DEVELOPING AN EXPERT SYSTEM FOR GP IMPLEMENTATION RUBY PINEDA-HENSON Department of Industrial Engineering Holy Angel University-Angeles City, Philippines [email protected]ALVIN B. CULABA Department of Mechanical Engieering De La Salle University-Manila, Philippines [email protected]
38
Embed
DEVELOPING AN EXPERT SYSTEM FOR GP IMPLEMENTATION RUBY PINEDA-HENSON Department of Industrial Engineering Holy Angel University-Angeles City, Philippines.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
UNIT PROCESSESINPUTS OUTPUTS IMPACTS IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES
GREEN PRODUCTIVITY INDICATORS
ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS Pairwise ComparisonMechanism For Consistency CheckA Panel Of Experts May Be
Utilized Geometric Means Of Comparison
Ratings
EXPERT SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY
The potential of expert system technology is explored to develop a software that emulates how human experts diagnose GP performance of manufacturing processes.
Expert systems (ES) are computer programs that use expert knowledge and heuristics or rules of thumb to solve problems in a specific domain.
Complex decision analysis may involve an intricate combination of facts and heuristic knowledge which is organized into three distinct components:
Knowledge BaseWorking MemoryInference Engine
GP DIAGNOSTIC SOFTWARE Front-end database system (Visual FoxPro) Windows shell program/interface CLIPS (C Language Integrated Production
System) expert systemThe shell program embeds the ES. The
Dynamic Data Exchange (DDE) feature of Windows operating environment is used to transmit data to and from the two program ends.
Reads environmental impact and improvement priority weights from AHP calculations as well as green productivity performance ratios and indices.
Using an interface program between the database and the expert system, knowledge processing is performed on the passed parameters
The output consists of diagnostic advice on the result of inventory analysis, impact assessment, improvement assessment and green productivity assessment.
APPLICATION TO GP ANALYSIS OF SEMICONDUCTOR ASSEMBLY/PACKAGING
PRODUCTS/ COPRODUCTS
EMISSIONS TO LAND
OTHER RELEASES
EMISSIONS TO WATER
Ancillary Materials
Energy
Raw Materials
EMISSIONS TO AIR
1
n
2
3
MATERIAL -BASED
ENERGY -BASED
PROCESS -BASED
PRODUCT -BASED
MANAGEMENT -BASED
GREEN PRODUCTIVITY PERFORMANCE
HUMAN TOXICITY: Water
emission
WATER RESOURCE DEPLETION
ENERGY RESOURCEDEPLETION
HUMAN TOXICITY: Air emission
HUMAN TOXICITY:
Land emission
ECOTOXICITY: -Aquatic
ECOTOXICITY- Terrestrial
UNIT PROCESSES
INPUTS OUTPUTS IMPACTS IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
IMPACT ANALYSIS
IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS
PROCESS INVENTORY ANALYSIS
Conceptual Framework for Green Productivity Analysis Applied to Semiconductor Assembly/Packaging
Semiconductor Assembly/ Packaging Process Flowchart
PROCESSES
DIE PREPARATIONFIRST LEVEL ASSEMBLYDIE ATTACHFLUX CLEANINGMOLDING/POSTMOLD CURESOLDER/POST SOLDER CLEANTESTING
INVENTORY DATA
SCENARIO 1 : BASE PERIOD
SCENARIO 2 : PLC MODIFICATION IN THE MOLDING PROCESS
Input - Output AnalysisMassin = Massout (1)
Energyin = Energyout (2)
The total amount of a specific material m for i unit processes is: n
M = m (3) i=1
The total amount of specific energy e for i unit processes is:
n
E = e (4) i=1
The total amount of a specific waste or emission from a unit process (i) to medium (j ),where j = 1 to 3 corresponding to air, water or land and for n unit processes is:
EijEij = (5)
n
i 1
3
1j
SEVEN IMPACT CLASSIFICATION
WATER RESOURCE DEPLETION -WRDENERGY RESOURCE DEPLETION-ERDHUMAN TOXICITY ON AIR - HTAHUMAN TOXICITY ON WATER - HTWHUMAN TOXICITY ON LAND - HTLAQUATIC ECOTOXICITY - ETATERRESTRIAL ECOTOXICITY - ETT
IMPROVEMENT TECHNIQUES
MATERIAL-BASED (MBT)ENERGY-BASED (EBT)PROCESS OR EQUIPMENT-BASED (PET)PRODUCT-BASED (PBT)MANAGEMENT-BASED (MGMT)
GREEN PRODUCTIVITY OF SEMICONDUCTOR ASSEMBLY / PACKAGING
Decision Hierarchy Structure for Green Productivity Analysis of Semiconductor Assembly/Packaging
• Aj = Wi Kij i = 1, 2, …n impact factors
• j = 1, 2, …m options
• where Wi = the relative weight of impact factor i with respect to the over-all goal
• Kij = relative weight of option j with respect to impact i
• Aj = priority weight of option j.
