Author Archives: Dr. Ron

About Dr. Ron

Materials expert Dr. Ron Lasky is a professor of engineering and senior lecturer at Dartmouth, and senior technologist at Indium Corp. He has a Ph.D. in materials science from Cornell University, and is a prolific author and lecturer, having published more than 40 papers. He received the SMTA Founders Award in 2003.

Taking Apart the Teardown

Posted on by

I think the analysis is a little off in a recent posting by Dominique Numakura about the cost of a product like the iPad.

Numakura states: “Consumer electronics product manufacturing cost must be less than 33% of retail price. Total component cost must be less than 25% of product retail price.”

In a teardown analysis performed for Dartmouth by my colleague Jim Hall of ITM, Jim used cost metrics similar to Numakura’s, for a hairdryer. The hairdryer cost $20 at a CVS drugstore. The same model is manufactured overseas for CVS and other stores, like Walgreen’s, with perhaps a different label. After manufacture, the hairdryer is shipped to a distributor. From the distributor, it was then shipped to the drugstore. So assuming that the manufacturer has to make it for 33% of $20, or about $6.70, the distributor needs to get $3 dollars or so, shipping several times adds another few dollars and it gets to the drug store for $13-$16 or so. Many hands have touched it by now, all adding cost.

For something more expensive and complex like the iPad or a laptop, this analysis is considerably off. There is no distributor, the number of hands touching these devices is minimized by the parent company. Less shipping is involved. I’m sure folks that make these products wish the margins were like Numakura suggests.

Recent analysis performed by iSuppli, which I think Numakura takes issue with, is closer to the mark, I think. iSuppli suggests that the BoM (bill of material) for the entry level iPad ($499 retail) is about $250 or 50% of the sales price. I actually think iSupply’s estimate of the assembly cost ($9.00) is too low.

In the past, Prismark had suggested that assembly and test is in the 10 to 15% range of total price, indicating something like $50 for our iPad. From another assembly cost perspective, a rule-of-thumb is that it costs between $0.05-$0.10 per component to assemble and test an electronic device. It is hard to imagine that the iPad has only 200 total components (including passives!), that a $9 assembly cost would require. Hence, I think the assembly cost would be more than $25. If so, this suggests a total cost of about $275 for the $499 iPad, still leaving a quite healthy gross margin of 45%. Commodity type electronics in the multiple hundred dollar range (e.g., a “vanilla” laptop or a 32” flat panel TV) almost certainly don’t enjoy these levels of gross margins; probably more like 10 to 20%.

While preparing to write this post, I shopped at a BJs. I saw a 32″ flat panel TV for $379. It is hard to image that the BoM for this TV would be $95 as Numakura suggests.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Is the Time Right for Solderless Assembly?

Posted on by

Folks,

Apex 2010 appeared to be a great success. Attendance was high and my “Lead-Free Assembly” workshop broke a personal record of about 60 attendees.

While at the show, I was invited to a meeting on solderless assembly, ably organized by Phil Marcoux. About 15 people were at the meeting. The intent was to crystallize what is needed to make solderless technology a reality. Many have suggested that solderless assembly’s time is now. The main reason being the challenges of lead-free solder-based assembly and its perceived lack of reliability. Some believe that solderless technology is a next logical step in assembly on the order of importance of the advent of SMT assembly.

I was well-behaved at the meeting (I am a something of a renowned skeptic of solderless assembly), but pointed out, early on, that any solderless assembly technique (the Occam process a likely contender), must be disassemble-able to meet the requirements of WEEE.

Much spirited but pleasant discussion transpired related to what is needed to make this technology a reality. Several folks mentioned that a “killer app” would be needed to kick-start solderless assembly, and supply the considerable monies needed.

Finally, near the end of the meeting, Phil, suggesting I had been too quiet, and asked me to chime in. I said that I agreed that a killer app was needed, and proceeded to tell a story. It went as such:

Let’s say it was several years ago and Steve Jobs heard about solderless technology. He was wondering if it might be right for Apple’s future killer app, the iPad. So we are invited to visit him on Infinity Drive. After confidentially agreements are signed, he starts speaking. He proceeds to tell us that the BOM for the entry level iPad is $250 and assembly adds $9. Reliability of lead-free products has been equal to, or better than, leaded products and lead-free enables finer PWB lead spacings than does leaded solder. So he is not unhappy with lead-free assembly, but would like to do solderless technology, if it makes sense. The assembled cost has to be less than the $259 and solderless reliability must be better. We would need to be ready for an April 2010 launch.

I think the cost metrics in this scenario would be difficult for a solderless technology to compete with. And, even if the price was a few dollars less, what is the compelling reason to change?

SMT arrived because through-hole technology could not meet the miniaturization requirements of modern electronics. We could not have modern electronics without SMT. What are the compelling reasons solderless technology should be used in an application like the one discussed above? The answer still escapes me.

Cheers,
Dr. Ron

Sans Data, Toyota ‘Whiskers’ Claims Razor Thin

Posted on by

After my recent post on the fact that no data link tin whiskers to the Toyota sudden acceleration issues, there continue to be more posts saying things like “Tin Whiskers Implicated in Unintended Acceleration Problems.”

