Optional, May select more than one
Summary of Statistics
| Potential Benefit? | Baseline Data? | Total Responded |
|---|
| Faster quality checks than offline methods such as CMM, calipers, or optical comparator | 6 (100%) | 1 (16.67%) | 6 |
|---|
| If you perform, or plan to perform, capability studies; faster, more complete, more accurate data for these studies | 6 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 6 |
|---|
| Faster, more efficient tooling development | 4 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 4 |
|---|
| Faster, more efficient production of flower patterns/diagrams | 1 (50%) | 1 (50%) | 2 |
|---|
| Ability to predict tooling wear for repair/replacement | 3 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 3 |
|---|
| Reduced downtime | 5 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 5 |
|---|
| Faster start-up times | 4 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 4 |
|---|
| Start-up scrap reduction | 4 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 4 |
|---|
| Production scrap reduction | 4 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 4 |
|---|
| Higher Throughput (faster speeds while maintaining specifications) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 1 |
|---|
| Ability to inspect and characterize raw material stock | 2 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 2 |
|---|
| Ability to capture profile changes due to coil-to-coil variability | 5 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 5 |
|---|
| Faster, more efficient new product development | 3 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 3 |
|---|
| More efficient use of manufacturing equipment and resources (people, energy, time, etc.) | 6 (100%) | 1 (16.67%) | 6 |
|---|
Total responses: 6
