$1000 pick place

[fcb]

Before I spend more time working on this side project (just finished a proof-of-concept) I thought I'd gauge reaction/interest.

Base spec for "Magnum":
Eurocard capable (160x100) placement area, facility to build bigger boards in two-halves.
1500+CPH (real-world)
36 location loose tray pick-up (interchangeable)
Integrated pump
Accuracy: 0603 at least, likely much better.
Vision system
Single USB connection to host computer
24V external supply (brick in cord type).
US $1000-1200 / £650+VAT

The software would be fairly comprehensive as it belongs to a more advanced $5K machine ("New York") I've been developing for some-time (which is based loosely on a machine I built for our own in-house assembly).

[mikeselectricstuff]

Tape feeders ? Without them it's a waste of time.
Eurocard is a bit small - would it really be much more expensive to make it bigger?

[EEVblog]

Eurocard capable (160x100) placement area, facility to build bigger boards in two-halves.

I really don't see the practical point unless it can do larger panels, with maybe a dozen feeders as a minimum.

[fcb]

This project is a developmental offshoot from a bigger/faster machine.

Feeders: I solved the conundrum of low cost smart feeders on the "NEW YORK" machine, but without resorting to drag feeders it would be difficult to put them on the baby machine and keep the cost down - however it would be simple enough to lay-strips down.

Board size: Yes, it can be increased a bit and the pick-up area is not rectangular. But much bigger and it starts getting awkward with the technology, so the idea is not to be an all-things-to-all-men type machine.

My main reason for posting is to see if there is any interest in a really low cost/small machine. I'm not convinced that there is a requirement, but I don't want to shelve the tech if it's useful.

[digsys]

I've been looking at manual/assist P+P for ages, and don't have any need for reel feeders.
I like the idea of cut tape feeder, but it wouldn't bother me if it wasn't included. I have HUGE stock variety, so loose bins is exactly
what I need. I'm assuming the theory is - optics > LCD screen, manual guided picker, vacuum pick-up, rotate knob etc
Questions- how would you handle flip/rotate the part? Could it auto-learn a part in future? Will it do the flux application as well.
I've been mulling over designing these type of "heads" for a while, and I'd definitely be interested to see what your plan is.

[fcb]

The loose bin thing relies on not over filling each tray - so long as the vision system can find a enough parts the right way up (for resistors) and physically separate then it can pick them. It can be very quick to setup, but is a compromise if you have large qty of passives on a board.

It's also not a manual or semi-auto machine - it's fully automatic. As for auto-learn, it relies on prepared component definitions - but that's pretty quick to write and we plan on having an extensive library of these to download.

[digsys]

I'm fine with full auto - so IF there's a part it can't place, for eg, it has to be done by hand? Did you ever consider being able to
"take control" for tricky parts? Just a question.
Do you have a pic of how a tray with loose parts would look? Quite interested.

[sleemanj]

My feeling is that it's too pricey for a hobbiest's toy (but then again, people buy 3d printers for about the same, maybe I'm just too much of a tight-ass, or underpaid, or both).

But without feeders it is too, what's the word, underspec'd for a small production tool.

You'll be aware I expect of the 3600 USD ones from China which have cropped up in the last few months - see http://dangerousprototypes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=4903 - a number of purchasers in that thread alone, so there is a market there, you should look into how much it would increase the cost to add feeders.

[marshallh]

$1k? Sign me up. Sick of hand placing crap tons of 0402's

[benemorius]

I'd be quite interested at that price for doing small production runs as a quasi-hobbyist, but not without tape feeders.

Let us see some pictures of your proof of concept and your $5k machine.

[mikeselectricstuff]

I think vision of loose parts in a tray is a potentially viable way to save the cost of feeders if it works well - combined with the ability to automatically shake the tray as necessary. However you still need the ability to use tape  feeders (at extra cost) for stuff like decoupling caps that are used in large quantities.

Using the head to pull the tape is a reasonable approach to save cost, but you still need a way to pull the cover tape - the cheap Chinese one partly solves this using a single motor across all feeders. I think the  main hing that machine has got wrong (apart from no vision) is you can't change the mix of tape widths. Having adjustable lane widths wouldn't have been too hard to do.

The thing many people don't understand about pick/place until they've used one is that it needs to be quicker to set up and run than to place manually, so for a single board, the best P&P in the world is still going to be slower than manual. And as you go up in quantity, there always comes a point where it's cheaper to use a subcontractor.
So the market for a low-end machine starting off in a niche of low-to-medium build qtys and people who need fast turnround.
Any further limitation in machine capability makes that niche smaller and smaller.

I have no doubt that there are some opportunities, especially by exploiting cheap processing to do vision, but nobody's going to make a fortune out of it.

I think manual placement aids or "semi-automatic" approaches are a total dead end - their benefit just can't justify the cost of making something that's a good enough improvement over hand placement


 

[fcb]

My feeling is that it's too pricey for a hobbiest's toy (but then again, people buy 3d printers for about the same, maybe I'm just too much of a tight-ass, or underpaid, or both).

But without feeders it is too, what's the word, underspec'd for a small production tool.

You'll be aware I expect of the 3600 USD ones from China which have cropped up in the last few months - see http://dangerousprototypes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=4903 - a number of purchasers in that thread alone, so there is a market there, you should look into how much it would increase the cost to add feeders.

