Quality 4.0:
`A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`Exploring the impact of absolute, non-contact, fully automated
`dimensional inspection in the production line
`
`A Frost & Sullivan White Paper
`
`Karthik Sundaram
`
`Prem Shanmugam
`
`www.frost.com
`
`50 Years of Growth, Innovation and Leadership
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 1
`
`

`

`Introduction and Context ................................................................................. 3
`
`The Vision of Quality 4.0 .................................................................................. 4
`
`Devising the Quality 4.0 Index ......................................................................... 8
`
`The BIW Dimensional Inspection Market ..................................................... 9
`
`Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 13
`
`Appendix ............................................................................................................ 14
`
`Reference ............................................................................................................ 14
`
`Disclaimer........................................................................................................... 15
`
`Frost & Sullivan
`
`T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 2
`
`

`

`INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
`
`Mass production, automation, and globalisation have had dramatic effects on the way products are designed,
`produced, and consumed. In the latter half of the 20th century, globalisation and low-cost outsourcing to
`emerging economies, marked the beginning of a shift in the balance of power in the industrial world to the East.
`The former low-cost production centres gained critical domain know-how and the capacity to compete with
`the West. Market competition became more intense, business cycles more volatile, and consumers more fickle.
`Against this backdrop, Industry 4.0 was conceived. Industry 4.0 involves a cross-fertilisation of ideas, inventions,
`and processes between the worlds of information technology and operational technology. It emphasises digitised
`production philosophies to improve shop-floor efficiency through the intelligent use of product and process data.
`
`The goal of Industry 4.0, a vision developed in cooperation with the German government in the first half of this
`decade, is to create the next generation of manufacturing automation driven by digitisation to ensure that the
`nation remains competitive in the global marketplace. Since then, the subject has gained universal resonance
`with new regional offshoots emerging across the world.
`
`The automotive industry, a pioneer in advanced manufacturing, is well positioned to implement and realise the
`benefits of Industry 4.0. Automakers today are confronting their own industry challenges that Industry 4.0 could
`potentially help resolve.
`
`Exhibit 1: Automotive Body-in-White– Key Automotive Trends of Relevance
`
`01
`
`Design Personalization
`Placing the customer at the centre
`of automotive – creating a ‘lot size
`1’ factory architecture and
`supporting personalized design
`
`Platform Strategy
`Auto OEMs push towards
`achieving standardized
`vehicle platforms for realizing
`economies of scale
`
`04
`
`Use of Multi-materials
`Use of multi-material hybrid designs to
`achieve lightweight production and increase
`energy efficiency during vehicle production
`
`03
`
`02
`
`Environmental Regulations
`Emission regulations governing
`CO2 and exhaust gas emissions,
`fuel efficiency, are driving weight
`reduction and electrification in
`auto production.
`
`Source: Frost & Sullivan
`
`3
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 3
`
`

`

`A study of the German automotive industry found that internal efficiency was the key driving factor for Industry
`4.0 adoption for an overwhelming 97%1 of respondents, followed by cost reduction (89%) and process
`transparency (86%). Much of the industry’s focus has been on designing smart vehicles and intelligent production
`lines, and while quality control has been a component of these imperatives, it deserves a singular focus. The
`purpose of this white paper is to draw the industry’s attention towards the need for a new vision for quality in
`automotive production with the backdrop of Industry 4.0.
`
`The paper explains the key trends influencing automotive Body-in-white (BIW) and qualifies the need for
`reimagining dimensional inspection processes. This new vision for quality is Quality 4.0—the details of which are
`explained in the latter part of the white paper.
`
`THE VISION OF QUALITY 4.0
`
`The Future of Dimensional Inspection and the Dawn of Quality 4.0
`Quality can make or break a purchase decision. It is not merely about a vehicle’s integrity but also reflective
`of an automaker’s commitment to customers and the industry at large. While quality has many aspects,
`Frost & Sullivan has restricted the focus of this paper to dimensional quality.
`
`A consumer’s perception of dimensional quality affects an automaker’s brand image: a car with poor fit and finish
`or malfunctioning internal components will leave a lasting impression. In the production process, suboptimal
`dimensional quality can lengthen lead times and cause cost overruns related to the reworking of non-compliant
`parts or forced downstream production adjustments.
`
`Manual dimensional inspection processes are time-consuming and costly, yet they have remained largely
`unchanged for decades.
`
`It is imperative that dimensional inspection keeps pace with disruptive Industry 4.0 forces in the design
`engineering and production automation spaces. To move forward, there is a fundamental need to reimagine the
`purpose of dimensional quality control and the process of dimensional inspection in the production environment.
`
`Quality 4.0 deals with the paradigm
`shift of making dimensional
`inspections move from being a
`mere qualifier of quality compliance
`to one that controls and regulates
`the manufacturing process.
`
`4
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 4
`
`

