Management device, management method, and program

Abstract

To provide a management device that can effectively support the resolution of problems that arise. [Solution] The management device 100 includes a first communication unit 108 that acquires monitoring data Da indicating the situation when component mounting devices M4 and M5 were mounting components P onto the substrate B, and event data Db indicating events performed on component mounting devices M4 and M5, and a processing unit 102 that, when a problem occurs in the situation indicated by the monitoring data Da, performs a priority determination process to determine the priority of each of a plurality of countermeasures for the problem based on the events performed during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data Db, and the problem itself.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a management apparatus and the like for managing production of mounted boards.

Background Art

[0002] Conventionally, error factor estimation apparatuses that estimate factors of errors occurring in manufacturing equipment have been proposed (see, for example, Patent Document 1). This error factor estimation apparatus can also be said to be a management apparatus for managing production of mounted boards. Note that a mounted board is a product produced by mounting components on a board.

[0003] The error factor estimation apparatus of Patent Document 1 acquires information on events that occurred in a predetermined period up to the time point when an error occurred, and estimates the factor of the error based on the information on the events. Specifically, the error factor estimation apparatus refers to a factor estimation table. The factor estimation table associates and shows events that may induce an error (specifically, trigger events), error factors, the accuracy rate of estimation for each factor, and the priority of each factor. The accuracy rate is calculated based on correctness / incorrectness information indicating whether the error was improved after countermeasures for the factor were implemented, and the priority is updated according to the accuracy rate. That is, the error factor estimation apparatus of Patent Document 1 updates the priority based on the correctness / incorrectness information, and investigates the factors in order from the factor with the highest priority. This makes it possible to increase the accuracy of factor estimation and shorten the time until the error is resolved.

Prior Art Documents

Patent Documents

[0004]

Patent Document 1

Summary of the Invention

Problem to be Solved by the Invention

[0005] However, the error cause estimation device described in Patent Document 1 only uniformly proposes countermeasures for the errors that occur, and there are cases where the errors are not improved, indicating room for improvement.

[0006] Therefore, this disclosure provides a management device that can effectively support the resolution of problems that arise. [Means for solving the problem]

[0007] A management device according to one aspect of the present disclosure includes an acquisition unit that acquires monitoring data indicating the status when a component mounting device was mounting components onto a substrate and event data indicating events performed on the component mounting device, and a processing unit that, when a problem occurs in the status indicated by the monitoring data, performs a priority determination process that determines the priority of each of a plurality of countermeasures for the problem based on the events performed during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data, and the problem itself.

[0008] These comprehensive or specific embodiments may be implemented as a system, method, integrated circuit, computer program, or recording medium such as a computer-readable CD-ROM, or as any combination of a system, method, integrated circuit, computer program, and recording medium. Furthermore, the recording medium may be a non-temporary recording medium. [Effects of the Invention]

[0009] The management device disclosed herein can effectively assist in resolving problems that arise.

[0010] Further advantages and effects of one aspect of this disclosure will be made apparent from the specification and drawings. Such advantages and / or effects are provided by several embodiments and configurations described in the specification and drawings, but not all configurations are necessarily required. [Brief explanation of the drawing]

[0011] [Figure 1] Figure 1 shows an example of the configuration of the production system in the embodiment. [Figure 2] Figure 2 shows an example of the configuration of a component mounting device in an embodiment. [Figure 3] Figure 3 is a diagram that partially shows an example of the AA cross-section in Figure 2. [Figure 4] Figure 4 is a block diagram showing examples of the functional configurations of the control device and the implementation line in the embodiment. [Figure 5] Figure 5 shows an example of data transmitted from the assembly line to the management device in the embodiment. [Figure 6] Figure 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing operation based on monitoring data by the processing unit of the management device in the embodiment. [Figure 7] Figure 7 shows an example of event data in the embodiment. [Figure 8] Figure 8 shows an example of the first table in the embodiment. [Figure 9] Figure 9 shows an example of the second table in the embodiment. [Figure 10] Figure 10 shows an example of the priority determination process by the processing unit in the embodiment. [Figure 11] Figure 11 shows another example of the priority determination process by the processing unit in the embodiment. [Figure 12] Figure 12 shows yet another example of the priority determination process by the processing unit in the embodiment. [Figure 13] Figure 13 shows an example of a screen display by the management device in the embodiment. [Figure 14] Figure 14 shows another example of the screen display by the management device in the embodiment. [Figure 15] Figure 15 shows an example of a process in which the processing unit in the embodiment reduces the weight of the implemented measures. [Figure 16]FIG. 16 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment increases a weight of an implemented countermeasure. [Figure 17] FIG. 17 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment decreases a weight of a dependent countermeasure. [Figure 18] FIG. 18 is a diagram illustrating another example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment decreases a weight of a dependent countermeasure. [Figure 19] FIG. 19 is a diagram illustrating still another example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment decreases a weight of a dependent countermeasure. [Figure 20] FIG. 20 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment increases a weight of a dependent countermeasure. [Figure 21] FIG. 21 is a diagram illustrating another example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment increases a weight of a dependent countermeasure. [Figure 22] FIG. 22 is a diagram illustrating still another example of processing in which a processing unit according to an embodiment increases a weight of a dependent countermeasure. [Figure 23] FIG. 23 is a flowchart illustrating an example of processing operation of a management apparatus according to an embodiment. [Figure 24] FIG. 24 is a diagram illustrating an example of a screen in a modification. DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

[0012] A management apparatus according to a first aspect of the present disclosure includes: an acquisition unit that acquires monitoring data indicating a situation when a component mounting apparatus mounts a component onto a substrate, and event data indicating an event performed on the component mounting apparatus; and a processing unit that performs priority determination processing for determining a priority of each of a plurality of countermeasures against a problem based on the event performed in a predetermined period up to a time point when the problem occurs, which is indicated in the event data, and the problem, when a problem occurs in the situation indicated by the monitoring data. Note that the problem is, for example, a phenomenon in which a failure rate such as suction failure or recognition failure becomes greater than a threshold, and may also be referred to as an error.

[0013] This system determines the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures for a problem, allowing operators to easily find and implement the optimal solution from among the options based on these priorities, thus enabling early problem resolution. Furthermore, since these priorities take into account potential causes of the problem, such as recent events, the reliability of the prioritization is increased. As a result, it can effectively support the resolution of problems that arise.

[0014] Furthermore, in the management device according to the second embodiment, the processing unit may, in the priority determination process, refer to a first table showing the multiple countermeasures for the problem and the respective priorities of the multiple countermeasures, and determine the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures by changing the priority of one or more of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table based on the event. Note that the second embodiment may be subordinate to the first embodiment.

[0015] This allows us to determine the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures based on the event that occurred shortly before the problem occurred, or, if the event did not occur, to simply use the priorities of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table as the priority of the countermeasure. As a result, we can determine the appropriate priority based on whether or not an event occurred.

[0016] Furthermore, in the management device according to the third embodiment, the processing unit may, in the priority determination process, refer to a second table showing the priority of each of the at least one countermeasures for the problem that occurs after the event has occurred, and determine the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures by changing the priority of each of the one or more countermeasures shown in the first table according to the priority of each of the one or more countermeasures shown in the second table. Note that the third embodiment may be subordinate to the second embodiment.

[0017] This allows priorities to be changed based on the second table, effectively determining the appropriate priority for each event.

[0018] Furthermore, in the management device according to the fourth embodiment, the processing unit may further determine whether the problem has been resolved based on monitoring data acquired by the acquisition unit after one of the multiple countermeasures has been implemented as an implemented countermeasure for the problem, and if it determines that the problem has been resolved, it may increase the priority that was determined for the implemented countermeasure in the priority determination process. Note that the fourth embodiment may be subordinate to any one of the first to third embodiments.

[0019] This means that if a problem is resolved, i.e., if the implemented measures are effective, the priority of those measures will increase. This allows for a more accurate reflection of the effectiveness of the implemented measures in the priority settings, thereby increasing the reliability of those priorities.

[0020] Furthermore, in the management device according to the fifth embodiment, if the processing unit determines that the problem has not been resolved, it may reduce the priority that was determined for the implementation measures in the priority determination process. Note that the fifth embodiment may be subordinate to the fourth embodiment.

[0021] This means that if a problem remains unresolved, i.e., if the implemented measures were ineffective, their priority will decrease. This allows for a more accurate reflection of the ineffectiveness of the measures in the priority settings, thereby increasing the reliability of those priorities.

[0022] Furthermore, in the management device according to the sixth embodiment, the multiple countermeasures are subordinate to each other, and if the processing unit determines that the problem has been resolved, it may further increase the priority determined in the priority determination process for each of the one or more countermeasures that are subordinate to the implemented countermeasures. Note that the sixth embodiment may be subordinate to the fourth or fifth embodiment.

[0023] As a result, if a problem is resolved, that is, if the implemented measures are effective, the priority of not only the implemented measures but also one or more measures dependent on them (i.e., dependent measures) will increase based on the dependency relationships between multiple measures. For example, if an implemented measure such as cleaning a unit is effective, the priority of the dependent measure such as replacing that unit will also increase. Therefore, the effectiveness of the implemented measures can be appropriately reflected in the priority of both the implemented measures and one or more dependent measures, thereby increasing the accuracy of those priorities.

[0024] Furthermore, in the management device according to the seventh embodiment, the multiple countermeasures are subordinate to each other, and if the processing unit determines that the problem has not been resolved, it may further reduce the priority determined in the priority determination process for each of the one or more countermeasures that are subordinate to the implemented countermeasures. Note that the seventh embodiment may be subordinate to any one of the fourth to sixth embodiments.

