Component Mounting Line Balance Evaluation Using Machine Exclusion

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In component mounting lines where specific component types are allocated to certain machines, the line balance efficiency worsens due to limited mounting points, making it difficult to evaluate optimization results and utilize the original device performance, as processing conditions are often set to default values without ensuring optimal settings.

Innovation Solution

An optimization device that calculates and displays the effectiveness degree of processing conditions, allowing operators to adjust and optimize settings for improved line balance efficiency and device performance by excluding machines with specific component types and calculating line balance efficiency based on optimized cycle times.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If component mounting machines with specific component type allocation (tray devices, abnormal shape suction nozzles) are included in the line balance efficiency calculation, then the evaluation reflects the actual production capacity, but the line balance efficiency worsens due to limited mounting points

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveevaluation accuracyVSAvoidline balance efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the component mounting machines into two categories: those with specific component type allocation (tray devices, abnormal shape suction nozzles) and those without. The line balance efficiency calculation is performed separately for each segment, allowing accurate evaluation of machines with specialized functions while maintaining overall productivity assessment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Machines with specific component type allocation are extracted from the general line balance efficiency calculation. These machines are evaluated separately to prevent their limited mounting points from artificially reducing the overall efficiency metric, while still being included in the comprehensive production capacity evaluation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Reliability

If processing conditions are set to default values to ensure safe operation, then operational reliability is maintained, but optimization results cannot be properly evaluated and original device performance is not utilized

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperational safetyVSAvoiddevice performance utilization
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary optimization calculations using default processing conditions to establish a baseline performance level. This preliminary action allows safe operation while providing a reference point for evaluating the potential improvements from optimized settings, enabling operators to make informed decisions about adjusting processing conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism that compares actual production results with optimized target values. This feedback loop allows operators to evaluate whether default settings are adequate or if optimization is needed, while maintaining operational reliability through continuous monitoring and gradual adjustment of processing conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If optimization process is performed with limited time to meet production schedules, then productivity is maintained, but excellent optimization results may be missed and original device performance cannot be fully utilized

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduction schedule adherenceVSAvoidoptimization time quality
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs a partial optimization process within the limited time available, focusing on the most critical processing conditions that have the greatest impact on line balance efficiency. This partial action approach ensures that optimization is completed within production schedules while still achieving meaningful improvements by concentrating resources on high-impact parameters.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP3277069B1Optimization device for component mounting line and optimization method for component mounting line
Publication Date: 2021.02.17 FUJI CORP
  • EP3277069B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3277069B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3277069B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

An optimization device (7) of a component mounting line (1) of the present invention includes a cycle time calculating section (831) which calculates respective cycle times (tc) required for mounting components of component types which are allocated to each of the component mounting machines (21 to 2A) by the optimization process onto a single board (K), an excluded machine setting section (832) which sets a specific portion of the component mounting machines (2A) to be excluded from further calculation processes, a balance efficiency calculating section (833) which calculates a line balance efficiency (LBE) indicating a degree to which the cycle times of the component mounting machines (21 to 29) which are not excluded are equalized, and a balance efficiency display section (834) which displays the line balance efficiency. Accordingly, the results of the optimization process which is carried out before starting production of the board are evaluated appropriately and the original device performance of the component mounting line can be utilized.