JP2010033149A - Inspection support system, product manufacturing system and product manufacturing method - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide an inspection support system, product manufacturing system and product manufacturing method, capable of suppressing a defect having a risk of occurrence at a shipment destination. <P>SOLUTION: The inspection support system includes: a constituent element inspection information storage means for storing inspection information related to the constituent elements of a product; a quality guarantee inspection information storage means for storing inspection information related to the quality guarantee inspection of the product; and an inspection evaluation means for performing prediction of the occurrence of defect based on the inspection information related to the product constituent element, for obtaining an alternative actual result of defect occurrence based on the inspection information related to the quality guarantee inspection, and for evaluating the possibility of defect occurrence at the shipment destination, based on the prediction of the defect occurrence and the alternative actual result of the defect occurrence. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2010,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to an inspection support system, a product manufacturing system, and a product manufacturing method.

In a product manufactured by assembling a plurality of parts, the quality of each part constituting the product (for example, the processing accuracy of the part) is the quality of the finished product (for example, the performance that the product should have) Etc.). For this reason, parts are inspected before production of the product to prevent the produced product from being defective.
However, even when the parts that have passed in the inspection of the parts are assembled with each other, the inspection of the finished product may fail.

  Therefore, before starting full-scale manufacturing, the accuracy inspection of each part and the performance inspection of the product assembled with the inspected part are performed, and the correlation between the inspection result of each part and the inspection result of the product is correlated. A technique for determining the combination of each component by obtaining is disclosed (see Patent Document 1).

However, even if the technique disclosed in Patent Document 1 can improve the yield in the manufacturing process of a product, it suppresses defects (typically so-called initial defects, etc.) that occur at the shipping destination of the product. You may not be able to.
JP-A-8-215957

  The present invention provides an inspection support system, a product manufacturing system, and a product manufacturing method capable of suppressing defects that may occur at a shipping destination.

  According to one aspect of the present invention, component inspection information storage means for storing inspection information relating to product components, quality assurance inspection information storage means for storing inspection information relating to quality assurance inspection of the product, Predicting the occurrence of defects based on the inspection information relating to the constituent elements, obtaining the results of occurrence of defects alternatively based on the inspection information relating to the quality assurance inspection of the product, and predicting the occurrence of defects and the occurrence of the alternative defects There is provided an inspection support system comprising: an inspection evaluation unit that evaluates a possibility that a defect occurs at a shipping destination based on the actual results.

  According to another aspect of the present invention, an assembling unit for assembling a product, a first inspecting unit for inspecting based on a predetermined inspection standard after the assembling, and a predetermined number of products after the assembling. A second inspection means for performing a quality assurance inspection and the above-described inspection support system, wherein the inspection support system predicts the occurrence of a defect based on inspection information relating to a component of a product, and the second The defect occurrence result is obtained alternatively based on the inspection information relating to the quality assurance inspection of the product provided by the inspection means, and the shipping destination is determined based on the prediction of the occurrence of the defect and the result of the alternative defect occurrence. A product manufacturing system is provided that evaluates the possibility of occurrence of a defect and provides the evaluation as inspection support information to the first inspection means.

  According to another aspect of the present invention, the occurrence of defects is predicted based on inspection information relating to product components, and the record of occurrence of defects is obtained alternatively based on inspection information relating to product quality assurance inspection. There is provided a method for manufacturing a product, characterized in that the possibility of occurrence of a defect at a shipping destination is evaluated based on the prediction of the occurrence of the defect and the result of the occurrence of the alternative defect.

  ADVANTAGE OF THE INVENTION According to this invention, the test | inspection assistance system which can suppress the defect which may generate | occur | produce in a shipping destination, the manufacturing system of a product, and the manufacturing method of a product are provided.

Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be illustrated with reference to the drawings.
FIG. 1 is a block diagram for illustrating a schematic configuration of a product inspection support system according to the present embodiment.
As shown in FIG. 1, the inspection support system 1 is provided with component inspection information storage means 2, quality assurance inspection information storage means 3, reference information storage means 4, and inspection evaluation means 5. Further, the component evaluation information storage unit 2, the quality assurance inspection information storage unit 3, and the reference information storage unit 4 are electrically connected to the inspection evaluation unit 5, and the information (data) stored in each is inspected and evaluated. The means 5 can be provided. Further, the inspection evaluation means 5 can evaluate the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination based on the provided information (data), and can provide this to an external device as inspection support information. The evaluation of the possibility of defects occurring at the shipping destination will be described later.