[0025] This means that if the problem remains unresolved, i.e., if the implemented measures are ineffective, the priority of not only the implemented measures but also one or more measures dependent on them (i.e., dependent measures) will decrease based on the dependency relationships between multiple measures. For example, if an implemented measure such as replacing a unit is ineffective, the priority of the dependent measure such as cleaning that unit will also decrease. Therefore, the ineffectiveness of an implemented measure can be appropriately reflected in the priority of both the implemented measure and one or more dependent measures, thereby increasing the accuracy of those priorities.

[0026] Furthermore, in the management device according to the eighth embodiment, the event may include at least one of the following: (a) an event relating to a component supplied by the component mounting device, (b) an event relating to a unit used in the component mounting device, and (c) an event relating to production data used in the component mounting device. Note that the eighth embodiment may be subordinate to any one of the first to seventh embodiments.

[0027] This allows for the determination of the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures based on events such as (a), (b), and (c) above, thereby appropriately increasing the reliability of that priority.

[0028] Furthermore, in the management device according to the ninth embodiment, the processing unit may further change the priority of the countermeasures determined in the priority determination process according to the input operation by the operator. Note that the ninth embodiment may be subordinate to any one of the first to eighth embodiments.

[0029] This allows for the prioritization of countermeasures to be determined not only automatically but also manually.

[0030] Furthermore, the management method according to the first embodiment is a computer-based management method that acquires monitoring data indicating the status when a component mounting device was mounting components onto a circuit board, and event data indicating events performed on the component mounting device, and when a problem occurs in the status indicated by the monitoring data, it performs a priority determination process to determine the priority of each of a plurality of countermeasures for the problem based on the events performed during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data, and the problem itself.

[0031] This makes it possible to achieve the same effects and advantages as the control device according to the first embodiment.

[0032] The comprehensive or specific embodiments of the above-described management device may be implemented as a system, method, integrated circuit, computer program, or recording medium such as a computer-readable CD-ROM, or as any combination of a system, method, integrated circuit, computer program, or recording medium. Furthermore, the recording medium may be a non-temporary recording medium.

[0033] The embodiments will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings.

[0034] The embodiments described below are all comprehensive or specific examples. The numerical values, shapes, materials, components, arrangement and connection configurations of components, steps, and the order of steps shown in the following embodiments are examples only and are not intended to limit this disclosure. Furthermore, among the components in the following embodiments, those not described in the independent claim representing the highest-level concept will be described as optional components.

[0035] Furthermore, each figure is a schematic diagram and not necessarily a strictly accurate representation. Also, the same component is denoted by the same reference numeral in each figure.

[0036] (Embodiment) [Production System] Figure 1 shows an example of the configuration of the production system in this embodiment.

[0037] In this embodiment, the production system 1 comprises three mounting lines L (i.e., mounting lines L1 to L3) and a control device 100. In the example shown in Figure 1, the production system 1 has three mounting lines L, but it is not limited to three; it may have one, two, or four or more.

[0038] Each of the assembly lines L1 to L3 is equipment for producing assembled circuit boards. They produce assembled circuit boards by performing solder printing, component mounting, and reflow operations on circuit boards brought in from the upstream side, and then transport the produced assembled circuit boards to the downstream side.

[0039] The management device 100 is a device for managing the production of mounted circuit boards, and for example, displays countermeasures for problems (i.e., errors) that occur in each of the mounting lines L1 to L3. The management device 100 communicates with the mounting lines L1 to L3 via wireless or wired connection. The wireless connection may be Wi-Fi®, Bluetooth®, ZigBee®, or low-power radio.

[0040] The assembly line L1 comprises a line management device 200, a substrate supply device M1, a substrate transfer device M2, a solder printing device M3, component mounting devices M4 and M5, an inspection machine M6, a reflow machine M7, and a substrate recovery device M8. The devices included in the assembly line L1, other than the line management device 200, are arranged in the following order and connected in series: substrate supply device M1, substrate transfer device M2, solder printing device M3, component mounting devices M4 and M5, inspection machine M6, reflow machine M7, and substrate recovery device M8. These devices other than the line management device 200 are hereinafter referred to as work machines. Furthermore, the assembly line L1 does not need to include all of the above work machines, as long as it includes the substrate supply device M1, at least one component mounting device, inspection machine M6, and substrate recovery device M8. Furthermore, the mounting line L1 may include, in addition to the above-mentioned work machines, a soldering device for applying solder to the substrate, a component insertion machine for mounting radial or axial components to the substrate, and so on. Also, the arrangement order of each work machine is not limited to the order described above. For example, the inspection machine M6 may be placed after the reflow machine M7 or the substrate recovery device M8. Alternatively, the functions of the inspection machine M6 may be provided by the component mounting machine M4, component mounting machine M5, reflow machine M7, or substrate recovery device M8.

[0041] The line management device 200 acquires production data generated by the management device 100 from the management device 100 and causes each work machine included in the mounting line L1 to produce mounted boards based on that production data.

[0042] The substrate supply device M1 supplies substrates to be used for the mounted boards produced on the mounting line L1 to the solder printing device M3 via the substrate transfer device M2. The solder printing device M3 performs the solder printing operation described above. In other words, the solder printing device M3 screen prints solder onto the substrates it receives from the substrate transfer device M2.

[0043] Each of the component mounting devices M4 and M5 performs the component mounting operation described above, which involves mounting one or more components onto one or more circuit boards. While the mounting line L1 is equipped with two component mounting devices M4 and M5, the number is not limited to two; it could be one, three, or more. Furthermore, it can be said that the mounted circuit boards are essentially produced through the component mounting operation performed by these component mounting devices M4 and M5.

[0044] The inspection machine M6 inspects the components mounted on the circuit board by the component mounting devices M4 and M5, and notifies the management device 100 of the inspection results via the line management device 200.

[0045] The reflow machine M7 performs the reflow operation described above. Specifically, the reflow machine M7 heats the circuit boards with components mounted on them, which have been transported from the component mounting machines M4 and M5 via the inspection machine M6, to harden the solder on the circuit boards and join the electrodes of the circuit boards to the components. In particular, the reflow machine M7 melts and solidifies the solder for component joining by heating according to a predetermined heating profile. This solders the components to the circuit board. The circuit board retrieval device M8 retrieves the circuit boards with the soldered components from the reflow machine M7.

[0046] The mounting lines L2 and L3 have the same configuration as mounting line L1. In this embodiment, each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 has the same configuration, but they may have different configurations. Also, in this embodiment, each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 is equipped with a line management device 200, but the line management device 200 may be provided independently of each of the mounting lines L1 to L3, or it may be incorporated into each of the mounting lines L1 to L3.

[0047] [Component mounting equipment] Figure 2 shows an example of the configuration of component mounting device M4. In this embodiment, component mounting device M5 has the same configuration as component mounting device M4. In this embodiment, the transport direction of substrate B is referred to as the X-axis direction, and the direction perpendicular to the X-axis direction is referred to as the Y-axis direction. The X-axis direction and Y-axis direction are directions along the horizontal plane. Furthermore, the direction perpendicular to the X-axis direction and Y-axis direction is referred to as the Z-axis direction. The positive and negative sides of the X-axis direction are the downstream and upstream sides in the transport direction of substrate B, respectively, and the positive and negative sides of the Y-axis direction are the rear (or far side) and front (or near side) in the front-to-back direction, respectively. The positive and negative sides of the Z-axis direction are the upper and lower sides in the up-and-down direction, respectively. Figure 2 shows the top surface of component mounting device M4.

[0048] The component mounting device M4 comprises a base 4, a substrate transport mechanism 5, two component supply units 6, two X-axis beams 9, a Y-axis beam 8, two heads 10, two component recognition cameras 11, and two substrate recognition cameras 12.

[0049] The substrate transport mechanism 5 is equipped with two rails aligned in the X-axis direction and is positioned in the center of the base 4. The substrate transport mechanism 5 transports the substrate B brought in from the upstream side and positions and holds the substrate B in a position for performing component mounting work.

[0050] The two component supply units 6 are arranged so as to sandwich the substrate transport mechanism 5 in the Y-axis direction. Each component supply unit 6 has multiple feeders 7 arranged in parallel along the X-axis direction. The feeders 7 feed the component tape containing the components in a pitch in the tape feeding direction, supplying the components to the position where the head 10 will pick up the components (hereinafter referred to as the component pick-up position).

[0051] The parts supply unit 6 may also be equipped with a tray feeder, a stick feeder, or a bulk feeder. A tray feeder supplies parts from a tray containing parts. A stick feeder supplies parts from a stick case containing parts. A bulk feeder supplies parts from a bulk case containing parts.

[0052] The Y-axis beam 8 is positioned along the Y-axis direction at one end of the base 4's upper surface in the X-axis direction (the right side in Figure 2). Each of the two X-axis beams 9 is coupled to the Y-axis beam 8 so as to be movable in the Y-axis direction while remaining aligned with the X-axis direction.

[0053] The head 10 is mounted on each of the two X-axis beams 9 so as to be movable in the X-axis direction. The head 10 is equipped with multiple suction units 10a that can move up and down while picking up and holding parts. A nozzle 10b is provided at the tip of each suction unit 10a (see Figure 3).

[0054] Each of the two heads 10 moves in the X-axis and Y-axis directions by driving the Y-axis beam 8 and the X-axis beam 9. As a result, each of the two heads 10 picks up a component from the component picking position of the feeder 7 located in the component supply unit 6 corresponding to that head 10 using a nozzle 10b, and mounts it to the mounting point (or mounting position) of the substrate B positioned in the substrate transport mechanism 5.

[0055] Each of the two component recognition cameras 11 is positioned between one of the two component supply units 6 and the substrate transport mechanism 5. The component recognition camera 11 captures an image of a component as the head 10, which has picked up a component from the component supply unit 6, moves above the component recognition camera 11. In other words, the component recognition camera 11 recognizes the holding position of a component by capturing an image of the component while it is held by the head 10.

