Skip to main content
Log in

Process Monitoring Strategies for Surface Mount Manufacturing Processes

  • Published:
International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Establishing reliable surface mount assemblies requires robust design and assembly practices, including stringent process control schemes for achieving high yield processes and high quality solder interconnects. Conventional Shewhart-based process control charts prevalent in today's complex surface mount manufacturing processes are found to be inadequate as a result of autocorrelation, high false alarm probability, and inability to detect process deterioration. Hence, new strategies are needed to circumvent the shortcomings of traditional process control techniques. In this article, the adequacy of Shewhart models in a surface mount manufacturing environment is examined and some alternative solutions and strategies for process monitoring are discussed. For modeling solder paste deposition process data, a time series analysis based on neural network models is highly desirable for both controllability and predictability. In particular, neural networks can be trained to model the autocorrelated time series, learn historical process behavior, and forecast future process performance with low prediction errors. This forecasting ability is especially useful for early detection of solder paste deterioration, so that timely remedial actions can be taken, minimizing the impact on subsequent yields of downstream processes. As for the automated component placement process where very low fraction nonconforming frequently occurs, control-charting schemes based on cumulative counts of conforming items produced prior to detection of nonconforming items is more sensitive in flagging process deterioration. For the reflow soldering and wave-soldering processes, the use of demerit control charts is appealing as it provides not only better control when various defects with a different degree of severity are encountered, but also leads to an improved ARL performance. Illustrative examples of actual process data are presented to demonstrate these approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albin, S. L. and Friedman, D. J., “Off Line Quality Control in Electronics Assembly: Identifying the Critical Problem,” IIE Transactions, Vol. 24,No. 5, pp. 58–65 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwan, L. C., “Effects of Autocorrelation on Control Chart Performance,” Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods, Vol. 21, pp. 1025–1049 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, M. O. and Magazine, M. J., “Sequencing of Insertions in Printed Circuit Board Assemblies,” Operations Research, Vol. 36,No. 2, pp. 192–201 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bard, J. F., Clayton, R. W., and Feo, T. A., “Machine Setup and Component Placement in Printed Circuit Board Assembly,” International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 6, pp. 5–31 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourke, P. D., “Detecting Shift in Fraction Nonconforming Using Run-Length Control Charts with 100% Inspection,” Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 23, pp. 225–238 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodge, H. F. and Torrey, M. N., “A Check Inspection and Demerit Rating Plan,” Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 9, pp. 146–153 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ermer, D. S. and Hurtis, G. M., “Advanced SPC for Higher Quality Electronic Card Manufacturing,” Quality Engineering, Vol. 8,No. 2, pp. 283–299 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagne, D., Quaglia, M., and Shina, S. G., “Methods for Paste Selection and Process Optimisation for Fine-Pitch SMT,” Soldering & Surface Mount Technology, Vol. 24, pp. 9–11 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, C., “Board Inspection: Solder Paste vs. Solder Joint,” Evaluation Engineering, pp. 20–22 (August 1995).

  • Goh, T. N., “A Control Chart for Very High Yield Process,” Quality Assurance, Vol. 13,No. 1, pp. 18–22 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goh, T. N., “A Statistical Procedure for Defect Control in High Quality Manufacturing,” Sensors, Controls, and Quality Issues in Manufacturing, ASME PED, Vol. 55, pp. 395–401 (1991).

  • Gopalakrishnan, L. and Srihari, K., “Solder Paste Deposition Through High Speed Stencil Printing for a Contact Assembly Environment,” Journal of Electronics Manufacturing, Vol. 8,No. 2, pp. 89–101 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, L. A., Wooddall, W. H., and Conerly, M. D., “Exact Properties of Demerit Control Charts,” Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 31,No. 2, pp. 207–216 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, T. E., “Quality Improvement Using Experimental Design,” International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 7,No. 1, pp. 70–76 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, W. L. and Tardif, V., “Component Partitioning under Demand and Capacity in Printed Circuit Board Assembly,” International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 159–176 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukacs, E., Characteristic Functions, Charles Griffen, London (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marwah, M., Li, Y., and Mahajan, R. L., “Integrated Neural Network Modeling for Electronics Manufacturing,” Journal of Electronics Manufacturing, Vol. 6,No. 2, pp. 79–91 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Messina, W. S., Statistical Process Control for Surface Mount Technology, Data Sleuths, USA (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mastrangelo, C. M. and Montgomery, D. C., “SPC with Correlated Observations for the Chemical and Process Industries,” Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 11, pp. 79–89 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, D. C., Statistical Quality Control, John Wiley and Sons, New York (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nembhard, D. A. and Nembhard, H. B., “A Demerit Control Chart for Autocorrelated Data,” Quality Engineering, Vol. 13,No. 2, pp. 179–190 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Romanchick, D., “Making the Right Choices for SMT Board Test,” Test and Measurement World, pp. 41–46 (November 1994).

  • Rowland, H., “Control Charts for Low Defect Rates in the Electronic Manufacturing Industry,” Journal of Systems Engineering, Vol. 2, pp. 143–150 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Seber, G. A. and Wild, C. J., Nonlinear Regression, John Wiley, New York (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shewhart, W. A., Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Products, Van Nostrand, New York (1931).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stapper, C. H., “The Effect of Wafer to Wafer Defect Density Variations on Integrated Circuit Defect and Fault Distributions,” IBM Journal of Research and Development, Vol. 28,No. 1, pp. 87–97 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tong, T. H., “Application of Standardised U-chart on Wave Soldering Process,” QC Focus, pp. 6–7 (January/February 1990).

  • Werbos, P. J., “Beyond Regression: New Tools for Prediction and Analysis in the Behavioral Sciences,” Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University (1974).

  • Xie, M., Lu, X. S., and Goh, T. N, “A Quality Monitoring and Decision-Making Scheme for Automated Production Processes,” International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 16,No. 2, pp. 148–157 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yourstone, S. A. and Montgomery, D.C., “A Time Series Approach to Discrete Real-time Process Quality Control,” Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 5, pp. 309–317 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, G., Patuwo, B. E., and Hu, M. Y., “Forecasting with an Artificial Neural Networks: The State of the Art,” International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 14, pp. 35–62 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ho, SL., Xie, M. & Goh, TN. Process Monitoring Strategies for Surface Mount Manufacturing Processes. International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 15, 95–112 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024432723561

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024432723561

Navigation