  The component inspection information storage means 2 stores inspection information relating to parts, devices, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “components”) constituting the product. For example, information on acceptance inspection (incoming inspection) and inspection at the manufacturer is stored as data. The stored information (data) can be provided to the inspection evaluation means 5. In addition, items closely related to the quality of the component can be stored as inspection information (data). For example, a manufacturer name, a manufacturing time, a manufacturing place, a component standard, a lot number, and the like can be stored.

The quality assurance inspection information storage means 3 stores inspection information relating to product quality assurance inspection. For example, information on environmental inspections and long-term reliability inspections is stored as data. The stored information (data) can be provided to the inspection evaluation means 5.
As information (data) regarding environmental inspection, for example, information (data) regarding inspection performed by changing temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure and the like can be exemplified. Moreover, as information (data) regarding the long-term reliability inspection, for example, information (data) regarding the inspection for performing the basic performance inspection over a long period of time can be exemplified.
The reference information storage means 4 stores reference information related to the inspection of the assembled product. For example, knowledge on the knowledge of skilled workers and information on inspection of the same model or similar models in the past are stored as data. The stored information (data) can be provided to the inspection evaluation means 5.
The reference information storage unit 4 is not always necessary. However, if the reference information storage unit 4 is provided, for example, a rule of thumb of a skilled worker can be taken into consideration, so that a multifaceted evaluation can be performed.

  In addition, each piece of information (data) stored in the component inspection information storage unit 2, the quality assurance inspection information storage unit 3, and the reference information storage unit 4 is classified by lot number. For this reason, in this embodiment, the occurrence of defects is predicted using the lot number as a key, the actual occurrence of defects is obtained alternatively, reference information is considered, and the possibility of defects occurring at the shipping destination is evaluated. I do.

Next, the operation of the inspection support system 1 will be illustrated.
The inspection support system 1 predicts the occurrence of defects based on the inspection information relating to the constituent elements stored in the constituent element inspection information storage means 2. At this time, in order to use it as an evaluation index for predicting the occurrence of a defect, numerical evaluation is performed using predetermined evaluation points.
In addition, based on the inspection information relating to the quality assurance inspection of the product that has been rejected in the quality assurance inspection stored in the quality assurance inspection information storage means 3, a record of the occurrence of defects is obtained instead. At this time, in order to use it as an evaluation index of the record of occurrence of defects, numerical values are used using predetermined evaluation points.
Based on the prediction of the occurrence of defects and the results of alternative defect occurrences, the possibility of occurrence of defects at the shipping destination is evaluated. In addition, information on a product that is highly likely to cause a defect is output as inspection support information. As described above, it is possible to evaluate the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination by adding the reference information stored in the reference information storage means 4 as well.

Further illustration will be given on the evaluation of the possibility of defects occurring at the shipping destination.
First, an example will be given regarding the prediction of the occurrence of defects.
FIG. 2 is a flowchart for illustrating prediction of occurrence of a defect.
FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 are schematic diagrams for illustrating the grading of each lot of components and the provision of evaluation points.
First, the inspection information for each lot of the component used for the corresponding product is acquired from the inspection information of the component stored in the component inspection information storage means 2 (step S1).

Next, each lot of each component is graded (step S2).
That is, the inspection information regarding each component of the product is classified into predetermined grades for each lot. For example, as shown in FIG. 3A, the grade of a lot that is in the vicinity of the specified value of inspection in one component is “A”, and the grade of a lot that is outside the range of “A” is “B”. , “C” can be assigned to a lot that falls outside the range “B”, and “NG” (fail) can be assigned to a lot that falls outside the range “C”.
FIG. 3A shows a case where the distribution is almost normal, but the present invention is not limited to this. For example, even in the case shown in FIG. 4A, the grade of a lot in the vicinity of the specified value for inspection is “A”, the grade of a lot in a range outside “A” is “B”, “ The grade of a lot that is out of the range “B” can be “C”, and the lot that is out of the range “C” can be “NG” (failed).
That is, grading can be performed regardless of the form of distribution, and each range of grading can be appropriately determined based on the contents of inspection, the type of component, the experience value, and the like. Moreover, the series of classification is not limited to the illustrated example, and can be changed as appropriate.
Next, predetermined evaluation points are assigned according to the grades classified, and these are stored as information (data) (step S3).
For example, as shown in FIG. 3B and FIG. 4B, the evaluation point “1” for the grade “A”, the evaluation point “3” for the grade “B”, and the grade “C”. An evaluation point “5” can be assigned to. In addition, since the component of "NG" (failure) is not used for manufacture of a product, it can avoid giving an evaluation point. Also, the evaluation points are not limited to those illustrated, but can be changed as appropriate.

