Wire Processing Technology Expo experts weigh in on best practices for a more productive industry.
BY MATT VINCENT
As part of the 7th annual National Electrical Wire Processing Technology Expo, held this past May in Milwaukee, Connector Specifier sponsored a series of educational seminars. Featuring an array of industry experts, the seminars imparted the latest technical and organizational intelligence and “best practices” for solving a variety of problems related to wire harness manufacturing.
In a presentation titled “Plug IPC/WHMA-A-620 Rev A Into Your Quality Program,” Jack Crawford, IPC’s (www.ipc.org) director of certification and assembly technology, reviewed the updates and additions to the increasingly ubiquitous “Rev A” standard for manufacturers and users of cable and wire harness assemblies, and what these changes mean for participants in the standard’s associated training and certification programs.
Noting that the “industry consensus” Rev A standard is, in scope, intended as a “collection of visual quality acceptance requirements” that can be used by wire harness makers as a “standalone, single source” of reference, Crawford emphasized that IPC’s approach to the document has always been “that words always take precedence over illustrations.”
To that end, Crawford noted that the terms “cable harness” and “wire harness” in the updated document are now used interchangeably. Concerning the exact usage of the words “shall” and “should,” he said, “shall” is now used exclusively wherever a requirement has been deemed mandatory.
In addition to defining three tiered classes of electrical products (general, dedicated, high performance), the updated standard specifies a document hierarchy of procurement, master drawing, IPC/WHMA-A-620-A, and customer documents, as a way to determine “who’s going to win [certain] battles.”
Crawford provided a detailed examination of all aspects of the document’s Chapter 19 on testing, which he noted “delayed publication of Rev A for a full year.” The new chapter mandates non-destructive testing and emphasizes intended table usage, while also detailing selection methods for a wide range of specific electrical and mechanical tests. Also new to Rev A are specifications mandating proper tool and equipment control, and requirements for observable criteria based on visual inspection.
Setting a standard
Summing up, Crawford reviewed IPC’s goals in administering its A-620 certification program, stating that the organization seeks “to provide a standard set of officially approved programs to enhance understanding of criteria in the standard; to provide an understanding of criteria to enhance an individual’s motivation and ability to correctly apply the criteria; and to teach methods and techniques on how to use, navigate, locate, and apply the criteria in the standard to the appropriate classes of production.”
Noting that IPC/WHMA membership is not required for program participants, Crawford outlined the program’s structure and length, elaborating upon specific course modules for topics, including: crimped and soldered terminations; insulation displacement (IDC); connectorization; molding and potting; splices; marking and labeling; protective coverings and solderless wraps; and coax/twinax cable assemblies.
In light of Crawford’s presentation, several attendees wanted to learn where training centers could be found in their home regions. Crawford noted that he encourages “the use of different training centers” to facilitate learning the standard’s criteria from a “variety of aspects and angles.”
Meanwhile, RoHS gains traction
Tackling the other 900-lb. gorilla of wire harness manufacturing-RoHS compliance-Ron Revell of 3M’s Electrical Solutions Division (www.3m.com) discussed “Electronic Materials Regulations (RoHS): First Year Report.”
In assessing the global RoHS landscape nearly one year after the inception of the EU standard, Revell noted, “what a difference a year makes.” In 2006, he pointed out, the roll out of the EU standard was imminent, while the scene in Asia, and especially in China, was still relatively vague. A year later, EU RoHS is steadily gaining traction, with policies for enforcement still being hammered out, while the China standard has been issued, and similar policies are set for release in Japan, Korea, and California.
“The big change in a year is we went from ‘thinking about it’ to implementing it, to now doing ‘the paperwork’ for different countries,” said Revell.
While noting that official plans are afoot in both the U.K. and China to formalize and strengthen compliance requirements along the documented lines of organizations such as ISO, Revell mused that “the funny thing is, there was a big rush to get it done, but there hasn’t been a big rush to enforce it.” He also sounded a note of caution: “When Asia rolls out, it’s going to be 100% out of phase, [because] they want compliance up front.”
Revell then focused on the specific differences between the EU RoHS policy and that of China. With EU RoHS, the six RoHS substances (lead, cadmium, mercury, hexavalent chromium, PBB, and PBDE) must not be present in homogeneous materials, at above the maximum concentration values, unless covered by an exemption. China RoHS, meanwhile, incorporates two levels of requirements, whereby all electronic information products (EIPs) must be marked to indicate whether any of the six substances are present. In China, such devices are specified in an official catalog, with substance restrictions that include the six EU-RoHS substances, and others. Also, while EU RoHS admits a growing list of about 30 exceptions, China RoHS mandates no exemptions for EIPs except as specified in the catalog.
For the China RoHS standard, released in March, enforcement is a directive of the Chinese government, and is expected to be much more stringent, and with penalties imposed. “A specific paragraph in the law imposes huge penalties for graft and corruption,” said Revell. Since the EU standard’s inception, enforcement in Europe has been inconsistent, and even sporadic, said Revell. But he noted there will be possible criminal penalties, including fines and loss of license, as a penalty for non-compliance in China. “They can put you out of business if you don’t comply,” he summed.
Revell also reviewed the RoHS marking requirements for China, where a green circle indicates that an EIP contains no restricted material and an orange circle with a number in the center indicates the number of years a device is cleared under an “environmental friendly use period.” According to Revell, China has also declared that all components used in high volume consumer electronics “must be green circle,” in accordance with test data approved by Chinese laboratories. Much of this data will be compiled from suppliers of such products.
