Manufacturing
Manufacturing — Group
Cross-site operations · year-to-month · Jun 2026
This week, group yield held at 95.7% (target 96%). The biggest drag is Plant-3-Chengdu at 93.4%1, -3.4pp below best-in-class Plant-5-Qingdao. Plant-3-Chengdu board warp is 4.3mm (spec <4mm)2, correlating with the Supplier-2 recycled liner. Monthly yield loss group-wide: RMB 24.3M.
- Yield loss narrowed RMB 0.5M to RMB 24.3M/mo
- P1Launch yield task-force at Plant-3-Chengdu targeting +3.4pp recoveryOpenOwner:Due:Impact:Why:Plant-3-Chengdu yield93.4%Yield lossRMB 5.7M/mo
- P1Contain Supplier-2 recycled-liner moisture impact on board warp at Plant-3-ChengduOpenOwner:Due:Impact:Why:Plant-3-Chengdu board warp4.3mmDriverSupplier-2 recycled-liner moisture
- P2Cascade Plant-5-Qingdao best-practice control protocol to lagging sitesOpenOwner:Due:Impact:Why:Inter-site yield gap+3.4pp
- P3Energy benchmarking review for high kWh/KSqM sitesOpenOwner:Due:Impact:Why:Group yield95.7%
Week-over-Week Movement
4 improved2 worsened· Jun 2026 vs May 2026Group yield+0.0pp
95.7%
from 95.6% last week
A-rate-0.2pp
98.2%
from 98.4% last week
Operating rate+0.1pp
89.0%
from 88.8% last week
kWh / ton-1
41
from 42 last week
Board warp (mm)+0.0
3.5
from 3.5 last week
Yield loss (RMB M/mo)-0.5
24.3
from 24.8 last week
Biggest Drivers
- Plant-4-Tianjin yield -0.7pp to 96.0%
- Plant-3-Chengdu yield -0.2pp to 93.4%
- Plant-5-Qingdao yield +0.8pp to 96.8%
Group Yield
95.7%
Target 96%-0.3pp
Group A-Rate
98.2%
Target 98%0.2pp
Operating Rate
89.0%
Target 88%1.0pp
kWh / KSqM
41
Baseline 42-1
Site yield tiles
Actual vs 96% target · year-to-month trend · click to drillKPI:
Cross-site KPI benchmark — Yield %
Select a KPI — monthly (year-to-month), one line per site
Group yield-loss waterfall
Decomposition of the gap from 100% theoretical yield
Board-quality dashboard — cross-plant
Board-quality spec compliance · worst-first (warp rising at Plant-3-Chengdu tracks the Supplier-2 recycled-liner switch)
| Site | Board warp mm (<4) | Moisture ppm (<9.5) | Print defects PPM (<250) | Breaches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chengdu | 4.3 | 8.6 | 201 | 2 |
| Tianjin | 3.6 | 8.2 | 171 | 1 |
| Suzhou | 3.2 | 8.8 | 129 | 1 |
| Dongguan | 3.1 | 9.0 | 215 | 1 |
| Qingdao | 3.2 | 8.5 | 180 | 0 |
Site Ranking
Worst-first — full metrics; click a site to drill into workshops
| Rank | Site | Status | Yield% | A-Rate% | kWh/KSqM | Operating% | BOM% | Chgvr | SC Status | Yield loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/5 | Plant-3-Chengdu | MISS | 93.4% | 98.1% | 45 | 88.8% | 89.9% | 31 · 13% | RISK | RMB 5.7M |
| 2/5 | Plant-2-Suzhou | OK | 96.0% | 98.1% | 42 | 87.8% | 93.9% | 24 · 8% | OK | RMB 6.1M |
| 3/5 | Plant-4-Tianjin | OK | 96.0% | 98.3% | 40 | 88.3% | 93.2% | 28 · 7% | OK | RMB 4.0M |
| 4/5 | Plant-1-Dongguan | OK | 96.2% | 98.2% | 40 | 89.4% | 94.0% | 35 · 6% | OK | RMB 6.0M |
| 5/5 | Plant-5-Qingdao | BEST | 96.8% | 98.1% | 41 | 90.5% | 94.1% | 23 · 4% | OK | RMB 2.6M |