Many of these posts link back to the earlier TechEye post. The basis for all of the posts is a paper written by EurIng Keith Armstrong titled, “Toyota ‘Sticking Pedals’ Recall is a Smokescreen,” and subtitled, “Their sudden unintended acceleration problem is caused by electronics either due to EMI, lead-free soldering or software ‘bugs.’ ” It does not appear that Armstrong’s paper was sponsored or refereed.

Since it appears that this entire wave of reporting implicating tin whiskers, in this important issue, emanates from Armstrong’s paper, it is helpful to quote his entire comments on tin whiskers

9.0 Lead-free soldering:
In recent years, various countries and trade blocs (including the European Union) have banned the use of lead on electrical solder, on the basis that lead going into landfill when electrical and electronic products are disposed of is bad for the environment, and hence for people.

But many accuse them of being shortsighted -– lead has been added to solder in quite large amounts for many decades because it made the other main constituent, tin, behave much better, considerably improving reliability.

Now that lead has been removed from solder, which is now mainly tin (with a little silver and copper added) all sorts of new possibilities arise for short-circuits and open-circuits, and intermittent shorts and opens, mainly on printed circuit boards (PCBs) and mainly associated with small-footprint integrated circuits (ICs), especially ball-grid arrays (BGAs).

Its really just another cause of intermittent or fixed short-or-open circuits in electronic PCBs and modules – but one that would not have been any problem until a few years ago, and so could have caught Toyota by surprise.

John R Barnes has created a monumentally huge library of references to the problems of lead-free soldering, especially tin whiskering, see www.dbicorporation.com/rohsbib.htm. Prepare to be totally overwhelmed!

Removing lead from solder has the following effects:

9.1 Tin whiskers
These will grow out of soldered joints and can contact other conductors, causing short-circuits between PCB copper traces and the pins of connectors. They are often no longer than 0.5mm (about 1/50th of an inch) but can grow to 1mm (about 1/24th of an inch) or longer, especially in damp conditions.
Even at 1/50th of an inch they can short between the pins on a modern integrated circuit (IC). And the process of removing the PCB for inspection can brush them off, so you never find them.
And if you didn’t accidentally brush them off, they are so thin they are very hard to see – you need a powerful microscope. They are as fine as the finest spider-web threads, yet can carry sufficient current to short-out the electronics. You won’t see them unless you are looking for them.
Being so thin, they can wave around in the breeze and/or due to shocks, vibration and acceleration, causing intermittent short-circuits.

The iNEMI organization has published guidelines (www.inemi.org) on how to ensure that tin whiskers don’t grow too long, but I don’t know to what extent these are followed by suppliers of electronics to the car industry in general, or Toyota in particular.

(Photo courtesy NASA)

Note that, in this paper, there are no data or any evidence regarding tin whiskers discussed from investigating any of the vehicles in question. All of this paper is opinion. In addition, the title of Armstrong’s paper leaves no room for any other cause: it has to be electronics or software. This position is very strong indeed for having no supporting data.

More recently Bob Landman added these comments to the tin whisker discussion: “The increased use of electronics in automobiles when mixed with RoHS can make for a deadly cocktail. We don’t know what the causative agent [in regard to the Toyota recalls] was, but I have heard recently of new autos showing up at dealers that will not start. That cause has been linked to tin whiskers.”

Bob heard this. There is no report and no data. Until Bob gives us a reference for some analysis and data, his comments are little more than hearsay. I searched the web in vain to find information related to Bob’s quote. In addition this comment is a little surprising, tin whiskers are usually associated with a certain amount of aging, hence not usually found in new products.

That tin whiskers exist and cause failures is irrefutable. NASA has an excellent website related to tin whiskers and failures caused by them. However, the total number of tin whisker fails reported is less than 100. Many other types of electronic failure modes would appear to be much more common.

My purpose of writing this post is not to suggest that tin whiskers are not a concern in lead-free electronics. However, it is a fundamental principle in engineering and science to only make pronouncements on how something failed, when they can be supported with data. No data support implicating tin whiskers in the Toyota incidents. It is also troubling how readily many people referenced the work of Armstrong without apparently reading what he said and checking his sources and lack of data.

Cheers,
Dr. Ron

‘The Foibles and Strengths of People’

Posted on by

Folks,

A reader commented that he liked the Patty and The Professor stories for their technical content, but he felt there was “too much story.” So, I feel an explanation for why I think the “story” part is important.

Manufacturing is accomplished by integrating people, processes, equipment, materials, components and so forth.  Most of our discussion on improving electronic assembly in blogs and other media, focuses on materials, equipment, processes, BGAs, QFPs, lead finishes, PWBs, etc. Look back at the first sentence and compare it to the second sentence. The thing we seldom discuss in examining ways to improve quality and productivity in our electronic assembly processes are the foibles and strengths of people.

Let’s explore the people aspect of electronics assembly by way of two examples, ACME and AJAX. ACME has the best equipment, the processes have been optimized by designed experiments to produce outstanding quality, and they use the best materials. AJAX has similar things going for it. However, at the end of the year, AJAX has noticeably greater productivity and profit.