Next, the product of the evaluation points for each lot in each stored component is calculated for the combination of lots, and stored as defect prediction information based on the component inspection information (step S4).
That is, for each combination of lots between the constituent elements, an evaluation point is calculated by obtaining the product of the assigned evaluation points as described above, and stored as defect prediction information based on the constituent element inspection information.

  For example, as shown in Table 1, a product of evaluation points for each lot in each component illustrated in FIGS. 3B and 4B is calculated and stored as defect prediction information.

一般的には、構成要素に関する検査において合格したものであっても規定値に近いものほど信頼性が高いと考えられる。例えば、等級「Ａ」のものは最も信頼性が高く、等級「Ｂ」、「Ｃ」となるにつれ信頼性が低下してゆくと考えられる。そのため、構成要素を組み合わせた場合においても等級「Ａ」同士を組み合わせたものは最も信頼性が高く、等級「Ｃ」同士を組み合わせたものは最も信頼性が低くなると考えられる。

In general, it is considered that the closer to the specified value, the higher the reliability, even if the inspection on the component is passed. For example, the grade “A” has the highest reliability, and it is considered that the reliability decreases as the grades “B” and “C”. Therefore, even when the constituent elements are combined, it is considered that the combination of the grades “A” has the highest reliability, and the combination of the grades “C” has the lowest reliability.

In the present embodiment, the occurrence of a defect is predicted by obtaining the product of evaluation points given for each grade. For example, when the class “C” having the lowest reliability is combined, the value is “25”, and when the class “A” having the highest reliability is combined, the value is “1”. . The product is not limited to the product of the evaluation points, and may be a sum. However, since the difference between the calculated values becomes larger when the product is used, the difference can be clarified.
Next, the occurrence of defects is predicted based on the calculated evaluation points (the product or sum of the assigned evaluation points) (step S5).

  In this case, for example, the evaluation point “25” that combines the least reliable grades “C” can be set to have a high possibility of occurrence of a defect. Note that it is also possible to predict the occurrence of defects by providing a predetermined threshold.

  Here, it is not possible to improve the evaluation accuracy for the possibility of a defect occurring at the shipping destination only by predicting the occurrence of a defect based on the component element inspection information. For example, even if the evaluation point is “25”, which is a combination of the least reliable grades “C”, a defect does not always occur at the shipping destination. Therefore, if all of the evaluation points “25” are discarded or re-inspected, the yield and productivity may be reduced.

  Therefore, in the present embodiment, not only the above-described prediction of the occurrence of defects, but also considering the actual occurrence of defects that are obtained alternatively, the possibility of occurrence of defects at the shipping destination is evaluated. Yes. Here, in general, it is difficult to collect information (data) relating to defects occurring at the shipping destination. Even if it can be collected, there is a possibility that inconveniences such as uneven distribution of information (data) or a small number of information may occur.

  For this reason, in the present embodiment, by using the inspection information related to the quality assurance inspection of the product which has been rejected in the quality assurance inspection stored in the quality assurance inspection information storage means 3, the actual occurrence of the defect is alternatively obtained. I want to ask. As described above, in the quality assurance inspection, environmental inspection and long-term reliability inspection are performed. In general, the contents of such inspection are often determined in consideration of the situation at the transportation and shipping destination. Therefore, what has failed in the quality assurance inspection can be regarded as having caused a defect in the shipping destination. In addition, since the product to be inspected and the number of inspections can be arbitrarily determined, the uneven distribution and number of information (data) can be controlled.

次に、蓄積された各構成要素のロット番号の組み合わせの数を算出する（ステップＳ１１）。
すなわち、品質保証検査において不合格となった製品の品質保証検査に関する検査情報に基づいて、各構成要素間におけるロットの組合せを求めてその組合せの数を算出する。 Next, an example of an alternative defect occurrence record will be described.
FIG. 5 is a flowchart for illustrating a case where the result of occurrence of an alternative defect is obtained.
First, information (data) relating to the lot number of each component constituting the product that has failed the quality assurance inspection is acquired, stored, and accumulated (step S10).
Table 2 is a table for illustrating information (data) relating to the lot number of each component stored and accumulated.