I don't think I would call it a toy, but certainly not something that would be used in-anger for runs of more than say 25 boards.

Feeders. Ahhh, the Achilles Heel of any PnP machine.

Yes, i'm aware of the TM220A/240A units, the fundemental problem with them is the lack of accuracy (no vision). If they solved that then I'd be buying them myself.  I considered modifying one, but at that point your paying a lot of $ for a bunch of rail, a plate and some motors.

I'd be quite interested at that price for doing small production runs as a quasi-hobbyist, but not without tape feeders.

Let us see some pictures of your proof of concept and your $5k machine.

Again, the feeders...

The proof-of-concept is just that, by showing it I just end-up giving my ideas away.  There's no point in showing the $5k machine until it's ready to be sold, I'm not planning on Kickstarting/IGG/pre-selling these. And the smart-feeders are subject to patent application.

I guess I should just duplicate the TM220A, add vision, USB and decent software.

[mikeselectricstuff]

If you really have a viable pick & place at $5000 I'd think it would make more sense to focus on that one, at least initially,  as you should be able  to make much more money on that than an ultra cheap option.

 
 

[Selectech]

I'm interested, but might actually be a candidate for the more fully featured unit.

Most of what I've seen in the low cost end { < 5K } has been lacking things so I've hung on to my $.

I continue to manual place, with CNC paste dispensing, and use some assembly houses for larger qty runs. Need to put down 20K to 50K+ parts per year on about 15 to 20 different assemblies. Mosty 0603 to 1206, with lots of SOT-23. Some QFN & fine pitch stuff. Need about 300 x 300mm working area to cover off singles and small panels. Fairly small # of component types per board { < 30 }, but a panel could well be 700 to 1000 items to place.  Generally building 10 to 50 of each item at a time, 3 to 6 types per week. Raw speed not such a big deal as ease of setup, flexibility and accuracy.

[nctnico]

IMHO it would be nice if the P&P machine could also apply paste. It shouldn't be hard to translate the paste mask into data to 'drive' a syringe.

[mikeselectricstuff]

IMHO it would be nice if the P&P machine could also apply paste. It shouldn't be hard to translate the paste mask into data to 'drive' a syringe.

That would be a significant selling point, providing more of an all-in-1 solution. as long as it worked well. You may need to go to an auger based system to get sufficient consistency though.
An issue is additional mass, but it doesn't have to move anywhere near as fast as for placing, as you don't need to keep returning to teh feeder area.  Another approach may be some sort of exchangeable head, where you swap the weight of the rotate/lift head with  a dispense + lift head - the lift range doesn't need to be anywhere near as much, and could probably even be a simple 2 position up/down.

[Eclipze]

Thought I'd add my experience on this topic, as there seems to be a lot of people with opinions but not exposure to actually using one of these machines.

I have a TM240A.  My purpose for it is for small board builds.  i.e. 20 to 200.  If were to get more, I'd get them done by a contractor.  But the important aspect is for getting that first run of boards done for field testing and prototypes.  As well as for niche part runs, where the client only wants a small quantity.

PLACEMENT ACCURACY
So far with 0603 and SOT323 I'm not having any issues.  Quite reliable.  I do need to use a better method to load the boards via drilled hole location, as routed board edge just isn't a good alignment reference.  I doubt I'II ever use it for placing larger chip parts, although it would be good to have a manual mode where I could pick, jog/rotate and place by eye.  Usually I go over the board with my bend hook (thin rod with 90 degree bend at the tip) to push/pull a few parts into better alignment.  I can see in the future placing some chips knowing that they won't be perfectly placed, needing a little help, but still quicker than placing manually.   Going to use it for a board design with 0402 soon.

SOLDER PASTE
I stencil my boards.  Use a syringe dispenser only for a single prototype.  Unframed prototype stencils are so cheap and make that much of a difference to reflow yield, I don't understand why people would do otherwise.  If there was an option for an automated dispenser, I wouldn't get it even if it was cheap, but you'd need a good/expensive auger type to get consistency anyway.  Start stenciling and you won't go back.

PLACEMENT SPEED
I don't run at maximum speed.  I'd need to build a sturdier table, as it can move very quick and shakes the table around.  I was surprised to not notice much of a difference in placement accuracy going maximum speed over what I usually run it at.  I did a time run on a board and could save near 25% of the time.  But I find between stenciling, reflowing and doing other work, the speed is fine anyway.  Where i would do 6..8 boards a day, placing with a vacuum pen, I can run through 24 boards in ~3 hours with the pick and place (including reflow).  As for the time for it to index the tape with the head... might be the cheap approach, but it's plenty fast and simplifies the mechanics (one less thing that can break).  It's also quite good at getting the tape indexed/aligned.

DUAL HEAD
Need to set the story straight here, as the comments I've read in a few threads here haven't quite understood the need.  There are two heads, which provides the option to load two different nozzle sizes.  There are 4 different size nozzles.  I often run two different nozzles, but for one board that has a large array of LEDs, I load both with the same size for dual component pickup speed.  Otherwise, I target the sizes I need to load all the chip parts.  Big stuff I'II load by vacuum pen anyway.  But there is some cross over where two different sizes can load the same parts.  For example, the small head can be used to pickup 0805 through to a SOT89, but if really needed, you might be able to get away with picking up a larger part if you slow the machine speed down.  So in general, you need at least two heads for a practical board load, without having an automated nozzle changer.  But you can also benefit from using both, where possible, to do dual component pickups.

