Module property verification : A method to plan and perform quality verifications in modular architectures

Modular product architectures have generated numerous benefits for companies in terms of cost, lead-time and quality. The defined interfaces and the module’s properties decrease the effort to develop new product variants, and provide an opportunity to perform parallel tasks in design, manufacturing and assembly. The background of this thesis is that companies perform verifications (tests, inspections and controls) of products late, when most of the parts have been assembled. This extends the lead-time to delivery and ruins benefits from a modular product architecture; specifically when the verifications are extensive and the frequency of detected defects is high. Due to the number of product variants obtained from the modular product architecture, verifications must handle a wide range of equipment, instructions and goal values to ensure that high quality products can be delivered. As a result, the total benefits from a modular product architecture are difficult to achieve. This thesis describes a method for planning and performing verifications within a modular product architecture. The method supports companies by utilizing the defined modules for verifications already at module level, so called MPV (Module Property Verification). With MPV, defects are detected at an earlier point, compared to verification of a complete product, and the number of verifications is decreased. The MPV method is built up of three phases. In Phase A, candidate modules are evaluated on the basis of costs and lead-time of the verifications and the repair of defects. An MPV-index is obtained which quantifies the module and indicates if the module should be verified at product level or by MPV. In Phase B, the interface interaction between the modules is evaluated, as well as the distribution of properties among the modules. The purpose is to evaluate the extent to which supplementary verifications at product level is needed. Phase C supports a selection of the final verification strategy. The cost and lead-time for the supplementary verifications are considered together with the results from Phase A and B. The MPV method is based on a set of qualitative and quantitative measures and tools which provide an overview and support the achievement of cost and time efficient company specific verifications. A practical application in industry shows how the MPV method can be used, and the subsequent benefits

Modular Product Verifications Based on Design for Assembly

The desire to conquer markets through advanced product design and trendy business strategies are still predominant approaches in industry today. In fact, product development has acquired an ever more central role in the strategic planning of companies, and it has extended its influence to R&D funding levels as well. It is not surprising that many national R&D project frameworks within the EU today are dominated by product development topics, leaving production engineering, robotics, and systems on the sidelines. The reasons may be many but, unfortunately, the link between product development and the production processes they cater for are seldom treated in depth. The issue dealt with in this article relates to how product development is applied in order to attain the required production quality levels a company may desire, as well as how one may counter assembly defects and deviations through quantifiable design approaches. It is recognized that product verifications (tests, inspections, etc.) are necessary, but the application of these tactics often result in lead-time extensions and increased costs. Modular architectures improve this by simplifying the verification of the assembled product at module level. Furthermore, since Design for Assembly (DFA) has shown the possibility to identify defective assemblies, it may be possible to detect potential assembly defects already in the product and module design phase. The intention of this paper is to discuss and describe the link between verifications of modular architectures, defects and design for assembly. The paper is based on literature and case studies; tables and diagrams are included with the intention of increasing understanding of the relation between poor designs, defects and product verifications.

An approach to evaluate product verifications

Companies implement a module product assortment as a part of their strategy to, among others, shorten lead-times, increase the product quality and to create more product variants with fever parts. However, the increased number of variants becomes a challenging task for the personnel responsible for the product verifications. By implementing verifications at module level, so called MPV (Module Property Verification) several advantages ensue. The advantages is not only a decrease in cost of verifications, but also a decrease in repair times, occupied space, storages with spare parts, and repair tools. Further, MPV also give an increased product quality due to an increased understanding of which defects that may occur. As an approach to implement MPV, this paper discusses defects and verification processes based on a study at a Swedish company. It also describes a matrix which is used to map relations between company specific cost drivers and so called verification factors. The matrix may indicate cost drivers which have a large impact on the total cost of product verifications.

Studies of Design and Assembly Defects on Integrated and Modular Architectures

It is known that despite companies’ efforts to improve the quality of their products, design and assembly defects results in large repair costs both in terms of repair and providing feedback to the origin of the defect. The purpose of this paper is to study these types of defects and the defect rates in design and assembly. The paper presents a web based questionnaire answered by 29 companies. The result shows that the defect rate (defects per product) spanned from 0.01 to 10. Also, design and assembly defects covered 46%, 23% respectively, of all occurred defects. A case study is also presented, performed at a company who recently implemented a modular architecture. In this company, defects from 5 700 integrated product architectures are compared with defects from 431 modular architectures. The average defect rate increased by 21.5% – from 0.65 to 0.79 – when a more modular architecture has been implemented. Furthermore, the study showed that the assembly defects have decreased while the design defects increased. The results presented in this paper will also support the development of the MPV (Module Property Verification) method which is briefly described.

Product verification and defect repair - status and considerations

Product verifications have become a cost-intensive and time-consuming aspect of modern electronics production, but with the onset of an ever-increasing miniaturisation, these aspects will become even more cumbersome. One may also go as far as to point out that certain precision assembly, such as within the biomedical sector, is legally bound to have 0 defects within production. Since miniaturisation and precision assembly will soon become a part of almost any product, the verifications phases of assembly need to be optimised in both functionality and cost. Another aspect relates to the stability and robustness of processes, a pre-requisite for flexibility. Furthermore, as the re-engineering cycle becomes ever more important, all information gathered within the ongoing process becomes vital. In view of these points, product, or process verification may be assumed to be an important and integral part of precision assembly. In this paper, product verification is defined as the process of determining whether or not the products, at a given phase in the life-cycle, fulfil the established specifications. Since the product is given its final form and function in the assembly, the product verification normally takes place somewhere in the assembly line which is the focus for this paper.