Corporate666: You’re right, there are many aspects to picking and placing. Rather than a wall of text, we thought our audience would appreciate a video. Our software is a working prototype that needs a new UI, but it seems that holding it back has been hurting us, so we will be making a video of it for an upcoming KS update. Our mechanical system is a stepper motor/belt drive cartesian system as one would expect, and we can achieve a 50-30 micron repeatability. We feel like we have given ample detail on commonly asked questions, but if you have further questions we would be more than happy to answer them.
I don't see how you can feel you have given ample detail. You are asking people to give you $4k of their money and all you provided was a few minutes of video. At the time I made my post, you had added some detail in the comments (I see you have since added more), but you are using all proprietary parts and designs with nothing open sourced or off-the-shelf assemblies. You aren't even using standard G-code.
That makes device an *incredibly* risky proposition. A backer is not only gambling on your ability to develop the software with the funds collected, but also to produce the units (assuming you're truthful that the hardware is 100% developed), and then also to exist as an ongoing concern as a business for spare parts and feeders and software updates. If any of that fails to happen, the unit is a paperweight.
I also think your numbers are unworkable. We manufacture commercial products using off-the-shelf components that are all individually UL/CE certified and fall under a rapid-approval program that UL/ETL have adopted for the specific market we're in. It's $10k per product for approval. Your product would require substantially more testing at substantially more cost, and add in the cost of FCC testing? Approvals alone would eat up half of your $100k budget at least. And the cost of injection molds for your feeders are going to eat up substantially more of your total $100k budget.
Then you mention in the KS campaign your 30 micron placement repeatable accuracy. I can see just from the picture of your board placed with the device that you're nowhere near that. How are you measuring this claim? Here you say 30-50 microns. Are you guaranteeing that a customer using this device will be able to place parts on a board with sub 50 micron repeatability, and if the unit cannot do that, it would be considered a defect that would be fixed at no cost under warranty?
You give no detail on your feeders, other than claiming they are three times faster to setup than any other desktop system. Feeders are the most difficult part of picking and placing, and this is a bold claim. I would expect that whatever breakthrough you have developed would be something you would want to brag about as it would be the major selling point to most potential buyers experienced with PnP machines. I don't see any detail on your feeders at all. I am curious what makes them so quick to set up? How are they actuated? What life cycle testing have you done on them? Are they rebuildable? What is the cycle error rate? The tape is wobbly in the KS page.. how come? Are they separate units for paper and plastic tape?
And the same with the software. You claim it is 6 times faster than other systems, but there is zero detail on it anywhere in the video. You say it just needs a new UI, but if you have function without a pretty face on it, why not explain what function is possesses that allows it to be 6 times faster than the alternatives?
I realize it sucks when someone craps on your product - but I would very much like to see a low budget PnP machine succeed. However, in order to be successful, I think such a machine must:
1) Use open source software
and/or
2) Support G-code
3) Use as many off-the-shelf parts as possible, especially on the electronics side (things like motor drivers, vision)
4) And the holy grail of PnP is feeders. That is the problem that needs solved. The best PnP design would use an open-source feeder that was simple, reliable, used as many off-the-shelf parts as possible, and whatever parts were custom would probably consist of a 2D machined aluminum plate so that there were no up-front tooling costs required and it would use off-the-shelf bearings, wheels, pulleys and such to operate.
I think the business opportunity is being the first people to solve the feeder issue and put together the above parts together in a plug-and-play system that works out of the box and has support from a US company and good software with a good interface and good availability of parts.
My .02.