What is the difference? People.

At AJAX, the workers have an understanding of the importance of productivity and a passion for their role in it. As a result, a stencil is seldom misplaced and a component placement machine is almost never without components in the feeders. In the long run, this type of attention adds up to 10% or so greater productivity and perhaps 20% greater profit.

This is why when Patty, Pete, The Professor and now Rob, are on an adventure, they clearly focus on the technical issues, but never fail to catch the people issues, too.

And so it is with all of us, people are our greatest resource.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

?

Put Brakes on EMI ‘Conclusions’

Posted on by

I know and respect the team at Circuitnet, but it seems like they made a pretty serious goof the other today.  Their top story  had headlines stating, “Tin Whiskers Behind Toyota Recall.”  The link to this story takes us an article with the title “Electronic Tin Whiskers may be behind Toyota recalls.”

So we start with a headline telling us that tin whiskers are behind the recall and when we go to the main article we see that tin whiskers may be behind the recalls.  The person that the article is quoting is Keith Armstrong an EMI (electromagnetic interference) expert.  In this article Armstrong states that EMI may be the culprit in Toyota brake malfunction.

From what I see in the article, Armstrong has no data, and has not looked at a failed Toyota brake system.  He is just arguing that EMI may be the culprit.  Who knows?

Armstrong is then quoted as saying that tin whiskers, in the lead-free solder, may be to blame for the recalls and he then references work by John Barnes.  Barnes’ exhaustive summary has nothing to say about tin whiskers in Toyota braking systems, just a bit about tin whiskers in general in the over 1,000 pages about lead-free issues.  Armstrong is then quoted as saying that the tin whisker problem, “has caused serious problems in the computer industry previously.”  The article at this link is dated Nov. 12, 2002, and is simply a call for papers on tin whiskers at a conference.  Strong suggestions for having no data!

I don’t want to minimize the concern for tin whiskers, but the headline in Circuitnet and the article it links to have nothing factual to do with tin whiskers in the Toyota recall situation.  Given the seriousness of this situation, this misleading reporting is troubling indeed.

Cheers,
Dr. Ron

P.S.: One commenter to the main article points out that Toyota uses leaded solder in the brake electronics.  I don’t know if this is true, but given the RoHS exemption that auto electronics has for lead, it would not surprise me.

In summary: Double yikes!!

The Hurdles of New Technology Adoption

Posted on by

Every so often a new electronics assembly technology comes along, and I am asked my opinion about it. The latest “new” technology for assembly is RF Activated “Green” Nano Solder.

My response when asked about this? I think Intel’s caveat in the article tells it all: “Intel cautioned, however, that several engineering refinements need to be made before the new RF soldering method can be used commercially.’

Interpretation: This puppy needs $20 million of R&D before it is ready.

Nano solders have been studied for years. They are interesting and have promise, but there are big hurdles. People will say they want an exciting new technology like this, until they find that the soldering material costs much more than their current one, they need new equipment, etc. All of a sudden, today’s process (disappointments included) don’t look so bad. It is hard to replace an incumbent process unless there is a strong need — and typically it must be at equal or lower cost. These will be challenges for this proposed process.

So my take is, it is interesting process science, but let’s wait to see more data, prototypes and cost estimates before we get too excited.

Any new technology process must be evaluated under the following criteria:

  • If “disruptive,” it must meet an overwhelming need. E.g.: If your process has a 95% first-pass yield and the 5% of the product that is repaired only cost a small amount, you would be unlikely to take a chance on a unproven technology when the time comes to invest money in it.
  • The new technology’s implementation must have a minimum of disruption, if implemented in a current process and the cost must be equal or less than today’s process. E.g.: You want to improve your process in #1; however, if the new process requires radically new equipment and/or materials, you would be hesitant to adopt.
  • The process will need several years to prove itself. You know the problems with today’s process, but what are the problems with the new process? You likely want yield and reliability data. These requirements take some time.
  • You must consider the improvements in the old process. Often a new process will aim at where the old process is today, not recognizing that the old process is often improving by the time the new process is implemented.

Using these criteria, let’s look at the implementation of SMT technology in the age of through-hole (TH), circa 1980. How did it measure up to these four criteria?:

1. SMT met an overwhelming need. One simply could not design a small, high performance personal product, like a mobile phone, with PTH.

2. SMT lines evolved from PTH lines, sometimes with radical changes, but the need overwhelmed any disruption.

3. Much work was performed on SMT products to demonstrate that reliability was acceptable.

4. The need for SMT was so great that PTH’s “future” was not an issue.

Contrast this to the SMT process discussed above (that has 95% first-pass yield) with the 5% fallout reworkable. It becomes difficult to envision making any “disruptive” change to a process like this .. it just won’t pay financially or in any other way.

Your comments?

