Backlight Manufacturing Process Change: Problems

BACKLIGHT MANUFACTURING PROCESS CHANGE
PROBLEMS
Backlight manufacturing just had an increase in demand and production capacity need to be increased.
It was already operating 24 hours and adding more production lines and training new operators were
not an option. This is a clean room operation and space is limited to the current clean room facility.
Another problem was the high workmanship error defect rate at QC inspection and QA inspection.
According to gathered data the defects were mostly scratches, spots and stains on the sheets and
lightguide. These four materials are the most expensive parts of the unit. To decrease and minimize
workmanship error on these materials is imperative or the company will continue to lose profit. An
increase in production to try to meet the higher demand will further increase the cost of defective
materials. A decrease in defective units will increase not only the profit but also the production
capacity.
CAUSES
Based on the failure analyses of the defects the top causes of the workmanship error are mis-handling,
foreign particles in-between sheets, scratches and spots from removing foreign particles at the
lightguide assembly, sheet assembly and QC inspection stations. The sheet assembly operators would
attach one sheet and inspect it for defects or foreign particles. If any of these non-conformities were
seen they would then remove the non-conformities (particles and stains) using a special adhesive tape.
They would do this after each sheet attached and there’s a total of 3 very sensitive sheets. Then at the
QC inspection station the QC inspector would again remove the non-conformities they would find using
the same special adhesive tape. The more the parts are being handled the higher the chance of creating
a non-conformity.
SOLUTIONS
Improving the process to minimize the handling of the sheets and lightguides appeared to be the
reasonable course of action. How to do it was what had to be figured out. After careful study of the
process, tact time and engineering evaluation results, the following changes were applied:
BEFORE:
 Lightguide Assembly
1. Attaches the lamp unit assembly to the lightguide, frame and white sheet.
2. Inspects the lightguide and the white sheet for non-conformities such as scratches,
stains and spots then removes or fixes the non-conformities as necessary.
 Sheet Assembly
1. Receives the lightguide assembly and inspects for non-conformities. Removes or fixes
the non-conformities as necessary.
2. Places the diffuser sheet and check for spots, stains and scratches on lightguide and
prism sheet. Removes or fixes the non-conformities as necessary.
3. Places the prism sheet and check for spots, stains and scratches on both sheets and
lightguide. Removes or fixes the non-conformities as necessary.
4. Places the wave sheet and check for spots, stains and scratches on all sheets and
lightguide. Removes or fixes the non-conformities as necessary.
 QC Inspection
1. Inspects the unit then removes or fixes the non-conformities as necessary.
AFTER:
 Added a Sheets and Lightguide Pre-cleaning Station using machines – to reduce foreign particles
coming from the parts.
 Eliminated lightguide assembly station – to reduce lightguide handling. This process is
incorporated with the sheet assembly process.
 Sheet Assembly
1. Performs lightguide assembly process – Assembles the lamp unit to the lightguide and
frame
2. Attaches the diffuser sheet – no inspection or cleaning to reduce handling
3. Attaches the prism sheet – no inspection or cleaning to reduce handling
4. Attaches the wave sheet – then inspect and clean as necessary just one time to reduce
handling
 QC Inspection – Strictly no cleaning or rework. Inspection only. Any non-conformities found,
the unit will be returned to the Sheet Assembly operator, or called to the attention of the line
leader for rework. This is to reduce handling by QC inspectors whose skill level in fixing non-
conformities are not at par with the Sheet Assembly operator. They are more skillfully trained
to inspect.
 Production line layout had to be changed to effectively implement changes
o Removed the lightguide assembly station
o Modified the sheet assembly station to accommodate the addition of the lightguide
assembly process and ergonomically setup the station for maximum efficiency as per
tact time study.
o Added an area for the sheet cleaning machine.
RESULTS
 Decreased workmanship error cost resulting to increased profitability.

 Increased output capacity by ~20% therefore meeting and exceeding the new delivery demand.
 Increased quality yield performance at QA Inspection.
 Reduced man-hour cost due to the elimination of the lightguide assembly station – also adding
to increased profitability.
 Increased floor space in the clean room due to the elimination of the lightguide assembly station
– resulting to improved cleanliness (reduced particle count).
 Kadz sent to Japan for 1 week to represent P.IMES as one of the top 200 IBM employees in the
Asia-Pacific region for the APTO symposium where he presented this process change. Woohoo!
😊

Backlight Manufacturing Process Change: Problems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Backlight Manufacturing Process Change: Problems

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Backlight Manufacturing Process Change: Problems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BACKLIGHT MANUFACTURING PROCESS CHANGE

 Decreased workmanship error cost resulting to increased profitability.

You might also like