FIXED TAPE ROWS
You are limited on lanes, which is why I went for the TM240A that has more.  Bigger placement area than I need, but more lanes.  4x10mm, 2x12mm and a heap of 8mm.  So far, hasn't been an issue.  I commonise on chip parts as much as possible anyway.  Larger boards with more parts are usually loaded double sided as well, which helps to minimise on the number of lanes needed.  As for needing more wide lanes... the larger the part the more I'II hand place those anyway.  It's the quantity of passives and small chip stuff that's the time saver having machine placed. 

PICK AND PLACE FILE
I use the Excel macro (slightly modified) to convert the Altium placement data to the Neoden format.  It's pretty straight forward.  I shuffle reel positions around as needed... easy done in Excel.  To optimise, I'II manually interleave the rows to get dual pickup running etc...  It's not uber automated and smart, but it's in Excel and pretty straight forward to get what you want.  You will need to have a little history file, so you know from experience that placing 1206 resistors is better with a 0.15, -0.2 offset and that an SMA footprint diode needs a 180 rotation to face the right way (or change your footprint to match).  Or if you are placing bottom layer, you need to flip the X coordinates.


THE BAD...
- Rotation speed is too fast.  I suspect some part accuracy is lost from this.  This is usually the first issue I see when the head is slightly undersized.  Sometimes I just have to clean the pickup head. 
- Would be good to have adjustable control on the blow back and head dwell. 
- Would be nice if the vacuum pumps only operated when the machine was running a file.
- I'm not that impressed with the front tray loading.  I need to change how parts are positioned to make better use of that for more accurate pickup.
- There are few idiosyncrasies with the firmware.  Particularly with file format.  For example, never try to pickup with both heads on the same tape, if it's indexed by 8mm.  e.g. PLCC LEDs.  Can only do this with 4mm index parts, otherwise the firmware locks up and needs to be power cycled.  You have to use two tapes to do this.  This is the typical software you'd see from China.  I avoid using the interface to make changes to the placement file... easier to use the PC.
- Setting up a placement file is a bit of overhead, but at least it's flexible and logical.

THE GOOD...
It actually works for real!  Useful, small footprint, mechanically simple and hopefully reliable.


OVERALL
Wasted a lot of time looking for a second hand machine.  Often to find it's accuracy was no longer up to speed after 10 years of work, old software and needed maintenance.  Possibly not as many options in Australia for second hand machines than overseas.  Big footprint and heavy too.  The cost of feeders... OMG.  Don't look at new machine prices, as you can spend more on feeders than the machine.  I really don't think it's feasible to get a mainsteam pick and place machine unless you are planning to run enough production work through it. 

Getting this Neoden machine was an option where it was a small footprint, doesn't need a compressor run, didn't take long to learn and get running and not likely to need much in the way of maintenance.  It's a good fit for small batch runs.


Here is a video of the first board I programmed it to load.

Was having trouble getting the PLCC LEDs to load reliably.  Usually they load, but of course the video I took had to mess two of them up.  Likely an example where using a bigger head size would be better, but I'II get away with the smaller one just for efficiency.

I also use an XReflow306 convection reflow oven.  Not exactly a budget machine, but good for batch runs.  Posted a picture of this setup on my Facebook, Oct 28th.  https://www.facebook.com/EcliptechInnovations   There is also a picture Aug 21st of a surface mount component tape holder I use... which is great for placing a lot of small parts with a vacuum pen off tape strips.

[Psi]

I would pay up to NZ$2K for something that actually worked reliably and could place down to 0603 on PCBs 20 x 20cm. (ideally a little bigger in one direction)

-Speed isn't much of an issue for a hobbyist as long as its not crazy slow.
-Machine vision is definitely required as is parts rotation.
-Inspection camera for alignment (fiducials)
-Open source, or at least open protocol is a big plus
-The most important part of all, as mike says, is the feeding system. It needs to take all width reels without custom feeders for each. It also needs to take loose parts in trays or loose tape. It's quite common for a hobbist to be using parts that are just too expensive to buy in whole reel quantities.
- Paste dispensing would definitely be awesome, as already said.

For a hobbyist to be interested it needs to be relatively simple parts/hardware wise so repairs/maintenance/mods are possible. Keep the really custom parts which have to be made/ordered specially to a minimum.

[GeoffS]

After following a few links to the TM240, I came across this open source,  pick and place machine. http://vbesmens.de/en/pick-and-place.html
Quite advanced for a one person, DIY project.

[fcb]

It's still an ongoing project for me, but I can't sink huge amounts of time into it unless I make it a commercially viable machine ($5K at least).

I did toy with the idea of open-sourcing it, but I still don't get the whole 'give it away for free thing' yet.

I've looked at the TM220A and the TM240A, and there is a part of me that says "if you can't beat 'em join 'em".

[Eclipze]

Having one at a $2k price point with vision, tape feeders and options similar to a $15k..30k commercial machine is quite unrealistic.  I don't wish to offend anyone with such a comment, but it doesn't take long to exceed that in parts cost for a serious machine.   But if you do go down that route and spend all the time and money to build one that is fast and accurate, you will still need a descent reflow oven and stencil printer.  Which aren't cheap.  Otherwise, you have a neat PnP bottlenecked by a toaster oven and messy stenciling station.

