EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Products => Other Equipment & Products => Topic started by: mrpackethead on October 22, 2014, 07:09:08 am
-
I'm wanting to investigate what it will cost me to buy a small PNP line for in-house small volume jobs. I'm constantly sending 20 and 30 boards away for manufacture all the time, and the time might just have come to buy a manufacturing line.
I'd like to be able to do 5000ish parts per hour, thats not so many, reliably, down to 0402 and .4mm pitch QFN's etc. i'll be looking for a stencil printer, placer and oven.
I'd consider good 2nd hand gear, or new.
Any Suggestions.
-
I am looking for the same thing for the same reason. I already have a printer and convection oven, just looking for the PNP system that makes sense. what I have found so far is that for small volume, the bigger brands are not such a great choice because of the complexity of setup time. I have a 5 axis CNC machines shop that educated me about reality of operating manufacturing in-house. Finding something simple, reliable, and capable of .4mm QFN's seems to be a tall order. This is especially true if you are not interested in single 8mm carriers that cost $2,500 each.
I have looked at the Manncorp FVX since it seems targeted to low volume, fine pitch work for a reasonable cost. I am hoping to demo it soon.
-
I don't know much about PnP but I don't think anyone can really suggest anything without an idea of a budget...
-
I don't know much about PnP but I don't think anyone can really suggest anything without an idea of a budget...
For 5K cph you'll be lucky to get below $20K used/refurbed, maybe $10K if you have plenty of space and luck out on a used big old machine as-is
-
I'm wanting to investigate what it will cost me to buy a small PNP line for in-house small volume jobs. I'm constantly sending 20 and 30 boards away for manufacture all the time, and the time might just have come to buy a manufacturing line.
I'd like to be able to do 5000ish parts per hour, thats not so many, reliably, down to 0402 and .4mm pitch QFN's etc. i'll be looking for a stencil printer, placer and oven.
I'd consider good 2nd hand gear, or new.
Any Suggestions.
Just out of curiosity, if you are only making 20-30 boards at a time, why do you need 5000pph capacity? When you say "constantly", do you mean every couple of days? And are these large boards with a lot of parts (like dozens of separate BOM line items)?
I am a big fan of Quad 4C's. They are relatively cheap, but I would ALWAYS buy any P&P machine only after seeing it work and verifying it was trouble free (and that parts and support were available). The 4C is rated for 3600pph, but that's optimistic, as with any P&P rating. But even with a realistic throughput of 2000pph and a large board with 100 components, you're looking at 20 boards per hour.
Running a line is a giant pain in the ass. We still run a manual stencil printer and manual reflow, but I have a few 4C's for P&P'ing. Most of my boards are small, two sided and have 10-20 unique BOM items. I get them panelized in 10's and I can easily paste, place and reflow 100 sheets of 10 in a day, which is 1,000 boards.
It's a bit of a pain in the ass to set everything up for a run, so if you are just thinking of 20 at a time, I'd perhaps reconsider. I'm running around 500 boards a month and I'd estimate I am at the very bottom end of what makes sense for in-house assembly with automated machinery. I don't bother with an in-line printer and reflow... I just use steel stencils and print manually, and manually reflow as well. P&P is the time consuming part, but having the right machine (one designed to be flexible) helps. The nice thing about 4C's is they are relatively dumb. You just program it to go to X, pick, go to Y, place. So you can pick from feeders, waffle trays, whatever. And you can mount feeders wherever you like on the table.
Contrast that with my previous Fuji IP or Dynapert - they had extensive component management included in their firmware which is great for the original owner but when you're the second owner and aren't paying for a service contract, all that stuff just adds headache.
But if you want to give it a shot, look at the 4C's. But what sort of budget are you looking at, and where are you located? If you are thinking of buying new, you're probably looking at the $200-300k range for a new entry level line from a brand name supplier.
-
Just out of curiosity, if you are only making 20-30 boards at a time, why do you need 5000pph capacity? When you say "constantly", do you mean every couple of days? And are these large boards with a lot of parts (like dozens of separate BOM line items)?
yes, multiple times per week. would be making 200-300 boards per week at the moment. BOM count varies of course, one of my more common items has 56 line times ( across both sides ), others are 30, 72, 14
Running a line is a giant pain in the ass. We still run a manual stencil printer and manual reflow, but I have a few 4C's for P&P'ing. Most of my boards are small, two sided and have 10-20 unique BOM items. I get them panelized in 10's and I can easily paste, place and reflow 100 sheets of 10 in a day, which is 1,000 boards.