`

`BIW: State of the Industry
`BIW is essentially the body of the vehicle and its underlying structure once stamped metal parts have been joined
`together. It is the metal structure without closures like doors and bonnet. BIW is a critical part of the production
`process that follows press shop and precedes paint shop and final assembly. The different stages of automotive
`manufacturing and the position of BIW are represented in the Exhibit 2.
`
`Exhibit 2: The Automotive Manufacturing Process
`
`01
`
`02
`
`03
`
`04
`
`Press Shop
`Involves shaping
`sheet metal through
`high pressure into
`various automotive
`body components
`such as doors, pillars,
`hood, roof, etc.
`
`Body Shop
`Welding area where
`all sheet metal parts
`are joined together to
`form the
`body-in-white and
`the closures
`
`Paint Shop
`Includes steps for
`surface preparation
`and painting of the
`complete body
`
`Final Assembly
`Assembling engines
`and other parts like
`wheels, seats, wind
`shield, dash board, etc.
`into the vehicle body
`
`Source: Frost & Sullivan
`
`According to estimates, the BIW market is expected to reach €100 billion by 20252. A BIW inspection identifies
`any dimensional anomalies. According to Frost & Sullivan research, the dimensional inspection market for BIW
`automotive accounted for $289.3 million in 2017. Production lead times are shrinking, and automakers are under
`pressure related to cost reduction, adoption of lightweight materials and the demands of product personalisation.
`Dimensional quality control in BIW processes can address these concerns. Traditional inspection approaches,
`such as the use of an offline coordinate measuring machine (CMM), are simply discordant with Industry 4.0
`demands. New approaches must be developed and adopted to ensure that quality and process controls are
`realised simultaneously.
`
`Perfecting BIW inspection:
`The earlier the better
`A perfected BIW process ensures that downstream processes in automotive
`manufacturing realise high levels of efficiency. Dimensional quality control at the BIW
`stage, when supported by data-driven analytics, detects product and process anomalies
`earlier in the production process. It also helps to control the assembly process in such
`a way that dimensional tolerance targets are hit consistently. The result is not only less
`downtime and rework, but a production process that continuously improves.
`
`5
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 5
`
`

`

`Pain Points on a Customer’s BIW Journey
`The automotive industry’s design and development process is inherently dynamic as new challenges emerge
`at various production points and intense competition increases time-to-market pressures. Automotive
`manufacturing generally includes three critical phases, as shown in exhibit 3.
`• Series development—involves prototype testing and development of manufacturing process design
`• Ramp-up phase—the transitionary phase wherein the real production line is built; this phase is also
`known as Pre-series
`• Series production—where the designed product and process is utilized for large-scale production
`
`Exhibit 3: The Product Development Phase
`
`Pre-series
`release
`
`Start of
`production (SOP)
`
`Full capacity
`reached
`
`~36 months
`
`~6-9 months
`
`Series development
`
`Series ramp-up
`
`~72 months
`
`Series
`production
`
`Pre- series I
`
`Pre- series II
`
`Zero series
`
`Production
`ramp-up
`
`Logistics planning
`
`Pre-series logistics
`
`Series Logistics
`
`Source: Filla, P., Klingebiel, K., Risk profiles for the Pre-series logistics in automotive ramp-up processes,3 p. 45
`
`Dimensional control is an important quality gate across the entire product development phase—starting from
`‘Pre-series’ where production processes are first developed and tested to ‘Series’ production, where vehicles are
`manufactured in scale. The BIW assembly in the production process is a critical juncture for dimensional quality
`control. Conventional models for quality control in BIW are inadequate and more often result in delayed product
`launches and extensive capital costs for manufacturers. For a measured view on how BIW processes can be
`strengthened with a new quality control and inspection approach, it is first essential to understand the current
`challenges confronting automakers across Pre-series and in-series production phases. Exhibit 4 illustrates these
`pain points.
`
`6
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 6
`
`