[0056] The substrate recognition camera 12 is attached to the plate 9a to which the head 10 is mounted. Therefore, the substrate recognition camera 12 moves integrally with the head 10. As the head 10 moves, the substrate recognition camera 12 moves above the substrate B positioned by the substrate transport mechanism 5, and captures images of substrate marks (not shown) provided on the substrate B to recognize the position of the substrate B. When the head 10 mounts components onto the substrate B, the mounting position is corrected based on the component recognition result by the component recognition camera 11 and the position recognition result of the substrate B by the substrate recognition camera 12.

[0057] Figure 3 is a diagram partially showing an example of the AA cross-section in Figure 2. Component mounting devices M4 and M5 have the function of mounting components P onto substrate B.

[0058] As shown in Figure 3, the parts supply unit 6 comprises a feeder base 13a, a plurality of feeders 7 mounted on the feeder base 13a, and a trolley 13 that supports the feeder base 13a.

[0059] The trolley 13 is configured to be detachably attached to the component mounting devices M4 and M5, and is further equipped with a cassette holder 15. The cassette holder 15 is configured to hold multiple component reels C. Each component reel C stores a component tape 14 in a wound state. Each of the multiple component reels C is held in the upper holding position Hu or the lower holding position Hd of the cassette holder 15. The component tape 14 pulled out from the component reels C held by the cassette holder 15 is mounted on the feeder 7. The feeder 7 may be placed on a feeder base 13a provided on the base 4 without using the trolley 13. Alternatively, the trolley 13 may hold the component reels C instead of the cassette holder 15.

[0060] Each nozzle 10b attached to the head 10 picks up and moves a component P supplied from the feeder 7 to the component picking position, thereby mounting the component P to the mounting position on the substrate B. Each nozzle 10b is attached to the suction unit 10a of the head 10 via a nozzle holder 10c.

[0061] In this embodiment, as described above, the component mounting devices M4 and M5 have the same configuration, but they may have different configurations.

[0062] [Functional configuration of the control device and the implementation line] Figure 4 is a block diagram showing examples of the functional configurations of the control device 100 and the implementation lines L1 to L3.

[0063] The management device 100 includes a management control unit 101, a processing unit 102, a first input unit 103, a first display unit 104, a first production storage unit 105, a monitoring data storage unit 106, an event data storage unit 107, a first communication unit 108, and a table storage unit 109.

[0064] The processing unit 102 generates production data and stores it in the first production storage unit 105. The production data indicates, for example, the mounting order of at least one component P to be mounted on the substrate B, and the position where those components P are mounted on the substrate B (i.e., the mounting position described above). The processing unit 102 also identifies the production status in each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 based on the monitoring data column stored in the monitoring data storage unit 106, and determines whether or not a problem has occurred based on that status. Furthermore, the processing unit 102 processes countermeasures for the above-mentioned problem based on the event data stored in the event data storage unit 107 and the first table 109a and the second table 109b stored in the table storage unit 109.

[0065] The first input unit 103 receives input operations from, for example, an operator of the production system 1, and outputs a signal corresponding to that input operation to at least one of the management control unit 101 and the processing unit 102. Such a first input unit 103 may include, for example, a keyboard, touch sensor, touchpad, mouse, etc.

[0066] The first display unit 104 displays the processing results from the processing unit 102, etc. Specific examples of the first display unit 104 include, but are not limited to, liquid crystal displays, plasma displays, or organic EL (Electro-Luminescence) displays.

[0067] The first production storage unit 105 is a recording medium for storing production data. The monitoring data storage unit 106 is a recording medium for storing monitoring data sequences showing the monitoring results for each of the mounting lines L1 to L3. The event data storage unit 107 is a recording medium for storing event data showing events performed on each of the component mounting devices M4 and M5 of the mounting lines L1 to L3. The table storage unit 109 is a recording medium for storing a plurality of first tables 109a and a plurality of second tables 109b. For example, these recording media may be hard disks, ROMs (Read Only Memory), RAMs (Random Access Memory), or semiconductor memory. Such recording media may be volatile or non-volatile.

[0068] The first communication unit 108 communicates with each of the mounting lines L1 to L3. For example, the first communication unit 108 transmits production data stored in the first production storage unit 105 to each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 in response to control by the management control unit 101. The first communication unit 108 also receives the aforementioned monitoring data sequence from each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 and stores it in the monitoring data storage unit 106. Furthermore, the first communication unit 108 receives event data from each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 and stores it in the event data storage unit 107. It can also be said that the first communication unit 108 is configured as an acquisition unit that acquires monitoring data sequences and event data.

[0069] The management control unit 101 controls the processing unit 102, the first display unit 104, the first production storage unit 105, the monitoring data storage unit 106, the event data storage unit 107, the first communication unit 108, and the table storage unit 109.

[0070] The management device 100 may be configured as a single device or as multiple devices. For example, the management device 100 may consist of a first device including a first input unit 103 and a first display unit 104, and a second device including all components other than the first input unit 103 and the first display unit 104. In this case, the first device may be located in the same factory as the mounting lines L1 to L3, and the second device may be located on a cloud server outside that factory. Alternatively, the entire management device 100 may be hosted on the cloud server or located in the aforementioned factory.

[0071] The mounting line L1 comprises a line control unit 201, a second input unit 203, a second display unit 204, a second communication unit 208, a second production storage unit 205, and a plurality of work machines 210. The plurality of work machines 210 are component mounting devices M4 and M5, etc. In addition, each component other than the plurality of work machines 210 included in the mounting line L1 may be provided in the line management device 200 or in any of the work machines 210.

[0072] The second input unit 203, like the first input unit 103 of the control device 100, receives input operations from, for example, an operator of the production system 1, and outputs an input signal corresponding to that input operation to the line control unit 201. Such a second input unit 203 may include, for example, a keyboard, a touch sensor, a touchpad, or a mouse.

[0073] The second display unit 204 displays information corresponding to the input signal, for example, in response to control by the line control unit 201. Specific examples of the second display unit 204 include, but are not limited to, liquid crystal displays, plasma displays, or organic EL displays.

[0074] The second communication unit 208 communicates with the management device 100. For example, when the second communication unit 208 receives production data from the first communication unit 108 of the management device 100, it stores that production data in the second production storage unit 205. Also, when the second communication unit 208 acquires a sequence of monitoring data generated based on the monitoring results of multiple work machines 210, it transmits that sequence of monitoring data to the first communication unit 108 of the management device 100.

[0075] The second production storage unit 205 is a recording medium for storing production data. The second production storage unit 205 may also store monitoring data sequences. For example, the recording medium may be a hard disk, ROM, RAM, or semiconductor memory. Such a recording medium may be volatile or non-volatile.

[0076] The multiple work machines 210 include a substrate supply device M1, a substrate transfer device M2, a solder printing device M3, component mounting devices M4 and M5, an inspection machine M6, a reflow device M7, and a substrate recovery device M8.

[0077] The line control unit 201 controls each component of the mounting line L1 other than the line control unit 201 itself. For example, the line control unit 201 controls each component based on operator input operations received by the second input unit 203. The line control unit 201 also causes multiple work machines 210 to perform the aforementioned solder printing, component mounting, and reflow operations based on production data stored in the second production storage unit 205. The line control unit 201 also monitors the multiple work machines 210. As a result, the line control unit 201 generates a series of monitoring data indicating the status when the mounting line L1 was mounting component P onto the substrate B, and transmits this series of monitoring data from the second communication unit 208 to the management device 100. The line control unit 201 also identifies events that occurred to the multiple work machines 210 and transmits event data indicating those events from the second communication unit 208 to the management device 100.

[0078] [Monitoring data columns and event data] Figure 5 shows an example of data transmitted from the implementation lines L1 to L3 to the management device 100.

[0079] Each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 monitors its own component mounting operation while component mounting is being performed and transmits a monitoring data column Dx indicating the monitoring results to the management device 100. This monitoring data column Dx consists of a column of multiple monitoring data Da. In other words, each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 repeatedly transmits the monitoring data Da to the management device 100, for example, periodically. Furthermore, each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 transmits event data Db indicating the event to the management device 100 whenever an event occurs to one of the work machines 210 included in that mounting line L. These work machines 210 are, for example, component mounting machines M4 and M5.

[0080] [Processing actions based on monitoring data] Figure 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of processing operation based on monitoring data Da by the processing unit 102 of the management device 100.

[0081] The processing unit 102 of the management device 100 acquires a monitoring data sequence Dx from each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 via the first communication unit 108. The monitoring data sequence Dx consists of a sequence of monitoring data Da that is repeatedly transmitted while the component mounting work is being performed, and indicates the content of the component mounting work. In a specific example, the monitoring data Da is data that shows the situation when component mounting devices M4 and M5 were mounting component P onto substrate B, and shows the work time, which is the time the component mounting work of mounting component P onto substrate B was performed, and the actual results during that work time. The actual results include the number of component P mounting operations, the number of suction failures and contributing units, and the number of recognized failures and contributing units. The number of mounting operations is the number of times the nozzle 10b performed the operation to pick up component P and mount it onto substrate B, and is sometimes called the number of suction operations. The number of suction failures is the number of suction errors in which the nozzle 10b was unable to properly pick up component P. The number of recognized defects is the number of recognition errors in which the part recognition camera 11 fails to properly recognize part P. The contributing unit is a unit included in the work machine 210 (specifically, the part mounting devices M4 and M5) that is considered to be the cause of the adsorption defect or recognition defect.

[0082] Each of the mounting lines L1 to L3 determines its performance for the time spent on component mounting. For example, the line control unit 201 monitors component mounting devices M4 and M5 to determine the number of mounting operations, the number of defective parts due to adsorption and the contributing units, and the number of defective parts due to recognition and the contributing units. For each work time during which component mounting is performed, the line control unit 201 generates the performance determined for that work time and monitoring data Da indicating that work time. Furthermore, each time the line control unit 201 generates monitoring data Da, it causes the second communication unit 208 to transmit the monitoring data Da to the management device 100.