Next, the number of combinations of lot numbers of the accumulated components is calculated (step S11).
That is, based on the inspection information related to the quality assurance inspection of the product that has failed the quality assurance inspection, the combination of lots between the components is obtained and the number of the combinations is calculated.

次に、組み合わせの数に応じて評価ポイントを付与し、付与された評価ポイントに基づいて代替的な不良発生の実績を求める（ステップＳ１２）。
表４は、表３における組み合わせの数に応じて評価ポイントを付与したものを例示するための表である。例えば、組み合わせの数が「０」の場合は評価ポイントを「０」、組み合わせの数が「１以上、４以下」の場合は評価ポイントを「１」、組み合わせの数が「５以上」の場合は評価ポイントを「５」とすることができる。
なお、以上は「構成要素１」と「構成要素２」とに着目した場合であるが、同様の処理（組み合わせの数の算出、評価ポイントの付与）がすべての構成要素の組み合わせに関して行われる。また、求められた代替的な不良発生の実績は不良実績評価情報として格納される。 Table 3 is a table for exemplifying information (data) related to the calculated number of combinations by focusing on “component 1” and “component 2” in Table 2. For example, when the number of combinations of each lot number is calculated for “component 1” and “component 2” in Table 2, and there are “10” combinations of “lot A3” and “lot B3” In the corresponding column of Table 3, “10” is entered.

Next, evaluation points are assigned according to the number of combinations, and an alternative defect occurrence record is obtained based on the assigned evaluation points (step S12).
Table 4 is a table for illustrating an example in which evaluation points are given according to the number of combinations in Table 3. For example, when the number of combinations is “0”, the evaluation point is “0”, when the number of combinations is “1 or more and 4 or less”, the evaluation point is “1”, and when the number of combinations is “5 or more” Can set the evaluation point to “5”.
The above is a case where attention is paid to “component 1” and “component 2”, but the same processing (calculation of the number of combinations, assignment of evaluation points) is performed for all combinations of components. Further, the obtained result of the occurrence of the alternative defect is stored as defect result evaluation information.

ここで、品質保証検査の検査数が増加すると、各構成要素のロット番号の組み合わせの数もそれにつれて増加することになる。そのため、ロット番号の組み合わせの数をそのまま用いると適切な評価ができなくなる場合が生じ得る。本実施の形態においては、組み合わせの数に応じて評価ポイントを付与することで情報（データ）に普遍性を持たせるようにしている。

Here, as the number of inspections for quality assurance inspection increases, the number of combinations of lot numbers of each component also increases accordingly. For this reason, if the number of combinations of lot numbers is used as it is, it may be impossible to perform appropriate evaluation. In the present embodiment, information (data) is given universality by assigning evaluation points according to the number of combinations.

  Note that the evaluation points according to the number of combinations are not limited to those illustrated, but can be changed as appropriate. Further, when the number of quality assurance inspections is determined within a predetermined range based on empirical rules, the number of combinations can be used as it is.

Using the failure occurrence prediction (failure prediction information) and alternative failure occurrence results (failure performance evaluation information) obtained as described above, the possibility of occurrence of defects at the shipping destination is evaluated. In this case, the product of the evaluation point in the stored defect prediction information and the evaluation point in the defect performance evaluation information is calculated, and the possibility of a defect occurring at the shipping destination is evaluated based on the calculated value. be able to.
Table 5 is a table for illustrating a case where the product of the evaluation points in Table 1 (failure prediction information) and the evaluation points in Table 4 (failure performance evaluation information) is calculated. For example, the product of the evaluation point “25” regarding “a combination of A3 and B3” in Table 1 and the evaluation point “5” regarding “a combination of A3 and B3” in Table 4 is “A3 and B3” in Table 5. And “125” in relation to “combination with”.
In this case, it can be evaluated that the higher the evaluation point, the higher the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination. For this reason, it is possible to determine a corresponding product by providing a predetermined threshold or the like and output the information as inspection support information.
The product is not limited to the product of the evaluation points, and may be a sum. However, since the difference between the calculated values becomes larger when the product is used, the difference can be clarified.

