Creating a Bench Mark instead of Following one.

Even the best can be improved further:
1975-76: Under the Ministry of Petroleum, GOI, a nationwide study was undertaken for Diesel Conservation in Organised Road Transport Sector. The study covered about 28 states in the country. I, being the team leader of a team comprising about 24 members, had analysed the performance of all the State Road Transport Corporations across the country. With his firm belief that NOTHING is PERFECT and that even the best can be improved further, decided to undertake the study of a corporation which was adjudged already to be the best performing states in the country as per the evaluation of the ASRTU (Association of State Road Transport Undertakings).
In that year, While the average diesel performance at all India level was 4.65 Kilo meters per litre of diesel for the Ashok Leyland make of buses, the Gujarat State Transport Corporation (GSRTC) was showing a performance at 4.85 KMPL.

The field study started with an initial meeting with the Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Mr. Rathore, IAS, along with a large team of his executives and managers. They welcomed the idea of the study, which would validate their claims of being the best.

Further, it was decided that while all the regions and the depots were not performing equally, the best of the regions and the best of the depots in that region will be taken up for the study. Accordingly, the Mehsana Region and Ambaji Depot of the region was finally selected for the study. In that particular year, while the average diesel performance was 4.65 Kilo meters per litre of diesel for the Ashok Leyland make of buses, this particular depot was reported to be performing at 4.85 KMPL.

A full diagnostic study of the operating practices of the depot was conducted over the following one weeks time. The study brought out two major areas needing improvements, viz:
1- The driving habits of the drivers, and
2- the inadequacies in infrastructure and facilities for proper upkeep and maintenance of the vehicles. A report was prepared and was presented to a large group of management team, which was also attended by a team of the Indian Oil Corporation, who were the major suppliers of the petroleum products to the corporation.

The major findings of the report were presented and it was expressed by the author that if;

1: An additional complement of technical manpower (fitters and mechanics) of five was placed in the depot, and
2: An additional maintenance pit was provided,

Then, the performance of the depot can be raised from the existing level of 4.85 KMPL to about 4.95 KMPL.

Major comments:
At this stage, I faced the questions, which were oft repeated in my career, as below:

1: Mr. Chari, can you drive a bus?
2: Do you know how a bus is maintained?
3: Do you know what a FIP (Fuel Injection System) is.
4: Do you know that we are the best in the country.
5: Do you know that we have the best of the maintenance practices adopted in this depot.
6: Do you know that we have the best of the drivers deployed in this depot?

The answers to all the questions was a simple “No” from me.

Then they said when you don’t know how to drive a bus, or what is an FIP or how to maintain a bus, how do you think you can train our staff who are already giving the best performance? Added to this, when our own experts could not beat the figures, what can you, who doesn’t even know how to drive a bus or how to maintain a bus, can say that the figures of performance can be further improved.

However, I could not stop appreciating the objective and dynamic leadership of the Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Mr. Rathore, an IAS person, who went ahead saying that “All right, Mr. Chari. Here is my sanction for the additional five crew members as suggested by you, and I am right now giving my consent and sanction for an expenditure of Rs. 3 lacs for the additional maintenance pit, as asked by you.

As we have not been able to do beyond what we have achieved, and you think that it can be further improved, I would suggest that you take over the administration of the depot. I am offering all the technical, administrative and financial support to you. Just take over and show me your promised performance level of 4.95 Kms.

He further added that “While I know you wouldn’t be able to do what you are recommending, just show us an average of 4.86 from the existing 4.85 KMPL, and I will still be happy.

And the final nail in the coffin was put by his statement “I only hope Mr. Chari, that you will at least be able to retain our figures of 4.85 KMPL. Even at that I will be happy that we are really the best.”

The presentation meeting ended on the note that the implementation would start immediately, as all the required sanctions were already made.

It was of course a difficult situation and a bit embarrassing too, however, I decided to first learn at least to drive a vehicle, to get a feel of the steering and the clutch and gear systems. I approached Ashok Leyland, Chennai, suppliers of the vehicles, with a request to help me learn driving a vehicle. The company, which was participating in this all India study, readily agreed and requested the concerned State Road Transport Corporation in Chennai to help me. A date was fixed and the concerned Works Manager of the depot on Anna Salai advised me to come down to the depot/workshop at 23:00 hrs. of that day, when all the members would be free and the roads will be comparatively free of traffic. Having earlier driven many types of two wheelers, I, though had some uncomfortable feeling and nervousness, could indeed drive the vehicle on the main Mount Road in Chennai. Subsequently, I spent one more day in understanding what was an FIP, which turned out to be the Fuel Injection Pump, it’s setting, and other major maintenance needing components and assemblies of the bus.