[0083] In a specific example, the monitoring data Da, as shown in Figure 6, represents the actual results (number of implementation tasks, number of adsorption defects, number of adsorption defect factors, number of recognition defects, number of recognition defect factors) at work time t as (A1, Ba1, B1, Ca1, C1). For example, work time t may be 1 minute or any other time.

[0084] When the processing unit 102 of the management device 100 acquires a monitoring data sequence Dx containing such monitoring data Da from its implementation line L, it calculates the spoilage rate of adsorption spoilage and the spoilage rate of recognition spoilage at each calculation point based on the monitoring data sequence Dx and the cumulative period information De. The cumulative period information De indicates the cumulative period.

[0085] In a specific example, the calculation date indicates the day the spoilage rate was calculated. The spoilage rates corresponding to each calculation date in Figure 6 are indicators based on the cumulative number of spoilages related to component mounting operations in which component P was picked up by component mounting devices M4 and M5 over the cumulative period. In other words, the spoilage rate for pick-up spoilage is the ratio of the number of pick-up spoilages accumulated over the cumulative period to the cumulative number of mounting operations (or pick-up times) accumulated over the cumulative period. The spoilage rate for recognition spoilage is the ratio of the number of recognition spoilages accumulated over the cumulative period to the cumulative number of mounting operations (or pick-up times) accumulated over the cumulative period. As a specific example of the unit of spoilage rate, ppm (parts per million) is used.

[0086] In other words, at each predetermined calculation point, the processing unit 102 accumulates the number of installation work and the number of adsorption defects shown in the monitoring data column Dx over the cumulative period at that calculation point. Then, the processing unit 102 calculates the adsorption defect rate from the number of installation work and adsorption defects accumulated over that cumulative period. Similarly, at each predetermined calculation point, the processing unit 102 accumulates the number of installation work and the number of recognition defects shown in the monitoring data column Dx over the cumulative period at that calculation point. Then, the processing unit 102 calculates the recognition defect rate from the number of installation work and recognition defects accumulated over that cumulative period. For example, at the first calculation point T1 (for example, day 1), the processing unit 102 calculates "Br1" as the adsorption defect rate due to factor unit "B1" and "Cr1" as the recognition defect rate due to factor unit "C1". Furthermore, the processing unit 102 calculates "Br2" as the spoilage rate due to adsorption spoilage by factor unit "B1" and "Cr2" as the spoilage rate due to recognition spoilage by factor unit "C1" at the second calculation time point T2 (for example, day 2).

[0087] [Event data, Table 1, Table 2] Figure 7 shows an example of event data (Db).

[0088] Event data Db is data indicating events that occurred to component mounting devices M4 and M5, and, as shown in Figure 7 for example, it shows the content of the event and the date and time the event occurred. The content of the event may be, for example, the replacement of nozzle 10b (i.e., nozzle replacement).

[0089] Figure 8 shows an example of the first table 109a.

[0090] Table 109a, as shown in Figure 8 for example, shows the relationship between problem type, factor unit, countermeasure, and weight. Problem type is the type of problem, for example, adsorption failure or recognition failure. Factor unit is the unit that corresponds to the factor that caused the problem of that problem type. Countermeasure is the countermeasure for the problem of that problem type. Weight is the priority of the countermeasure. In a specific example, Table 109a shows adsorption failure as the problem type and feeder 7 as the factor unit for that adsorption failure. Furthermore, Table 109a shows feeder replacement, splicing tape reset, splicing reset, and reel reset as countermeasures for adsorption failure. Furthermore, Table 109a shows a weight of 1.5 for countermeasure "feeder replacement", a weight of 0.7 for countermeasure "splicing tape reset", a weight of 0.6 for countermeasure "splicing reset", and a weight of 0.5 for countermeasure "reset reel".

[0091] Feeder replacement is the process of replacing, for example, the feeder 7 attached to the feeder base 13a, and this process also replaces the component tape 14 and component reel C attached to the feeder 7. Splicing tape reset is the process of reapplying the splicing tape used in splicing, which is the process of splicing a new component tape 14 onto a component tape 14 already attached to the feeder 7. In other words, in splicing, splicing tape is applied to the rear end of the existing component tape 14 (specifically, the carrier tape of the existing component tape 14) and the front end of the new component tape 14 (specifically, the carrier tape of the new component tape 14). Splicing tape reset is the process of reapplying that splicing tape. Splicing reset is the process of peeling off the splicing tape after splicing has been performed, checking whether the rear end of the existing component tape 14 and the front end of the new component tape 14 are connected in an improper shape, and if they are connected in an improper shape, adjusting the shape of at least one of the rear end and the front end, and then performing splicing again. For example, if at least one of the edges of the rear end and the front end is tilted, splicing reset will cut at least one of the rear end and the front end so that the edges are not tilted. It can also be said that splicing reset is performed by splicing tape reset. Reel reset is the operation of rearranging the parts reel C on the trolley 13, and the parts reel C may be replaced.

[0092] Figure 9 shows an example of Table 109b.

[0093] The second table 109b shows events, problem types, countermeasures, and weights (i.e., priorities) in relation to each other, as shown in Figure 9, for example. In a specific example, the second table 109b shows splicing as the event and adsorption failure as the problem type. Furthermore, the second table 109b shows splicing tape reset, splicing reset, and reel reset as countermeasures for adsorption failure. Furthermore, the first table 109a shows a weight of 1.5 for the countermeasure "splicing tape reset", a weight of 1 for the countermeasure "splicing reset", and a weight of 0.8 for the countermeasure "reset reel".

[0094] [Processing behavior related to the weight of countermeasures] Figure 10 shows an example of the priority determination process performed by the processing unit 102.

[0095] When a problem occurs in the situation indicated by the monitoring data Da, the processing unit 102 performs a priority determination process to determine the weight (i.e., priority) of each of the multiple countermeasures for that problem, based on the events that occurred during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data Db, and the problem itself.

[0096] Specifically, as described above, the processing unit 102 calculates the spoilage rate periodically, for example, and determines that a spoilage rate problem has occurred when the spoilage rate exceeds a threshold. Furthermore, the processing unit 102 determines whether an event occurred during a predetermined period immediately preceding the time when the problem occurred. This predetermined period may be one minute, one hour, or any other period. In other words, the processing unit 102 searches for an event data Db containing a date and time within that predetermined period from one or more event data Db stored in the event data storage unit 107. If the processing unit 102 finds the event data Db through the search, it determines that the event indicated in the event data Db has occurred. An event determined to have occurred in this way can be said to be the most recent event. In short, when a problem occurs, the processing unit 102 identifies the most recent event.

[0097] Next, the processing unit 102 reads the first table 109a from the table storage unit 109, which corresponds to the type of problem that occurred (i.e., the problem type) and the factor unit of that problem. The problem type is spoilage corresponding to the spoilage rate that exceeds the threshold, as described above, and is either adsorption spoilage or recognition spoilage. The factor unit of the problem is the factor unit corresponding to that problem type, as shown in the monitoring data Da. Furthermore, if there is a recent event, the processing unit 102 reads the second table 109b, which corresponds to the problem type and the recent event. Next, the processing unit 102 updates the read first table 109a using the read second table 109b. In other words, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of multiple countermeasures by changing the weights of one or more countermeasures shown in the first table 109a using the second table 109b. That is, priority determination processing is performed.

[0098] For example, as shown in Figure 10, the processing unit 102 determines that a problem of type "adsorption spoilage" has occurred due to the cause unit "feeder," and identifies "splicing" as the most recent event. In this case, the processing unit 102 reads the first table 109a, which corresponds to the problem type "adsorption spoilage" and the cause unit "feeder," from the table storage unit 109. Then, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of multiple countermeasures by changing the weights of one or more countermeasures shown in the first table 109a using the second table 109b, which corresponds to the problem type "adsorption spoilage" and the most recent event "splicing."

[0099] Specifically, the first table 109a shows the weights of countermeasure "feeder replacement" (1.5), countermeasure "splicing tape reset" (0.7), countermeasure "splicing reset" (0.6), and countermeasure "reset reel" (0.5). Then, the second table 109b shows the weights of countermeasure "splicing tape reset" (1.5), countermeasure "splicing reset" (1), and countermeasure "reset reel" (0.8).

[0100] In this case, the processing unit 102 adds the weight "1.5" of the countermeasure "Splicing Tape Reset" shown in the second table 109b to the weight "0.7" of the countermeasure "Splicing Tape Reset" shown in the first table 109a. As a result, the processing unit 102 determines the weight of the countermeasure "Splicing Tape Reset" for the problem of type "Adsorption Destruction" caused by the factor unit "Feeder" to be 2.2.

[0101] Similarly, the processing unit 102 adds the weight "1" of the countermeasure "Splice Reset" shown in the second table 109b to the weight "0.6" of the countermeasure "Splice Reset" shown in the first table 109a. As a result, the processing unit 102 determines the weight of the countermeasure "Splice Reset" for the problem of type "Adsorption Spawning" caused by the factor unit "Feeder" to be 1.6.

[0102] Similarly, the processing unit 102 adds the weight "0.8" of the countermeasure "reset reel" shown in the second table 109b to the weight "0.5" of the countermeasure "reset reel" shown in the first table 109a. As a result, the processing unit 102 determines the weight of the countermeasure "reset reel" for the problem of type "adsorption spoilage" caused by the factor unit "feeder" to be 1.3.