I started this DIY build back in 2006. 
http://www.cnczone.com/forums/rc_robotics_autonomous_robots/97551-eclipzes_smd_picknplace_build.html
That thread had.... Replies: 724   Views: 125,228  before it was closed.  WOW

Went through two builds myself.  It's a lot of work, but it came down to software being the limiting factor.  I was going from a serious hobby through to a business at the time.  The time investment became impractical, unless I planned to commercially build that PnP as a product.  There is a point where having a serious machine with all the vision assist and tape feeding relates to using it for a reasonable volume of boards.  You are then in a grey area, where all that time spent on the PnP is far more than just hand populating with descent vacuum pen off tape in batches.  Even if you were only doing 10 or 20 boards and had a pick and place machine, it's likely faster to hand build them anyway.

I found that grey area lasted 1-2 years, where having a home built/cheap hobby PnP would have been really nice.  On the flip side... now days, any volume of board loading, I have to get done externally.  I just don't have anywhere near the time to handle that as well as everything else.  But... the cost of the TM240A to help build some small batches is rather convenient, quick and affordable at this end of business, even for the cost.  Means I can test the market with a small batch before committing to a real production run.  Or if really needed, I'm sure I could loose 3-4 days just board loading to do a small production run.  I may not last that long before getting too grumpy and snapping though

If you want to build a pick and place cheaply, consider the end goal.  It's a lot of fun, but for business use, it's a time sink.  Ideally, you'd snap up a cheap 2nd hand machine in good working order, with all the peripheral feeders and parts.  Otherwise, an off-the-shelf no-vision option might be the middle ground.  For now, my expectation is to see a machine with vision, nozzle changer and descent software at the $5k mark in a few years.  But not with feeder cassettes.

[Psi]

Having one at a $2k price point with vision, tape feeders and options similar to a $15k..30k commercial machine is quite unrealistic

The TM220A/TM240A is pretty close to what a hobbiest wants, it just needs vision and perhaps some extra feeding options. Maybe a little smaller in size to save costs, 400x360 pcb/panel is pretty big.

There cant be $5000 worth of materials in that thing. Should be quite doable to get it's cost down to 2K

[nctnico]

Projects like these need a lot of software. Most of the cost is time spend by programming not the materials.

[fcb]

Projects like these need a lot of software. Most of the cost is time spend by programming not the materials.

Actually, the software side isn't the biggest headache and probably not the most time consuming bit in making a low-cost machine.  I suspect that given a couple of days, most of us could program a TM220A style machine, it is basically driving motors to a simple list of co-ordinates.

In my experience, the two challenges are 1. vision centering of a component and 2. accurate feedback of present head position.  The vision centering is complex and people often underestimate how important a good image is.  Accuracy of present position is usually taken care-of by building a very rigid structure, which ends up weighing alot and you get into this sort of performance death spiral.

As far as the vision goes, I rolled my own over several months, rather than using available libraries.  My approach to accuracy is to use light-weight parts and a novel realtime 2D triangulation system for the head. You get speed and instant out-of-the-box calibration, from a light-weight low cost machine.

[Lizerd]

Nice idea!!.
sounds like you already have done the major parts for the 5k machine, care to show us some pictures of your software and hardware ? 

[mikeselectricstuff]

 you will still need a descent reflow oven and stencil printer.  Which aren't cheap.  Otherwise, you have a neat PnP bottlenecked by a toaster oven and messy stenciling station.

Oven and stencilling will rarely be a bottleneck, even with a moderately fast P&P unless the number of parts is low.
Reflow+cooldown time will be typically of the order of 4-6 minutes, so until your P&P time gets below maybe 8-10 mins per panel  you don't need to look at converyor oven - a second toaster oven perhaps.   
there is nothing inherently expensive in a decent stencil printer, though this is still a gap in the market - the Eurocircuits one is pretty good, but over-engineered and expensive.

[Corporate666]

Actually, the software side isn't the biggest headache and probably not the most time consuming bit in making a low-cost machine.  I suspect that given a couple of days, most of us could program a TM220A style machine, it is basically driving motors to a simple list of co-ordinates.

In my experience, the two challenges are 1. vision centering of a component and 2. accurate feedback of present head position.  The vision centering is complex and people often underestimate how important a good image is.  Accuracy of present position is usually taken care-of by building a very rigid structure, which ends up weighing alot and you get into this sort of performance death spiral.

As far as the vision goes, I rolled my own over several months, rather than using available libraries.  My approach to accuracy is to use light-weight parts and a novel realtime 2D triangulation system for the head. You get speed and instant out-of-the-box calibration, from a light-weight low cost machine.

I spent YEARS pursuing the cheap, easy, reliable PnP machine and what you said above exactly mirrors my experiences.  There really just isn't a cheap way to do it... speed means rigidity and that means expensive.  Inaccurate and PnP really don't go together, nor do slow and PnP.

The big problem with PnP's are that the commercial units have tons and tons of tricks to ramp up speed... but those tricks leads to complexity and reliability issues, and they get outdated and massively expensive to maintain.  I think there is probably a solid business to be had in retrofitting existing machines with aftermarket (simplified) controls.  You start with a really nice rigid structure with all the bells and whistles like ballscrews and optical encoders and the right sized motors... get rid of all the crap like air blow this and laser aligned that and retrofit some sort of standard NC control.  That's what we did with an old gantry style Celmacs machine.  It already had high pitch ballscrews, a rigid frame and all the parts we needed.  It had all the motors, position sensors, encoders, etc.  Just had an outdated proprietary control.  We ripped it out and retrofitted Mach3 and would write G-Code programs as PnP programs using custom M-codes for pick and place.  The feeders were controlled by the pick operation which made things easy, and it was very reliable.