“Subcontractors will provide data, all consolidated into a document for the Chinese government,” Revell explained.
As for the impact of the various RoHS laws to date, Revell cited statistics showing a 100% increase of compliance in the EU and China over the past year, with the U.S. lagging by half of that percentage. U.S. RoHS is still something of a linguistic anomaly, he said, though California is threatening to adopt the EU’s list of restricted substances-especially regarding the manufacture of devices with CRT display screens larger than four inches and the use of heavy metals therein.
Emphasis on lean operations
Two speakers at the Expo seminars delivered presentations focusing on ways for wire harness makers to apply principles of the process management philosophy known as “lean manufacturing” as a way to optimize their companies’ manufacturing and cost accounting operations.
In “Optimizing Manufacturing Operations,” Tyco Electronics’ regional manager Rodger Diehl illuminated the benefits of his company’s ProductionCHEK process flow system for lead makers. Developed by Diehl, the system incorporates “Six Sigma” process optimization criteria while promoting the central focus of the “lean” philosophy, which is to eliminate waste.
The system employs a data collection sheet to help a company identify areas for improvement. Upon completion, the form identifies areaswhere the company can improve productivity. After an analysis, Tyco Electronics then proposes a program (usually incorporating the company’s Ampomator System III lead maker) to help a company achieve desired results.
As a foundation to his talk, Diehl highlighted the relationship between the concepts of “applied cost,” defined as the total direct and indirect cost associated with producing goods, considering a range of variables and inputs; and “efficiency,” defined as a measure of the amount of finished goods that are produced over a period of time (i.e., “the total amount of time that a machine or process is adding value divided by the total amount of time in the entire process”). Diehl contended that, while as concepts, the elements of applied cost and efficiency are often analyzed separately, in a lean environment, they must be viewed in tandem if they are to be effectively managed.
Diehl added that optimal management of such factors as plant equipment, people, processes, and materials are also key factors that affect efficiency. He also enumerated a series of “Lean opportunities Pain Points,” or process inefficiencies, with specific regard to “the seven deadly wastes” of defects, overproduction, transportation, waiting, inventory, motion, and processing. In the ProductionCHEK system, said Diehl, these “Pain Points” are addressed via training, new processes, optimized processes, and the introduction of new technologies and capital equipment.
In terms of optimizing manufacturing operations for lead makers, Diehl distilled the ProductionCHEK system’s core methodology as a means of applying Six Sigma principles to identify opportunities for eliminating waste while standardizing and streamlining set-up procedures and incorporating “value-adding activities.”
The system’s principles, said Diehl, include defining process improvement goals, measuring and identifying an operation’s current status and conditions, analyzing the process via detailed observations, and ultimately improving process control through a series of “evidence-based” recommendations, based upon a series of periodically conducted audits.
Good news, bad news
Larry Rubrich of business consulting and book publishing company WCM Associates (www.wcmfg.com) followed with a seminar titled “Accounting for Lean-What Operations Need to Know.” As harness makers successfully implement lean methodologies throughout their operations, Rubrich suggested, such drastic process improvements are likely to occur as to, ironically enough, create a whole new set of problems.
In a successful lean environment, noted Rubrich, batch operations are replaced with “one piece flow” and “flow lines”; inventories and set-up times are radically reduced, as are lead times through manufacturing; on-time deliveries become the rule; shop floor space expands; and direct and indirect labor division requirements are eliminated.
In such optimally functioning lean environments, Rubrich said, traditional cost accounting methods tend to lose their relevance, which can lead accounting departments to “throw their hands up in the air,” often becoming a barrier to an organization’s overall “lean transformation.”
Rubrich sought to provide manufacturing operations staff with a basic understanding of how implementing the lean philosophy can affect a company’s financial outlook, with special regard to the traditional measures of a standard cost accounting system, so that organizations’ accounting and manufacturing departments might “create a common understanding and partnership that supports the lean journey.”
Process and materials updates
The Expo’s remaining seminars offered members of the wire harness industry practical updates concerning processes and materials. In “Intro to Statistics for Wire Processing,” Peter Waas, engineering manager at Komax Corp. (www.komax.com), posited that, in the wire processing arena, statistical measurement and analysis of key parameters are critical to providing products of consistent quality.
The seminar reviewed the basics of statistical process control and showed how these principles can be applied to the wire processing industry. Topics included variances and tolerances, destructive testing, prediction of failure rates, and standard deviation.
Citing Six Sigma criteria, Waas detailed the hands-on use of statistical algorithms and Excel tables for determining process and machine capability indexes, as well as the parameters for tools used in implementing wire processes-including calculating the variables for such elements as crimp force, crimp height, pull force, and measuring boards.
In his “Update on Halogen-Free Wire & Cables,” Bill Wilkens, chief engineer at Anixter’s U.S. Wire & Cable group (www.anixter.com), addressed the key advantages and disadvantages of using low smoke zero halogen (LSZH) wire and cables in applications ranging from shipboard and mass transit, to central office/data center environments.
Citing a quote by the science historian James Burke (“If you understand something today, it must already be obsolete”), Wilkens’ presentation included a discussion of typical LSZH cable performance requirements, definitions of common LSZH terminology, a listing of the insulation and jacket materials typically used to obtain LSZH characteristics, applicable industry codes and standards, and installation considerations.
MATT VINCENT is senior editor for Connector Specifier.