[0103] On the other hand, the weight of the countermeasure "feeder replacement" is not shown in the second table 109b. Therefore, the processing unit 102 decides to use the weight "1.5" for the countermeasure "feeder replacement" shown in the first table 109a as the weight of the countermeasure "feeder replacement" for the problem of type "adsorption failure" caused by the factor unit "feeder".

[0104] Figure 11 shows another example of the priority determination process performed by the processing unit 102.

[0105] For example, as shown in Figure 11, the processing unit 102 determines that a problem of type "recognition failure" has occurred due to the cause unit "nozzle," and identifies "nozzle cleaning" as the most recent event. In this case, the processing unit 102 reads the first table 109a, which corresponds to the problem type "recognition failure" and the cause unit "nozzle," from the table storage unit 109. Then, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of multiple countermeasures by changing the weights of one or more countermeasures shown in the first table 109a using the second table 109b, which corresponds to the problem type "recognition failure" and the most recent event "nozzle cleaning."

[0106] Specifically, Table 109a shows the weights of countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" (1.5), countermeasure "replace the nozzle" (1.2), countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle tip" (0.6), and countermeasure "revise the nozzle arrangement" (0.5). Table 209b shows the weight of countermeasure "revise the nozzle arrangement" (1.5). Cleaning the nozzle reflector is the work of cleaning the reflector included in the nozzle 10b. The reflector is a component that reflects light emitted from the lighting device for imaging by the component recognition camera 11. Replacing the nozzle is the work of replacing the nozzle 10b which is attached to the head 10 via the nozzle holder 10c. Cleaning the nozzle tip is the work of cleaning the tip of the nozzle 10b which comes into contact with the component P due to the component P's suction. Revising the nozzle arrangement is the work of reviewing the arrangement of the nozzles 10b attached to the head 10 and changing it as necessary.

[0107] In this case, the processing unit 102 adds the weight "1.5" of the countermeasure "nozzle placement review" shown in the second table 109b to the weight "0.5" of the countermeasure "nozzle placement review" shown in the first table 109a. As a result, the processing unit 102 determines that the weight of the countermeasure "nozzle placement review" for the problem of type "recognition failure" caused by the factor unit "nozzle" is 2.

[0108] On the other hand, the weights of the countermeasures "cleaning the nozzle reflector," "replacing the nozzle," and "cleaning the nozzle tip" are not shown in the second table 109b. Therefore, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of the countermeasures "cleaning the nozzle reflector," "replacing the nozzle," and "cleaning the nozzle tip" shown in the first table 109a as the weights of the countermeasures for the problem of type "recognition failure" caused by the factor unit "nozzle."

[0109] Figure 12 shows yet another example of the priority determination process performed by the processing unit 102.

[0110] For example, as shown in Figure 12, the processing unit 102 determines that a problem of type "adsorption spoilage" has occurred due to the factor unit "head," and identifies "production data change" as the most recent event. In this case, the processing unit 102 reads the first table 109a corresponding to the problem type "adsorption spoilage" and the factor unit "head" from the table storage unit 109. Then, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of multiple countermeasures by changing the weights of one or more countermeasures shown in the first table 109a using the second table 109b corresponding to the problem type "adsorption spoilage" and the most recent event "production data change."

[0111] Specifically, Table 109a shows the weights of the countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" (1.5), the countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" (1.2), and the countermeasure "head replacement" (0.6). Nozzle holder cleaning is the operation of cleaning the nozzle holder 10c, and nozzle holder replacement is the operation of replacing the nozzle holder 10c attached to the head 10. Head replacement is the operation of replacing the head 10. Table 209b shows the weight of the countermeasure "production data review" (2.5). Production data review is the operation of reviewing the above-mentioned production data and changing it as necessary.

[0112] In this case, the countermeasure "production data review" shown in the second table 109b, and its weight, are not shown in the first table 109a. Therefore, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of the countermeasures "nozzle holder cleaning," "nozzle holder replacement," and "head replacement" shown in the first table 109a as the weights of the countermeasures for the problem of type "adsorption spoilage" caused by the factor unit "head." Furthermore, the processing unit 102 determines the weight "2.5" of the countermeasure "production data review" shown in the second table 109b as the weight of the countermeasure "production data review" for the problem of type "adsorption spoilage" caused by the factor unit "head."

[0113] Thus, in the priority determination process, the processing unit 102 in this embodiment refers to a first table 109a which shows multiple countermeasures for a problem and the priority of each of those multiple countermeasures. The processing unit 102 then determines the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures by changing the priority of one or more of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table 109a based on the event shown in the event data Db. In other words, in the priority determination process, the processing unit 102 refers to a second table 109b which shows the priority of at least one countermeasure for the problem that occurs after the event has occurred. The processing unit 102 then determines the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures by changing the priority of one or more of the countermeasures shown in the first table 109a according to the priority of one or more of those countermeasures shown in the second table 109b.

[0114] As a result, in this embodiment, the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures for a problem is determined, allowing the operator to easily find and implement the optimal countermeasure from among the multiple countermeasures by referring to these priorities, thereby enabling early resolution of the problem. Furthermore, since these priorities take into account the most recent events that may have caused the problem, the reliability of the prioritization can be increased. As a result, the resolution of the problem that arises can be effectively supported.

[0115] Furthermore, in this embodiment, the priority of each of the one or more countermeasures shown in the first table 109a is changed based on the event. This allows, for example, if an event has recently occurred, the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures can be determined according to that event, and if the event has not occurred, the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table 109a can be used as the priority of that countermeasure. As a result, an appropriate priority can be determined according to the presence or absence of an event. In addition, in this embodiment, since the priority is changed based on the second table 109b, an appropriate priority can be effectively determined according to the event.

[0116] In the examples shown in Figures 10 to 12, the processing unit 102 reads the second table 109b, which corresponds to the problem type and most recent event of the problem that occurred, from the table storage unit 109, and modifies the weights of one or more countermeasures shown in the first table 109a. However, if the second table 109b is not stored in the table storage unit 109, the processing unit 102 simply determines the weights of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table 109a as the weights of the multiple countermeasures for the problem that occurred.

[0117] Furthermore, in this embodiment, the event includes at least one of the following: (a) an event relating to the component P supplied by the component mounting devices M4 and M5, (b) an event relating to the unit used in the component mounting devices M4 and M5, and (c) an event relating to the production data used in the component mounting devices M4 and M5. Examples of events in (a) include feeder replacement, splicing tape reset, splicing reset, and reel reset. Examples of events in (b) include nozzle reflector cleaning, nozzle replacement, nozzle tip cleaning, and nozzle arrangement review. Examples of events in (c) include production data review. As a result, the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures is determined based on the events such as (a), (b), and (c) above, thereby appropriately increasing the reliability of that priority.

[0118] Figures 13 and 14 show examples of screen displays by the management device 100.

[0119] The processing unit 102 of the control device 100 displays, for example, the screen 21 shown in Figure 13 on the first display unit 104. The screen 21 includes a list of countermeasures. The countermeasure list shows each weight determined by the processing unit 102 and the countermeasure corresponding to that weight, arranged in order of weight. The order of weights is from large weight to small weight. For example, the weight of each countermeasure is determined as shown in the example in Figure 12. In this case, as shown in Figure 13, the countermeasure list on the screen 21 is arranged in the order of countermeasure "production data review" weight "2.5", countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" weight "1.5", countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" weight "1.2", and countermeasure "head replacement" weight "0.6", with the combination of countermeasures and their weights being arranged in that order. The processing unit 102 may also display the screen 21 on the second display unit 204 of the mounting line L via the first communication unit 108 and the second communication unit 208.

[0120] The operator, by viewing such a screen 21, implements, for example, the countermeasure with the greatest weight. Then, as shown in Figure 14, the operator selects the implemented countermeasure by performing an input operation to the first input unit 103 or the second input unit 203. For example, the operator selects the implemented countermeasure by placing the pointer 21a on the implemented countermeasure on the screen 21 and performing a click operation. In other words, the processing unit 102 selects one of the multiple countermeasures shown on the screen 21 as the implemented countermeasure in response to the operator's input operation to the first input unit 103 or the second input unit 203.

[0121] Next, the processing unit 102 confirms the effect of the selected countermeasure. In other words, the processing unit 102 determines whether the previously occurring problem has been resolved based on the monitoring data column Dx obtained after the countermeasure has been implemented.

[0122] Specifically, the processing unit 102 calculates the spoilage rate after the implementation of countermeasures based on the monitoring data column Dx, and defines the spoilage rate after the countermeasures are implemented as the spoilage rate after countermeasures. The processing unit 102 then determines whether the change in spoilage rate obtained by subtracting the spoilage rate after countermeasures from the spoilage rate before countermeasures (spoilage rate at the time of the problem) exceeds a threshold. The processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved if the change in spoilage rate exceeds the threshold, and determines that the problem has not been resolved if the change in spoilage rate is less than or equal to the threshold. The spoilage rate mentioned above is the spoilage rate for adsorption spoilage if the type of problem that occurred is "adsorption spoilage," and the spoilage rate for recognition spoilage if the type of problem that occurred is "recognition spoilage." The threshold may be, for example, 200 ppm, or it may be any other value.

[0123] Then, if the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved, it changes the weights, for example, in the countermeasures list to increase the weights corresponding to the implemented countermeasures mentioned above, and if it determines that the problem has not been resolved, it changes the weights to decrease. At this time, the processing unit 102 rearranges the array of combinations mentioned above according to the changed weights.

[0124] Figure 15 shows an example of the process by which the processing unit 102 reduces the weight of the implemented measures.

[0125] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 15(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "adsorption failure" caused by the factor unit "head". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "production data review" weight "2.5", countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" weight "1.5", countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" weight "1.2", and countermeasure "head replacement" weight "0.6".