一般的には、品質保証検査において検査されるものの数は少ない。そのため、出荷先における不良発生の可能性を不良実績評価情報のみを用いて評価するものとすれば、評価の精度が低くなるおそれがある。一方、構成要素の検査においては検査されるものの数が非常に多い。
そのため、不良発生の予測（不良予測情報）と代替的な不良発生の実績（不良実績評価情報）の双方を用い、互いの欠点を補い合わせることで評価の精度を向上させるようにしている。

In general, the number of items inspected in quality assurance inspection is small. Therefore, if the possibility of occurrence of a defect at the shipping destination is evaluated using only the defect performance evaluation information, the accuracy of the evaluation may be lowered. On the other hand, in the inspection of components, the number of items to be inspected is very large.
For this reason, both the prediction of defect occurrence (defect prediction information) and the alternative defect occurrence record (defect record evaluation information) are used to supplement each other's defects to improve evaluation accuracy.

Further, as described above, it is also possible to evaluate the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination by adding the reference information stored in the reference information storage means 4.
Table 6 is a table for illustrating reference information.
What is illustrated in Table 6 represents the experience value of compatibility between components using evaluation points. For example, if it is empirically known that “component 1” and “component 2” are incompatible (prone to cause defects), a high evaluation point (“5”) is given, When it is empirically known that “component 1” and “component 3” are compatible (not likely to cause defects), a low evaluation point (“1”) is assigned. can do.

And the product with the evaluation point illustrated in Table 5 can be calculated, and the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination can be evaluated based on the calculated value. In this case, it can be evaluated that the higher the evaluation point, the higher the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination. For this reason, it is possible to determine a corresponding product by providing a predetermined threshold or the like and output the information as inspection support information.
The product is not limited to the product of the evaluation points, and may be a sum. However, since the difference between the calculated values becomes larger when the product is used, the difference can be clarified.

このようにすれば、熟練した作業者の経験則のようなものも考慮することができるので、より多面的な評価を行うことができる。

In this way, since a rule of thumb of a skilled worker can be taken into consideration, a multifaceted evaluation can be performed.

Next, the product manufacturing system 100 according to the present embodiment is illustrated. Note that a case where a product is assembled from parts, devices, etc. will be described as an example.
FIG. 6 is a block diagram for illustrating a product manufacturing system according to the present embodiment. In the figure, solid arrows indicate the flow of data, and broken arrows indicate the flow of steps.
The product manufacturing system 100 includes a receiving inspection (arrival inspection) means 101, a component carrying-in means 102, an assembling means 103, a product inspection means 104, a quality assurance inspection means 105, and an inspection support system 1 according to the present embodiment. Yes. Further, the shipping stage 106 can be appropriately provided.

  The incoming inspection means 101 includes various measuring means (not shown), inspects the dimensions, accuracy, performance, etc. of the received components, and is provided in the inspection support system 1 as inspection information (data) of the components. It can be sent to the component inspection information storage means 2. Further, information (data) relating to matters closely related to the quality of the component is also sent to the component inspection information storage means 2 provided in the inspection support system 1. As such a thing, a manufacturer name, a manufacturing time, a manufacturing place, the specification of a component, a lot number etc. can be illustrated, for example.

  The acceptance inspection means 101 is not always necessary. For example, when inspection data of a component manufacturer is attached, it is possible to omit an incoming inspection (incoming inspection). In such a case, the attached inspection information (data) may be sent to the component element inspection information storage means 2 provided in the inspection support system 1. However, if the receiving inspection means 101 is provided, it can respond to various receiving forms.

  The component carry-in means 102 includes various handling means (not shown), and the assembly means 103 is passed through the inspection by the receiving inspection (arrival inspection) means 101 or attached with the inspection pass data from the manufacturer. Carry in. It should be noted that items that have been rejected by the inspection by the receiving inspection (incoming inspection) means 101 and that have incomplete inspection data at the manufacturer are not carried into the assembling means 103 and are corrected, discarded, etc. It is carried out toward the stage.

  The assembling means 103 assembles the product. In other words, various assembly devices and processing devices (not shown) are provided, and the loaded components are assembled and processed. For example, electric parts such as motors, sensors, recording media, capacitors, circuit boards, semiconductor devices, batteries, and the like are assembled in a frame or device, wiring is soldered, or surface treatment such as painting is performed.