Total cost was $1k for the machine, few hundred in parts, and it would do 1kPPH running at 50% speed.  Ran that sucker for years and sold it to a hobbyist when we got more serious.

Other than the above, the feeders are the crux of the issue.  But feeders are one of those things where if you have them and don't need them, they are essentially scrap metal.  If you need them and don't have them, they are invaluable.  I see them selling for $1,000/ea used, and other times I see them being scrapped out for scrap metal prices.  There must be a brand of feeder that has been the same for years and has been used on countless machines... maybe Assembleon,  Juki,  Mydata,  Siemens, Universal, Fuji... someone must have lots of machines out there that used the same feeders that are highly available, cheap, and easy to interface with.  Seems that would be a great starting place for a home brew PnP?

[fcb]

Lets take the QSP2 from Quad.  Weighs something in the region of 2 tons. Moves a part not weighing more than 1g perhaps 12 inches. Does it with a precision of perhaps 0.03mm.

Take a CNC machining centre perhaps a Hurco VM10, weighs 2.7 tons. Moves a 250kg bed around at 6M/min whilst making chips at 15HP, to an accuracy in-the-region of 0.03mm - substantially better if you slow it down.

Why do many PandP machines weigh millions of times more than the part they move, common answer is rigidity. And that's true, but at huge expense.. Big head means bigger carriage means even bigger gantry means huge motors, etc....  Story doesn't stop there though - you need lots of feeders, these are heavy and take up alot of space, so do nothing to decrease the mass of the machine.

[mikeselectricstuff]

I think the key to real progress in cheap P&P would be to replace mechanical grunt with clever sensing - if you have an accurate way of measuring head position directly at the head. then you can use closed-loop control  and greatly reduce the need for high rigidity and weight, as you'd only need to move a very lightweight lift/rotate head, and home in on the exact position when you're almost there.
There would also be scope for self-learning of the dynamics to get closer to the desired position each time by looking at previous feedback data, reducing time spent on the final fine-tune. 
I think something could be done using laser time of flight and/or interferometer type sensing.
It  actually only needs to be repeatable, as absolute accuracy/linearity could be calibrated using the fid camera and a calibration sheet.
Maybe a ring of retroreflective tape on the nozzle, just above where the part sits, and two steerable mirrors pointing at it (or steerable complete laser assemblies) - these would not need to be accurate or move fast, as they will know roughly where to look for the nozzle, and if the measurement reference point is at the centre of rotation, the rotation angle won't affect accuracy.

Feeders get a lot easier if you use the head to advance - I think this is a reasonable compromise. The TM220 almost gets this right, but fails by not having flexibility in lane widths - that can't be too hard to do better with movable partitions/guides. Feeding the waste tape under the work area is a neat way to simplify the mechanism.
And picking loose parts from trays or short strips shouldn't be too hard with decent vision.


 

[Eclipze]

Closed loop vision feedback would help quite a lot.  Rigidity is still pretty important though if going for reasonable speed.  The TM240A head is pretty small and looks light, but I still cannot run it feed speed on what I considered a very study and heavy table. 

The TM220A and TM240A have fixed feeders, however it's not a far stretch to replace that block with an alternative bank.  That mounting block takes 6 bolts.  If Neoden had an alternative, it would take much to load a different block before setting up for a run.  If anything, I believe a practical and accurate approach would be to divide up this tape block into 4 or 6 sections.  So you can unbolt and change over some of them to suit the loading job, without having to unload some of those common parts.  This could be a cheap and position accurate reliable approach.

I still think the software side is more complex than a lot of people first consider.  The movements are just a small part.  There is a database requirement for all the parts, banks, pickup positions, tape index lengths etc... Managing failed pickups, starting or re-starting at different parts, fidicuals and board rotation correction, panelisation with placement, nozzle changing, teach modes, file imports... and all the vision libraries for various parts.  It's a lot of software.  I used Mach3, but it was a rather fixed format for basic operation... and was very easy at the basic function level.

For tape feeding, indexing using the head is such a practical approach for an entry level machine.  The mechanical overhead and cost is so small.  Which also translates to lower complexity and less that can go wrong.  The tradeoff is lower placement speed, but at the practical speeds for an entry level machine, it's not a significant factor.  The friction drive on the tape spooling used on the TM220A/TM240A has worked really quite well.

[Corporate666]

I think one of the issues at play is that it's very easy to run into a level of complexity where it's just much easier and cheaper to buy something off the shelf.  That's where I ended up.  I have three Quad 4C's at the office.  Each of them is still supported by a local company who bought all the parts/tooling right from Tyco and still offers factory warranty support... but the machines are simple.  I paid around $7k for each machine and they do around 1,800 PPH and came with maybe 20 feeders each.  They are dead simple to set up and run and have up and down looking cameras and vision, handle vibratory feeders, waffle trays, etc.