[0126] For example, when the countermeasure "production data review" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been solved by the implementation of that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been solved, that is, that the countermeasure was ineffective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "production data review" to "2.5", as shown in Figure 15(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "2.4" by subtracting 0.1 from the weight of the countermeasure "2.5".

[0127] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows the system to determine appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0128] Figure 16 shows an example of the process by which the processing unit 102 increases the weight of the implemented measures.

[0129] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 16(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "recognition failure" caused by the factor unit "nozzle". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" weight "1.5", countermeasure "replace the nozzle" weight "0.7", countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle tip" weight "0.6", and countermeasure "revise the nozzle arrangement" weight "0.5".

[0130] For example, when the countermeasure "nozzle replacement" is implemented as an implemented countermeasure, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been resolved by the implementation of that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved, that is, that the implemented countermeasure has been effective, it changes the weight of the implemented countermeasure "nozzle replacement" from "0.7", as shown in Figure 16(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the implemented countermeasure to "0.8" by adding 0.1 to the weight of the implemented countermeasure "0.7".

[0131] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows the system to determine appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0132] Thus, in this embodiment, the processing unit 102 determines whether a problem has been resolved after one of several countermeasures has been implemented as an implemented countermeasure. At this time, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been resolved based on the monitoring data Da acquired by the first communication unit 108 (i.e., the acquisition unit) after the implemented countermeasure has been implemented. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved, it increases the priority that was determined for the implemented countermeasure in the priority determination process. As a result, when a problem is resolved, that is, when an implemented countermeasure is effective, the priority of that implemented countermeasure increases, so that the effectiveness of the implemented countermeasure is appropriately reflected in the priority, and the accuracy of that priority can be increased.

[0133] On the other hand, if the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been resolved, it reduces the priority that was determined for the implemented countermeasure in the priority determination process. As a result, if the problem has not been resolved, that is, if the implemented countermeasure was ineffective, the priority of that countermeasure is reduced, so that the ineffectiveness of the implemented countermeasure is appropriately reflected in the priority, and the accuracy of that priority can be increased.

[0134] In the example above, only the weight of the implementation measures is changed, but the weights of dependent measures, which are other measures besides the implementation measures, may also be changed. Dependent measures are measures that are subordinate to implementation measures. For example, if an implementation measure is ineffective, and that implementation measure is to replace the unit, then the dependent measures of that implementation measure may be to clean the unit, or to replace or clean the sub-units contained within that unit.

[0135] Figure 17 shows an example of the process by which the processing unit 102 reduces the weight of dependent measures.

[0136] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 17(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "adsorption failure" caused by the factor unit "feeder". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "feeder replacement" weight "1.5", countermeasure "splicing tape reset" weight "0.7", countermeasure "splicing reset" weight "0.6", and countermeasure "reset reel" weight "0.5". In the example in Figure 17, the countermeasure list also shows the types of the multiple countermeasures. The types of countermeasures are "replacement", "cleaning", etc. If the implemented countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the unit, is ineffective, then the countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as resetting other units that are substantially associated with the replacement of that unit, can be said to be subordinate to the implemented countermeasure.

[0137] For example, when the countermeasure "feeder replacement" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been solved by the implementation of that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been solved, that is, that the countermeasure was ineffective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "feeder replacement" to "1.5", as shown in Figure 17(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "1.4" by subtracting 0.1 from the weight of the countermeasure "1.5".

[0138] Here, if the implemented measure "feeder replacement" is ineffective, the measures "splicing tape reset", "splicing reset", and "reel reset" are each subordinate measures to their respective implemented measures. Therefore, as shown in Figure 17(b), the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "splicing tape reset" from "0.7", the weight of the subordinate measure "splicing reset" from "0.6", and the weight of the subordinate measure "reel reset" from "0.5". In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "splicing tape reset" from "0.7" to "0.6". Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "splicing reset" from "0.6" to "0.5". Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent action "reset reel" to "0.4" by subtracting 0.1 from its weight "0.5".

[0139] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows for the determination of appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0140] Figure 18 shows another example of the process by which the processing unit 102 reduces the weight of dependent measures.

[0141] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 18(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "recognition failure" caused by the factor unit "nozzle". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" weight "1.5", countermeasure "replace the nozzle" weight "0.7", countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle tip" weight "0.6", and countermeasure "revise the nozzle arrangement" weight "0.5". In the example of Figure 18, as in the example of Figure 17, the countermeasure list also shows the types of the multiple countermeasures. The types of countermeasures are "replacement", "cleaning", "maintenance", etc. Furthermore, if the implemented countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the unit, is ineffective, then the countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as cleaning the subunits included in that unit, can be said to be subordinate to the implemented countermeasure.

[0142] For example, when the countermeasure "nozzle replacement" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been solved by implementing that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been solved, that is, that the countermeasure was ineffective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "nozzle replacement" to "0.7", as shown in Figure 18(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "0.6" by subtracting 0.1 from the weight of the countermeasure "0.7".

[0143] Here, if the implemented measure "nozzle replacement" is ineffective, the measures "cleaning the nozzle reflector" and "cleaning the nozzle tip" are subordinate measures to the implemented measure, and are therefore dependent measures. Accordingly, as shown in Figure 18(b), the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent measure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" (1.5) and the weight of the dependent measure "cleaning the nozzle tip" (0.6). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent measure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" (1.5) to "1.4". Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent measure "cleaning the nozzle tip" (0.6) to "0.5".

[0144] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows for the determination of appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0145] Figure 19 shows yet another example of the processing by the processing unit 102 that reduces the weight of dependent measures.

[0146] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 19(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "adsorption failure" caused by the factor unit "head". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" weight "1.5", countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" weight "0.7", and countermeasure "head replacement" weight "0.6". In the example of Figure 19, as in the examples of Figures 17 and 18, the countermeasure list also shows the types of the multiple countermeasures. The types of countermeasures are "replacement", "cleaning", etc. If the implemented countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the unit, is ineffective, then the countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as cleaning the unit, can be said to be subordinate to the implemented countermeasure. Furthermore, in that case, the countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the subunits included in the unit, and the countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as cleaning the subunits, can also be said to be subordinate to the implemented countermeasure.

[0147] For example, when the countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been resolved by implementing that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been resolved, that is, that the countermeasure was ineffective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" to "0.7", as shown in Figure 19(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "0.6" by subtracting 0.1 from the weight of the countermeasure "0.7".

[0148] Here, if the implemented measure "nozzle holder replacement" is ineffective, the measure "nozzle holder cleaning" is a subordinate measure, and is therefore a dependent measure. Accordingly, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent measure "nozzle holder cleaning" from "1.5" as shown in Figure 19(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent measure "nozzle holder cleaning" from "1.5" to "1.4".

[0149] Alternatively, for example, if the countermeasure "head replacement" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been resolved by the implementation of that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been resolved, that is, that the countermeasure was ineffective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "head replacement" to "0.6", as shown in Figure 19(c). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "0.5" by subtracting 0.1 from the weight of the countermeasure "0.6".

[0150] Here, if the implemented measure "head replacement" is ineffective, the measures "nozzle holder cleaning" and "nozzle holder replacement" are subordinate measures to the implemented measure. Therefore, as shown in Figure 19(c), the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "nozzle holder cleaning" (1.5) and the weight of the subordinate measure "nozzle holder replacement" (0.7). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "nozzle holder cleaning" to "1.4" by subtracting 0.1 from its weight "1.5". Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "nozzle holder replacement" to "0.6" by subtracting 0.1 from its weight "0.7".

[0151] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows for the determination of appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0152] In the example above, the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures are changed to be smaller, but if the implementation measures are effective, their weights are changed to be larger. In that case, for example, if the implementation measure is cleaning the unit, the dependent measures would be replacing that unit, cleaning or replacing the larger unit that includes that unit, etc.

[0153] Figure 20 shows an example of the process by which the processing unit 102 increases the weight of the dependent countermeasures.

[0154] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 20(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "adsorption failure" caused by the factor unit "feeder". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "feeder replacement" weight "1.5", countermeasure "splicing tape reset" weight "0.7", countermeasure "splicing reset" weight "0.6", and countermeasure "reset reel" weight "0.5". In the example of Figure 20, as in the examples of Figures 17 to 19, the countermeasure list also shows the types of the multiple countermeasures. The types of countermeasures are "replacement", "cleaning", etc. Furthermore, if the implemented countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as resetting the unit, is effective, then the countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing other units that substantially involve resetting that unit, can be said to be subordinate to the implemented countermeasure. In addition, the countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as resetting other units that substantially involve resetting that unit, can also be said to be subordinate to the implemented countermeasure.

[0155] For example, when the countermeasure "Splicing Tape Reset" is implemented as an implemented countermeasure, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been resolved by the implementation of that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved, that is, that the implemented countermeasure has been effective, it changes the weight of the implemented countermeasure "Splicing Tape Reset" from "0.7" as shown in Figure 20(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the implemented countermeasure from "0.7" to "0.8" by adding 0.1.

[0156] In this case, if the implemented measure "resetting the splicing tape" is effective, then the measures "feeder replacement," "resetting the splicing," and "resetting the reel" are all subordinate measures to the implemented measure, and are therefore considered subordinate measures.

[0157] Therefore, as shown in Figure 20(b), the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent action "feeder replacement" ("1.5"), the weight of the dependent action "splicing reset" ("0.6"), and the weight of the dependent action "reel reset" ("0.5"). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent action "feeder replacement" ("1.5") to "1.6" by adding 0.1. Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent action "splicing reset" ("0.6") to "0.7" by adding 0.1. Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the dependent action "reel reset" ("0.5") to "0.6" by adding 0.1.

[0158] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows for the determination of appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0159] Figure 21 shows another example of the process in which the processing unit 102 increases the weight of the dependent measures.

