We recap our five blog posts that captured the most attention in 2017, from getting your leak test right and containing warranty costs with data to how the repair bay can contribute to a more effective defect data management strategy.
Aaron Alberts explores how, when it comes to collecting process data to raise the bar on quality and productivity, you can never have too much. The key is to break down the data silos across the plant floor and get all that data into one centralized database for analysis.
When it comes to leak, a smaller part is faster to test. But you can’t just make a part smaller – or can you? Steve White discusses ways to shorten fill time by considering test station fixturing and connections, the part’s internal geometry and supply pressure.
We teamed with Smart Manufacturing Magazine on a survey to better understand how readers use data collected from the production line versus how they would like to use it, to drive productivity, quality and profitability in their plants. Here is what the results tell us.
The “R” word, recall, makes manufacturers cringe. Richard Brine digs into how the scope and impact of a recall can be dramatically reduced if all relevant production data has been collected and organized by serial number to create a complete birth history record for each part.
This e-book explores the art and science of achieving a more reliable, accurate and faster leak test. We cover seven practical steps, ranging from getting station setup right, to how to effectively use data and digital process signature analysis.
Concluding our three-part series, Patrick Chabot looks at how individuals from the plant floor to the office engage with and benefit from a repair bay data analytics system that’s integrated with the rest of the data collection and analysis from the production line.
The Repair Bay, Part 2: Why enhanced defect data management should be seen as a positive on the plant floor
With this installment, Patrick Chabot emphasizes that it takes more than tools and processes to turn the repair bay into an effective defect data management station to drive continuous improvement. Buy-in, from the corner office to the plant floor, is crucial.
John Perkins discusses how an ICP-based accelerometer that’s connected to a test monitoring system can keep noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) testing on the factory floor and avoid the cost and complexity of having to use an anechoic chamber.
Ron Pawulski cites a Sciemetric use case to explore how digital process signature analysis can save medical device makers from the cumbersome and costly process of end-of-line destructive testing for quality assurance.