ATT ar) a Sear ea eT a wes DUE Ce a Cae Ly rent Ty DNL)A Convergent Approach for Problem Solving Ha Dao, SSA & Company and Bill Maxon, Shai Abstract Ithas been argued thatthe best approach to problem solving involves powerful statistics Tequiring a good amount of deta, attr all, ‘day's problems are more complex and require more sophisticated techniques to ‘elo thom. Mast problome salvars are engineers and engineers work in the realm of physics and geometry. The laws of physics are not any different today than they were ‘years ago wnen te so cated simpa probleins weve a1uund. Whit ake twday’s tochnioal prablome eoom co tough ie the inabilty ofthe engineer to think through th science driving the probe, and getting distracted with unnecessary statistical analysis doesn’thelp them, Instead of quessing at potential causes, engineers should use a more efficient stratogy and oliminate whats not causing tie problem. This paper discusses a convergent approach to problem solving with 2 caso study ilustrating how using 2 proaressive search. auicklv and efficient. eliminated potential causes fora lifted wire bonds on circuit boards, Baokground If you speak to any executive about problem solving, they wil tell ou they are looking for 5 things: Speed tothe rot cause, Efficiency with resources and te, Focus to maximize ity of techniques and results, ce Work tu eisure Cunsisivity. Howaver ifyou closely examine your problom solving strategy. your teams might not he meeting these § attributes. Speed — are the teams making progress on a daly basis solving even the mast dificult problems in a few weeks if nota few days? ericlency How many people ore on your teams? If its more than 2 dedicated problem solvers, itis too big and you are wasting resources. Focus are the teams converging on the root cause or diverging? Simplicity ~ Does ‘he progress ote team make sense’ Ist easily followed and would the custome be able to follow along? Standardized work are al the teams using the same approach in, LLC Xx and are they documenting their work ina ‘common tormat to aid communication and ‘w cuuivey, in # common language, progress ‘and roaulte? Ytox Tie ¥ lw X approach starts witha well- dofined ¥, sometimes referred to a3 the Green This metric is a measured response that has engineering leverage and reveals insight into the physics for the failure. A good Y to X approach relies on Ienttying contrast. nis contrast can be explained by identifying the wause OX) through a prograssive and convergent strategy. This approach eliminates the need to lst potential X's through brainstorming and engineering judgment inen tasting eacn to see ifthey have an effect an the ¥, During ‘2 progressive search investigation, oach stage is divided into natural buckets or spits. By leveraging contrast with simple efficient strategies, these buckets are progresswvely eliminated and all further ‘wuikis focused on what remains. Now this contrast may reside between parts, between processes, or other areas that may not be so apparent. The trekto {00d problem solving is identifying the Mot-so-obvious contrasts, especially wire yous sick or we You las no loveragoablo contrast wth parts or processes. By leveraging contrast between extremes, @ multitude of X's can be quickly and eficiently eliminated leaving only few suspects forthe root cause, The candidate can then be tested with an efficient confirmation test. Why io 9 Vt0 X otratogy 20 efficient? It is haraisa af the Parata principle, square root of the sum of the squares, and talking to the parts. Combining the three provide ‘8 powerful problem solving strategy. There are not many root Causes ‘Many of focays problems appear to be complex and overly complicated leading to the conclusion that there mustbe many causes or XS. This is simply not true. Complex problems become understandable with imple yet very effective convergent strategies. Itisnt necessary to control or even idenily many Xo solve difficult probloms; ity yoars of practice! experience ‘and Pareto tellus thisns of Dollars) Net Worth (Bi Pareto 1s me BU/ZU rule, When states for any ivan effect uly 2096 ofthe X's have ony noticoable contribution. Vilfrado Parsto, mado this discovary after studying the distribution cof wealth of nations under different paltcal systems and time periods. He concluded there is always a non-random cistribution of ‘wealth, Not only is your piggy bank affected but your problem solving strategy s also affected. For problem solvers, it separates ‘he trivial many from the vital fev AY = f(AX) {tho problom ie described as a change in Y.thera ig ana, mayha two, X's that account for most ofthis change. Tis isthe X (often referred to asthe Red X®) you want to discover first. The real question comes down tothe techniques. Are your tools designed tv flush out these daminant X's or are they going toflugh out any X that has some statistical significance or correlation tothe ¥? If vou find yourself disappointed after implementing corrective actions or contrling the “root ‘cause then your tools are not designed to find the true root cause or the dominant X Serre TT ‘Which x has more power “Th square 1uut of re sum uf Ure squares is 8 statiticl law. It howe us the non-linear relationship between Xin Y terms. The power ofthe dominant Xis exponentially, ‘more powerful than any other X! ‘When two independent distributions are ccumbined, their standard deviations do not add, but combino ac equaroe. The standard deviation af tha roeulting distribution wil he the square root ofthe sum ofthe squares of the standard deviations of the source distributions, {he dominant Xis causing 5 units of variation in an output and another Xie contributing unite th eelativn affact is not 6:2 but 25:4. The total amount of variations not (5+2) but about 84 {the square root of 25+4), \ (52+22) = 5.38 What happens when you attempt to control variation by addressing e root couse other Uva te domino X® In the prior exemple if you romove ono unit of variation from tho smaller cause, the result will be @ reduction of total variation from 54to about 5.1 V (52412) = 5.09 Alternatively had you removed 1 uni uf ‘variation from the dominant X and lft the \woaker ¥ lon, th total variation would have fallen to about 45 units \ (424-22) = 4.47 Both the dominant ané smaller XS are a true cause of variation, but the dominant X has ‘much more power over the effect. Itmay have been statistically significant