[0160] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 21(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "recognition failure" caused by the factor unit "nozzle". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" weight "1.5", countermeasure "replace the nozzle" weight "0.7", countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle tip" weight "0.6", and countermeasure "revise the nozzle arrangement" weight "0.5". In the example of Figure 21, as in the examples of Figures 17 to 20, the countermeasure list also shows the types of the multiple countermeasures. The types of countermeasures are "replacement", "cleaning", "maintenance", etc. When an implemented countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as cleaning the unit, is effective, it can be said that a countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the unit, is subordinate to that implemented countermeasure.

[0161] For example, when the countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been solved by implementing that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been solved, that is, that the countermeasure has been effective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" from "1.5" as shown in Figure 20(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "1.6" by adding 0.1 to the weight of the countermeasure "1.5".

[0162] Here, if the implemented measure "cleaning the nozzle reflector" is effective, the measure "replacing the nozzle" is a subordinate measure to that implemented measure. Therefore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "replacing the nozzle" from "0.7" as shown in Figure 20(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "replacing the nozzle" from "0.7" to "0.8".

[0163] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows for the determination of appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0164] Figure 22 shows yet another example of the process in which the processing unit 102 increases the weight of the dependent measures.

[0165] The countermeasure list, as shown in Figure 22(a) for example, shows the weights of multiple countermeasures for the problem of type "adsorption failure" caused by the factor unit "head". The weights of these multiple countermeasures are: countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" weight "1.5", countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" weight "0.7", and countermeasure "head replacement" weight "0.6". In the example of Figure 22, as in the examples of Figures 17 to 21, the countermeasure list also shows the types of the multiple countermeasures. The types of countermeasures are "replacement", "cleaning", etc. If the implemented countermeasure of type "cleaning", such as cleaning the unit, is effective, then the countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the unit, can be said to be subordinate to that implemented countermeasure. Furthermore, if the implemented countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing a small unit included in a large unit, is effective, then the countermeasure of type "replacement", such as replacing the large unit, can be said to be subordinate to that implemented countermeasure.

[0166] For example, when the countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been resolved by implementing that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved, that is, that the countermeasure has been effective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "nozzle holder replacement" from "0.7" as shown in Figure 20(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "0.8" by adding 0.1 to the weight of the countermeasure "0.7".

[0167] Here, if the implemented measure "nozzle holder replacement" is effective, the measure "head replacement" is a subordinate measure to that implemented measure. Therefore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "head replacement" from "0.6" as shown in Figure 22(b). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "head replacement" from "0.6" to "0.7".

[0168] Alternatively, for example, when the countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" is implemented, the processing unit 102 determines whether the problem has been solved by the implementation of that countermeasure. If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been solved, that is, that the countermeasure has been effective, it changes the weight of the countermeasure "nozzle holder cleaning" from "1.5" as shown in Figure 22(c). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the countermeasure to "1.6" by adding 0.1 to the weight of the countermeasure "1.5".

[0169] Here, if the implemented measure "nozzle holder cleaning" is effective, the measure "head replacement" is a subordinate measure to that implemented measure. Furthermore, in that case, the measure "nozzle holder replacement" is also a subordinate measure to that implemented measure. Therefore, as shown in Figure 22(c), the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "head replacement" (0.6) and the weight of the subordinate measure "nozzle holder replacement" (0.7). In other words, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "head replacement" (0.6) to "0.7" by adding 0.1. Furthermore, the processing unit 102 changes the weight of the subordinate measure "nozzle holder replacement" (0.7) to "0.8" by adding 0.1.

[0170] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may modify the weights of the implementation measures and dependent measures described above for the first table 109a. This allows for the determination of appropriate weights based on the modified first table 109a if the problem occurs again later.

[0171] In this embodiment, multiple countermeasures have a dependency relationship, and the processing unit 102 utilizes this dependency relationship. That is, when the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved, it increases the priority of each of the one or more countermeasures dependent on the implemented countermeasure, which was determined in the priority determination process. As a result, when the problem is resolved, i.e., when the implemented countermeasure has been effective, the priority of not only the implemented countermeasure but also one or more countermeasures dependent on that implemented countermeasure (i.e., dependent countermeasures) increases based on the dependency relationship of the multiple countermeasures. For example, if an implemented countermeasure such as cleaning a unit is effective, the priority of the dependent countermeasure, such as replacing that unit, also increases. Therefore, the effectiveness of the implemented countermeasure can be appropriately reflected in the priority of the implemented countermeasure and one or more dependent countermeasures, thereby increasing the accuracy of their priorities.

[0172] On the other hand, if the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been resolved, it reduces the priority determined in the priority determination process for each of the one or more countermeasures dependent on the implemented countermeasure. As a result, if the problem has not been resolved, that is, if the implemented countermeasure was ineffective, the priority of not only the implemented countermeasure but also one or more countermeasures dependent on it (i.e., dependent countermeasures) will be reduced based on the dependency relationships of the multiple countermeasures. For example, if an implemented countermeasure such as replacing a unit was ineffective, the priority of the dependent countermeasure, such as cleaning that unit, will also be reduced. Therefore, the fact that the implemented countermeasure was ineffective can be appropriately reflected in the priority of the implemented countermeasure and one or more dependent countermeasures, thereby increasing the accuracy of those priorities.

[0173] The processing unit 102 may also search for and identify dependent measures corresponding to implemented measures by referring to dependent data. For each measure, the dependent data indicates one or more measures (i.e., dependent measures) that are dependent on the implemented measure, both in the case where the implemented measure was effective and in the case where it was not effective. The processing unit 102 may read and refer to the dependent data from a storage unit provided in the management device 100, or it may acquire and refer to it in response to an input operation by an operator to the first input unit 103 or the second input unit 203.

[0174] Furthermore, in the examples shown in Figures 15 to 22, the processing unit 102 changes the weights depending on whether the implemented measures are effective or ineffective, but it does not need to change the weights if the effectiveness of the implemented measures is unknown. For example, if the target mounting board is changed after the implemented measures are taken (i.e., a model change occurs), it is difficult to confirm the effectiveness of the implemented measures from the monitoring data column Dx acquired after the model change. As a result, the effectiveness of the implemented measures becomes unknown. Therefore, once the processing unit 102 detects that a model change has occurred, it does not need to change the weights based on the effectiveness of the implemented measures.

[0175] Figure 23 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing operation of the management device 100 in this embodiment.

[0176] First, the processing unit 102 of the management device 100 retrieves the most recently stored monitoring data sequence Dx from the monitoring data storage unit 106 (step S1). Then, the processing unit 102 calculates the spoilage rate based on the monitoring data sequence Dx and determines whether or not a problem has occurred based on the spoilage rate (step S2).

[0177] Here, if the processing unit 102 determines that no problem has occurred (No in step S2), it repeatedly executes the process in step S1. On the other hand, if the processing unit 102 determines that a problem has occurred (Yes in step S2), it reads the first table 109a corresponding to the problem and the unit that is considered to be the cause of the problem (i.e., the cause unit) from the table storage unit 109 (step S3). Furthermore, the processing unit 102 determines whether or not there was an event immediately preceding the occurrence of the problem based on one or more event data Db stored in the event data storage unit 107 (step S4).

[0178] Here, if the processing unit 102 determines that an event has occurred recently (Yes in step S4), it reads the second table 109b corresponding to that problem and event from the table storage unit 109 (step S5). Then, based on the first table 109a and the second table 109b read in steps S3 and S5, the processing unit 102 determines the weights (i.e., priorities) of multiple countermeasures for the problem that occurred (step S6). In other words, the processing unit 102 performs priority determination processing.

[0179] Next, the processing unit 102 presents a list of countermeasures (step S7). Specifically, if the processing in step S6 is performed, the processing unit 102 generates a list of countermeasures that includes multiple countermeasures for the problem that occurred and the weights of those multiple countermeasures determined in step S6. Then, the processing unit 102 displays the screen 21 containing the list of countermeasures on at least one of the first display unit 104 and the second display unit 204. On the other hand, if the processing unit 102 determines in step S4 that there was no recent event (No. in step S4) and does not perform the processing in step S6, it generates a list of countermeasures that includes multiple countermeasures shown in the first table 109a and the weights of those multiple countermeasures. In other words, the processing unit 102 determines the weights of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table 109a as the weights of the multiple countermeasures for the problem described above. Then, the processing unit 102 displays the screen 21 containing the list of countermeasures on at least one of the first display unit 104 and the second display unit 204.

[0180] Next, the processing unit 102 selects one of several countermeasures included in the countermeasure list as the implemented countermeasure in response to an input operation by the operator to the first input unit 103 or the second input unit 203 (step S8). Subsequently, the processing unit 102 retrieves the most recently stored monitoring data sequence Dx from the monitoring data storage unit 106 (step S9). This monitoring data sequence Dx is the data transmitted from the implementation line L to the management device 100 after the implemented countermeasure has been carried out.

[0181] Then, the processing unit 102 calculates the spoilage rate based on the monitoring data column Dx acquired in step S9 and determines whether the problem has been resolved based on that spoilage rate (step S10). If the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has been resolved (Yes in step S10), it increases the weight of the implemented countermeasure selected in step S8, as shown in the countermeasure list (step S11). At this time, the processing unit 102 may also increase the weight of one or more dependent countermeasures in addition to the implemented countermeasure. Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may increase the respective weights of the implemented countermeasures and dependent countermeasures shown in the first table 109a.

[0182] On the other hand, if the processing unit 102 determines that the problem has not been resolved (No. in step S10), it reduces the weight of the action taken in step S8, as shown in the action list (step S12). At this time, the processing unit 102 may also reduce the weight of one or more dependent action measures in addition to the action taken. In other words, the processing unit 102 updates the action list shown on screen 21 in accordance with the reduction in the weights of the action taken and dependent action measures. The processing unit 102 may also reduce the weights of the action taken and dependent action measures shown in the first table 109a. Then, the processing unit 102 repeatedly executes the process from step S8.

