Circuits Assembly - August 2008 - (Page 28)

Program Generation Figure 1. Commit screen. Figure 2. Detail screen. We’re all very busy, but I believe in the payback system. When I first came up with the idea of Dynamic Programming and how I wanted to handle program management, I deleted all the parts library databases, not only in the programming software, but on the machines as well. Everything was deleted in a matter of a few minutes. (As an aside, and I don’t recommend this, but I didn’t initially tell my employer what I was about to do. When I owned up, the response was: “What! Why did you do that?” I explained my process and how program management was going to be conducted. In giving his OK, my boss also asked that the next time I do something major to at least let him know first. Away I went to recreate my databases.) At the time, I had about 500 part numbers in my database, and approximately 120 different products that needed to run. One by one, I entered the part shape information in the database, using manufacturer component drawings to input these data. Working in my favor was the company’s robust database of specifications for components it used. But it lacked the component mechanical drawings. This brought static from the R&D engineers. “They don’t supply us with that information,” they informed me. I spent hours on the Internet looking for those first 500 components. But in time, I found a drawing for every single component. After showing R&D and documentation staff these drawings were, in fact, available, I put together a directive for them to include with every single part they introduce to the factory. Now, when I don’t get a mechanical drawing for a component, it gets kicked back to the R&D engineer who chose the part (and who probably designed the pad layout). The database done, I began generating programs for the production line. The first board took awhile to work, but I succeeded. During the process, I took notes, and later updated the offline database. I then regenerated the programs and downloaded the same product I just got running (overwriting the tweaked program). That program ran perfectly. At that instant, I realized I had generated a perfect operational program offline and was able to run the program without touching it after it was put on the machine. This was major milestone: It was possible to generate perfect machine programs for my software. Each time a new product came on the floor, I only had to “tweak” any components I didn’t use in the previous product. Each time I changed the database, I regenerated all the programs. Thus, each program would have a shorter and shorter debug time until the point where none existed. Building the dynamic database was in sync with the changing machine databases. The programs improved with each generation. From an initial duration of two hours, the debug time dropped to zero with those products. In fact, to this day, I can regenerate Offline products and not even walk on the floor. It is Verify Information programs for those Program Generator and transparent to production. Parts Database Commit to Database The initial rebuild of the database was time-consuming. The database maintenance is much easier. The Comparison only debugging required Program Program Management is for componentsSystem entered into the database. Data are entered first into the database based on the manufacturers’ drawings. Detailed notes are taken during data entry and, because they are new Machine Parts components need to be looked at components, it is clear which Information Database Enter New Parts Into Database Input CAD Information For Parts Placement Offline Program Generator Parts Database Verify Information and Commit to Database Generate Machine Program(s) Transfer Program(s) to Machine(s) Program Good? No Make same changes to Off-Line Database Modify Program on machine Yes Program Good? Program Management System Comparison Program Yes Machine Parts Information Database Stop Run Production No Figure 3. Closed loop program generation cycle. 28 Enter New Parts Into Database Figure 4. Program generation and debug flow chart. circuitsassembly.com Circuits Assembly AUGUST 2008 http://circuitsassembly.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Circuits Assembly - August 2008

Circuits Assembly - August 2008 Contents Caveat Lector Industry News Market Watch Talking Heads Screen Printing Better Manufacturing Auditing a Fabricatior Cutting Machine Programming Time Simultaneous Acoustic Imaging and Surface Mapping Tech Tips Soldering Test and Inspection Process Doctor Pb-Free Lessons Learned Getting Lean Component Advances Product Spotlight Ad Index Assembly Insider Techincal Abstracts

Circuits Assembly - August 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.