2021 IEEE 8th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications
Quality Improvement for the Packaging of Test to Tape machine Using the
Statistical Process Control
Yogi Tri Prasetyo
School of Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Management Mapúa University
2021 IEEE 8th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications (ICIEA) | 978-1-6654-2895-8/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICIEA52957.2021.9436748
658 Muralla St., Intramuros, Manila 1002, Philippines
e-mail: ytprasetyo@mapua.edu.ph
Satria Fadil Persada
Department of Business Management, Institut Teknologi
Sepuluh November
Kampus ITS Sukolilo, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia
e-mail: satriafp@gmail.com
Abstract—The essential issue in a quality orientated association
is to what exactly level we can fulfill the customers expectations.
In the event that customers expectation is characterized, it is
important to evaluate how we can fulfill these desires. A
product which should be appropriate for use should be created
in a steady process, which implies that the process should have
the option to create the product with an adequate variability of
expressed quality lists regarding their stated target. Statistical
Process Control (SPC) was performed, and it was presumed
that the tool was competent. There was not SPC development
during pre-production. After poor quality of packaging were
detected at expanding level it was obvious that process
variability had expanded, and the process was no longer
capable. The investigation ends with the advancement of the
process improvement actions.
Keywords-quality tools; process improvement; test tape
machine; peel force; Statistical Process Control (SPC)
I. INTRODUCTION
Semiconductors are nowadays widely adopted in several
of industries, especially consumer electronics,
communications, automotive, defense and aerospace. With
the continuous technology advancement and rising demand
in the end-user industries, the global semiconductor sales are
projected to witness a more promising future.
For Montgomery (2013), Statistical process control (SPC)
has been generally used to improve efficiency, decreasing
the misuse of information sources and revise, and, therefore,
reducing costs and expanding production. SPC is a set of
tools to utilized for taking care of the issues whose main
objective is to measure, monitor, control, and improve
process quality. Control charts are a significant SPC tool.
They are utilized to evaluate measure fluctuation all
through time and to demonstrate if the process is in control
or not [1]. Quality is one of the important factors that need to
consider attracting customers. Having a good quality or high
978-1-6654-2895-8/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Mapua University. Downloaded on May 29,2021 at 15:41:06 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Angelo Vincent Z. Bautista
School of Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Management Mapúa University
658 Muralla St., Intramuros, Manila 1002, Philippines
e-mail: avzbautista@mymail.mapua.edu.ph
A.A.N. Perwira Redi
Industrial Engineering Department, Bina Nusantara
University
Jakarta 11480, Indonesia
e-mail: wira.redi@gmail.com
quality of the product or machine the more the customer
satisfies and build trust on the company. Also, having a good
quality machine which delivered to customer may also help
for the next and future project because of satisfaction that
may receive from the customer feedback. For Sousa,
Rodrigues, and Nunes, it is important to incorporate quality
tools (QTs) and methodologies to minimize faulty products,
thus reducing overall quality costs. This can be accomplished
by decreasing process variability, enabling the productivity
and profitability of the company to further increase. A
company's quality feature ensures conformity with product
requirements and incorporates process changes to produce
more efficiently [2].
The purpose of this study is to increase the quality of
packaging by focusing on the machine efficiency
improvement using SPC. To catch up the demand of the
products the management need to find the best way or
solution that will benefits to the company.
II. METHODOLOGY
In this paper used the SPC (Statistical Process Control) to
achieve and to control the quality performance of the
packaging of the Test to Tape Machines. According to
Dutoit, Dehombreux, Lorphevre, and Equeter [3] statistical
process control allows, through statistics to monitor the
process and to perform preventive action before there is an
unacceptable number of defective products. This paper only
focused to improve the packaging quality for the Taping
station of Test to Tape machines.
A. Definition of the Problem
The Peel force test results of the Test to Tape machines
are producing poor quality and inconsistent reading for the
packaging. The customer was complained about the
performances of the new 7 machines. Therefore, as a vendor
of the said machines. The R&D team are looking to find a
solution for the said issue. In Table I, based on the data
373
collected the Taping Station has (29.72%) for Peel (Table II) for the Peel Force of each machine, to performed
Force/unsealed, which contributed more error encountered the control chart to evaluate the performances of the
for the one (1) month monitoring. Peel Force is the result machines. According to Stuart, Mullins, and Drew (1995) in
when the cover tape and carrier tape sealed together through the context of a parts manufacturing industry where items are
adhessive materials. According to Emblem and Hardwidge produced in a regular stream, the control chart includes
(2012) adhesives are critical to the structure of most measuring a main quality parameter at regular intervals,
packaging, whether applied during the conversion process or measuring several items each time, and plotting the mean
on the packaging line. From a production perspective, value and range of each such subgroup on a pair of line plots
adhesive choice can significantly affect line efficiency and [6].
production performance [4].
TABLE II. CONTROL CHART FOR R
TABLE I. LIST TOTAL ERRORS ENCOUNTERED FOR THE ONE (1)
MONTH TEST TO TAPE MACHINE No.:
DAYS Range
Total Cumulative % 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Error Frequency %
Errors of Frequency 1 58 57 55 60 60 56 71 16
Taping 1: Peel
340 340 29.72% 29.72% 2 61 60 63 63 61 62 63 3
Force/ Unsealed
Tray Input: down
3 62 60 61 61 60 60 62 2
238 578 20.80% 50.52% 4 59 61 60 61 59 60 62 3
position error
Blue Test Site: 5 59 58 55 63 61 57 60 6
203 781 17.74% 68.27%
movement timeout 6 63 63 56 58 73 65 67 17
Golden Test Site: 7 57 59 60 60 59 58 60 4
196 977 17.13% 85.40%
movement timeout 8 65 62 64 60 64 63 61 5
Recentering 1: down 9 68 58 63 73 68 64 63 15
67 1044 5.86% 91.26%
position error
Minitable: unit 10 66 70 69 66 70 68 68 4
54 1098 4.72% 95.98%
placing down TOTAL 75
Taping 1: index
46 1144 4.02% 100.00% .
cycle aborted
`. In constructing the control chart for R, we will be using
this process data, consisting of weights of each machine for
10 days sample. The objective is to determine if the process
variability is in control. The R chart is used to monitor
sample ranges and it thus provide with some information
about the process variability. The range is the numerical
differences between the largest and smallest value in sample
each day. Thefore the range for the first sample is 71 minus
55 which gives 16. For the second sample the range is 63
minus 60 which gives 3. Considering in that fashion we have
the ranges for all samples.
Next we calculate the centerline, R-bar is the average of
the ranges. Total of the ranges is 75. Therefore the mean of
Figure 1: Graph of Total Errors Encountered for the One (1) month Chart.
the range R- bar is 75 divided by 10 (10 samples) which
gives 7.5.
TABLE III. R CHART