Yes it is. But its more of a pita,having to work around Subbies. I want more control!
It's a bit of a pain in the ass to set everything up for a run, so if you are just thinking of 20 at a time, I'd perhaps reconsider.
On the Juki we use now, ( at the sub contractor ) that can set the jobs up in sub 1 hour. Thats not so bad, i have thought.
>I'm running around 500 boards a month and I'd estimate I am at the very bottom end of what makes sense for in-house assembly with automated >machinery.
But if you want to give it a shot, look at the 4C's. But what sort of budget are you looking at, and where are you located? If you are thinking of buying new, you're probably looking at the $200-300k range for a new entry level line from a brand name supplier.
I'm looking at New, but $200k seems a lot, there are options that seem feasible around the $50k mark.
-
I dont think an assembly line really makes sense, if you cannot have it running 16+ hours a day. You just need to find the right manufacturer. If you are sending out 200-300 boards per week, this is a stocking issue, not manufacturing. Are you really sending orders for the manufacturer's ten times a week? Cannot you just stock some 5000 of them and have the manufacturing ready for a three months, instead of doing the pick and place on a daily basis?
You should really consider an alternative before you make a slave from yourself.
-
I dont think an assembly line really makes sense, if you cannot have it running 16+ hours a day. You just need to find the right manufacturer. If you are sending out 200-300 boards per week, this is a stocking issue, not manufacturing. Are you really sending orders for the manufacturer's ten times a week? Cannot you just stock some 5000 of them and have the manufacturing ready for a three months, instead of doing the pick and place on a daily basis?
You should really consider an alternative before you make a slave from yourself.
It's not just about throughput - sometimes latency and flexibility is more important. Moving in-house is a big step and will take time and effort, but can certainly be worthwhile, even at low volumes.
-
Yes it is. But its more of a pita,having to work around Subbies. I want more control!
For me, the biggest advantage is "just in time" manufacturing. When I outsourced, we had to buy the components and ship them off to the assembler. Of course, you never use full reels of every component at the same time, meaning you often have leftovers of expensive parts that you have paid for just sitting collecting dust.
On the Juki we use now, ( at the sub contractor ) that can set the jobs up in sub 1 hour. Thats not so bad, i have thought.
An hour isn't too bad... but you definitely need to consider whether you are doing high mix low volume or low mix high volume, or something in between. A machine with cheap feeders means and that can accept many feeders means you can leave even lesser used components on the machine and save on setup time. If you are doing lots of boards, ease of programming is important as well.
I'm looking at New, but $200k seems a lot, there are options that seem feasible around the $50k mark.
May I ask what brands you're looking at? $50k seems the extreme low end for new equipment, especially if it's an automated line (automatic printing and reflowing, conveyors in between and elevators on each end). When I was looking at new, the cheapest "real" machine I found was APS Gold, which was around $30k for the P&P, and that was about 10 years ago. They are now "DDM Novastar" and I'm sure the machine is a lot more now, even though it's still very entry level. The main brands like Juki/Assembleon/MyData/Universal I think start more like the $200k range for the machines, IIRC.
-
Don't forget that many of the big manufacturers offer supported used machines. No idea what entry cost is though.
-
For a short-run in-house setup, I would say that CPH throughput is the last measure of success. As I have been researching this for a while and very near the point where I purchase, flexibility and ease of use are at the top of the list. Changeover and setup time will likely eclipse the actual placing cycles. I learned that lesson when I built my 5 axis CNC shop to do in-house prototypes and short production. Technical and parts support are also important which is why I am not looking at used machines that have huge costs for service contracts even if the purchase if the machine was reasonable. Many of the used machines that looked good at first are past to point where service is available at all. The more current machines are much more expensive and generally geared toward high volume speed.
My interest in a line is quick turnaround of specialty PCB's and total control of each one as they come off the machine. Sending to a CM is not only expensive, but even worse, it's slow. I have to work with whatever schedule they have, get the BOM setup to perfection, kit the parts, etc. Our current manual placing process is generally much faster than a CM at low volumes. I am able to test, inspect, change, etc as the process happens. Since I designed the circuit, I don't have to ask anyone what something is.
