Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1484263
40 PCB007 MAGAZINE I NOVEMBER 2022 Newer equipment begets higher technology builds and thus, more revenue. e drawback is knowing how to get this product out the back door. ere are delays in electrical testing due to long test times using equipment that is not best suited for today's demand. Decision time: Do we update our equip- ment, or do we delegate it? is is a deep ques- tion with many variables. Usually, ET is just another department in a large operation. Pay- roll, utilities, supplies, and such are amortized and integral to the entire operation. In the decision-making process, one must evaluate the real cost of electrical test. Years ago, I had a conversation with a higher management indi- vidual at a large PCB manufacturer who can- didly stated, "Todd, I can't even spell electrical test." So, there you go. To really understand the cost of ET, you need to dig into the trenches of the operation. What are your standard cycle times, cost of equip- ment maintenance, supporting equipment cost and maintenance, down times, and the availability of spare parts for what are, many times, older equipment with no further OEM support? Once you have your arms around the cost of quality regarding ET, you can have a better idea where you stand. Now it's time to investigate whether my dol- lars spent on ET make sense. If I invest and update my ET theatre, what are my expected deliverables? Will one machine decrease my cycle time? Can I perform more tests such as 4-Wire Kelvin, buried passives, IR, and Hi- Pot? What capital budget do I have to work with? Interesting enough, although ET QA is a significant part of the overall process, many ET managers find that capital expenditures have been directed to the manufacturing process. "Make do" is the common response. us, the outsource option make sense. We now have the cost of ET in our hands and the cost/availability of upgrading. Is the over- all cost to upgrade feasible against the gains expected? Many times, the answer is "no." Although the upgrade provides advantages over current methods, it does not significantly reduce cycle time as the equipment is quickly saturated with the higher technology product and many times, cycle time increases. Now, there are two camps on the outsourc- ing topic. ere are those who always believe that "we can do it ourselves." ere are ben- efits to that if you have the knowledge, equip- ment, and experience to take ET head-on and provide all the deliverables your customers expect. It is imperative that you know your cost of quality, or you are living in a dream and wasting dollars on your bottom line with inef- ficiency and lost time. Reinventing the wheel is not always the best option. e other camp embraces new ideas and has learned that the cost of quality does not calcu- late favorably to invest large amounts of capital to just get to the technology level required by increasing demand. ey already have calcu- lated that reinventing the wheel will only result in a flat tire. Here, outsourcing is the favorable option. Again, this can be just sending prod- uct to a service center to be tested using an on-demand scenario (which many do). Maybe you just want to lose the ET headache alto- gether. ere are options where outsourc- ing the entire ET operation may be feasible. Scenar io s may include ju st equipment , equipment and labor, or even full black box integration. No more equipment/technology Newer equipment begets higher technology builds and thus, more revenue. The drawback is knowing how to get this product out the back door.