MIJOINT delivers customized solutions to meet the demands of the world’s leading connector manufacturer for high precision, full automation and enhanced efficiency. Please refer to the following case study for details.
The process flow of this project includes: Contact-1 cutting + alignment, Contact-2 cutting + alignment, ceramic suction + alignment, cutting + alignment, robotic arm insertion, overmolding, robotic arm unloading, Carrier cutting, AOI, 3D inspection, and packaging.
The customer's miniature products of consumer electronics faced two major challenges: First, the positioning accuracy for 0.5-5 mm miniature components was difficult to stabilize within ±0.01 mm. Second, during multi-piece simultaneous suction and insertion, success rates fell below 95% due to fluctuations in surface flatness and suction force (0.1-0.5 N). This severely constrained production continuity and efficiency. Therefore, the customer hoped to integrate all processes to achieve fully automated production while ensuring stable high-precision.
Unstable positioning accuracy led to poor coherence of process flow, while insertion success rates below 95% frequently caused production interruptions. This resulted in material waste, prolonged equipment downtime, and severely limited on-time order delivery capability, ultimately increasing production costs and eroding profits. Traditional manual insertion also significantly reduced both efficiency and yield.
After receiving the project, our team took the following steps to address the customer's needs:
1. Upon receiving the project, we conducted process discussions with the customer. After performing a risk analysis on whether to adopt multi-part insertion or individual-part insertion for overmolding, we ultimately decided on the individual-part insertion method.
2. We conducted Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) on the machine and DOE verification on individual verification modules (e.g., high-precision Carrier cutting, insertion stability of robotic arm).
3. We evaluated and verified the inspection items of the product to confirm whether the inspection accuracy can meet the customer's standards. Conducted 3D design, followed by the first review and the second review, and then carried out 2D design;
4. We conducted 3D design, followed by primary and secondary design reviews, and then proceeded with 2D design.
5. Procurement, assembly, software & program installation, equipment debugging, and equipment MBO.
6. EVT, DVT, RAMP, and MP phase.
|
Performance Indicator |
Before Improvement |
After Improvement |
Improvement Range/Effect |
|
Daily Capacity |
20 kpcs/day |
50 kpcs/day |
Capacity increased by 150%, meeting the delivery requirements of large-scale orders |
|
Product Yield |
93% |
99.5% |
Yield increased by 7%, defective product cost reduced by 92% (estimated proportionally) |
|
Labor Configuration per Shift |
10 HC/shift |
1 HC/shift |
9 HC saved per shift, labor cost reduced by 90% |