bu practcally ‘speaking itis worthless end therefore adding cost to control with litle to na improvement in vyour metric.A progressive search The fastest route to finding the dominant X is through a progressive seerch. This requires, leveraging contrast between extremes of the ¥ distribution. By leveraging the extremes, weak X's are avoided leaving only the dominant X as the only possibilty of causing such a large variation nthe ¥. this means very few parts are needed tu suv problems, and the otatiatea uoed to inveatigate the fitferanes are simple and straight forward letin the prablem solver focus on strateay and tool selection not statistical analysis Once the dominant X candidate is identified, itis now ready forthe tra XtoY Confirmation is the only time for an X to Y approach. Wit a well-structured progressive scorch, many suspects will be eliminated leaving only a few and often one candidate This means you can run a more efficient confirmation test. Only after effective clue ‘generation (screening experiments and DOES 4are not eficient clue generation tecnniques) isXtoY appropriate, Atthis point you should have an understanding of tha physics sllowing You to make a decision on what to control oreliminate. The confirmation test now becomes a way to demonstrate that you truly understand the problem and can predict the response with the knowm true root cause. Conclusior For any outout, there are a number of input factors X that affect variation. Given enough resources and time, you could discover al of these XS. As a practical matter, however, there isno need todo this. Pareto tlis us there is, anly one dominant and tha square root of the sums of squares says thatthe power of this Xis far greater than many ofthe other X's combined. Therefore, « progressive search is the quickest and most efficient way to find the dominant X. This is a combination af good strategy, a balance between engineering and statistics, and evidence based problem solving Case Study Ton Yoor Old Problem Focus Electronics manutacture was losing credibility with ts customer due to several fallad attompts to colve a prablom invohing lifted wies hands a eteuit haard eosting them $2 milion per year. Initially the customer ‘wanted to find the cause for excessive tin contamination on the gold pads, however, tin didnot explain al of the contrasts and the project was redefined as finding the ro2t cause for lifted wiro bond. The wire bonder places a ball bond on the ASIC, then puts a wedge or stiteh bond on the bond pad Approach, The destructive event med it easy Ww Wack the location of filad wire bonds, however the project quickly moved to measuring peak force in grams using a wire pull tester. Converge ‘The team began the investigation by analyzing the field returns. A concentration diagram auickly revealed a nonrandom pattern between the nine bond sites. The twa lower bond sites were the ony sites to exhibit ited wire bonds. A muit-vari revealed a similar pattern with current production units Those two nonrandom patterns mado tho critical split hetween strength and eneray ‘The problem for this particular case is due to poor strangth ofthe bond, not excessive nergy in the application, whether it be énvironmental, mechanical, or electrical Forensic analysis of tild returns show ifted wire bonds at sites 1 and 2 ‘The next split wes betwen (Wu lle energy from the wire bondor, contamination on the hand pad, or inefficient weld ofthe gold wire tothe gold pad. Furthor forensic analysis of the field returns provided clues to the answer. sites, and twas also found at the non-lfted bond sites. This meant tin was either part of ‘an interaction or nota cause for week bands. ‘SEM analysis showed streaking which is indicative of an inefficient bond. The transfer of energy trom the wire bonder to the weld was beiny compromised, The gold ped was deflecting under the pressure of the wire bonder “in contamination was found atthe raiea pond Test Now that we understood the physics ofthe failure, a model was created and vorifed that excessive deflection was occurring at sites, 1 and 2. A Spike B vs. C Test confirmed with 95% confidence that thera was an interaction between tin contamination and pad deflectionUnderstanding the Physics For ten years, the customer was convinced ‘that in contamination was the sule reason {or lied wiro bonds. Thoy falled to recognize, thattin did not oxplain the eantraethetwasn thar contrasts This ultimately led to the discovery of an interaction. By revealing ‘and understanding that lifted wire bonds required high tin and high deflection this ave tie custunter a much eesier solution toimplomont and there wae no eoct ascnciatad withthe corrective nation Apply AA simple program change to the wire bonder ‘moved the bong site on stes 1 and 20 Fucativt ar ne ped Usa uid wut delet Leverage There were mutiple lines manufacturing this product, Alllines were updated as well as the PEMEA and control plan. Actual savings were ‘8 ion annually Untrasoniowi ceran ess waves and streaks from ¢ capillary throughout wedge face. High bow Derlection inthe Z Axis, Pull Strength (grams) Minimum Specification Zero % Tin Low High (< 8%) (> 8%)Contact: Questions and comments can be sent to: Ha Dao at: hdao@SSAandoo.com Bill Maxson at: wrmaxson@shainin.com Defini ns, Acronyits, Abbreviations: 80/20 Principle: An inbuilt imbalance between causes and results, inputs and vutputs, and effurl and reward. * BOB: Best of the Best and Worst of the Worst are tho ‘extreme eamplos that can bo roadily takon from a distribution of tho Groon Y®.! Green Y°: Is a response that has engineering leverage and reveals insight into the physics for the failure.” Red X®: {s the product feature or process setting that drives ‘the Green Y® from BOB to WOW. ! wow: ‘Worst of the Worst and Best ot the Best are the extreme samples that can be readily taken from a distribution of the Graen Y®.! References: 1. Shainin LLC, Problem Solving for Engineering, vi.1g 2006, Page: 1-2, 1-5, A-32, A-34 2, Richard Koch (1998) The 80/20 Principle the Secret lo Success By Achieving More With Less (Currency and Doubleday), pages: 4, 264 3, ttpy//www.shainin.com Required Before Ee ae DP DM —— Stronath of | Ze Bond ea Sl pee \eSion| | Inefficient 2) Enetgy (C1) ariatior sal Dynamic (Bond Pad is Flat But Has Bounce) Bond (B,) Static (Bon: Sao r Secure Lis Warped, ete Red X OA The Fall Edition of Automotive Excellence Coming Soon!