It’s been a while. I didn’t even realize it, but I did not write any entry here for 5 months. I guess I was busy or something...
Anyway, who is interested in alarms?
I don’t mean fire alarms. I mean alarms during the measurement process.
Everybody? Ok cool. I am glad to hear that.
So, when you define what is an alarm in the process its easier for the operators to track the issues, right? Because operator has to take care when those alarms are being shown on the big screen in the laboratory (or anywhere else...).
Now imagine you define your alarms, and you have multiple measuring stations equipped with O-QIS modules. What if some of the alarms are ignored? And nobody cares about them? Isn’t that problematic? I would say it is at first...
But there is another point of view. What if you ignore that specific kind of alarm and nothing bad happens? What if you still produce a good usable product. And what if you are still able to efficiently improve your process over time?
Well, maybe that alarm is not important. In that case, change the definition. Don’t waste time with things that are not important and not helping you with production.
....
On the other hand, maybe if you ignore that alarm, everything goes bananas, and you will have a big big problem with your delivery and with your profit...
....
My point is – THINK. Thinking process behind this is most important. Made a first definition, test it in the real environment and adjust on the spot if needed.