Ones and Zeros

How to repeat the error?

2006-11-11T01:53:00.000-05:00

few days ago i was reading a validation report that started "How To Repeat the Error". we are so used to the often quoted dogma "never repeat the same mistake twice". but in the world of Reliability engineering, repeatability of experiments is a mantra. an experiment should be designed in such a way that it should produce the same result consistently when repeated multiple times under the same conditions. be it PASS or FAIL, correct or wrong, the result has to be consistent and stable. else, the design of the experiment is questionable. the assumptions involved in designing the experiment requires careful analysis and in the worst case, the validity of the experiment does not hold its ground at all.

all said, there is one question that has been bothering me since i had encountered it. when you transfer a semiconductor manufacturing process from one fab to another, with all the process parameters and fab set up maintained at the same values (meaning everything DITTOed), won't we be able to produce an exactly similar piece of silicon? i was told NO. but i think, YES.

Classic American - An Episode with Ron

2006-11-05T15:04:00.000-05:00

Ron symbolized what a truly broad-minded American is. his love for America was not surprising at all, but his concern for the well being of the entire manhood was. thanks Ron for showing what a classic American is. not everyone in this country of equal opportunity prefers the Amen "God bless America". there are indeed such magnanimous men like Ron who would pray for the people of the world. He told me once that he is going to write to The President. i am not surprised.

Playing Bad Guy - An Episode with Ron

2006-11-05T14:59:00.001-05:00

always be prepared to play the bad guy if need be and not feel bad about it. even if it be in the last stage of validation, avoiding a design flaw from reaching the production floor and ultimately the customer is more important than giving them a piece of diamond jewelery with one missing stone. his words still ring in my ears: "just state the facts. i will play the bad guy. don't worry"

Ron struck an analogy of a senator standing up to his conviction for the good of the people, costing him anger and unrest from his own party members. there were certain occasions in political scenario where the elected representative of the people pushed a bill for a noble cause and then handed over the office to another person by simply deciding not to contest for a second term. it takes plenty of courage to do this sort of thing. a particular bill or policy would have been the only reason for such broadminded public servants to go through the ordeal of elections.

while talking about how important it is to stop flaws in the design and validation from going to production, he also stressed that each little thing costs money. especially small mistakes in semiconductor biz are too costly for a company of any size.

GM versus Toyota - An Episode with Ron

2006-10-23T01:56:00.000-04:00

Toyota became the world's largest automobile manufacturer in a short period of time, competing against long established giant rivals like GM, Ford and Daimler Chrysler. this mega feat of an achievement was possible because while the giants were sleeping like a monster, Toyota was creeping like a snake. for the Asian company soaked in oriental philosophy, nothing is too small for improvement. winning or leading by innovation is one approach that still holds true but in a booming consumer market, it is just one another approach. for a global market place, innovation alone will not be the bread winner. constant improvement on a day-to-day basis on every aspect of the business is the secret of the trade that has made Toyota the ultimate winner so far.

while GM and Ford are shutting down their factories, Toyota is opening up new ones. innovation is necessary but does not always happen in a scale large enough to out beat competition and offer affordability to customers. GM concentrated on bringing out newer models every few years and introduced different segments of cars. they failed to improve and improvise their already released models. Toyota meticulously came up with improved versions of each car they provided in a particular segment and earned the trust of customers. this concept ensures the customers that their car company is here and will provide full customer service by their constant upgrades. will you buy a windows PC if Microsoft stopped providing upgrades?

this concept of constant improvisation and improvement applies to other industries like semiconductor and chip making companies too.

(this blog is going to be a part of a series called " Episodes With Ron"...plan to follow up on this soon)