Before that I had a Fuji that I got for cheap money because it just went out of support with Fuji... an IP2 or something?  The quality of the Fuji was phenomenal - but it was so complex with sensors on everything, needlessly complex robotic loader arms to shuttle waffle trays from one area to another, etc, etc.  A real pain to keep it running reliably.  Before that I had a pair of Dynapert Chipshooters... 16,000CPH.  Like gatling guns... Dynapert was a local company and I got them cheap and managed to get one running reliably... got the original invoices too - over $400k each.  But soooo complex and always needing tweaked, cleaned, lubricated, adjusted, fixed. 

The retrofitted Celmacs was great because we built it from start to finish so we knew it's innards completely and when something went wrong, we knew what to do.  But other than that, nothing really beats the Quads... super simple, and it's nice being able to call the manufacturer if I need do (haven't had to yet).  I really think it's a very hard business case to make doing low volume PnP for the small guy... just really hard to make the numbers work.  It seems like it should be so easy, but it's just really hard to really do it.  Accuracy and feeders are hard nuts to crack.

[fcb]

Yes, but can the 4C be carried upstairs by one person and shoved in the boot (trunk) of a car.

[Eclipze]

I know in the past I've had issues with having floor space for such equipment.  For many hobbists, being able to run a compressor to run a commercial pick and place machine would be a deal breaker alone without getting complaints from the neighbors hahaa...  But there can also be other limitations, such as needing 3-Phase or high current wiring.  Even for my reflow oven, I had to have a 32amp circuit all the way from the meter box and 25A socket and plug installed/fitted to run it.  Another possible trap for people would be to get a pick and place, then realise just how much fumes they'll get from reflowing the boards.  If you can't reflow the volume of boards, there isn't much need for a pick and place.  I used to have a ducted fan setup to exhaust the fumes outside, but still had the roller door up to keep the workshop clear enough to occupy.  Have a filtration setup now, so at least the neighbors don't get suspicious and wonder what I'm cooking back there hahaa...

[Corporate666]

Yes, but can the 4C be carried upstairs by one person and shoved in the boot (trunk) of a car.

Yes, his name is Mr. Hulk


No, but... how often do you need to do that?  I realize a hobbyist might want to put a PnP in his attic but if someone is doing such low volume that they want to put their PnP in the boot of their car and carry it up stairs, why not just put the boards together by hand and/or outsource the boards?  I think that the rigidity required for sufficient accuracy for PnP is going to be mutually exclusive with the lightness required for hand carry which will also be exclusive with the sort of reliability that PnP requires for accurate placement.  Maybe it's possible with a lot of electronic sensing and processing like Mike describes above, and maybe that is future of the hobbyist PnP machine... but I have never seen anything close to a successful homebrew hobby PnP machine.  I've seen tons of attempts with aluminum extrusions, or frames like 3D printers or the like, but they just never work - and that's exclusive of the feeder problem, which is a whole other can of worms.

[fcb]

I started out with a Versatronics RV, Mike has similar machine - the actual machine is certainly 'carryable' upstairs or through door ways.

Any affordable p&p needs to run off single phase and be easily transported/moved (no pallet-truck/tail-lift, etc..) and fit through an standard doorway.

As for compressor etc... I don't believe this needs to be built in, nice if it is, but not critical - I have a little silent compressor under my p&p bench for my paste dispenser and other services, it was <£300 new.

[mikeselectricstuff]

I started out with a Versatronics RV, Mike has similar machine - the actual machine is certainly 'carryable' upstairs or through door ways.

It seems odd that after all these  years (?20?) the RV is still probably the best value, smallest viable used P&P available (in UK at least).
The only thing I've seen that looks comparable is the Mechatronika M10V - not sure what this costs though. 

[Corporate666]

I started out with a Versatronics RV, Mike has similar machine - the actual machine is certainly 'carryable' upstairs or through door ways.

Any affordable p&p needs to run off single phase and be easily transported/moved (no pallet-truck/tail-lift, etc..) and fit through an standard doorway.

As for compressor etc... I don't believe this needs to be built in, nice if it is, but not critical - I have a little silent compressor under my p&p bench for my paste dispenser and other services, it was <£300 new.

I saw Mike's video of that machine - that's not what I would call carryable... it's just about the same size as a Quad 4C.  You mentioned carrying up a set of stairs or going in a car boot... that Versatronics is like the Quad - you would put it in place and leave it there long term.  I'm not even sure you would want that on the second floor of a wood-floored house, would you?  What does it weigh?  Maybe it's all aluminum?  It looks like a heavy beast.  The Quad 4C is single phase too, but it does require shop air (or an external vacuum pump). 

[Eclipze]

All things considered, perhaps what people want isn't necessarily yet achievable in terms of size and cost.  There is probably a good reason so many of these projects are started, but never finished.  Yet the cheapest machine coming out of China is still much more expensive than many expect.  Even given it doesn't have vision and a few other items on the wish list.  I can tell you now, even unpacking the TM240A out of the wooden crate, it would definitely be a two man job to lift or move it anywhere. 