`

`Exhibit 4: BIW Dimensional Quality Control Pain Points
`
`In Pre-series
`
`In Series production
`
`Time & Cost of frequent
`tooling modifications
`
`Missed “SOP” (start of
`production) target date
`
`100% inspection in Pre-series
`
`Manual rework of parts in
`body shop
`
`Rework to “make things fit”
`downstream
`
`Production
`stoppage/downtime loss
`
`More reliable inspection data
`without delay for better
`process control
`-
`
`A natural second step that requires analyses are the downsides associated with the current BIW inspection
`processes, as shown in Exhibit 5.
`
`Exhibit 5: BIW Inspection Process Pain points
`
`Accuracy of in-line dimensional data
`insufficient for detecting process trends
`
`Low reliability of inspection data
`owing to insufficient data volume
`(1 set per shift in best case)
`
`Delayed availability of
`inspection data in Pre-series
`and series production
`(> 8 h after part was produced)
`
`Existing inspection methods are expensive*
`
`*Note: includes cost expenditure for CMM rooms, in-line FMS systems, labour for parts/component transfer to CMM and run inspection,
`process sequence break-up during inspection)
`
`It would greatly aid automotive manufacturers to fine-tune the process of BIW dimensional inspection in the
`Pre-series phase. This can ensure that automakers do not miss critical production targets that influence sale
`conversions and customer retention. However, in reality, this is often not the case and many car manufacturers
`have issues to achieve their Pre-series targets, both in terms of quality and timelines. It also helps us understand
`the gaps of conventional inspection systems that are deployed in BIW. The industry could be aided by a new
`inspection process that can address all the current pain points stifling operation. This inspection system must
`align with the vision of Quality 4.0. This is where we see a need to evolve an index—one that can help measure
`the status of a given BIW inspection process vis-à-vis the Quality 4.0 paradigm, helping to determine the best
`inspection system that can be deployed.
`
`7
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 7
`
`

`

`DEVISING THE QUALITY 4.0 INDEX
`
`The Quality 4.0 index is developed by Frost & Sullivan and defines key criteria that quality inspection systems
`and processes need to adhere to, to comply with the vision of Industry 4.0. A fully integrated inspection in the
`production line that does absolute measurement supported by advanced digital tools and capable of performing
`100% inspection checks, enabling process control and continual process improvement, forms the building blocks
`of the Quality 4.0 Index. Exhibit 6 illustrates this in more detail.
`
`Exhibit 6: The Quality 4.0 Index
`
`In-Line
`Inspection
`Fully automated, real-time
`inspections in the production line
`or in a by-pass station
`
`100%
`Inspection
`Inspection of every product
`that is manufactured
`
`Digital
`Infrastructure
`Digital capabilities that help to
`acquire, store, and process
`inspection data linked to CAD
`
`Weighted Rating for BIW
`
`Weighted Rating for BIW
`
`Weighted Rating for BIW
`
`Absolute
`Measurement
`Inspection results in
`measurement units without the need
`for correlations and comparisons
`
`Process
`Control
`Leveraging inspection data
`for process optimization
`
`Pre-series
`Alignment
`Ability and ease of performing
`100% dimensional inspection
`in Pre-series production
`
`Weighted Rating for BIW
`
`Weighted Rating for BIW
`
`Weighted Rating for BIW
`
`The Quality 4.0 Index is applicable to all discrete manufacturing inspection contexts. In the automotive BIW
`context, Frost & Sullivan developed a weighted score for each index element, taking into account key end-user
`challenges and the expected value for future BIW processes. The Quality 4.0 Index for BIW can be used to
`pursue a comparative study and benchmarking of existing BIW inspection systems and identify their alignment
`with the larger Quality 4.0 paradigm. A closer look at the different elements in the Index illustrates the gaps in
`conventional CMM methods that are widely used in the automotive industry today. For instance, conventional
`CMM methods are pursued in separate rooms, capable of only sample checks, with little or no ability to aid
`in process control. The result is a labour-intensive, time-consuming, legacy process that is isolated from the
`production line. Besides the sole benefit of measurement accuracy, conventional CMM room inspections fail
`to meet any requisite criteria for Quality 4.0. The same can also be said of many other dimensional inspection
`systems in the marketplace. Moreover, most of the existing systems are either inadequate or inefficient in pre-
`series production, where product and process design can be optimised to the maximum. This calls for a new BIW
`dimensional inspection system, one that successfully meets the varied criteria of Quality 4.0.
`
`8
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 8
`
`