After completing this orientation, I came down to Ambaji depot and the assignment was started in full vigour, on the 1st of January 1976. By this time, the concrete structure of the maintenance pit was also completed.

Two major activities incorporated were,
i- Training the maintenance crew on adjustments of the FIPs, Breaks, Accelerators, Air pressures in the tyres etc., and
ii- On a pre identified standard route, and using a specially refurbished bus, with a glass tank for diesel measurement, a series of driving tests, alongwith instructions on using the clutches, accelerators, breaks, and maintenance of optimum speeds, a drivers team was trained.

A new insight:

While undertaking the training of the maintenance crew, I noticed that suppliers of the Fuel Injection Systems, viz: M/s MICO Bosch, Bangalore have already provided the maintenance schedules to each and every corporation and they were strictly adhering to those schedules.
However, one new dimension was realised during these interactions.
It turned out that the Chassis manufacturers, viz: M/s Ashok Leyland manufactured only one type of the chassis and a standard engine. The buyers of these chassis used them to convert them in to either a truck or a bus.
This was the most critical observation. It was realised that if a chassis is used for a truck, it carries loads of almost up to 15 MT (of sugar cane) and still runs in the speed ranges of 60 to 80 kms/hr on the highways. However, if the chassis is converted to a bus, it also runs at the same speed range.
A bit of engineering knowledge and application of fundamental principles of Physics revealed that there was a class difference in the power required under the two different operating conditions.
Condition 1: When the chassis is converted to a truck: It carries about 15 MT (Though meant for 10 MT) and runs in speed ranges of 60 to 80 km/hr
Condition 2: When the chassis is converted to a bus: It carries about 3.5 MT (max 50 passengers with an average weight of 60 Kgs. Per person (including children) and an additional luggage weight of about 10 kgs./head) and also runs in speed ranges of 60 to 80 km/hr

If one goes by the power requirement, using basic and fundamental principles of physics, the bus requires just about one fourth of the power as required by the truck.
The natural question was “Why should we use the same engine for these two extreme conditions and requirements.
In this sequence, the author met the management representatives of the Ashok Leyland and it came out that as the requirement of the chassis for bus bodies is a very meagre portion as required by the trucks, it is not economical for them to design a separate engine for buses and hence they were supplying the standard design.

Looking for an alternative sub optimal solution:

Having come to know that there is a limitation in designing a separate engine for the buses, a small group meeting was organised and a brain storming session was conducted. Out of many ideas, one idea that emerged was “Can we reduce the power of the engine?”
Deliberations were held with engineering personnel and a study and understanding of the very fundamental operation of an engine was discussed. It came out that the power generated by an engine is a function of the fuel pumped in to the cylinders per stroke. If the fuel injected is lower, then the power generated will be lower. However it will bring down the efficiency of the engine.
Finding out a technical solution:
Taking off from the above, the groups spent time on finding out ways and means to achieve and try out the option. At this stage, I felt “Why not to talk to the manufacturers of the FIP?” Accordingly, I spoke to the manufacturers, viz: MICO Bosch, Bangalore, who readily invited me for a discussion.
The engineers of the company informed that it is technically possible to reduce the power of an engine by controlling the injection of the fuel, and in their terms they call it “DERATING” the system.
They also informed that by adjusting the springs in the FIP settings unit, this can be done, but they informed that technically the derating can not be and should not be done more than 12% of the normal settings, as otherwise the system will malfunction.
During the course of implementation, this measure was effectively implemented.
Other measures:
Having identified one of the major contributing factors, I could identify a few other parameters, which hamper the performance of a vehicle. They were identified as;
a- Air pressure in the tyres. A less inflated tyre adds to the drag on the road, and thereby results in the driver trying to accelerate the vehicle beyond the capacity of the engine, thereby consuming more fuel. An over inflated tyre would result in to jumping of the vehicle and uncontrolleable conditions, which normally force the drivers to reduce the speeds.
b- Timely calibration of the measuring instruments like the pressure gauges, diesel dispensing nozzles, Feeler gauges used for adjustment of the tappets of the cylinders etc. As regards the feeler gauges, it was observed that the gauges were very old, and over period, they have reduced in thickness, and thus they effected the actual dimensions.
c- Proper use of Clutch in combination with the breaks. The habit of clutch riding by drivers was rectified by properly explaining them the technical implications.
d- Use of gears appropriately synchronised with the speeds. The drivers were observed to be having a tendency of starting the bus in second gear, stating that the engine is powerful enough.
e- Proper gears to be used in up hill and down hill drives
f- Periodic lubrication of the various parts, as per the maintenance schedules. Changing of the gear oil in the gear boxes at proper intervals or use of vehicle, as old used oil carries metal debris and filings, which damage the cylinder liners and thereby effect the performance.
g- Speed controls: By discussing the subject with the manufacturers, it was identified that if the buses are operated in the speed ranges of 55 to 60 km/hr speeds, they give the best fuel performance. Over or under these ranges, the specific fuel consumption is higher.
h- Etc. etc.