It is disconcerting when people judge the cost of such equipment to be much lower than the actual price, with no reference for comparison.  It may look like it costs $2k, but you have to consider the entire business case.  The cost of development has to be covered, including wages and all the prototypes.  Tooling costs.  All the software development.  Then there is production, everything from stock management and procurement through to logistics, advertising and even having the warehouse floor space to assemble/build and test them.  Everyone in this process is doing so to earn a living as well, and this profit on top is the mechanism that ultimately puts such a product on the market.  Raw cost of parts is merely one component to the total cost.  It is getting easier to mis-judge cost in a market where toaster ovens are manufactured in the millions and you can pick one up in a competitive market for $30.  Yet the cheapest IR reflow oven direct from China on ebay will set you back $308.  ~10 times more expensive.  Getting to something reasonable, like the T200C+ direct from China and your up at $2.8k not including delivery and the need for a 25A circuit installed.  I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't understand why it costs more than $1000.  Having recently investigated, a descent small batch oven (not a China model) is likely in the range of $4.2k to $7k+, not including delivery.

I probably fit more so in the category for an early adopter of technology, and pay the premium for the privilege.  At the same time, if I found a Quad in good condition when I searched and going for a good price I likely would have jumped on it.  Looking at old second hand machines, finding them in good condition and capable of 0402 placement was too ambitious.  At least in Australia.  I'II stick to prototype and small batch runs, and save the real board loading bulk for the professionals with the professional expensive bling machines :-)

[mikeselectricstuff]

I started out with a Versatronics RV, Mike has similar machine - the actual machine is certainly 'carryable' upstairs or through door ways.

Any affordable p&p needs to run off single phase and be easily transported/moved (no pallet-truck/tail-lift, etc..) and fit through an standard doorway.

As for compressor etc... I don't believe this needs to be built in, nice if it is, but not critical - I have a little silent compressor under my p&p bench for my paste dispenser and other services, it was <£300 new.

I saw Mike's video of that machine - that's not what I would call carryable... it's just about the same size as a Quad 4C.  You mentioned carrying up a set of stairs or going in a car boot... that Versatronics is like the Quad - you would put it in place and leave it there long term.  I'm not even sure you would want that on the second floor of a wood-floored house, would you?  What does it weigh?  Maybe it's all aluminum?  It looks like a heavy beast.  The Quad 4C is single phase too, but it does require shop air (or an external vacuum pump).

The RV base+arm unit is heavy but just about carryable - it sits in a steel frame which is just square tube,with a wooden(!) base-board , so not especially heavy. As it uses a SCARA type geometry, the motion transmitted to base/floor is mostly torque, so it doesn't  need  to be as heavy as for an X/Y gantry.
Even then, the arm construction is quite a lot heavier than it really needs to be, as the hardware was originally designed for light machining. The head mechanism could also be made a lot lighter - the rotation stepper is much bigger than it needs to be.

[Corporate666]

All things considered, perhaps what people want isn't necessarily yet achievable in terms of size and cost.  There is probably a good reason so many of these projects are started, but never finished.  Yet the cheapest machine coming out of China is still much more expensive than many expect.  Even given it doesn't have vision and a few other items on the wish list.  I can tell you now, even unpacking the TM240A out of the wooden crate, it would definitely be a two man job to lift or move it anywhere. 

I was unfamiliar with the TM240A machine, but a quick Google search turned up some Youtube videos... I was pretty amazed... at how crap it was (apologies to any owners).  The guy said he paid $5500 for it delivered.  I paid $6k for the latest Quad 4C I bought which was totally refurbished 3 years ago by the manufacturer and came with the latest software, LCD screen, 20+ feeders, the newest "deep field" up and downward cameras, etc.  That was about market rate for the machine.

I will run 500-1000 boards through it every couple of weeks and in the past 2 years, nothing has gone wrong with it at all, other than having to clean solder paste out of the nozzles twice and having to swap out a couple of feeders that got clogged up with tape detritus, but that's tens of thousands of placements with no issues - and around 1,500CPH realistic, and it rarely misses a placement and will do 0402's all day with no issues. 

Here's a 4C in action



It also has a nozzle changer, supports vibratory feeders, waffle trays, can do part inventories, pattern repeats, component fiducials, board fiducials, allows for multiple feeders with the same component and will automatically jump to the next feeder when one runs out - and has SMEMA input and output on motorized transport rails for easy board load in and load out.  Plus I can call a 1-800 number and get support, and even buy an extended warranty.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all - I am totally agreeing with you 100% that people don't take the costs into account.  This guy who spent $5500 on that Chinese hunk of junk wasted his money unless nothing else was available.  In-house board assembly is all about cost... older machines that either require more maintenance or are slower don't have much value in a contract assembly house.  My Quad 4C's are good for high mix low volume.  They are not the fastest machines around but you can load them up with tons of feeders (on all four sides, I think you can fit 130+ feeders on the machine) and it has tooling holes on 1" centers all over the surface of the whole area for any sort of jigs and fixtures you can dream up - so it's very flexible.  But for a contract assembler - it will never be competitive with something like a Fuji CP6.  So you just have to keep your eyes open for something like the Quads - they are fully depreciated and often well maintained and can be bought cheap.  It's false economy trying to save by getting a $2k PnP then spending hundreds of hours screwing with it.

[Corporate666]

I started out with a Versatronics RV, Mike has similar machine - the actual machine is certainly 'carryable' upstairs or through door ways.

Any affordable p&p needs to run off single phase and be easily transported/moved (no pallet-truck/tail-lift, etc..) and fit through an standard doorway.

As for compressor etc... I don't believe this needs to be built in, nice if it is, but not critical - I have a little silent compressor under my p&p bench for my paste dispenser and other services, it was <£300 new.