-
.....They are now "DDM Novastar" and I'm sure the machine is a lot more now, even though it's still very entry level. The main brands like Juki/Assembleon/MyData/Universal I think start more like the $200k range for the machines, IIRC.
DDM Novastar has some compelling low-volume options. They specialize in low-volume prototype. They can probably make .4mm QFN placement in the ball park of $50k. I have spoken with them and they are high on my list of options. "MyData" class of PNP is far beyond what I ever want in-house.
-
.....They are now "DDM Novastar" and I'm sure the machine is a lot more now, even though it's still very entry level. The main brands like Juki/Assembleon/MyData/Universal I think start more like the $200k range for the machines, IIRC.
DDM Novastar has some compelling low-volume options. They specialize in low-volume prototype. They can probably make .4mm QFN placement in the ball park of $50k. I have spoken with them and they are high on my list of options. "MyData" class of PNP is far beyond what I ever want in-house.
The big thing I didn't like about the DDM/Novastar was that it was slow as hell for placing larger chips and I didn't like their centering. They used centering fingers for small passives and a kind of "nudge box" for QFP's and such. Maybe it works well, but I haven't seen any of the big guys doing that and I'm always suspicious of methods that deviate from tried-and-true norms.
On the price though... $50k for a machine that can do 0.4mm is one thing. But IIRC the guy is looking at $50k for the whole line, so you have to include an automatic screen printer and reflow oven, plus at least a couple of conveyors and (really, if you're linking it all up in a line) a couple of board elevators at each end, otherwise you wind up with someone running back and forth loading boards in and out. There's also feeder cost... I've seen brands that have feeders that range from $200 to $3,000 (not even talking vibratory feeders). On my old Dynapert, the tape advance mechanism, tape cutting and cover removal was all handled on the machine itself... so the feeder was basically a bent piece of sheet metal with an air plunger to advance a cog and index to the next part. On my Fuji IP, the feeders were "smart" and had motors, air, a data connection and parts counters built into them. They also cost well over $1k each, IIRC.
To me, buying used is the best deal going, especially if you get feeders (and you usually do). But P&P's are complex electromechanical beasts and there's always a reason someone is selling theirs... my limited experience is the majority of those being sold have some kind of issue. I like the idea of buying used from the OEM. At a minimum, I'd only buy something that had factory support available, if it was for a production environment.
-
.....They are now "DDM Novastar" and I'm sure the machine is a lot more now, even though it's still very entry level. The main brands like Juki/Assembleon/MyData/Universal I think start more like the $200k range for the machines, IIRC.
DDM Novastar has some compelling low-volume options. They specialize in low-volume prototype. They can probably make .4mm QFN placement in the ball park of $50k. I have spoken with them and they are high on my list of options. "MyData" class of PNP is far beyond what I ever want in-house.
The big thing I didn't like about the DDM/Novastar was that it was slow as hell for placing larger chips and I didn't like their centering. They used centering fingers for small passives and a kind of "nudge box" for QFP's and such. Maybe it works well, but I haven't seen any of the big guys doing that and I'm always suspicious of methods that deviate from tried-and-true norms.
On the price though... $50k for a machine that can do 0.4mm is one thing. But IIRC the guy is looking at $50k for the whole line, so you have to include an automatic screen printer and reflow oven, plus at least a couple of conveyors and (really, if you're linking it all up in a line) a couple of board elevators at each end, otherwise you wind up with someone running back and forth loading boards in and out. There's also feeder cost... I've seen brands that have feeders that range from $200 to $3,000 (not even talking vibratory feeders). On my old Dynapert, the tape advance mechanism, tape cutting and cover removal was all handled on the machine itself... so the feeder was basically a bent piece of sheet metal with an air plunger to advance a cog and index to the next part. On my Fuji IP, the feeders were "smart" and had motors, air, a data connection and parts counters built into them. They also cost well over $1k each, IIRC.
To me, buying used is the best deal going, especially if you get feeders (and you usually do). But P&P's are complex electromechanical beasts and there's always a reason someone is selling theirs... my limited experience is the majority of those being sold have some kind of issue. I like the idea of buying used from the OEM. At a minimum, I'd only buy something that had factory support available, if it was for a production environment.