Comparison of the pre and post training impact:
For ensuring that the pre and post training comparisons are fair, it was decided that all the trials and training of the drivers will be conducted on a standard route and a standard vehicle, thereby eliminating chances of any major variations.
Accordingly, with the help of the management, a standard route was identified which was about 15 kms. from the depot. All the trials were conducted on this standard road.
Similarly, to avoid any variations in different vehicles, one vehicle was specifically identified for use in all the trials.
Through the route of Drivers’ training and better maintenance of the vehicles, I was able to demonstrate a performance at 4.96 kmpl in a two weeks’ association. Specially designed formats were developed to keep records of this exercise.
The results were very much applauded by the management. At this stage, I offered that the depot may be run on the prescribed norms for a further period of at least a month and then only the performance be measured.
The new Bench Mark:
The corporation was impressed with the results and continued the efforts, to report an achieved figure of 5.1 kmpl over the next six months period.
Net Impact:
The corporation, subsequently decided to establish Diesel Conservation cells in all of their 72 depots across the state of Gujrat, and ever since, GSRTC has been maintaining the best performance status.
As of today, in 2009, the corporation is reported to be achieving average figures of about 5.25 kmpl.
Conclusion:
I am of firm view and believe that nothing is perfect and everything can be improved further.
The results mentioned above are only stopgap targets. If the manufacturers of the vehicles can design appropriate engines to meet the needs of the buses, the performance can be improved by leaps and bounds. Thus a real breakthrough can be achieved, and we can perhaps reach the western performance figures of almost about 8 to 9 kmpl..
This can be seen and understood in the light of a typical and privately run Bajaj autoriksha, used in the rural areas for inter town transport system in almost all the states in India. It is a very common sight to see them carrying up to 15 to 16 passengers and still running at speeds of 50 to 60 km/hr. That shows the power and capacity of the small engine used in the autoriksha, and so also the design of the chassis. On these lines, the much talked about Nano brought by TATAs is a case in sight. If only we could modify the shape, engine sound, add one more wheel and improve comfort levels and looks of the autoriksha, to make it look more like a car.
What is needed?
If we really want and desire to set benchmarks, there is a need for a total shift in the paradigm. The conventional ways of improvements have their own limitations, due to the inherent design of the system. Unless we prepare ourselves to give a totally new look to the products and processes, and prepare ourselves to consider all possibilities of change, these breakthroughs will not be realised.
This has happened in all those cases where people talk about latest of the technologies.
It is to be clearly understood that if it was not for Madam Curie, there would not have been radium. Same is the case with Thomas Alva Edison for his Incandescent bulb, Louis Pasteur for Penicillin, Abraham Bell for Telephone and so on and so forth.
Business Process Reengineering calls for a totally new way and new look at how things are being done and how differently they can be done.
The need is:• A totally OPEN Mind.
• Will to Change:
• Determination that if someone else has done it, why can’t I do it even better.
However, as all such landmark improvements take place only when decisions are taken. And the decision making power lies in the hands of the top management. The lower rungs of management and staff and workers do have ideas, but if they have to be implemented, some one has to take the decisions. And, further more, when we consider something entirely new, there always is a risk factor involved. The technical acumen, experiential and technical gut feeling and combined wisdom of the team members will always deliver the desired goals.