Dr. Ron

Read more: http://blogs.indium.com/blog/an-interview-with-the-professor/0/0/an-interview-with-the-professor

Battling ‘The Big O’

Posted on by

Patty and Pete were able to squeeze in nine holes of golf, although it was stressful for Patty. Pete was a good golfer, but not in Patty’s league; he typically shot in the low 80s for 18 holes compared to Patty’s 68-72 range.

Today, going into the 9th hole, Patty was even par and Pete was one under. He was teasing her relentlessly.

The ninth hole was 532 yards long. Patty used all of her recent training and focused as she drove the ball. Her swing speed hit 114 mph and with a 4 mile an hour tailwind, her drive was 291 yards, 30 yards beyond Pete. Her second shot, with a five wood was 12 feet from the pin. Her putt was dead center for an eagle, Pete’s 8-foot birdie putt lipped out of the hole. Whew! She beat Pete by one stroke! Pete was still thrilled that he gave Patty such a close call.

As they left the golf course, Pete said, “John is really working miracles at the factory, given the constraints he is working under. He has developed a disciplined approach to changeovers and uptime, and has eliminated most waste. But the factory really needs to be cleaner and more organized. With all that is on his plate, and no cleaning staff, he will have trouble implementing a 5S. It will be hard to win new customers with the place looking like it does.”

The next morning, as they prepared for the meeting with Oscar Patterson, Patty noticed that John’s color was ashen.

“John, are you alright?” Patty asked.

“You’ve never been in a meeting with Mr. Patterson. He can be a bit … uh …. difficult,” John stammered.

“From what I hear he is a ruthless, brutal dictator,” Pete added.

John did not disagree.

Patty thought it might be best to call back to her site GM to clarify her mission.

The GM told her, “This guy is a blowhard. It would be great if you could review with him your findings and get his buy-in. But, don’t take any grief from him. He forgets that he sold us his company. Now he has a boss, and it is me. I told him you were going to perform an audit and I want him to work with you.”

So Patty, John, and Pete went to Oscar Patterson’s office to review their findings. Patty was immediately intimidated by him. He was a huge man, with a ponderous stomach. But the posters in his office were the worst. One read “I’m the Boss, you aren’t.” Another read, “My way or the highway.” Then she saw, “The Golden Rule of Management: Whoever has the gold makes the rules.” The last one she took time to read was especially troubling: “It’s a question of mind over matter: I don’t mind and you don’t matter.”

Patterson spoke first, “Let’s get this over with, I don’t have time to waste on this nonsense. I’m the boss and I’m responsible for profits, so give me your crap and get out of here.”

The Professor always advised Patty that after an audit it is best to present the strengths first and then the problems. However, never call the problems “problems”; call them “opportunities for improvement.”

“I learned this from my colleague Joe Belmonte,” The Professor told her. She had since met Joe at a few trade shows and was impressed by his wealth of experience and in-depth knowledge of assembly processes.

She started by discussing the very good 25% uptime, and the fact that the operators were quite good at changeovers. Pete had pointed out that the operators told him that John was responsible for both of these successes. The operators liked and respected John, but realized he had a tough job working for Patterson.

As imagined, Patterson warmed up to this compliments.

“I told ACME management that buying my company was a good deal. We cut costs and I am able to make a profit even though I have losers like John working for me,” Patterson bragged.

Patty was furious at this comment. Pete looked like he was going to jump across the table and take a swipe at the “Big O.” John just sat there looking defeated.

“This isn’t as bad as I thought it would be,” boomed Patterson. “Continue.”

Patty then reviewed the 7 mudas. She had been surprised that the company did quite well in this part of the audit also, undoubtedly attributable to John:

1. Overproduction
2. Unnecessary transportation
3. Inventory
4. Motion
5. Defects
6. Over-Processing
7. Waiting.

Hence, Patty’s comments were positive on this topic.

“You’se guys aren’t so bad,” boomed Patterson. “I told you I was good at generating profits, even stuck with a dufus like John here,” he finished.

At that comment, Pete’s faced turned the most crimson Patty had ever seen.

Patty then went on to “Opportunities for Improvement.” She thought she would start with 5S.

“We performed a 5S audit of your facility. This manufacturing philosophy consists of:

1. Sorting
2. Set in Order
3. Shining
4. Standardizing
5. Sustaining the Improvements,” she started.

“As ACME strives to get more customers for our contract manufacturing services, 5S is an important consideration, as many of our current and future customers practice Lean and especially 5S at their facilities,” Patty added.

As she went on, she reviewed the lack of order and cleanliness in the facility. She had photos of dried solder paste on the stencil printers, the flux and dust “stalactites,” and several other examples of 5S violations. Patterson’s face soon matched Pete’s in its level of sanguinity. But he said nothing.

Patty then volunteered that she and Pete would work with John and his team to implement a 5S if desired.

Patty could see Patterson was ready to blow, but she felt she must go on. The only topic left was turning off the nitrogen in the wave soldering machine. As Patty played the wave soldering video, surprisingly, Patterson seemed interested.
She continued, “We think an opportunity for improvement would be to reinstate use of nitrogen in the wave soldering process. First-pass yields have dropped from 94% to 87%, thus increasing rework. Or, perhaps, implementing a more robust wave solder flux. I contacted a wave flux vendor and I have some recommendations.”