`

`THE BIW DIMENSIONAL INSPECTION MARKET
`
`The BIW dimensional inspection market currently has five major types of systems. Whilst CMM is still the highest
`adopted system, there are four key segments increasingly gaining market share. White light, Tracked Optical
`Sensor, Flexible Measurement System (FMS), Laser Radar – have emerged as strong contenders for CMM, each
`with their unique value-selling propositions.
`
`Each of these systems is tailor-made for specific contexts and can be broadly classified on the basis of:
`
`1. Location of Measurement: In a measurement room, next to the production line or integrated into the
`production line (by-pass or in-line)
`
`2. Type of Measurement: Absolute and Relative
`
`The definition for each of these systems has been detailed in the Appendix.
`
`End-user Viewpoints on the Dimensional Inspection Market
`From our discussion with automotive OEMs, it is certain that there is a definite shift towards measurements
`integrated into the production line (by-pass or in-line). Measurement room inspections are currently used during
`design stages and for troubleshooting. In the years ahead, CMM usage is likely to get phased out and replaced
`by newer, advanced systems. In regards to measurements in the production line, a few end users expressed
`concerns about quality. A general perception is that in-line measurements might provide inferior inspection
`results vis-à-vis a measurement room approach. Questions about accuracy arise, especially due to the impact of
`temperature, vibration and humidity during measurements in the production line. On the whole, it is evident that
`automotive OEMs foresee a change in the way dimensional inspection is pursued in BIW. It is thus imperative for
`dimensional inspection systems in the production line to ensure that environmental conditions on the shop floor
`do not impact measurements. There was also a reasonable scepticism from end users regarding the software
`capability of different dimensional inspection systems as the volume of data acquired rises. However, what was
`also obvious from the research was the lack of clarity of end-users on how dimensional inspection can benefit
`process control and optimisation.
`
`To provide a comparative analysis of the current market, Exhibit 7 provides a SWOT (strength, weakness,
`opportunities and threats) analysis for each dimensional inspection system.
`
`9
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 9
`
`