Auto print and conveyors would be way down the shopping list for a budget setup. As long as panel size is sensible, time to print & move is minimal compared to placement time
-
We looked at Essemtec's machine at APEX and it was interesting, with high speed jetting of solder paste in the PnP machine. It eliminates the need for stencils and stencil printer, which gives some nice flexibility. I don't remember the cost, but I don't believe it was in your ball park. We were looking for a faster line in the 200-300K range. I think this was a little lower than we needed speed wise at 6000 cph. That goes down a little with paste jetting.
-
If you're in the EU look at the Polish Mechatronika machines. I was in Poland a few years ago and saw then in use at a few places - they had a good reputation and seemed to be very good value for money.
-
The big thing I didn't like about the DDM/Novastar was that it was slow as hell for placing larger chips and I didn't like their centering. They used centering fingers for small passives and a kind of "nudge box" for QFP's and such. Maybe it works well, but I haven't seen any of the big guys doing that and I'm always suspicious of methods that deviate from tried-and-true norms.
The mechanical centering is used on their lower end machines to save money. The bigger ones use vision for alignment which is what seems to make sense for me. It seems the mechanical centering systems are marketed to prototyping environments and large pitch SOIC, 0603, etc.
I have a manual printer and used batch convection oven that is just big enough for most panels. Total cost on the printer/oven was about $6k and I am hoping to spend around $50k on P&P although that could go up to $75k+ depending on how nervous I get about the fine pitch stuff. So far, I have been able to place .4mm QFNs by hand with a microscope and vacuum pen with about 99% success. The problem is that I am driving myself nuts in the process - really hoping for a machine to sweat the details.
For me, I know so little about the machines and have no time to fiddle with maintenance that new seems to be the right choice. If I had a little more wiggle room in my schedule, I would be more inclined to look at the used market of higher-end options.
-
Aggree the CPH figure is probably a little redundant.
$50k was for a PNP, but need to add feeders and stencil printing and oven on top of that, just to be clear. Realostically there won't be much ( any ) change from a $100 - $120 spend.
The german made autotroniks look good. theres a machient hat will hold 288 reels which would mean 95% of my parts could continuously live on the machine.. ( BA388 ).. Might be overkill.
I dont think an assembly line really makes sense, if you cannot have it running 16+ hours a day. You just need to find the right manufacturer. If you are sending out 200-300 boards per week, this is a stocking issue, not manufacturing. Are you really sending orders for the manufacturer's ten times a week? Cannot you just stock some 5000 of them and have the manufacturing ready for a three months, instead of doing the pick and place on a daily basis?
You should really consider an alternative before you make a slave from yourself.
Without going into it too deeply, its not a question of repeatably making 200-300 of the same board.. We make LOTs and LOTs of low volume stuff. Thats the nature of our business. Our high volume stuff is already being made in Asia, by volume manufacturing.. the problem we are trig to solve is the in-between the 5 boards that can be hand manufactured, and the 500+ where it makes sense to outsource it. Our business is super time critical, so being able to manage it ourselves is really very beneficial.
-
We looked at Essemtec's machine at APEX and it was interesting, with high speed jetting of solder paste in the PnP machine. It eliminates the need for stencils and stencil printer, which gives some nice flexibility. I don't remember the cost, but I don't believe it was in your ball park. We were looking for a faster line in the 200-300K range. I think this was a little lower than we needed speed wise at 6000 cph. That goes down a little with paste jetting.
Have you tried dispensing in the PnP? I talked to the folks at Quad (well, the factory folks who continue to support them) and they said dispensing was "ok", which, coming from the seller, probably means it totally sucks. They said it was useful for prototypes but not intended for production work.
I have a desktop pressurized fluid dispenser and it works OK - but the problem is that you need to keep adjusting the pressure and dispense time to keep your dots the same size, otherwise they get bigger/smaller with minor differences in temperature (paste heats or cools as it's being dispensed) and how much paste is left in the syringe. A PnP has no way to make those adjustments.
-
As paste print quality is the biggest factor in final quality, I don't think it's worth messing with paste dispensing except maybe for low-density stuff (0805, SOIC).
The cost of a stencil will easily be repaid in saved rework time.
If you need it quick, then a vinyl cutter (silhouette Cameo) can do reasonable polyester stencils, but you still need to wait for the PCB, so stencil leadtime is generally not an issue.