Figure 2: Example of Peel Fore Test : (a) passed, (b) failed.

B. Gathering Data
For Bajpai (2018) before examining and analyzing them
by charting and statistical analysis, it is very important to
collect useful data, the statistical analysis of the process is a
vital part of SPC since it is crucial to evaluate the random
variance and it is possible to control non-random variation
[5]. To determined the inconsistency of the result of the Test
to Pack machines for the peel force. We collected 10 samples
The formula for the lower control limit (LCL) is D3xR-
bar and the formula for the upper control limit (UCL) is D4x
R-bar. The D3 and D4 are obtained from the table of control
limit constants. See the appendix A. Based on the result of R
chart, the machines are inconsistent or “out of control” for

374

Authorized licensed use limited to: Mapua University. Downloaded on May 29,2021 at 15:41:06 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the peel force. To improve the quality of peel force of the Changing the design of the roller guide of the 7 machines
Test to Tape machines, the R&D was decided to change a bit of Test to Tape machine will help to improve the tension of
of the machine parts and materials related to the taping the cover tape before will go to the sealing.
station. Another concerned was human errors, including 2. Additional Plastic Spacer.
technicians and Operators. Those factors stated was part for
contributing of the Peel force problems.
C. Quality Improvement
After collecting all the results of the peel force of the
carrier tape using the Peel Force Tester. We determined that
the quality of the peel force of the Test to Tape is “out of
control”. For Favero and Belfiore (2019) a process is “in
control” when the variety in the item quality attributes is just Figure 5. Plastic Spacer
a consequence of irregular causes. These causes are inherent Plastic spacer installed one of the roller guides because
to the process (not recognizable), and they do not influence the tape has an adhesive both left and right of the tape, in
the item quality attributes. A process is “out of control” which the adhesive might be lessen because it touches barely
when the variety in the item quality attributes or in the on the roller guide. Putting spacer on this roller guide may
degree of deformities is a consequence of uncommon causes preserved the adhesive until will go to the sealing.
that can be remedied or avoided. This process variety is an 3. Sealing Rubber (O-ring)
abnormality, significantly affecting item quality attributes,
which requires an immediate intervention [7].