`

`Exhibit 7: Body-in-White Dimensional Inspection Market, SWOT Analysis
`CMM
`
`Strength
`• High market
`awareness
`• Multiple probes
`options – tactile &
`optical
`• Large measurement
`volume & high
`accuracy
`• Absolute
`measurement
`
`Weakness
`• Inflexible(fixed
`location), heavy
`ground works
`required
`• Need for climate
`controlled room
`• Small probe standoff
`(liable to collisions)
`• Slow measurement
`and programming
`
`Opportunities
`• Newfound
`opportunity
`emerging across
`shop-floor inspection
`• Flexibility to use
`multiple types of
`probes; such as
`optical probes,
`enabling faster
`measurement
`
`Threat
`• The move towards
`in-line inspection
`and 100%
`inspection
`• Strong competition
`from other faster
`and more
`affordable
`technologies
`
`White Light
`
`Strength
`• Fast
`measurement
`and data capture
`• Large
`measurement
`volume
`• Absolute
`measurement
`
`Weakness
`• Unsuitable for certain
`surface finishes
`• Need to manually add
`and remove markers
`and adapters
`• Time taken for
`analysis and feature
`extraction
`• Large data volume for
`storage and
`processing
`
`Opportunities
`• Evolving concepts
`of Industry 4.0,
`including “Big Data”
`driving adoption of
`surface inspection
`
`Threat
`• Availability of
`strong and
`affordable
`alternative in-line
`inspection
`solutions
`• The move towards
`in-line metrology in
`automotive
`
`Tracked Optical Sensor
`
`Strength
`• Fast
`measurement
`and specific data
`capture
`• Full surface
`information
`• Absolute
`measurement
`
`Weakness
`• Need for line of sight
`• Concerns on
`measurement
`reliability
`• Limitations on full
`feature inspection,
`especially for hard to
`reach features
`• Requirement for
`detailed robot path
`programming
`
`Opportunities
`• Shift towards
`non-contact
`inspection in
`automotive
`
`Threat
`• Need for
`high-accuracy
`• Risk of part
`damage due to
`sensor collision
`
`10
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 10
`
`

`

`FMS
`
`Strength
`• Fast data capture
`and fast feature
`measurement
`• Supports 100%
`inspection
`• Relatively
`inexpensive
`• Easily integrated into
`the production line
`
`Weakness
`• Low accuracy from
`robot
`• Go/no-go
`information only
`• Setup tedious
`• No absolute
`measurement
`
`Opportunities
`• The continued move
`towards 100%
`in-line metrology in
`automotive
`
`Threat
`• The move toward
`absolute
`measurements to
`aid process control
`and optimization
`• Need for higher
`accuracy
`measurements
`
`Laser Radar
`
`Strength
`• Large measurement
`range and volume
`• Fast & high accuracy
`feature measurement
`• Features and surface
`measurements
`without surface
`preparation
`• Absolute
`measurement
`• Ideal for In-line and
`shop-floor
`measurements
`
`Weakness
`• Line of sight
`required
`• Accuracy drops for
`longer ranges
`• Relatively slow
`detailed scanning
`of large surfaces
`
`Opportunities
`• The move towards
`in-line metrology in
`automotive
`• Increasing demand
`for surface inspection
`• Need for process
`control and
`optimization.
`
`Threat
`• Customer
`acceptance of
`absolute, in-line
`measurement
`philosophy
`• Primarily supplied by
`one vendor in the
`market
`
`11
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 11
`
`