At this Patterson became even redder in the face, in a rage he grabbed Patty’s laptop and threw it on the floor. Instinctively Pete dove for the laptop, spun around and inserted his chest between it and the floor. Patty had never seen such agility in a 45-year-old man.

“You bozos are worse than John the clown here!” he shouted, as he gestured toward John.

Patterson then kicked the trio out of his office. Pete was ready for a fight, but John and Patty, both visibly shaken, held him back.

Patty immediately called Sam, her GM, and told him in detail their findings and what happened at the meeting. She gave a good impression of what John had accomplished in spite of Oscar Patterson.

“Wow! Patty, I’m so sorry. I didn’t expect it would be this bad. I’ll change my schedule and fly there today. This situation will not stand. Why don’t you and Pete take a break and meet me for dinner at Dinardo’s at 7 PM? Bring John with you.”

Patty was glad that she backed up her files the night before, even though it looked like her laptop was fine.

Colonial Williamsburg was only a 45-minute drive away, and it was just 10 AM. Taking Sam’s advice to “take a break,” she and Pete drove away and toured this beautiful living museum. They also had lunch at the Trellis.

Surprisingly, with the Williamsburg respite and all of the walking Pete and Patty did, they were more relaxed and hungry than they thought they would be.

On the way back to Dinardo’s, Patty asked Pete, “How did you save my laptop? I’ve never seen such an agile, athletic move.”

“Twenty-nine years of beach volleyball,” Pete answered. “I was good enough that I tried out for the Olympics in ’92. Humbling experience,” he added.

About 10 minutes before they arrived at the restaurant, Patty’s mother called with updates on the wedding plans … only 10 weeks and counting!

John had arrived early at the restaurant and Patty and Pete met him. He looked nervous.

“John, how’s it going?” asked Pete.

“It’s hard to be optimistic,” John answered.

On that note Sam walked into the restaurant.

“This must be John Davis, the new GM, having replaced Oscar Patterson,” Sam stated with great cheer.

The words didn’t seem to register with John. “Congratulations John, well deserved,” Patty and Pete chimed in.

In the few days they were there, Patty and Pete had grown quite close to John. As the information sank in, tears welled up in John’s eyes.

“Do you think I’m up to the job?” he asked.

“John, you are already doing the job,” Patty answered.

Epilogue: Sam had felt it best to have the police accompany him to see Oscar Patterson with the news that he was fired. Patterson became so agitated that the police had to threaten to arrest him before he calmed down and was escorted from the facility.

With John at the helm, the “shop” was not recognizable in 3 weeks, as he implemented a 5S program that he designed with Patty and Pete. He performed some DoEs to find a wave solder flux that could perform well, without nitrogen, for most of his applications. However, he still used nitrogen for a few boards that had a large thermal mass. All of these, and the many other decisions he made were data driven.

Have you performed a Lean audit of your facility? Do you regularly practice 5S and look to eliminate the 7 mudas? Are your decisions “data driven” as John’s are?

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

The End of Cleaning

Posted on by

Patty was eating her lunch at her desk while reading Golf Digest. She had been training with weights, performing stretches and getting lessons from a long drive pro in Grantham, NH. It was at 90-minute commute, but it was worth it. The sophisticated machines that the golf center there indicated that her average drive was up from 250 to 268 yards. Still way short of Rob’s 294, but she was making progress!

Patty was kind of depressed as she read; the Tiger Woods scandal had her in a funk. Her feelings were summed up by another person, who suggested they were in a state of mourning. Her mind was drifting when she was startled by Pete’s knock at the door.

“Hey kiddo, pack your bags looks like another trip,” Pete cheerfully announced.

Pete, how is it that you always know what’s going on before I do? I’m supposed to be the manager,” she teased.

“Somes got it, somes ain’t,” he quickly shot back.

They both chuckled. Patty and Pete made a good team. He was well-connected and knew what was going on. Through Patty and the Professor, Pete was encouraged to go to night school to get his degree and was always trying to learn things from both of them. Through Pete’s “knowing the ropes,” he was a wise counselor to Patty on the realities of getting things done. They both helped each other immensely and they both knew it.

“So, what’s the scoop?” Patty asked.

“Well, remember our parent company bought out a privately held company in Virginia a month or so ago, right?” Pete responded.

“Sure,” said Patty.

“Senior management went on a tour and concluded that the place is a mess. They are going to ask us to perform an audit and develop an improvement action plan,” Pete went on. “Bring your golf clubs; the courses are open down there.”

Patty went into her office and checked her email. Sure enough, there was a dispatch from the site GM telling her to see him about a trip to the new facility in Virginia. Patty went to see him and received very broad instructions.

“That place looks like a pig sty in a swamp. Go do your magic and give us a plan to fix it up. Oh, and by the way, the former owner has stayed on as the site’s GM. Ahh … ahh, he is a little rough around the edges … thought I’d give you a heads up,” the GM shared.