I saw Mike's video of that machine - that's not what I would call carryable... it's just about the same size as a Quad 4C.  You mentioned carrying up a set of stairs or going in a car boot... that Versatronics is like the Quad - you would put it in place and leave it there long term.  I'm not even sure you would want that on the second floor of a wood-floored house, would you?  What does it weigh?  Maybe it's all aluminum?  It looks like a heavy beast.  The Quad 4C is single phase too, but it does require shop air (or an external vacuum pump).

The RV base+arm unit is heavy but just about carryable - it sits in a steel frame which is just square tube,with a wooden(!) base-board , so not especially heavy. As it uses a SCARA type geometry, the motion transmitted to base/floor is mostly torque, so it doesn't  need  to be as heavy as for an X/Y gantry.
Even then, the arm construction is quite a lot heavier than it really needs to be, as the hardware was originally designed for light machining. The head mechanism could also be made a lot lighter - the rotation stepper is much bigger than it needs to be.

Ahhh, that's different than the one I have seen then... the one I saw looked virtually the same size/shape as a Quad 4D - about 4 feet square and maybe 5 feet tall, box steel frame with a metal plate about 3.5 feet up and a cylindrical arm in the center of that.  There must be different models then....the one in the pics above looks substantially smaller.

[Eclipze]

I paid $6k for the latest Quad 4C I bought which was totally refurbished 3 years ago by the manufacturer and came with the latest software, LCD screen, 20+ feeders, the newest "deep field" up and downward cameras, etc.

WOW!!!  That's ridiculous!!!  I remember talking to several dealers at the Electronex Expo, as well as those that followed up with phone calls and emails.  I literally had one guy give a decent belly laugh at me when I said i was looking for a 2nd hand machine under $10k.  As an example, there was a 2008 Autotronik BS-384 with a great range of feeders that had my interest.  Until the price range was disclosed $30-$35k.  I'd love to hear from other Aussies about this sort of thing, as often I wonder if the respective climate here is just massively different to the UK/USA.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Ahhh, that's different than the one I have seen then... the one I saw looked virtually the same size/shape as a Quad 4D - about 4 feet square and maybe 5 feet tall, box steel frame with a metal plate about 3.5 feet up and a cylindrical arm in the center of that.  There must be different models then....the one in the pics above looks substantially smaller.

The RV is basically this unit sitting in  a frame with feeders either side. And I do mean just "sitting". It doesn;t rely on the frame for any more than support and to hold the covers, the latter being for protection from dust & mechnaical hazard ( it can give you a nasty whack  ), and to help control light levels - the vision likes to have consistent ambient light levels.
You could use it without the frame - you'd just need the base board which supports the feeders.

[matkar]

The only thing I've seen that looks comparable is the Mechatronika M10V - not sure what this costs though.

According to http://www.elektroda.pl/rtvforum/topic2318954.html more than 19000EUR...

[mikeselectricstuff]

If it includes feeders, 19KEU isn't that bad if it works well

[nctnico]

It looks nice but if I do the math outsourcing is still cheaper.

[Eclipze]

Make sure your math includes the overheads associated with using an external party to do the board loading.  Small board run done yourself.  Much cheaper unframed stencil, no paperwork, quoting, chit chat, building reference samples, validation sample, handling build varients, handling of loose/tape strips, no expensive chip loading component losses etc...  For a descent size job, spending 2-3 days to establish the production run with an external supplier makes total sense.  But everytime you have a small run job, spending 20 mins to setup the machine and loading the build as you need within a day is a big savings.... both in time and outgoing expenses. 

[mazurov]

I also have TM240A, it is a nice machine. It is discussed quite extensively here -> http://dangerousprototypes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=4903&sid=8d99a69d51b41610859d3a2be0bd57de .

[Harvs]

Can I ask where you got it from/through?  Last time I looked at threads on it there was some considerable difficulty acquiring one if you weren't versed in Taobao.

[Eclipze]

I looked at Taobao... wasn't worth the risk and trouble to save a couple hundred.  Deal direct with the manufacturer... http://www.neodentech.com/
Mia quite good and quick to deal with.  Had stock on the shelf and super quick to dispatch.  Just what you want if sending funds overseas.
Mia@neodentech.com

I would recommend to ask about the "Export Necessary Accessories", which is an extra pack of various parts.  May come in useful.

[nctnico]

Make sure your math includes the overheads associated with using an external party to do the board loading.  Small board run done yourself.  Much cheaper unframed stencil, no paperwork, quoting, chit chat, building reference samples, validation sample, handling

In the NL I know several companies which are perfectly setup for small jobs. Like €250 initial setup costs for 10 boards (TQFP, SMT and some thru-hole). I'm sure you can find these kind of companies in every country but you have to look hard because they don't spend as much on advertising as the big assembly houses.

[Varys]

Make sure your math includes the overheads associated with using an external party to do the board loading.  Small board run done yourself.  Much cheaper unframed stencil, no paperwork, quoting, chit chat, building reference samples, validation sample, handling

In the NL I know several companies which are perfectly setup for small jobs. Like €250 initial setup costs for 10 boards (TQFP, SMT and some thru-hole). I'm sure you can find these kind of companies in every country but you have to look hard because they don't spend as much on advertising as the big assembly houses.

I wonder if you have some addresses from those people since I`m also active in the Netherlands.