`

`Benchmarking BIW Inspection
`To further evaluate the Quality 4.0 readiness of the current BIW dimensional inspection market, Frost & Sullivan
`assessed how each dimensional inspection system weighs in relation to the six building blocks of the Q4.0 Index
`detailed earlier. Ratings and scores are shown in Exhibit 8. The score for each attribute of every product is based
`on Frost & Sullivan research and interviews with key industry stakeholders. The benchmarking results indicate
`that many of the popular systems today lack sufficient capability from a Quality 4.0 standpoint. Interestingly,
`tracked optical sensors and Laser Radar were found to be the two most promising systems with strong Quality
`4.0 attributes. In particular, the Laser Radar system was identified as the best available system in the marketplace
`for automotive BIW customers to realise Quality 4.0 in their production lines.
`
`Exhibit 8: BIW Dimensional Inspection Market: Q4.0 Product Benchmark
`
`Q4.0 Index
`
`CMM
`
`White Light
`
`Laser Radar
`
`FMS
`
`Tracked
`Optical Sensor
`Elements Weight Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score
`In-line
`Inspection
`100%
`Inspection
`Digital
`Infrastructure
`Absolute
`Measurement
`Process
`Control
`
`0.15
`
`0.13
`
`0.17
`
`0.15
`
`0.20
`
`4
`
`2
`
`8
`
`9
`
`3
`
`0.60
`
`0.26
`
`1.36
`
`1.35
`
`0.60
`
`2
`
`3
`
`8
`
`8
`
`5
`
`0.30
`
`0.39
`
`1.36
`
`1.20
`
`1.00
`
`8
`
`6
`
`8
`
`8
`
`7
`
`1.20
`
`0.78
`
`1.36
`
`1.20
`
`1.40
`
`8
`
`7
`
`8
`
`8
`
`8
`
`1.28
`
`0.91
`
`1.36
`
`1.20
`
`1.60
`
`9
`
`9
`
`4
`
`3
`
`3
`
`1.35
`
`1.17
`
`0.68
`
`0.45
`
`0.60
`
`Benchmarking DI market
`
`Pre-series
`Alignment
`
`Total
`
`0.20
`
`1.00
`
`3
`
`0.60
`
`4.8
`
`5
`
`1.00
`
`5.3
`
`5
`
`1.00
`
`6.9
`
`8
`
`1.60
`
`7.9
`
`1
`
`0.20
`
`4.5
`
`Note: Total has been rounded.
`
`Laser Radar – A best in class in-line inspection system
`Laser Radar is a fully automated, versatile system that brings non-contact measurement
`to the production line. It is a novel approach that includes direct surface and feature
`measurement with the capacity to perform 100% inspection checks.
`The Laser Radar system is surface independent, i.e., it can inspect most surfaces and is not
`sensitive to lighting or temperature. The latter is a big advantage of Laser Radar, especially
`for measurements in the production line. The system can operate without targets and make
`inspections with a very high level of accuracy. The system also scores well in its ability to
`be used in Pre-series production. Compared to other systems, Laser Radar can be applied
`in Pre-series without the need for time consuming fine-tuning of scan paths, adjustment of
`acquisition parameters or lengthy off-line CMM correlations.
`
`12
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 12
`
`

`

`CONCLUSION
`
`Our research demonstrates that the conventional methods of performing dimensional inspection are shifting with
`changing perceptions of quality. With the backdrop of Industry 4.0, the idea of quality is witnessing profound
`transformation, and quality inspection is evolving into more than a mere function of pass or fail. In this paper, we
`envisioned the paradigm of Quality 4.0 and its index to illustrate how quality as a function can be improved and
`enable automotive manufacturers to achieve better process control.
`
`In automotive, Industry 4.0 is leading to a massive revamp of all manufacturing functions, starting from design
`and engineering to production and the aftermarket. But in stark contrast, the function of quality and the method
`of dimensional inspection are still largely traditional. This is especially pronounced in the BIW phase that has
`abundant customer pain points. The conclusion is that there are still many opportunities for improvements in BIW
`dimensional inspection. This is essential for the industry, especially in automotive body-in-white, where quality is
`still largely pursued via legacy inspection systems like CMM.
`
`Furthermore, in the paper, we detailed a Quality 4.0 index that is intended to break down the vision into tangible
`attributes. Using the index, we benchmarked the different BIW inspection systems and identified their capability
`to facilitate Quality 4.0. Laser Radar proved to be the most promising system that can enable BIW inspections
`to meet the criterions of Quality 4.0. From our research, we identify Laser Radar to be the best-in-class in-line
`inspection tool for automotive BIW. This is based on our interpretation of what we see in the markets today
`supported further by the interviews with customers and dimensional metrology vendors.
`
`On the other hand, in our end-user discussions, we saw that there was a lack of clarity on what quality can
`help achieve, especially on the front of process control. This is one of the objectives of this paper—to enhance
`customer awareness of the subject. To summarise, automotive BIW is certain to shift in the direction of Quality
`4.0. This transition will involve dimensional inspection becoming a fully automated, non-contact, absolute
`measurement that is integrated in the production line.
`
`13
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 13
`
`