-
I have a paste dispenser and it was the reason I ended up with a real printer. The dispenser as noted by others is really only a last resort tool and nearly useless for fine pitch.
I have a few PCB's that are double sided but only have 5-6 0805 passives on side 2. For these the dispenser is great. Faster than setting up the printer and precision is not needed.
-
I have a paste dispenser and it was the reason I ended up with a real printer. The dispenser as noted by others is really only a last resort tool and nearly useless for fine pitch.
I have a few PCB's that are double sided but only have 5-6 0805 passives on side 2. For these the dispenser is great. Faster than setting up the printer and precision is not needed.
Yup. Printing is the one thing you should never cheap on!
-
I used to work for a company where they had their own PnP and oven. One of the issues they has was that gold plated PCBs worked much better than tin plated ones. All in all it was a bitch to setup. IIRC it took half a day to change from one product to another. For low volume stuff it may be an idea to have 2 or 3 low cost low volume lines so you can keep 1 or 2 lines running while the other one is converted for a different product. And there are also things to consider like the room temperature and humidity (=airconditioning). For lead free it helps a lot to solder in a nitrogen atmosphere.
-
Hi Guys
Over the pass 4 years i have spent £50000 on used Assembly machines.
I run an electronics assembly company in the UK specialize prototypes to medium production runs.
Dek 248 Stencil Printer
Quad 4C SMD pick & place machine
Samsung CP40CV pick & place machine
Diagnosys Scanpoint 50 AOI
Quad QCR Reflow oven
cheers
Pete
-
I used to work for a company where they had their own PnP and oven. One of the issues they has was that gold plated PCBs worked much better than tin plated ones. All in all it was a bitch to setup.
Gold plate vs Tin. I use OSP finished boards mostly, unless theres a specific reason to use something else. HASL finished boards are great if you are hand soldering them, but suffer enough surface variation that it can be a source of issues for Solder Pasting.
IIRC it took half a day to change from one product to another. For low volume stuff it may be an idea to have 2 or 3 low cost low volume lines so you can keep 1 or 2 lines running while the other one is converted for a different product.
Thats an important factor in considering what you buy. I sure won't be buying 3 lines. :-) Speed of setup varies massively between machines, but its not that big a deal.
-
We always supply gold plated boards if we are assembling them.
The Quad 4c is a Dos based machine and will place about 3600 cph and the Samsung CP40 is Windows based and will place about 12000 cph.
-
All in all it was a bitch to setup. IIRC it took half a day to change from one product to another.
Holy crap that must be a seriously inefficint process!
-
Gold plating for solder terminals is a bad idea, gold dissolves extremely quickly in molten solder. On solidifying, most of the dissolved gold precipitates out in the form of large, brittle crystals of Gold and Tin, which weaken the joint structure considerably and cause cracks.
-
Gold plating for solder terminals is a bad idea, gold dissolves extremely quickly in molten solder. On solidifying, most of the dissolved gold precipitates out in the form of large, brittle crystals of Gold and Tin, which weaken the joint structure considerably and cause cracks.
AFAIK the layer is extremely thin. The gold is more to prevent oxidation of the pads. Anyway, 99.9% of the PCBs you'll find are gold plated because it works best with solder reflow.
-
The gold plating is very thin but it still causes AuSn4 crystals making a brittle joint. I have never had a problem with tinned PCBs as long as they are kept clean.
-
Gold is the industry standard for fine-pitch stuff, as well as any PCB with contact pads.
-
Gold for contacts yes but surprised by use of gold for fine pitch stuff. As it is not my main area of expertise I'll take your word for it, I am just going by what I learned years ago from soldering expert Rudolf Strauss so have avoided using gold except for edge connectors.
-
Gold for contacts yes but surprised by use of gold for fine pitch stuff. As it is not my main area of expertise I'll take your word for it, I am just going by what I learned years ago from soldering expert Rudolf Strauss so have avoided using gold except for edge connectors.
Edge connectors because of the malleability, but what Mike refers to fine pitch is ductility, that's why they used to use gold to connect IC pins to the actual chip, although now they use aluminum and maybe silver, but they are not solder, they are bonded with heat and sound (high frequency) as far as I know.
Gold has it all but it's expensive so now they do have alternatives for bond wires.
-
Gold flash on boars is too thin to cause a joint to go brittle
-
"Flat" is the standard for fine pitch stuff. Nice side line to the main topic, but anyway,...