  The product inspection unit 104 performs inspection based on a predetermined inspection standard after the product is assembled. That is, various measuring means (not shown) are provided to inspect the dimensions, accuracy, appearance, performance, etc. of the product. In addition, storage means (not shown) for storing information (data) necessary for various inspections is provided. A part of the products passed by the inspection by the product inspection means 104 is sent to the quality assurance inspection means 105, and the rest is sent to the shipping stage 106. In addition, what is rejected by the inspection by the product inspection means 104 is not sent to the shipping stage 106 but is carried out toward a stage (not shown) where correction, disposal, etc. are performed.

The quality assurance inspection means 105 includes various inspection means for performing a quality assurance inspection of a product, and performs a quality assurance inspection of a predetermined number of products after the product is assembled. Examples of the various inspection means include an inspection means for performing an environmental inspection and a long-term reliability inspection. In addition, the inspection result can be sent to the quality assurance inspection information storage means 3 provided in the inspection support system 1 as inspection information (data) related to the quality assurance inspection. Information (data) sent to the quality assurance inspection information storage means 3 includes, for example, information (data) related to the inspection performed by changing the temperature, humidity, and atmospheric pressure as information (data) related to the environmental inspection, and reliability over a long period of time. Examples of information (data) relating to the inspection include information (data) relating to the inspection for performing the basic performance inspection over a long period of time. In addition, storage means (not shown) for storing information (data) necessary for various quality assurance inspections is provided.
In addition, the product that has been inspected by the quality assurance inspection means 105 is discarded. Depending on the contents of the quality assurance inspection, it may be sent to the shipping stage 106.

  As described above, the inspection support system 1 predicts the occurrence of a defect based on information (data) stored in the component element inspection information storage unit 2. Further, an alternative defect occurrence record is obtained based on information (data) relating to the rejected product sent from the quality assurance inspection means 105 and stored in the quality assurance inspection information storage means 3. Then, the possibility of a defect occurring at the shipping destination is evaluated based on the prediction of the occurrence of the defect and the result of the alternative defect occurrence, and product inspection means using the information of the product that is highly likely to cause the defect as inspection support information 104. At this time, it is also possible to evaluate the possibility that a defect will occur at the shipping destination in consideration of the reference information stored in the reference information storage means 4 and send this to the product inspection means 104 as inspection support information. it can.

  The inspection support information sent from the inspection support system 1 is stored in a storage unit (not shown) provided in the product inspection unit 104. When a product corresponding to information (data) that is highly likely to cause a defect at the shipping destination is in the shipping stage 106, it can be re-inspected. In this case, the re-inspection can be performed in more detail. In addition, the inspection data stored in the storage means (not shown) provided in the product inspection means 104 is rewritten so that when the corresponding product flows, a more detailed inspection or repeated inspection is performed. Can be.

  The shipping stage 106 is provided with various means for storing products so that preparation for shipping can be performed. Further, based on the inspection support information sent from the inspection support system 1, the corresponding product can be carried out toward the product inspection means 104.

Heretofore, the present embodiment has been illustrated. However, the present invention is not limited to these descriptions.
As long as the features of the present invention are provided, those skilled in the art appropriately modified the design of the above-described embodiments are also included in the scope of the present invention.
For example, the arrangement, the number, and the like of each element included in the inspection support system 1 and the product manufacturing system 100 are not limited to those illustrated, and can be changed as appropriate.
In addition, regarding the provision of evaluation points, higher evaluation points are assigned as the possibility of occurrence of defects increases. However, lower evaluation points may be provided as the possibility of occurrence of defects increases.
Moreover, each element with which each embodiment mentioned above is combined can be combined as much as possible, and what combined these is also included in the scope of the present invention as long as the characteristics of the present invention are included.

It is a block diagram for illustrating schematic structure of the inspection support system of the product concerning this embodiment. It is a flowchart for illustrating prediction of defect occurrence. It is a mimetic diagram for illustrating classification of each lot of a component, and giving of an evaluation point. It is a mimetic diagram for illustrating classification of each lot of a component, and giving of an evaluation point. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the case where the track record of alternative defect occurrence is calculated | required. It is a block diagram for illustrating the manufacturing system of the product concerning this embodiment.

