EMS Test Strategy
A programming bottleneck can affect more than cycle time. As production volumes grow, adding programming stations can also increase equipment costs, operator requirements, and the amount of floor space needed to keep the line moving.
For one major North American manufacturer of industrial and consumer automation products, a request for faster in-system programming (ISP) led to a broader improvement. By combining in-circuit test (ICT) and on-board programming with CheckSum Parallel Test, the manufacturer eliminated a separate programming step and reduced its production test costs.
CheckSum’s original case study, published August 31, 2023, reports a $2 million cost reduction. The customer subsequently purchased six CheckSum test systems within 12 months.
The manufacturer had more than 20 years of electronics manufacturing experience and an established test process. Its existing ICT platform was performing well.
The challenge emerged as boards became smaller and more advanced. Larger panels contained more devices to program, increasing the workload at the programming station.
Because programming took place separately from ICT, it became the production bottleneck. Meeting the takt time requirements of new products would have required additional programming stations and operators, consuming more production floor space.
The customer initially wanted a better stand-alone programmer that could program more devices in parallel at higher speeds. Replacing its ICT platform was not part of the original plan.
Combining ICT and ISP allows manufacturers to perform electrical testing and device programming within one production test station. Parallel capabilities increase the number of boards tested or devices programmed at the same time, while process consolidation can remove a separate station and its associated handling.
In-circuit test checks electrical characteristics of an assembled circuit board to identify manufacturing defects. In-system programming writes firmware or other data to programmable devices while they remain installed on the board.
These are distinct operations. Integrating them within one system allows manufacturers to reconsider the time and resources required for the complete test process.
For this customer, that meant evaluating whether one station could handle both operations faster than the existing approach.
After reviewing the customer’s test and programming requirements, CheckSum proposed a solution that combined ICT and on-board programming using its Parallel Test capabilities.
The proposed system could perform both operations substantially faster than the customer’s existing solutions. The original case study features the 12KN test system.
The customer was satisfied with its established ICT platform, so the decision required evidence from its own production environment. CheckSum and the manufacturer agreed to an on-site evaluation to verify the proposed test and programming times before the customer committed to the change.
That evaluation gave the customer a practical basis for comparing the integrated solution with its existing process.
The on-site evaluation confirmed the central result: the CheckSum system completed ICT and programming faster than the previous platform completed ICT alone.
The manufacturer approved the solution and eliminated its separate programming step.
| Process area | Previous approach | CheckSum solution |
|---|---|---|
| Test and programming flow | ICT followed by a separate programming step | ICT and programming within one test system |
| Cycle time comparison | ICT alone took longer than the new combined operation | Both operations completed faster than the previous ICT process alone |
| Programming capacity | Meeting new takt time requirements would require more stations and operators | Separate programming step eliminated |
| Production resources | Separate operations required more people and floor space | Fewer operators and less floor space required |
The customer purchased six CheckSum test systems over the following 12 months. Operators appreciated the ease of use, management welcomed the reduced costs, and the plant manager could put the freed people and floor space to better use.
The reported $2 million reduction reflects this customer’s application and process change. Savings for another manufacturer depend on its production volumes, test requirements, programming workload, and operating costs.
This case illustrates a useful question for manufacturers facing a programming bottleneck: could improving the complete test process reduce the need for additional stations?
A faster programmer may address one constraint. Evaluating ICT and ISP together may reveal opportunities to consolidate operations and use production resources more efficiently.
For your own application, compare:
The customer’s on-site evaluation was a key part of the decision. It established whether the proposed process could deliver the required performance on the customer’s products.
Parallel programming writes data to multiple devices at the same time. When programming limits output, increasing parallel capacity can help shorten panel programming time. The achievable improvement depends on the devices, data size, interfaces, and board design.
It eliminates the separate programming step when both operations can be performed within the same test station. The devices still receive the required programming as part of the integrated process.
The customer consolidated ICT and programming into one system, shortened the combined operation, and removed the need for a separate programming step. The case study reports fewer operators, less floor space, and a $2 million cost reduction.
If programming is limiting your production output, start with an analysis of your boards, panels, and complete test requirements.
CheckSum’s Free Parallel Test Project Analysis includes a review of ICT and programming, throughput and takt time, system configurations, and budgetary costs for systems and fixtures.
Request a Free Parallel Test Project Analysis to explore how an integrated process could improve your production test operations.
Based on CheckSum’s customer case study “ISP Request Leads to $2 Million Cost Reduction in Test Process,” originally published August 31, 2023.