-
I was faced with the same issues about a year ago.
Looked at the options and settled on a Ploish made Mechatronika M10V. Does about 1500chph down to 0201.
Has dual cameras( top and bottom ) feedrs are supplied ias banks of feeders not individualfeeders. Per feeder You are looking at a few hundred dollarat most.
Accepts a comma delimited P&P file or protel generated P&P file. Has a bank of 8 nozzles needs compressed air to run a vacuum generator and runs on a Windows XP machine.
Price feeders, machine nozzles 20K+ Euro.
EDIT: can process cut tape and loose ( bulk cubic components ) All up with the feedr banks 36components. with cut tape for low volume work dependeing on PCB size in excess of 100 components plusj skii slope vibratory feeder.
Look for M10V on Youtube
-
From what I've seen the M10V is about the best combination of smallest/cheapest that doesn't make too many compromises on useability or flexibility.
Looks like it can pick parts randomly located in trays, which is nice.
My only criticism is the camera doesn't seem to be very well positioned, being a fair distance from all feeders - you really want it as close as possible to some tape feeders so you can put the most common parts in the closest feeder. Is there an option for more than one camera?
The lack of even the option of a flying camera is also a disappointment - they could probably double the placement rate with this, and it's not too hard to do.
IconicPCB - do you have a breakdown on pricing?
-
The M10V looks like a great low cost option. I am very curious if they are able to support machines well in the USA. The placement rate is still faster than all of the other processes that surround the P&P machine in our case. I have to do lots of inspection, hand soldering of wires, testing, programming, etc and 1200CPH would still be faster than I can do those other things. The best thing about moving into in-house P&P is being able to design with smaller components and not have the challenge of building prototypes and short batches. Hand placing 0201, 0402, .4mm is dicey while prototyping. Assembly houses charge an amazing amount to run 5 PCBs that we don't even know they work. On top of that, they can take a week to do it. I cant wait to get setup with a decent machine.
The Manncorp FVX is a similar priced machine that has parts/support in the USA. Any opinions on that one?
-
Mikeselectric,
Yes i do.. but my pricing is based on NO REPRESENTATIVE in Australia.
Mechatronika I think may have an agent in USA so Your pricing will be my pricing plus whatever the agent deems right for them.
Machine frame circa 13K euro
Feeder bank circa 2.8K to 3.6K euro ( two banks per machine )
Ski slope vibratory feeder circa 0.8K euro plus 50euro per tube adapter.
Nozzles 100 euro each
JDEC tray holder circa150 euro
72 bin loose component holder circa 300 euro
Had i had a bit more money in the kitty I would have gone for the M80 machine.
Serious small machine many more feeders ( four or five times as many ) and flying camera for component centring ( one feeder bank occupies equivalent of 16 x 8mm feeders )
If You are considering the mancorp machine You might do better by getting the machine from the original japanese source .
-
Gold flash on boars is too thin to cause a joint to go brittle
Do you have evidence to support that? The gold flashing which used to be common on component legs and tabs could cause very serious embrittlement problems.
-
Gold plating for solder terminals is a bad idea, gold dissolves extremely quickly in molten solder. On solidifying, most of the dissolved gold precipitates out in the form of large, brittle crystals of Gold and Tin, which weaken the joint structure considerably and cause cracks.
AFAIK the layer is extremely thin. The gold is more to prevent oxidation of the pads. Anyway, 99.9% of the PCBs you'll find are gold plated because it works best with solder reflow.
A high percentage of prototype boards may be gold coated, but volume production boards? Gold coating lets people be sloppy about oxidation. This is useful for prototyping, although you still need to be careful about oxidation of all the components. For reliable production people need to take real care about oxidation, and comply with all the "use by" dates. If you do that gold offers no assembly benefits, and getting rid of the gold certainly helps reliability - at least until the tin whiskers get you. :)
-
What is the Japanese original source for the MANNCORP mvx?
-
Why does even a medium P&P machine cost the equivalent of a car? It is not rocketscience anymore?
-
Why does even a medium P&P machine cost the equivalent of a car? It is not rocket science anymore?
Be fair. They are still a lot cheaper than a rocket of any decent size.