Figure 6. Sealing Rubber (O-ring)

The original O-ring was 2mm width only, but the design
engineer decided to change into 4mm width to cover up
Figure 3: Fish Bone Diagram. more area for the adhesive of the cover tape into carrier tape.
4. Pressure Controller
Kent (2016) SPC is intended to recognize the occurrence
of special or assignable causes and every adjustment in the
process. Special causes are the critical and recognizable
causes or functions which can prompt the production of
products that do not meet the specification. SPC for either
variables or attributes searches for patterns that are not
random and then provides the tools to recognize and correct
Figure 7. Pressure Controller
the special cause. The best technique for finding the special
cause is to utilize the cause-and-effect chart (Fish Bone We decide to adjust more pressure on sealing head when
investigation) [8]. Based on the given fish bone analysis, it is time to seal in the carrier tape. Based on the old setting
these factors are causing the poor quality of a peel force. To the old pressure setting was below 4 bars, and the 7 machines
improve the result of the Peel Force, some adjustments and has different setting, that is why the result of the Peel Force
changes are needed to consider. for Test to Tape machines was causing inconsistent.
1. Change the Design of the Roller Guide for the cover 5. Sealing Time
Tape

Figure 8. Sealing Time

Figure 4. Cover Tape Roller Guide

375

Authorized licensed use limited to: Mapua University. Downloaded on May 29,2021 at 15:41:06 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Based on the observation the sealing time was one of the improvement and based on their desire standard test result of
factors why the machines had different reading, and the peel force for a Test to Tape machine in figure 12, it only
result of peel force is inconsistent. From 20 milliseconds shows that the result is almost similar to the standard value.
adjusted to 300 milliseconds to ensure the adhesive of the
tape is intact. So that, it will be seal properly on the carrier
tape.
6. Conduct Training for the Technician

Figure 11. Peel Force Test Result (a) Before and (b) After

Figure 12. (a) After Improvement (b) Standard Peel Force Test

Figure 9. Sealing head and Sea-saw adjustment To verify of all the Test to Tape machines, if the quality
Conducting for in deep training for technician will improvement of the packaging has reach the consistent
enhance the ability to do the right set-up of the machine as reading of the Peel force. Again, we conducted the 10
far is the peel force is concern. Adjusting the sea-saw left sample of each Test to Tape machines to check if all is “in
and right, front, and back will helps to make the sealing head control” using the SPC (Statistical Process Control). In the
more balance when sealing. Also, by adjusting the sealing below Table IV its shows that the total of the ranges was 33
head may also determine what the better position to have a after the improvement, while the total of the ranges before
higher peel force result. improvement was 75. As this result, the mean of the range
for R-bar will be 3.30 compared to 7.5 when the Test to Tape
III. RESULTS machines was not taken any improvement for the quality of
After all the improvement was implemented for all the packaging.
machines for the Test to Tape. The figure 10, the result was TABLE IV. CONTROL CHART USING R RANGE AFTER IMPROVEMENT
shown before and after of the sealing of the cover tape into
Carrier Tape. Based on the pictures, the right picture was TEST TO TAPE MACHINE No.:
smoother and clearer the sealing in the carrier tape compared DAYS Range
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
to the left picture. The left picture is before the improvement
1 74 73 72 73 70 72 75 3
of the machines.
2 72 71 70 74 72 70 70 4
3 72 73 72 73 74 72 74 2
4 73 73 71 73 74 70 70 4
5 70 70 70 71 71 72 71 2
6 72 71 70 73 75 71 72 5
7 72 73 72 70 73 72 72 3
8 71 73 72 71 72 72 73 2
9 72 73 71 73 75 72 74 5
Figure 10. (a) before and (b) After Improvement for the Sealed Tape
10 72 72 71 70 71 71 73 3
After the improvement of the Test to Tape machines. TOTAL 33
Figure 11, it shows the significant increased the value of the
result of the Peel force Test from 62.952 jumps into 73.633.
To compare the result of the peel force after the