The trip was a breeze and Patty did bring her clubs. She and Pete decided to wean themselves from The Professor on this one. As they arrived they met John Davis, the operations manager. John seemed pleasant but serious, and a little subdued, almost like a puppy that had been kicked too many times. He also didn’t make eye contact when he talked.

As they walked out into the shop floor, Patty was aghast. Not only was the floor disorganized but it was filthy. As she walked toward one of the reflow ovens it almost looked like tinsel was hanging from the ceiling. She couldn’t figure out what it was.

“John, what is that hanging from the ceiling above the reflow oven?” Patty inquired.

John was taken aback, as if he never noticed the hanging material.

Patty pointed and said again, “This stuff.”

“You know, I never paid much attention. I’m not sure what it is,” he finished.

As they approached the reflow oven, they could see sticky material hanging from the ceiling like stalactites.

The trio studied it and suddenly Pete exclaimed, “It’s flux dripping from the ceiling with cobwebs hanging on it.”

“How is this possible? Aren’t the flux condensation and cob webs cleaned up during routine cleaning?” asked Patty incredulously.

“We don’t ever clean,” sighed John.

Patty and Pete were speechless.

“How can you never clean?”, asked a stunned Pete.

Our GM, Oscar Patterson, says cleaning is a waste of money.

Neither Patty or Pete know what to say.

Patty and Pete, accompanied by John, continued their audit over the next few days. They were pleasantly surprised to see that uptime was a respectable 25%. They got to know John a little and, on the third day of their visit, were surprised to see that he was more dour than the past two days.

“John, what’s up?” asked Pete.

“It’s hard not to be discouraged,” said John.

“How so?”, Inquired Patty.

“Well, Mr. Patterson went to SMTAI and heard a paper in which the speaker said that it has never been shown that nitrogen in the reflow process improves quality and reliability. In addition, he heard that nitrogen makes tombstoning worse,” replied John forlornly.

“Well that’s true, in surface mount assembly.” replied Pete and Patty in unison.

“But Mr. Patterson turned the nitrogen off on our wave soldering machines. He didn’t even tell me,” moaned John.

“Yikes!” exclaimed Patty.

“Looks like the Big O struck again,” Pete chimed in.

Patty was going to respond to Pete’s comment, but she thought she would wait until they were alone.

Patty then commented, “A good solder paste should not need nitrogen in reflow, but nitrogen almost always helps in wave soldering. Did Mr. Patterson perform any experiments to show that acceptable yields could be obtained without using nitrogen in the wave machines?”

“No,” replied John, “he just canceled the blanket PO for nitrogen and was beaming when he announced at a staff meeting that by not using nitrogen we save $10,000 a month.”

“Didn’t anyone ‘push’ back?” Patty asked.

“You don’t know Mr. Patterson, Patty,” John replied.

“You mean the Big O,” Pete interjected.

Patty glared at Pete.

Patty then asked, “It’s almost quitting time. Have you got a few scrap boards and a cylinder of nitrogen?”

“Yes, I think so,” said John, “We certainly have scrap boards and I have a few cylinders of nitrogen we use for other purposes.”

Patty then suggested that they perform an experiment. Fortunately, Patty and Pete now bring a camera and video camera with them, so Pete was assigned to video the proceedings. Patty ran a few scrap boards through the wave soldering machine with no flux or nitrogen. The boards looked hilarious when they came out of the wave, they had huge stalactites on the bottom. The 4” x 6” boards must have had a pound or two of solder on the bottom. Pete was laughing so hard that he couldn’t hold the camera steady. Even John cracked a smile.

“Kiddo,” where did you learn that?” Pete asked. “I’ve been around a long time and this board takes the cake.”

“I took some training from the folks at Speedline and we did this in a class,” answered Patty. “But wait, the best is yet to come.”

She then asked John to turn on the nitrogen and they ran the same board through, still with no flux. The board came out of the wave looking fine. John inspected it.

“It looks like it could be shipped,” John said with amazement.

“Absolutely amazing,” added Pete.

“That’s why nitrogen is important in wave soldering,” Patty summed up.

“It is possible for a robust flux to get excellent yields in wave without nitrogen, but a DoE should be performed to verify this hypothesis,” Patty added.

As they left the building for the day, Patty admonished Pete. “I told you to behave. What is this ‘The Big O’?”

“I spent a little time getting to know the operators. Everyone calls Oscar Peterson the “Big O” behind his back. He is 6’4, 380 pounds. The word is he is a real dictator; it’s his way or the highway. He is also a miser, always looking to cut costs. The operators clean the restrooms and make the place as look good as they can by cleaning during their breaks.” Pete summed up.

Will Patty and Pete confront the Big O? How will it go? Is nitrogen in the wave really that important?

How are the plans for Patty’s wedding going?

Stay tuned for the latest.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Note: It may be hard to believe, but I witnessed both the end of all cleaning at a facility and the end of using nitrogen in wave soldering at the same assembly facility of a large (>$10 billion) company. So, this story is based on fact.

Emerson’s Rule

Posted on by

As Patty, The Professor and Pete maneuvered around the partially completed product, Patty noticed signs everywhere that proclaimed: “Being Responsive to Our Customer is Our Biggest Asset.”

