Total loss function Case Study

To illustrate the advantages of the loss function, a case study which places emphasis on low variations of the target value to minimise cost and loss of the product will be examined.

5.1 Loss function in Developmental Design

The loss function can be used to compute the advantages of being on target with low variation for the distribution of a product characteristic. The following figures describe the relationship between the output voltage and the gain of a power transistor in a regulated power supply circuit. This information is commonly available from transistors manuals and data sheets which are published by the manufacturers of the components.

Fig 5.1.0 From the figure, it can be seen that for a design specification of 115V, it would be necessary to use a transistor with a gain of 20, which would cost approxiamateley 25 cents. The cost of the electronic component depends on the tolerance and the power handling capability. The 25 cent transistor has a tolerance of 30% which will be assumed to be three standard deviation away from the target value. Hence one standard deviation is equivalent to 10% in tolerance. In figure 5.1.0, it can also be seen that the variation in the gain, is transmitted to the variation in the voltage. If a normal distribution of the gain is assumed , then a normal distribution of voltage will be obtained. While it is centred around the target of 115V, it is also possible to have a voltage as low as 109 and as high as 121V. If a higher tolerance transistor is used then the

tolerance would be reduced. However, this would mean a higher cost in the overall product. To produce the true regulated power supply could then cost up to four times the original design cost. However, a more cost effective approach is to use the portion of the voltage Vs gain curve that is less steep. In this way, the large variation in gain to the output voltage is not transmited. This part of the curve is around the 40-HFE point. Even with the 30% tolerance range, the variation in voltage around this point is 2 Volts. Hence, it is seen that designing in the constant region of the relationship will reduce the variation. The distributions for transistor A and transistor B are shown in the following diagram:

Figure 5.1.1 Distribution Curve for Transistor A and B The figure shows the output of both transistors, with the output of transistor B shifted and superimposed over the output of transistor A. From inspection, transistor A, with is wide and flat distribution curve, will exhibit a large variation in its output voltage. Whereas transistor B will exhibit the opposite characteristics. To calculate the expected loss, integration of the area of the loss function with the area of the distribution must be preformed. This may be done numerically, point by point, or by combing the distribution function with the loss function. The results shows that the expected loss (EL) which is related to the standard deviation k and the location of the average of the distribution to be: EL = k[ (AL - m ) + S ] The losses for the two transistors can then be calculated as follows: For transistor A: EL = 0.444[ ( 115 -115) + 2 ] EL = $1.78

For transistor B: EL = 0.444[ (124 -115) + 0.33 ] EL = $36.01 The loss for transistor B is excessive because it is 9 volts of the target. This loss can be minimised by using a higher current limiting resistor which would shift the entire voltage versus gain curve as follows:

Figure 5.1.2 New Gain Vs Voltage Curve The loss for transistor B now becomes: EL = 0.444[ (115 -115 ) + 0.33 ] EL = $0.048 Hence the above case study has shown how Taguchi quality engineering by design methodology can be put into practice to minimise the output variation. Since loss is a function of the variation, reducing the variation will ultimately reduce the loss.