[0183] (modified version) In the above embodiment, the weight of the countermeasure is automatically determined by the processing unit 102. In this modified example, the weight is further manually changed.

[0184] Figure 24 shows an example of screen 21 in this modified example.

[0185] In this modified example, the processing unit 102 changes the weights shown in the countermeasure list included in the screen 21 in response to an operator's input to the first input unit 103 or the second input unit 203. In other words, the weights are changed manually. In this case, the processing unit 102 may associate the mark 21b with the changed weight and display it. This makes it easy for the operator to understand that the weight associated with the mark 21b has been changed manually.

[0186] Furthermore, the processing unit 102 may change the weights shown in, for example, the first table 109a or the second table 109b in response to an operator's input operation to the first input unit 103 or the second input unit 203. In this case, the processing unit 102 determines the weights to be included in the countermeasure list using the manually changed weights shown in at least one of the first table 109a and the second table 109b, and then displays the mark 21b associated with the weights included in the countermeasure list. Even in such a case, the operator can easily understand that the weights associated with the mark 21b have been changed manually.

[0187] In this modified example, the processing unit 102 changes the priority of the countermeasures determined in the priority determination process according to the input operation by the operator. This allows the priority of countermeasures to be determined not only automatically but also manually.

[0188] Although one or more embodiments of the control device 100 and control method have been described above based on embodiments and modifications, this disclosure is not limited to these embodiments and modifications. Various modifications that a person skilled in the art can conceive of may also be included in this disclosure, as long as they do not depart from the spirit of this disclosure.

[0189] For example, in the above embodiment and its modifications, the processing unit 102 determines that a problem has occurred when the spoilage rate exceeds a threshold, but it may also determine that a problem has occurred when an indicator other than the spoilage rate exceeds a threshold. The other indicator may be, for example, the defect rate or productivity. Note that indicators such as productivity, spoilage rate, and defect rate may also be called production-related indicators. Productivity is, for example, the number of mounting operations per unit time, and CPH (chips per hour) is used as one specific unit of productivity. The defect rate is, for example, the ratio of the number of defects of a component P to the number of mounted components P (i.e., the number of mounting points). Similar to the spoilage rate, ppm is used as one specific unit of the defect rate. The number of defects is the number of mounting errors in which the component P was not correctly mounted at the mounting position on the substrate B.

[0190] Furthermore, in the above embodiments and modifications, the event data Db indicates events performed on component mounting devices M4 and M5, but it may also indicate events performed on only one of the component mounting devices M4 or M5. Additionally, the event data Db may indicate events performed on work machines 210 other than component mounting devices M4 and M5.

[0191] In the above embodiments and modifications, one or more components included in the management device 100 and the implementation line L may be implemented by dedicated hardware or by executing software programs suitable for those components. One or more components may be implemented by a program execution unit such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) or processor reading and executing software programs recorded on a recording medium such as a hard disk or semiconductor memory. Here, the software that implements the management device 100 and the like in the above embodiments and modifications causes a computer to execute each step of the flowchart shown in Figure 23, for example.

[0192] The following cases are also included in this disclosure.

[0193] (1) The one or more components described above may specifically be a computer system consisting of a microprocessor, ROM (Read Only Memory), RAM (Random Access Memory), a hard disk unit, a display unit, a keyboard, a mouse, etc. A computer program is stored in the RAM or hard disk unit. The microprocessor operates according to the computer program, thereby enabling one or more components to perform their functions. Here, a computer program is composed of a combination of multiple instruction codes that indicate commands to the computer in order to achieve a predetermined function.

[0194] (2) The one or more components described above may be comprised of a single system LSI (Large Scale Integration). The system LSI is a highly functional LSI manufactured by integrating multiple components onto a single chip, and specifically, it is a computer system comprising a microprocessor, ROM, RAM, etc. The RAM stores a computer program. The system LSI achieves its function by operating the microprocessor in accordance with the computer program.

[0195] (3) The one or more components described above may consist of a detachable IC card or a standalone module. The IC card or module is a computer system consisting of a microprocessor, ROM, RAM, etc. The IC card or module may include the above-mentioned multi-functional LSI. The IC card or module achieves its function by the operation of the microprocessor according to the computer program. The IC card or module may be tamper-resistant.

[0196] (4) The disclosure may also be the methods described above. Alternatively, it may be a computer program that implements these methods using a computer, or a digital signal consisting of a computer program.

[0197] Furthermore, this disclosure may also refer to a computer program or digital signal recorded on a computer-readable recording medium, such as a flexible disk, hard disk, CD (Compact Disc)-ROM, DVD, DVD-ROM, DVD-RAM, BD (Blu-ray® Disc), semiconductor memory, etc. Alternatively, it may refer to a digital signal recorded on such a recording medium.

[0198] Furthermore, this disclosure may also include the transmission of computer programs or digital signals via telecommunications lines, wireless or wired communication lines, networks such as the Internet, data broadcasting, etc.

[0199] Alternatively, the program or digital signal may be carried out by another independent computer system by recording and transferring it on a recording medium, or by transferring the program or digital signal via a network or the like. [Industrial applicability]

[0200] This disclosure can be used, for example, in a control system to support the production of mounted circuit boards. [Explanation of symbols]

[0201] 1. Production System 4 bases 5. Substrate transport mechanism 6. Parts Supply Department 7 feeders 8 Y-axis beam 9 X-axis beam 9a Plate 10 heads 10a Adsorption Unit 10b Nozzle 10c Nozzle Holder 11. Part Recognition Camera 12. Circuit board recognition camera 13 bogies 13a Feeder base 14-part tape 15 Cassette Holder 21 screens 21a Pointer 21b Mark 100 Management device 101 Management and Control Unit 102 Processing Unit 103 First Input Section (Input Section) 104 1st display section (display section) 105 First Production Storage Unit 106 Monitoring data storage unit 107 Event Data Storage Unit 108 1st Communications Department (Acquisition Department) 109 Table storage section 109a Table 1 109b Table 2 200 Line Management Device 201 Line Control Unit 203 Second Input Section 204 2nd display section 205 Second Production Storage Unit 208 Second Communications Department 210 Work Machines B substrate C Parts Reel Da monitoring data Db Event Data De Cumulative Period Information Dx monitoring data column Hu upper holding position Hd lower holding position L Implementation Line L1, L2, L3 implementation lines M1 board supply device M2 PCB Transfer Device M3 Solder Printing Machine M4, M5 component mounting equipment M6 Inspection Machine M7 Reflow System M8 Substrate Recovery Device P parts

Claims

1. An acquisition unit that acquires monitoring data indicating the status when a component mounting device was mounting components onto a circuit board, and event data indicating events performed on the component mounting device, When a problem occurs in the situation indicated by the monitoring data, the system includes a processing unit that performs a priority determination process to determine the priority of each of a plurality of countermeasures for the problem, based on the events that occurred during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data, and the problem itself. Management device.

2. In the priority determination process, the processing unit performs the following: Refer to the first table, which shows the multiple countermeasures for the aforementioned problem and the respective priorities of each of the multiple countermeasures, The priority of each of the multiple countermeasures shown in the first table is determined by changing the priority of each of the multiple countermeasures based on the event. The control device according to claim 1.

3. In the priority determination process, the processing unit performs the following: Refer to the second table showing the priority of each of the at least one countermeasures for the problem that occurs after the aforementioned event has taken place. The priority of each of the multiple countermeasures is determined by changing the priority of each of the one or more countermeasures shown in the first table according to the priority of each of the one or more countermeasures shown in the second table. The control device according to claim 2.

4. The aforementioned processing unit further, After one of the aforementioned multiple countermeasures is implemented as an action to address the problem, the acquisition unit determines whether the problem has been resolved based on the monitoring data acquired by the acquisition unit. If it is determined that the aforementioned problem has been resolved, the priority that was determined for the implementation measures in the priority determination process is increased. The control device according to claim 1.

5. The aforementioned processing unit, If it is determined that the aforementioned problem has not been resolved, the priority that was determined for the aforementioned implementation measures in the priority determination process is reduced. The control device according to claim 4.

6. The aforementioned measures are in a subordinate relationship. The aforementioned processing unit, If it is determined that the aforementioned problem has been resolved, then the priority determined in the priority determination process is increased for each of the one or more measures subordinate to the aforementioned implementation measures. The control device according to claim 4.

7. The aforementioned measures are in a subordinate relationship. The aforementioned processing unit, If it is determined that the aforementioned problem has not been resolved, further reduce the priority determined in the priority determination process for each of the one or more measures subordinate to the aforementioned implementation measures. The control device according to claim 5.

8. The event includes at least one of the following: (a) an event relating to a component supplied by the component mounting device, (b) an event relating to a unit used in the component mounting device, and (c) an event relating to production data used in the component mounting device. The control device according to claim 1.

9. The aforementioned processing unit further, The priority of the countermeasures determined in the priority determination process is changed according to the input operation by the operator. The control device according to claim 1.

10. A management method performed by a computer, The system acquires monitoring data indicating the status when the component mounting device was mounting components onto a circuit board, and event data indicating events that occurred to the component mounting device. If a problem occurs in the situation indicated by the monitoring data, a priority determination process is performed to determine the priority of each of several countermeasures for the problem, based on the events that occurred during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data, and the problem itself. Management method.

11. The system acquires monitoring data indicating the status when the component mounting device was mounting components onto a circuit board, and event data indicating events that occurred to the component mounting device. If a problem occurs in the situation indicated by the monitoring data, a priority determination process is performed to determine the priority of each of several countermeasures for the problem, based on the events that occurred during a predetermined period up to the time the problem occurred, as indicated in the event data, and the problem itself. A program that causes a computer to perform a task.

Images