Pete commented, “This place is so crowded with partially built product that not another tube of solder paste or even a solder preform could fit out here.”

The trio then approached a technician who was working on a product changeover. Patty introduced herself in Spanish and asked what he was doing.

Pedro’s face beamed when he heard Patty addressing him in his native tongue. He responded to her in Spanish.

“I’m doing a product changeover,” Pedro replied, “We are really good at them, because we do so many. This is actually the second changeover I’ve done on this line today,” he continued.

“Your first job, must have been a very small lot size,” Pete commented.

“Oh, no,” Pedro chuckled. “We never ran the first job.” He went on, “Another more important job than the fist came along and we were told by our supervisor to changeover for that one.”

“You mean you never ran any boards for the first job?” The Professor queried.

“That’s right,” said Pedro. “This only happens a couple of times a month.”

“I really like working here,” Pedro continued. “I feel proud that I have learned to be so good at changeovers and all of us have been able to work a lot of overtime since the ‘Being Responsive’ campaign started. We feel like we are really making a difference and getting great pay,” he beamed. “Just look at all of the product on the floor,” We are really producing a lot of stuff.”

Our team strolled away from Pedro and his coworkers and ran into a very hyper man, Phil Marcos, production manager. Phil was one of those types that made people nervous just being near him.

“Great job! Great job! These folks are really supporting my responsiveness campaign,” Phil projected at 250 words a minute in a strong Long Island accent. “I don’t have much time to chat, I have to stop production on line 4 for a ‘Being Responsive’ job that just came in. I need to have Pedro and the ‘changeover guys’ change that line over for this new job,” he finished as he trotted away. As he looked back, he added, “I’m so excited that next quarter we will have 15% more production and that sales are up 10% this year.”

As Phil left, The Professor commented, “It’s a good thing Phil doesn’t speak Spanish, I’m not sure my ancient brain could process 250 Spanish words a minute.”

They all burst out in laughter.

“I wonder where they will put all of the WIP when production increases 15%?” asked Pete.

The team spent the better part of two days reviewing production and inventory figures. They learned that the site had eight SMT/through-hole mixed assembly lines. Before Phil Marcos arrival, normally six of the lines were dedicated to jobs with very large lot sizes. Some of the jobs ran for months without a changeover. Since Phil’s arrival, high-mix, low-volume jobs have been sought by sales. The two lines devoted to such jobs in the past were insufficient to handle the influx in high-mix jobs. Customers demanded fast turn for these jobs as they paid a 5% premium. Since profit margins at this site were about 10%, these jobs seemed like a great deal financially. To meet this new demand most lines were regularly disrupted. There seemed to be little logic in how a line was selected, but all agreed that the facility looked “responsive.”

Pete found a room for Patty, The Professor and himself to review the data. Pete had been watching The Professor and it was clear that he was holding back to let Pete and Patty learn by searching for the answer without too much help from him.

“The loss in profit clearly relates to the changeovers,” Patty said. “Professor, why don’t you let Pete and I figure this one out and see if we get it right?” she added.

The Professor beamed at his two protégés.

After numerous calculations, Patty and Pete presented their conclusions to The Professor. After a few minor suggestions, The Professor agreed with their conclusions. They went off to review their findings with Harry Hopkins, Jane (the new corporate CFO), and hyper Phil Marcos.

Patty started the meeting with a preamble. “We developed a spreadsheet of costs, sales and profit. We are sure it is not the type of format finance uses, but it helps us to understand the problem.”

She projected the spreadsheet onto the screen and continued, “As you can see, sales are indeed up by 10% for this year, but that extra income was more than lost because inventory costs are up 66% and labor costs up 22%.” Patty went on, “The labor cost is understandable: you are doing many changeovers, often on second shift. Not only do you have to pay overtime premiums, but the many changeovers cause some disruption to all workers … your breakrooms have never been so crowded!

“Inventory carrying costs are a little harder to understand,” Patty continued. “Your increase in inventory is mostly product on the shop floor or WIP. Last year there was almost no WIP, now there is about $4 million in partially finished product on the floor at anytime. This decreases your inventory turns from 17 to about 10. We were able to make these inventory turn estimates, because holding each week of inventory costs about 1% of the yearly cost of all of the inventory. The bottom line is that the WIP is killing profitability, and the 5% cost adder for the responsiveness jobs doesn’t come close to making up for this loss.”

Hyper Phil moaned, and then rapidly said, “You’re saying that my being responsive to the customer campaign is a failure.”

“Not really, Phil,” intoned The Professor. “Just be more careful in your implementation.”

“Can you give an example?” moaned Phil.

“May I tackle this one?” asked Pete. “We did quite a thorough analysis and are convinced that you can implement 90% of your ‘responsiveness’ jobs and not negatively affect production. As an example, four ‘responsiveness’ jobs last week began at 1 PM and finished at 6 PM, too late for the day’s shipments. They didn’t ship until 10 AM the next day. They could have been assembled on the next shift, with no disruptive changeovers and no extra WIP hanging around.”

