functions, as shown in the lowerright of Fig. 6 (upper), and this is less economical thanTR. We therefore aimed to develop a production systemthat would economically reach maximum efficiency forany production volume. For this purpose, we tried to real-ize a “system with a variable process aggregation rate,” inwhich TR, FMS, and AC can be swapped with no waste,as indicated by the diagonal arrows.

On the other hand, in TR, a single facility handles asingle process for a single job. Therefore, switching fromAC to TR requires a significant change in the operationprograms of the robots used for the facilities, so modelchangeover time and additional investment are needed.The characteristics of the lot circulation flow system that

small large

high

low TR

AC

TR

AC

Traditional measure

New measure

Production volume

Proc

ess

aggr

egat

ion

rate

high

low

Proc

ess

aggr

egat

ion

rate

small large

Production volume

Fig. 6. Measure for production volume fluctuation.

we developed are shown in Fig. 7. In the system, a sin-gle facility handles only one process at a time, even inAC as in TR. However, the single facility in AC processeswork pallets that circulate on a revolving conveyor, andit performs multiple processes as a result. This systemcan be realized by feeding multiple work pallets as a loton the revolving conveyor. This flow system can utilizethe same robot program throughout the production sys-tem forms of TR, FMS, and AC, and it can switch thesystem form quickly with no waste. Several line capabil-ities can be chosen by combining the number of facilitiesand the count of the lot circulations in accordance with



ABCD

EF

AB

C

D

EF

AB

CD

EF

AC

FMS

TR

Fig. 7. Quickly shift between AC, FMS, and TR by utilizingthe lot circulation flow system.

FMSTR

FMSAC

Reuse surplusmachine

FMS

FMSTR

FMS

Lot circulationflow

FMSTR

FMSAC

Reuse surplusmachine

FMS

FMSTR

FMS

Lot circulationflow

Fig. 8. Overview of the equipment reuse in lot circulationflow system.

the number of processes.The structure of equipment reuse realized by the lot cir-

culation flow system is shown in Fig. 8. When a newproduct has been developed, AC is first created for smallproduction volume. As the production volume increases,the number of facilities increases and the AC grows toFMS and to TR. When the production volume decreases,the number of the facilities decreases, and the FMS isswitched back to AC. Production finally ends at the endof the product’s life. Since new facilities become neces-sary in the factory for another new product, the excessfacilities that were used for the past products are reusedto make a new production line. This cycle is repeated.

The stable total domestic automobile production of re-cent years indicates that the decrease in production ofsome products will be offset by the increase in produc-tion of other products. If the abovementioned measurecan be taken, the system form will be changed to respondto various product changes, and the facilities that becomeunneeded due to decreases in production will be able tobe reused by new lines in the factory. As a result, the fa-cilities will be able to be used for a longer period of time,and the life cycle cost will be reduced considerably.

4.2.2. Function Divided ModulesThe facilities were modularized to respond to the fol-

lowing three changes.

- Only necessary facility functions can be quickly re-placed in accordance with a change in products with-out affecting the other functions.

- Proposals of on-site operators in terms of the im-provement of the facilities are easily employed to

Robot

PLC

Assembly

Transfer

Parts supplying

grasping

positioning

assembly

holding

positioning

feeding

separating

positioning

feeding

Pallet module

Parts supplying module

Robot hand module

Basic module

PLC

Function divided modules

Fig. 9. Function-divided modules.

further enhance productivity (utilization of improve-ment proposals).

- Progress in the world’s facility technologies canquickly be reflected to further enhance productivity(facility updates).

The characteristics of the present modularization areshown below.

In general, if facilities are configured with fine mod-ules, only related modules need to be changed to respondto changes, and additional investment in the form of re-placing the modules can be minimized. However, themodularization of components could increase initial in-vestment because the production cost of the componentscould be lower if they were produced as a single unit. Itis therefore necessary to optimize the modularization torespond to expected changes.

The final target is to minimize the facility cost for itsentire life, or its lifecycle cost (LCC). The LCC is calcu-lated by summing the following costs.

LCC = ∑ [ Initial cost + Running cost + Modelchangeover cost − Reuse effect − Facilityimprovement effect ].

To minimize the LCC, the functions of the assemblyfacilities were analyzed [7] and the relation between ex-pected changes and the functions expected to be affectedwas studied. Then, minimum modularization of facilitieswas carried out in three areas. The modules make up whatis called a function-divided module facility (Fig. 9).

(1) Components that directly contact objects are modu-larized to the extent possible:Robot hands, pallets, parts feeders, etc.

(2) Components that would not be affected by thechange are produced as a single unit:Base machines, conveyors, etc.

(3) Components that are expected to be improved soonare produced as replaceable units:Robots, controllers, etc.

Figure 10 shows a function-divided module facility de-veloped for car air-conditioner unit assembly facilities.



Fig. 10. Function divided modules in practice.

Standardized connector withthe ‘module identification flags’

All in one programmingBasicmodule

Module

Fig. 11. Plug and play technique between modules.