Explanation of symbols

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Inspection support system, 2 Component element inspection information storage means, 3 Quality assurance inspection information storage means, 4 Reference information storage means, 5 Inspection evaluation means, 100 Manufacturing system, 101 Reception inspection (arrival inspection) means, 102 Component element carrying means , 103 assembly means, 104 product inspection means, 105 quality assurance inspection means, 106 shipping stage

Claims (12)

Component inspection information storage means for storing inspection information relating to product components;
Quality assurance inspection information storage means for storing inspection information relating to the quality assurance inspection of the product;
Prediction of defect occurrence is performed based on inspection information relating to the component of the product, and a record of defect occurrence is obtained alternatively based on inspection information relating to quality assurance inspection of the product. An inspection evaluation means for evaluating the possibility of a defect occurring at the shipping destination based on the defect occurrence record;
An inspection support system characterized by comprising:   The inspection evaluation means classifies the inspection information on each component of the product into a predetermined grade for each lot, gives a first evaluation point according to the graded grade, and between each component Calculating a second evaluation point by obtaining a product or sum of the assigned first evaluation points for each lot combination, and predicting the occurrence of the defect based on the second evaluation points; The inspection support system according to claim 1, wherein the system is an inspection support system.   The inspection evaluation means calculates the number of combinations by obtaining a lot combination between each component based on the inspection information related to the quality assurance inspection of a product that has failed the quality assurance inspection, and the calculated 3. A third evaluation point is assigned according to the number of combinations, and the result of the alternative defect occurrence is obtained based on the given third evaluation point. The inspection support system described.   The inspection evaluation means evaluates a possibility that a defect will occur at a shipping destination based on a product or sum of the second evaluation point and the third evaluation point. 3. The inspection support system according to 3. Reference information storage means for storing reference information related to the inspection of the assembled product is further provided,
The inspection evaluation unit gives a fourth evaluation point to the reference information, and is based on a product or sum of the second evaluation point, the third evaluation point, and the fourth evaluation point. The inspection support system according to claim 4, wherein a possibility that a defect occurs at a shipping destination is evaluated. Assembly means for assembling the product;
First inspection means for performing inspection based on a predetermined inspection standard after the assembly;
Second inspection means for performing quality assurance inspection of a predetermined number of products after the assembly;
An inspection support system according to any one of claims 1 to 5,
The inspection support system predicts the occurrence of a defect based on inspection information relating to a component of a product, and substitutes a defect based on inspection information relating to a quality assurance inspection of the product provided from the second inspection means. A probability of occurrence is obtained, the possibility of occurrence of a defect at the shipping destination is evaluated based on the prediction of the occurrence of the defect and the record of the occurrence of the alternative defect, and the evaluation is used as the inspection support information. A product manufacturing system characterized by being provided to an inspection means. It further comprises a receiving inspection means for inspecting the received components.
The product manufacturing system according to claim 6, wherein inspection information relating to a component of the product is provided from the acceptance inspection unit to the inspection support system.   Predicting the occurrence of defects based on inspection information relating to product components, and obtaining alternatives based on inspection information relating to product quality assurance inspections, predicting the occurrence of defects, and generating alternative defects A method for manufacturing a product, characterized in that the possibility of a defect occurring at a shipping destination is evaluated based on the results of Classifying the inspection information on each component of the product into a predetermined grade for each lot,
A first evaluation point is given according to the graded grade,
A second evaluation point is calculated by obtaining a product or sum of the assigned first evaluation points for each lot combination between the constituent elements, and the occurrence of the defect is predicted based on the second evaluation points. The method of manufacturing a product according to claim 8, wherein: Based on the inspection information related to the quality assurance inspection of the product that has failed the quality assurance inspection, calculate the number of combinations by obtaining the combination of lots between each component,
A third evaluation point is given according to the calculated number of combinations,
The method for manufacturing a product according to claim 8 or 9, wherein a result of occurrence of the alternative defect is obtained based on the given third evaluation point.   The product manufacturing method according to claim 10, wherein a possibility that a defect occurs at a shipping destination is evaluated based on a product or sum of the second evaluation point and the third evaluation point. Method. A fourth evaluation point is given to the reference information related to the inspection of the assembled product,
Evaluating the possibility of a defect occurring at a shipping destination based on the product or sum of the second evaluation point, the third evaluation point, and the fourth evaluation point. The manufacturing method of the product of Claim 11.

Images