Friday, January 16, 2015

How To Control Number Of Decimal Point In Minitab Report ?

How to control number of decimal point to be report in Minitab report ?

This question come into my mind since long time ago, but I didn't really bother as it doesn't impact me too me. I have to take this seriously when I try to generate a report where I only need 3 decimal point to be show in my report.

I was using the Assistant Manu to generate a box plot as below, it is simple to use no doubt, but I spend my whole morning trying to find a way to adjust the number reporting limit to 3 decimal point.

In fact, I can't..... and I have to give up. It really spend me too much of time to hunt for the solution.




I try to write to Minitab support team to ask about the issue, answer to me was quite disappointing. Yes, I m not allow control number of decimal point to be use for Minitab reporting.

Anyway, Minitab do give me a workaround to overcome my problem, in fact, I m not really satisfy with their proposal.

Here is the solution suggested by Minitab

"As a workaround for the time being, you could consider using Stat > Basic Statistics > Store Descriptive Statistics instead of the boxplot in the Assistant menu to obtain the table of values below.  Enter C3 in the first field and the column that defines the boxes in the second field.  Click the Statistics button to select the statistics you want to display.  Once the values for N, Mean, Standard Deviation, Minimum and Maximum are stored in the worksheet, you can right click on any column and choose Format Column > Numeric.  In the new dialog box, choose Fixed decimal, and enter 2 as the number of decimals.  This way, you can control the number of decimals displayed in the output."

Monday, January 5, 2015

My 1st Impression On Minitab Release 17


Minitab is one of the statistical analysis software I’m using since many years back. I started with Release 11, follow by 12, 13, 14 and 15. To be honest, if you ask me about the different of the several version I come across. My answer to you would be: No much different or no surprise.

That is the reason why I stop to upgrade the software after Release 15.

In fact, I notice the availability of Release 17 in my company software management server quite some time ago; however I don’t take it so seriously mainly due to my previous perception.

I start to in contact with the new Release after changing my PC. Thanks to the technician setting up the PC for me, I got everything new, including the Minitab Release 17 of course.

I don’t have any experience with Release 16, therefore, Release 17 to me is a surprise. There are several interesting feature that strong enough to motivate me to further explore. The “Assistant” menu is something I find it very useful and user friendly. It makes statistical analysis much more layman, and definitely makes my training much easier.

Is not my plan to explain the feature in “Assistant” menu as I believe all Minitab user able to handle it and understand report generated.

 
 
You may take a tour at Minitab official website if you intent to know more about the product.

Friday, October 17, 2014

One Piece Flow For Semiconductor Packaging Assembly Process

Can “One Piece Flow” concept applicable in semiconductor packaging assembly process?
To me, there is no “Yes” or “No” answer for this case, it’s very much depend on the nature of product mix.

There are two situation in manufacturing, so to semiconductor assembly industries
- High volume low mix
- Low volume high mix

Its depend on who you ask, the guys from memory, chip card or LED product line may tell you one piece flow is possible, as design of such product line is quite standard and high demand. Therefore they can just load their assembly line with volume and keep their line running for few days without any change over.

I may tell you different story if I have to answer the question. As I come from the environment of producing power semiconductor to automotive industries. It is a high mix low volume business environment in general, therefore, one piece flow to is quite difficult to achieve.

Two or three time line changeover is common in my environment, due to the design complexity and JIT concept emphasis by the automotive customer. Therefore, batch production system still a better way to run production in this industry. Of course, study of optimum batch size is require to ensure high utilization of equipment and human resource.

Over my many years’ experience in this industries, I haven’t see any successful assembly line using the concept of one piece flow. I also see some key equipment supplier trying to introduce the linked line, that integrate various processes through a conveyor system in the early 90’s, but today, they are no longer offer such solution in the newer machine.

Why ?

The main reason is – the conveyor system limit the line flexibility of line balancing.

Monday, September 15, 2014

Discussion Over Bottom Up Deployment Approach

I’m feeling a bit disappointing when I have to turn down an invitation to be a speaker of 6th Lean Six Sigma & Performance Excellence Asia Summit 2014. In other word, I miss the chance to share my experience in deploying LSS program through bottom up approach.

The main root cause is, somebody in the team that holding higher influence power have different opinion regarding the deployment approach that we are adopt in the past three year.

Well, let’s discuss,

Top down program deployment approach should be familiar to most LSS practitioner. The approach is pretty simple; the few big bosses of an organization set goal and direction, everyone under the hierarchy just follow command from the top. Usually, top down deployment approach give limited freedom for the people to speak up their opinion toward the top management decision.
Whereas, bottom up approach is a bit complicated and confusing. Somebody may mislead that as long as there are top management involvement in the working team, it shouldn’t be classify as bottom up approach anymore. It should be classify as Hybrid approach. Huh…. from who the theory comes from?

Ok, if based on his theory, LSS deployment that adopting bottom up approach should start at shop floor level and initiate by the shop floor operator then? No management involvement at the beginning. Can this happen in LSS deployment? I doubt.

Bottom up, based on my understanding, is a management approach where more freedom was given to a program committee set their direction that supporting achievement of organization goal. The “Program Working Committee” members may consist of shop floor operator, engineer, director, senior VP, or even CEO. It depends on the nature setup of the program.

In this case, program goal and direction is set by the working committee, not the top management. Top management may not be so much involve in the program, but must be acknowledge the existence of the program activities,  or sometime play an advisory role to ensure overall organizational goal and direction is followed.

I think the different of top down and bottom up approach could be easier to understand based on the statement below;

Top Down – I m the boss, I set the goal and direction, just follow me, no question ask.

Bottom up – we are in a family, let’s work out something to help our family grow.

Make sense ?

There is no right or wrong answer here, individual perception differ mainly due to education background and experience. I respect different voice, but forcing me to align with a special power could be a wrong way.

Friday, August 15, 2014

Laney P / Laney C Chart

Found something new in my newly installed Minitab Release 17.

The Laney P and Laney C chart.
If you wish to know the different of classical P and Laney P', pls Google around, you will get the comprehensive answer.