`

`APPENDIX
`
`Below are definitions of some of the major Dimensional Inspection systems used in Automotive BIW.
`Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM)
`Traditional CMMs of horizontal arm, bridge, or gantry type with tactile or laser scanning probes to carry
`out measurement.
`White Light Systems
`Operating on the basis of white light interferometry, a white light scanner creates a full surface scan of the
`object. Overlapping and aligned individual images and measurements allow complete coverage of an object
`in absolute coordinates.
`Tracked optical sensor on robot
`Tracked optical sensors enabled by non-contact and non-destructive technology can digitally capture
`the surface of physical objects. Small-area laser or optical-based sensors tracked by a large-volume
`measurement system give point cloud data in absolute coordinates.
`Laser Radar
`Laser Radar is an emerging alternative to traditional CMMs. The system uses a focused laser beam to
`perform accurate, contactless, and absolute measurements on almost any surface, including highly reflective
`bare body panels as well as shiny painted surfaces.
`Flexible Measurement System
`An FMS consists of laser line sensors that are installed in a fixed position around the measurement object or
`at the end of a robot. The laser line is projected on a feature and the sensor records the “image” of this line.
`Outcomes of this method lead to relative measurements due to reliance on robot repeatability.
`
`REFERENCE
`1. Germany Trade & Invest (GTAI), Industrie 4.0 - German Market Report & Outlook, p4
`2. Roland Berger, ‘Automotive metal components for car bodies and chassis’, p.30
`3. Representation based on Filla, P., Klingebiel, K., Risk profiles for the Pre-series logistics in automotive ramp-up processes, p. 45
`
`14
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 14
`
`

`

`DISCLAIMER
`
`The white paper was prepared by Frost & Sullivan. Frost & Sullivan does not make any representations or
`warranties to any third party with respect to the information contained in this report. While reasonable steps
`have been taken to ensure that the information in this report is correct, Frost & Sullivan does not give any
`warranty or make any representation as to its accuracy and does not accept any liability for any errors or
`omissions. The study should not be used or relied upon by anyone without independent investigation and
`analysis and Frost & Sullivan will not assume any liability for any such use or reliance by third parties. Any
`trademarks and other service marks contained in this document are the property of respective owners and may
`not be used without their prior written permission.
`
`15
`
`Quality 4.0: A Paradigm Shift of In-line Inspection in Body-in-White
`
`All rights reserved © 2019 Frost & Sullivan
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 15
`
`

`

`Schedule a meeting with our global team to experience our
`thought leadership and to integrate your ideas, opportunities and
`challenges into the discussion.
`
`Visit our Industrial web page.
`
`Attend one of our Growth Innovation & Leadership (GIL) events
`to unearth hidden growth opportunities.
`
`Interested in learning more about the topics covered in this white
`paper? Call us at 877.GoFrost and reference the paper you’re
`interested in. We’ll have an analyst get in touch with you.
`
`Frost & Sullivan, the Growth Partnership Company, works in collaboration with clients to leverage visionary
`innovation that addresses the global challenges and related growth opportunities that will make or break today’s
`market participants. For more than 50 years, we have been developing growth strategies for the Global 1000,
`emerging businesses, the public sector and the investment community. Is your organization prepared for the next
`profound wave of industry convergence, disruptive technologies, increasing competitive intensity, Mega Trends,
`breakthrough best practices, changing customer dynamics and emerging economies?
`
`For information regarding permission, write:
`Frost & Sullivan
`3211 Scott Blvd
`Santa Clara CA, 95054
`
`Silicon Valley
`3211 Scott Blvd
`Santa Clara, CA 95054
`Tel +1 650.475.4500
`Fax +1 650.475.1571
`
`San Antonio
`7550 West Interstate 10, Suite 400,
`San Antonio, Texas 78229-5616
`Tel +1 210.348.1000
`Fax +1 210.348.1003
`
`London
`Floor 3 - Building 5,
`Chiswick Business Park
`566 Chiswick High Road,
`London W4 5YF
`Tel +44 (0)20 8996 8500
`Fax +44 (0)20 8994 1389
`
`877.GoFrost • myfrost@frost.com
`http://www.frost.com
`
`NE X T STEPS
`
`MacNeil Exhibit 2182
`Yita v. MacNeil IP, IPR2020-01139, Page 16
`
`