Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/881969
40 SMT Magazine • October 2017 the question of "left-shift," that is the reinstate- ment or increase in the level of incoming in- spection. There are two problems associated with this. Firstly, there is the cost of labor. Adding indi- rect costs to manufacturing, after having en- joyed a good period of time without them, is going to be hard to accept. Then, there is the re- quirement of the skill and experience levels of those people who specify, manage and perform the tests. Even if we could find experienced peo- ple today, the cost of hiring engineers with de- grees who know about the various statistic de- pendent sampling rules and test result interpre- tation is going to be significant. In-house expe- rience is likely near to zero. It will be an uphill battle. To do nothing, however, would be like a ticking time-bomb. To raise the issue openly and vocally would invite a loss of confidence from customers. To put into place an active so- lution within manufacturing is a compelling al- ternative, so long as there is a positive cost jus- tification. In other words, the ROI is not just based on what disaster may or may not some- day happen. We are, after all, in 2017, so we should be looking for a smarter, modern solution to this problem. Rather than looking at each individ- ual element of the problem separately, it is bet- ter to create an overall specification for a ma- terial logistics system that will satisfy all of the key needs of the business. On the shopping list needs to be incoming inspection support, ma- terial logistics management and traceability. Especially in the electronics assembly indus- try, the solution needs to include support and understanding of complex processes, achieved by connection to automated processes, such as SMT machines, robots and associated inspec- tion and test equipment. The combined singu- lar solution then yields a net benefit for manu- facturing, rather than representing an addition- al cost. Justification of the complete solution is then so much easier than trying to get disparate solutions working together in an attempt to ad- dress the business-critical need for quality. To find a holistic, singular solution for the entire shopping list is the goal. In electronics as- sembly, a great deal more than 80% of materi- als are placed today with SMT machines, which are very complex with respect to the way ma- terials are used and consumed, especially when considering dual lanes, multiple modules and materials that exist in multiple instances. These same issues actually also apply to the latest as- sembly process robots, as well as some manual processes. To gather accurate traceability data requires precise communication with the machines themselves. Of course, machines in isolation don't usually understand what the materials are, other than their shape, so continuous refer- ence to a material identification, logistics, and management system is required, including the unique identification of each instance of a ma- terial carrier. It sounds like a lot of work, until you consider the values that can be gained. Typ- ically, using Lean material logistics, shop-floor material stocks can be reduced by between 75% and 95%. With accurate accountability of ma- terial usage and spoilage, unexpected materi- al shortages can be eliminated, leading in most cases to a vast reduction of buffer stock in the warehouse, which can double the number of material turns. The saving of material investment, plus the ability to utilize the process and material trace- ability data for active quality management al- ready yields a significantly short ROI. It is there- fore not necessary to justify investment in the software by talking only about potential disas- ters. With the built-in specialist support for in- coming inspection, where the rules and guides are already a part of the software, performing the various tests and inspections can now be done with a regular production operator skill level, trained only to follow the easy-to-use guides. COUNTERFEIT: A QUALITY CONUNDRUM " We are, after all, in 2017, so we should be looking for a smarter, modern solution to this problem. "