4.2.3. Plug and Play for Facility ModulesTo realize a system that can change form quickly with

no waste, quick reassembling of modules is also neces-sary so that production is not affected. For this purpose,we focused on plug-and-play (PnP) technology [8], whichwas first proposed for personal computers. With PnP tech-nology, simply plugging in hardware makes the environ-ment ready to function with no manual intervention re-quired. Applying this technology to facilities, we devel-oped a PnP technology for facility modules. As shown inFig. 11, the following three conditions for PnP were metwith the company facilities through connector standard-ization, the use of discrimination flags, ladder programhierarchization [9], and all-in-one programs.

- Mechanical and electrical elements can be connectedand disconnected.

- Connected devices can be discerned.

- Resources and device drivers can be assigned.

In order for the facilities to follow the progress ofrapidly-advancing facility element technologies and notbecome old-fashioned, we employed Device Net, theworld’s famous open-field network [10], for the facilities(Fig. 12). Fig. 13 is an overview of the protean productionsystem.

4.3. Verification of EffectThe developed protean production system has been

used at our automotive air conditioner factory since 1998.Two of the effects found in the six years of operation arepresented below.

Function divided modules

Basic module

PLC

Robot

Device Net

Fig. 12. Utilization of Device Net.

4.3.1. Response to a Change: Response to ProductionReduction and Product Generation Change

[Status of changes]There was a generation change in a certain transverse-

mounted type of automotive air conditioner unit that hadbeen manufactured for four years, and the production vol-ume of Line A (with 10 facilities) was expected to de-crease from 50,000 to 25,000 units per month. On theother hand, there arose a need to develop a new Line H(production capability of 25,000 units per month) for anew car air conditioner. With the previous type of pro-duction system, Line A would have been left with lowworkload, and additional facility investment would havebeen necessary for the Line H.

[Response]Five facilities were eliminated from Line A, the pro-

duction volume of which was expected to decrease. Theprocesses originally assigned to the ten facilities were as-signed to the remaining five facilities of the line, and thelot circulation was increased from 1 to 2. For the processconcentration, a robot facility difference correction tech-nology was applied to realize quick renovation [11]. Onthe other hand, the five facilities removed from the Line Awere redone by exchanging the function-divided modulesto be used for Line H (Fig. 14).

[Effect]The reuse of the facilities reduced new facility invest-

ment by 50%.

4.3.2. Response to a Change: Productivity Improve-ment after Operation

[Status of changes]The sales prices of automobile parts are not always

fixed but are changed according to market trends or designchanges. Faced with severe global competition, automo-bile manufacturers requested larger price reductions thanever around 1998. To secure the market share and profit,we needed to meet the request and reduce costs throughfurther productivity improvements. Since our previousproduction lines had already been highly automated, itwas difficult to reduce our personnel cost. Also, sinceproductivity was already set near the upper limit to max-imize the performance of the facilities, it was difficult tosignificantly enhance productivity.



Swift reconstructions to adopt product changes by;

‘Function divided modules’‘Plug and play techniques’


Modules

New Robot

New CPU

Kaizen idea

Enhancement

Curtailment Swiftly change the number of machines to adapt productions

volume changes by;‘Lot circulation flow system’

Continuous improvement of productivity by;


Swift reconstructions to adopt product changes by;



Modules

New Robot

New CPU

Kaizen idea

Enhancement

Curtailment Swiftly change the number of machines to adapt productions

volume changes by;‘Lot circulation flow system’

Continuous improvement of productivity by;


Fig. 13. Overview of the protean production system with new technology.

After

ABCDEFG

Before

ABCDEFG

Line

H

Line

Reuse

Curtailment

Fig. 14. Response to production curtailment and productmodel change by PPS.

0.91.01.1

1.2

1.3New PLC

New robot

years

Weight Reduction of robot’s handPr

oduc

tivity

Fig. 15. Trend of productivity by PPS.

[Response]Operators and service personnel at the production sites

discussed the production improvements. The operatorsproposed shortening the robot motion paths and reducingthe weight of hand units, and the service personnel pro-posed a new high-speed robot and a new PLC that couldshorten scan time. These proposals took advantage of thefunction-divided module configuration connected by theopen field network.

[Effect]Productivity has increased by 6.3% per year on aver-

age since the start of the operation, contributing to costreduction (Fig. 15).

4.3.3. LifecycleTable 3 shows the evaluation of the systems that have

been used for six years. Through actual product produc-tion reductions and product generation changes, it has al-

Table 3. Evaluation of PPS over six years.

Item Existing system PPS

Response to 150,000/month(Fixed)

10,000–150,000/monthproduction volume

fluctuationResponse to parts

2 week ∼ 3 month 2 days ∼ 1 weekimprovements,model changesImprovement of Fixed Improvingproductivity +6.3%/year

PPS (result)Manual system(assumption)

Existing FMS (assumption)

income

outgo

year1 2 3 4 5

Fig. 16. Trends of life cycle cost.

ready been confirmed that the facilities can be reused.Production improvements have been made constantly,mostly by on-site workers. Although the target lifecyclewas initially set to 15 years, the facilities have been usedfor 16 years.