376

Authorized licensed use limited to: Mapua University. Downloaded on May 29,2021 at 15:41:06 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE V. R CHART AFTER IMPROVEMENT

Figure 13: Graph of Total Errors Encountered for the whole month Chart
after the Improvement

As Masaaki [9] mentioned that Statistical Process

Control is an analytical decision-making tool that enables
To take the performance of the Test to Tape machines you to see when a process is running properly and when it is
using the R Chart for its statistical process control. After not. In any system, variation is present, determining when
plotted the ranges in the R chart to determine the 10 sample the variation is normal and when correction is needed is the
of each Test to Tape machines, if all machines are having key to quality control. Same with other studies using SPC
same performances for the peel force after the improvement. tools as continuous quality improvement [10-13]. It shows in
As given the result, the R-bar is (3.30). We can say that, after the results, when implementing the SPC was able to meet or
all the improvement has been made the peel force quality of improve their product quality. Through stabilizing a
the packaging for the Test to Tape machines was improved, production process and decreasing the total of varieties in
and the R chart result are “in Control”. productivity, both the customers and the vendors benefits.
As part of the quality improvement for the peel force for The customer gains by obtaining a reliable and tested
the packaging of the Test to Tape machines. We conducted product, and the vendor benefits by preventing the expenses
another monitoring for the machine to show how is the and embarrassment related with a recall. A continual
improvement of the machine performances as for as the improvement process, also sometimes called a continuous
Taping station is concerned. Based on the Table VI and improvement process (abbreviated as CIP or CI), is a directly
Figure 13, the error encountered for the peel force/unsealed comes to enhance products, services, or processes. These
was dramstically reduced from 29.72% to 17.4% for its total actions may achieve "incremental" improvement over time
error of the machines after the improvement was finished. or "breakthrough" improvement instantaneously. Sujová and
Also during the monitoring, it also shows the decreasing of Marcineková [14] Delivery (customer valued) processes are
frequency of the error from 340 to 51 only, and that is 85% constantly evaluated and improved within the light of their
drops from the orginal value. efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility. For most
management systems, some see CIPs as a meta-process (such
TABLE VI. LIST TOTAL ERRORS ENCOUNTERED FOR THE WHOLE business processes management, Quality control, project
MONTH AFTER THE IMPROVEMENT
management and program management). W. Edwards
Error Frequency
Total
%
Cumulative % of Deming [15] a pioneer of the sector, saw it as a part of the
Errors Frequency
Tray Input: down
'system' whereby feedback from the method and customer
68 68 23.20% 23.20% were evaluated against organizational goals the very fact that
position error
Blue Test Site:
65 133 22.20% 45.40% it are often called a management process doesn't mean that it
movement timeout
must be executed by 'management'; but rather merely that it
Golden Test Site:
movement timeout
53 186 18.10% 63.50% makes decisions about the implementation of the delivery
Taping 1: Peel
51 237 17.40% 80.90%
process and therefore the design of the delivery process itself.
Force/ Unsealed A wider definition is that of the Quality Assurance Institute,
Minitable: unit
placing down
27 264 9.20% 90.10% which described "continuous improvement as a gradual
Taping 1: index never-ending change that is:'... focused on improving a
21 285 7.20% 97.30%
cycle aborted company's efficiency and/or effectiveness to achieve its
Recentering 1: down
8 293 2.70% 100.00% policy and goals. It is not restricted to quality projects.
position error
Improvement in business strategy, business results, customer,
employee, and supplier relationships are also subject to
continuous improvement. Put clearly, it means 'all the time
getting better.