Patty added, “We believe that you should leave five of your eight lines undisturbed to handle jobs with very large lot sizes and have three lines for some large lot sizes and the ‘responsiveness’ jobs.

“We can work with you to develop a plan to minimize changeovers and WIP while continuing to be responsive. Your shop flow should be organized more like a ballet than a hockey game, quotinq Phil Crosby. You can be responsive and minimize disruption on the shop floor … a balance is needed,” she summed up.

“One thing to remember, is ‘Emerson’s Rule,’ ” The Professor interjected.

“What is that,” everyone asked.

“It is from my dear friend, Professor Bob Emerson of Binghamton University. He says, ‘Never release a job to the floor unless you are committed to finishing it uninterrupted.’ Bob is an expert on inventory management, he knows the crippling cost of inventory if not well managed, especially WIP, which includes much added value.”

The meeting broke up with Phil, Harry and Jane gratefully thanking the trio. Patty and Pete agreed to stay for a few days to help Phil set up a modified production control system.

“Boy, I was surprised how well that was accepted,“ Patty confessed.

Pete, who usually has insider info, responded, “Phil was told to work with us or else …. I guess he listened.”

On that note, Patty’s cellphone buzzed. It was her mother, with the latest wedding details.

All the best,

Dr. Ron

Searching for Lost Profit

Posted on by

After just finishing her department’s monthly activity report, Patty took a break to stare out her window, admiring the beauty of last night’s fresh snowfall. Her mind quickly went to the events of the past week.

Rob had “popped the question” and Patty had quickly said yes. Their mothers were ecstatic. Both Patty and Rob liked and enjoyed each other’s parents. Patty recognized this as a blessed situation, but both mothers were now spending 10 hours each day planning the wedding. A result, Patty and Rob were both fielding several calls a day from each mom. Patty decided to go “with the flow” and count her blessings that both she and Rob had great parents.

She briefly looked down at the ring Rob had given her. It was a striking two carat emerald with 0.4 carat diamonds on either side. Rob was concerned that Patty might not like an emerald, but he explained that the price of diamonds is controlled and that “you could pave your driveway with diamonds for each equally good sapphire, ruby, and especially emerald that exists in nature.”

“All the emerald mines of Colombia produce only one or two good 2 carat emeralds per year,” he went on to say.

Well, one of them was right there on her finger. In addition to the uniqueness of emerald, the setting was in rhodium, the hardest and rarest of the precious metals. “Five hundred times more rare than gold,” Rob told her. She was especially impressed when she looked up rhodium on the Web and found this quote: “Rhodium has been used for honours, or to symbolize wealth, when more commonly used metals such as silver, gold or platinum are deemed insufficient.” Gold and platinum insufficient!?

Rob was secretive about how he found such an apparently rare ring. But it was consistent with his many other successes in life. She was thrilled to have him as a future hubby, even if she did beat him at golf.

These happy and a little stressful thoughts were interrupted, by Pete coming to her door.

“Hey, kiddo, get packed, looks like will be going on another trip. Guadalajara, this time. Como es su espanol?” Pete said with gusto.

“Mi espanol es muy bueno. Why do you think we will go to Guadalajara?” Patty asked.

“Well, I just talked to Pedro and he said that they performed our productivity audit. Uptime is 29%, and all lines are time balanced to +/-2%, about as best as could be hoped.”

Patty and her team developed a Productivity Audit from what they learned with The Professor in their recent adventures together.

“Then what is the problem?” Patty inquired.

Pete responded, “Jane, the finance exec we met on our trip to South Carolina, implemented a company-wide profitability software program. It was implemented and Guadalajara is 10% too low. No one can figure out why. I think we’ll want The Professor for this one.”

Patty called and was stunned that The Professor was again available. Apparently this was his off term teaching at Ivy University, as he teaches over the summer.

When our trio arrived at ACME’s Guadalajara facility they all spoke in Spanish. Patty had taken Spanish in 4th grade through high school, Spanish was one of the 7 or 8 languages The Professor spoke and Pete’s grandparents hailed from Puerto Rico. They were surprised that the site GM, Harry Hopkins, asked them to speak in English.

“Give me a break, I grew up in Boston, I can barely speak English,” he joked in his heavy Boston accent. “We want you to help us find that lost 10%, we must be doing something wrong. Help us find it,” Harry implored. “One thing I can tell you is that I am really proud of my team; they are really working hard, you can tell by all of the product that is out there. It makes me proud just to walk out on the shop floor and see all of the product!”, he went on.

Patty was relieved that Harry was so supportive. Apparently Jane had sent the “good word” about how the trio had helped ACME’s South Carolina plant.

As the trio went on a tour, one thing immediately struck Patty, there was hardly room to walk around. There were partly assembled boards all over the place.

At the end of the tour Patty spoke up, “This facility is striking in how much partially completed product is on the shop floor.”

And therein lies the problem,” responded The Professor.

How can profits be off when uptime and line balancing are so good? Could it be that Guadalajara uses poor solder pastes, fluxes or performs? Will our illustrious trio find the problem? Does Patty really like her emerald engagement ring?

Stay tuned for the latest.