Table 2 Relative Weights of Options (Aj) to Improve Green Productivity Performance
of Semiconductor Assembly/Packaging
AggregateRESULTImpacts WRD ERD HTA HTL HTW ETA ETT
Relative weight of impacts, Wi 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.21
Options Relative weight of options with reference to impacts, Kij Aj
MBT 0.19 0.15 0.24 0.42 0.26 0.31 0.34 0.28
EBT 0.17 0.32 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.14 0.18
PET 0.38 0.30 0.27 0.24 0.25 0.22 0.24 0.27
PBT 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.11 0.12
MGMT 0.14 0.13 0.19 0.14 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.17
GREEN PRODUCTIVITY INDICATORS
BASED ON MATERIAL/ENERGY UTILIZATION:
Water Utilization Ratio (MUR) = kg product /kg water input
BASED ON ENERGY UTILIZATION:Energy Utilization Ratio (EUR) = kg product/kWh energy input
SPECIFIC WASTE OR EMISSION RATIOS
BASED ON WASTE MINIMIZATION:Waste Ratio or Emission Ratio (WR/ER) = kg waste or emission/kg total material
input
GREEN PRODUCTIVITY INDEX
GP INDEX OF “1” IS ASSIGNED TO THE BASE PERIOD AND GP INDEX FOR TEST SCENARIO IS DETERMINED
FOR TEST SCENARIO
FOR MATERIAL/ENERGY PRODUCTIVITY:
IF GP INDEX > 1 , GP IMPROVEMENT IF GP INDEX <1, GP DECLINE FOR WASTE OR EMISSION INDICES: IF GP INDEX > 1 , GP DECLINE IF GP INDEX < 1 , GP IMPROVEMENT
Table 3. Green Productivity Ratios and Indices
GP Water Utilization Ratio 0.001869 1.000000 0.001871 1.001070 >1 Improvement in GP/ Water Utilization Ratio
GP Energy Utilization Ratio 0.043383 1.000000 0.045046 1.038333 >1 Improvement in GP/ Energy Utilization Ratio
GP Human Toxicity - Land Waste Ratio 0.000508 1.000000 0.000508 1.000000 Constant GP/Human Toxicity-Land Waste Ratio
GP Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Waste Ratio 0.000726 1.000000 0.000723 0.995868 <1 Improvement in GP/Terrestrial Ecotoxicity
GP Human Toxicity -Water Waste Ratio 0.184547 1.000000 0.184547 1.000000 Constant GP/ Human Toxicity-Water Waste Ratio
GP Aquatic Ecotoxicity Waste Ratio 0.000312 1.000000 0.000312 1.000000 Constant GP/ Aquatic Ecotoxicity Waste Ratio
GP Human Toxicity - Air Emission Ratio 0.020410 1.000000 0.020410 1.000000 Constant GP/Human Toxicity-Air Emission Ratio
Test Scenario : With PLC Modification
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
The assessment methodology and computerized diagnostic prototype may be utilized as an internal management or self-assessment tool by companies in their continuous GP improvement strategies.
The application of expert systems technology is particularly appropriate to provide flexibility in testing assumptions and in preserving valuable human expertise on green productivity implementation in the manufacturing industry.
Enhancements may be made in future versions with more powerful analysis engine, sufficient database and comprehensive scope of GP analysis to include all life cycle stages.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Asian Productivity Organization (APO) for the materials on Green Productivity
Semiconductor and Electronics Industries of the Philippines (SEIPI) and the Association of Electronics and Semiconductors for Safety and Environment Protection (AESSEP) for their favorable endorsement of the study to some member-semiconductor companies which provided the necessary data and information for this research.