377

Authorized licensed use limited to: Mapua University. Downloaded on May 29,2021 at 15:41:06 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IV. CONCLUSION
This paper enabled to recognize the possible major
causes of variability in the production process of a Test to
Tape machine for causing the packaging to produced poor
quality and inconsistent reading for the Peel Force Test,
through application of Statistical Process Control (SPC), and
suggested counter measure to improve the process and
decreasing the number percentage of the defective products.
This paper confirmed in its experimental that statistical
process control model as tools for continuous quality
improvement. SPC can be viewed as an extremely helpful
tool in make sure the process stability. The tool is very
appropriate for attaining the desired objectives of quality
improvement and effective way can help solve the problems
of the process of quality improvement. As mentioned by
Bajpai the cost vs benefits of SPC are vital for the
manufacturing. By having too little quality assurance, the
high cost will result because there will be a high rejection
rate at the end. Therefore, the amount of quality control
practiced depends on the intended use of the product. In
addition, statistical process control lessens the total of cash
that your company is misusing on additional material during
production, regardless of whether it is scrap, rework, or
warranty.
APPENDIX
TABLE OF CONTROL LIMIT CONSTANTS
378
Authorized licensed use limited to: Mapua University. Downloaded on May 29,2021 at 15:41:06 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
TABLE OF CONTROL LIMIT CONSTANTS
REFERENCES
[1] D. C. Montgomery, “Introduction to Statistical Quality Control, seven
ed.,” John Wisley & Sons Inc, Arizona State University, 2012.
[2] S. Sousa, N. Rodrigues, and E. Nunes, “Application of SPC and
quality tools for process improvement,” Procedia Manufacturing,
2017, doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.247.
[3] C. Dutoit, P. Dehombreux, E. R Lorphevre, and L. Equeter,
“Statistical Process Control and Maintenance Policies for Continuous
Production Systems Subjected to Different Failure Impact Models: In
Review,” Procedia CIRP, 2019, doi:10.1016/j.procir.2020.01.050
[4] A. Emblem and M. Hardwidge, “Adhesives for packaging,”
Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2012, pp. 381
[5] P. Bajpai, “Biermann's Handbook of Pulp and Paper 3rd edition,”
Paper and Board Making Vol 2, Elsevier Science, 2018, pp. 446-448,
doi:org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814238-7.00022-2
[6] M. Stuart, E. Mullins, and E. Drew, “Statistical quality control and
improvement,” European Journal of Operational Research, Febuary
1995, pp. 204, doi:org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00069-0
[7] L. P Favero, P. Belfiore, “Data Science for Business and Decision
Making,” Academic Press, 2019, pp. 941, doi:org/10.1016/B978-0-
12-811216-8.00022-7
[8] R. Kent, “Quality Management in Plastics Processing,”
Elsevier Science, 2016, pp. 128.
[9] I. Masaaki, “Gemba Kaizen: A Commonsense, Low-Cost Approach
to Management (1st ed.),” McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-031446-2, 1997.
[10] A. Azizi, “Evaluation Improvement of Production Productivity
Performance using Statistical Process Control, Overall Equipment
Efficiency, and Autonomous Maintenance,” Procedia Manufacturing,
Febuary 2015, doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.032
[11] M. Gupta, and H. Kaplan, “Using Statistical Process Control to Drive
Improvement in Neonatal Care A Practical Introduction to Control
Charts,” Elsevier Science, 2017, doi:org/10.1016/j.clp.2017.05.011
[12] D. Binny and et al., “Investigating output and energy variations and
their relationship to delivery QA results using Statistical Process
Control for helical tomotherapy,” Physica Medica, 2017,
doi:org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.05.052
[13] N. P. Grigg, J. Daly and M. Stewart, “Case study: the use of statistical
process control in fish product packaging,” Elsevier Science, 1998,
doi:org/10.1016/S0956-7135998000018.
[14] A. Sujová and K. Marcineková, “Modern Methods of Process
Management Used in Slovak Enterprises,” Procedia-Economics and
Finance Journal, 2015, pp. 889-893, doi: 10.1016/S2212-
5671(15)00381-0
[15] E. W. Deming, “Statistical Adjustment of data,” Dover
Publications, ISBN: 0486646858, 2011.