Figure 16 shows the production lifecycle cost trend.Studies done on product changes that occurred in the sixyears after the start of the operations indicated significantprofit improvement over the cases in which the previousproduction systems, such as FMS or the manual operationsystem, were employed.

5. Conclusion

A new automated production system called the pro-tean production method has been explained. This system



was developed under the theme “development of a flex-ible production system” to reduce the lifecycle cost sig-nificantly by responding to rapid changes and using fa-cilities for a long period of time. The system began in1998, so it has been in use for 16 years. Twelve produc-tion lines using this system are still in operation at ourautomotive air conditioner factory, and three lines are stillin operation at another product factory. This fact atteststo the system’s high adaptability to changes. The systemreminds us of the value of highly automated productionlines, which have been the advantage of Japan’s manufac-turing industry. It also motivates on-site operators to im-prove productivity even though motivation had been lessassociated with highly automated production lines thanwith ones employing more manual labor. Therefore, itindicates that Japan’s manufacturing industry is still com-petitive in the global competition of today.

The production system was introduced because it wasexpected to trigger new robot evolution. Of course, oneof the most important units in the flexible manufacturingsystem is the robot.

The present production system was developed 16 yearsago, but its system concept is still valid and usable. Thesystem can make a direct contribution to business prof-its. While it ensures flexibility, its cost competitivenessis not significantly higher than that of other typical pro-duction lines. It can be further improved in terms of costcompetitiveness. The development of control software tofurther improve the plug and play structure of facilities,the simplification of robot teaching, and higher speed vi-sual equipment have been requested, but they were notable to be realized due to technological limitations at thetime, high initial investment, or the limited performanceof the production lines. Not only has there been recent ex-ponential progress in robot control technologies and costreductions of 3D visual devices, but dualarm robots, thesynchronized control of multiple robots, flexible hands,high-speed bin picking, and other production system com-ponent devices and control technologies have also experi-enced dramatic progress. With this progress, the presentsystem will be able to progress further. We hope that thesystem will trigger new robot or control technologies.

References:[1] K. Fukaya, S. Tsuchiya, and Y. Yamazaki, “Development of Rev-

olutionary Automation Line for Meter Gauge,” J. of Robotics andMechatronics, Vol.26, No.2, 2014.

[2] The Japan Society for Precision Engineering, “Production Systemhandbook,” CORONA Publishing Co., Ltd., 1992.

[3] Y. Tsuru, “Innovation and Evaluation of a Production System,” Nip-pon Hyouronsya Co., Ltd., 2001.

[4] T. Shinohara, “Impact from elimination of Conveyor. Self-contained Cell Production,” NIKKEI Mechanical, July 24th, pp. 20-38, 1995.

[5] T. Shinohara, “Encouragement of Inhouse Machine,” NIKKEI Me-chanical, August 5th, 1996.

[6] T. Fugimoto, “The Theory of Evaluation of a Production System,”Yuhikaku Publishing Co., Ltd., 1997.

[7] The Japan Society for Precision Engineering, “Foundation of Auto-matic Assembly,” Ohmusha Ltd., 1987.

[8] T. Shanley, “Plug and Play Architecture,” MindShare, Inc., 1985.[9] M. Aoki, “New Programming Technique for Programmable Con-

troller,” Kindaitosyo Co., Ltd., 1994.

[10] T. Kai, “Foundation of Fieldbus,” Ohmusya Ltd., 1995.[11] T. Koyama, “Feature; Opening of Robot Controller, Denso Robot

Controller NetwoRC,” Japan Robot Association, An organ bulletinRobot, No.121, 1998.

Name:Yasuhiko Yamazaki

Affiliation:DENSO Corporation

Address:1-1 Showa-cho, Kariya-shi, Aichi 448-8661, JapanBrief Biographical History:1986 Graduated from Shinshu University1986- Joined DENSO Corporation2009- Director of Driving Assist & Safety Manufacturing, DENSOCorporation2011- President, DENSO Barcelona S.A.2013- Director of Production Engineering Department, DENSOCorporation2014- Executive Director of Production Promotion Center, DENSOCorporation

Name:Katsuhiko Sugito

Affiliation:DENSO Manufacturing Michigan, Inc.

Address:One Denso Road, Battle Creek, Michigan 49015-1083, U.S.A.Brief Biographical History:1989 Graduated from Keio University1989- Joined DENSO Corporation2011- Vice President, DENSO Manufacturing Michigan, Inc.

Name:Sojiro Tsuchiya

Affiliation:DENSO Corporation

Address:1-1 Showa-cho, Kariya-shi, Aichi 448-8661, JapanBrief Biographical History:1975 Graduated from Nagoya University1975- Joined DENSO Corporation2011- Executive Vice President, Member of the Board of Directors,DENSO Corporation2013- Advisor, Senior Technical Executive, DENSO Corporation


Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

http://www.tcpdf.org

development of flexible manufacturing system

Documents