Why is Data Content Important?

Electronic component data content is the foundation of OEM/CEM internal, operational systems – product realization and materials management. Without accurate, current, and enriched data content, OEM/CEM systems will be limited in financial and time-based efficiency; time-to-market and time-to-money will also ultimately be effected.

Product Realization Data Content Related Issues

Product realization systems (this includes specifically advance engineering and R&D departments, design for manufacturability functions, and PCB/CAD design functions) can be immediately improved with better data content.

• Advanced engineering/R&D departments need accurate and current component data from datasheets for design activity support. External aggregation services are available for one-stop datasheet and data content access, but aggregator’s data content is not guaranteed to be accurate or current. The electronic component’s datasheet URL locations tied to data content may also change. Private, internal database data content is not accurate or current also. In most cases, unfortunately, datasheet access is left to the design engineer and their own private (and outdated) catalog and hardware/software manual library.
• Design for manufacturing requires accurate and complete knowledge of alternate devices and device packaging to meet operational, performance and system packaging goals and constraints. Current databases – external aggregated databases or internal databases – have unevenly populated content to support upgrades/downgrades, family choices, and equivalent replacements. This information is necessary to support design for manufacturing functions.
• PCB/CAD design functions require symbols, footprints as well as parametric data required for system simulation and timing analysis. Unfortunately, data has to be manually extracted from the datasheet and placed manually into EDA tools for schematic capture, layout, simulation, and timing diagrams. If a new device is used, precious time is required to manually enter all data content required to build symbols and footprints. Simulation and timing diagram analysis takes even more time to manually enter even more parametric content. Symbol libraries are available from EDA manufacturers, but do not include current and new devices. Footprints require more manual input and then are modified to fit the application size requirements.

Materials Management Data Content Related Issues

Missing, inaccurate, incomplete, and non-current data also has an impact on AVL generation and optimization and global materials management.

• AVL generation and optimization - The selection of a supplier requires knowledge about their pricing, availability, product portfolio, purchasing logistics, and technical support capabilities. Data content needs are tied to pricing, availability, and product portfolio appropriateness.
  • The pricing and availability data content, for BOM support, needs to be placed into an internal, electronic component database for both design engineering and purchasing access, and updated frequently. A database missing updated and current electronic component pricing and availability will create poor purchasing decisions. The selection and qualification of a supplier rests in part on the electronic access of pricing currency and product availability as well as an internal database that supports vendor approval decisions based on current purchasing content.
  • A potential vendor’s product portfolio that matches BOM requirements is also important. However, if product content is inaccurate or has duplicate part numbers, AVL optimization by definition will not be achieved. Inaccurate parametric data could lead to the wrong approved vendor selection, and duplicate orderable part numbers could fracture purchasing power throughout the universal component management system.
• Global materials management depends on complete, current, and accurate electronic component information.
  • Part numbers found in internal or external, aggregated electronic component databases are no better than 20% accurate and hence, most of the part numbers cannot be placed into an electronic data exchange without checking and verification delays.
  • Inaccurate part numbers will create delivery delays at best, and possible an inventory partially filled with unusable electronic components.
  • Inaccurate part numbers for expensive electronic components also prevent the efficient, internal aggregation of expensive commodity device purchases and the subsequent loss of mass buy discounts.
  • Low priced commodity devices are frequently ordered because of the number of devices found within a BOM. Inaccurate part numbers for low priced commodity devices dramatically increases data entry costs.
  • Incomplete data such as life cycle status may create electronic component shortages because the part is not available anymore. The need to find a substitute quickly or the use of inappropriate and out-dated devices in the absence of a cross-reference data will cause additional delays.
  • Incomplete parametric data also creates delays and prevents the fast access to second sources using a cross-reference device library dependent on deep, rich parametric content.
  • Incomplete and inaccurate parametric data negates the use of an internal database by design engineers. Engineers will ignore data content because of inaccuracy. The engineers will use their own resources bypassing the internal database.
  • If the engineer uses the internal database knowing that orderable part numbers and parametric data content may not be accurate, as a result, the design engineer may enter new part numbers that may be produce duplicate records. Duplicate records may split commodity purchases, reducing possible volume purchase discounts.
  • Duplicate part numbers create additional qualification and internal database insertion costs through manufacturing and component quality control.

Data Content Related Savings

• If duplicate part number entry can be prevented, internal entry, maintenance, and part qualification costs of $75/part to $250/part part number duplication costs can be eliminated.
• The real savings on duplicate part numbers occur when purchasing places volume commodity orders for expensive line items; tens of thousands of dollars can be saved through combined part purchases through a single, accurate part number.
• Cross-referenced parts to a shared, equivalent part number across multiple BOMs can also result in tens of thousands of dollars saved.
• Elimination of duplicate part numbers for low cost commodity devices will reduce data entry, tracking, and inventory costs. If low cost commodity items are ordered multiple times within each week from multiple suppliers without cross-referencing or elimination of duplicate part numbers, thousands of dollars can be saved also.
• Accurate parametric data, datasheet URL access, symbol, footprint, simulation data, timing diagram data, and electronic access to pricing and availability data will take 4 weeks off the design cycle. For a OEM, a 4-week reduction of design cycle time reducing design cycles from 4 months to 3 months could mean another design cycle per year per engineer. For a CEM, a 4-week reduction of design cycle time for an OEM application means more design can be completed each year.

How much is design cycle time reduction worth? Another product can be built each year, possibly generating millions of dollars in additional product revenue as a result of another design cycle and another product.

How much is time to market worth?

Wrap-up

Solving data content problems will improve time to market and time to money for the OEMs as well as the CEMs, and the electronic component manufacturers. Everybody wins.

What should be done? Data content needs to be unified (consistent across all operations and departments), complete, accurate, and current across all business segments and operations within a CEM and OEM to reap the benefits described above. Data content can be a strategic weapon, or be treated as a necessary evil with the resulting inefficiencies, extra costs, and .

The decision to improve data content ultimately rests with the OEMs and CEMs top management where decisions effecting cross departments and cross operations actually are made and implemented.