-
Gold plating for solder terminals is a bad idea, gold dissolves extremely quickly in molten solder. On solidifying, most of the dissolved gold precipitates out in the form of large, brittle crystals of Gold and Tin, which weaken the joint structure considerably and cause cracks.
AFAIK the layer is extremely thin. The gold is more to prevent oxidation of the pads. Anyway, 99.9% of the PCBs you'll find are gold plated because it works best with solder reflow.
A high percentage of prototype boards may be gold coated, but volume production boards? Gold coating lets people be sloppy about oxidation.
99% of the volume produced boards I've ever seen are gold coated. The problem is not oxidation but flatness of the PCB surface.
-
Why does even a medium P&P machine cost the equivalent of a car? It is not rocketscience anymore?
It has never been rocket science, but, like rockets, not many people need P&P machines, so the development cost has to be spread amongst a low number of units.
There will always be an entry cost due to precision mechanical stuff - it's never going to get below a few K for a useable machine.
-
As a designer and manufacturer of specialty commercial products that mix complicated mechanics with electronics, I regularly get the "Why is this so expensive?" question.
My answer is....design and manufacture it for yourself, sell a very small qty and then you will know. The sales channels cost 30-50% of most industrial products because they are a tough and time consuming sale that generally needs specialized and experienced sales people. The company has to go to various trade shows, make videos, documentation, etc. Those massive expenses are on top of the R&D costs.
At some point, most companies are hoping to make some money as well. Your margin is NOT completely set in stone after the machine is out the door either. With a challenging piece of equipment like P&P, most customers are expecting to have someone walk them through all the of the problems. With entry level machines, this is way more serious since you are mixing inexperience with a low-end product. Cheap cars are made by the millions which creates a totally different economy of scale.
-
I get the sales pitch. In comparison, you can get decent german made cnc milling/routing tables that have much more expensive steppers and linear ballbearing guidance (due to the extreme forces milling metals) for less than €4k. Than look at a Polish made CNC machine and they ask starting prices (so not complete yet) from €15k.
You can tell me a lot of stories but no way that this is in balance.
Not many people need P&P machines, so the development cost has to be spread amongst a low number of units.
This is also a chicken and egg problem IMO, if that entry machine would cost <€5k many more hobbieists would order one and numbers would go up.
Oh well I just have to face it that a P&P is not going to be in my reach.
-
There are some promising open source pick&place machines... They've been promising for quite a while now.
The cost in pnp isn't in the moving of a spindle accurately - it's moving a complicated head, from complicated feeder, past (simple, now) cameras, then placing it carefully.
The software is hard, if you want anything usable rather than trivial. Making that, and having it be a help, rather than a hindrance, is hard and takes money, people and effort.
You should be able to search for the thread about open source pnp, where I suggested, quite hard, that what hobbyists need, is a good manual++ system, rather than yet another half-arsed automated pnp machine. (As it turns out, they were building something that promised to be rather less half-arsed. Firepick or something? OpenPnP based software, and an interesting placement mechanism.)
Anyway, this stuff is annoyingly hard. A pick & place machine that gets it right 99% of the time is an abomination. Picking components correctly 100% of the time is hard with a capital H...
I'm sure that, eventually, an open source system will arrive. At that point, you'll discover what a pain it is, to load, program, setup and maintain a machine this complex, especially when it's only used occasionally.
Build or buy a good manual machine, and get on with life... For larger volumes, sub it out. That's the firm opinion of this cynic (who owns more machines than is sane)
Edit: OP has volumes that make a pnp line a reasonable proposition, and he's still struggling to find a good setup. For occasional hobbyist use - I'd stay manual for now!
-
Cars have now been in existence for over a hundred years... everybody owns one.. they are a commodity.
Why are they as expensive as specialty industrial equipment?
-
Mrpackethead,
Visit Adafruit forums on assembly... You will find interesting info on the Japanese manufacturer there.
-
Cars have now been in existence for over a hundred years... everybody owns one.. they are a commodity.
Why are they as expensive as specialty industrial equipment?
They are as expensive as the sum of their parts + 30-40% which is a lot less than a P&P.
-
Another thing to consider is durabilty - even a low-end P&P will be expected to place millions of parts within its lifetime, whilst maintaining good accuracy.
As mentioned before, 99% accuracy is next to useless as even a moderate sized panel will often have 1K+ parts. As soon as you need to rework a few tens of parts the advantage of doing it automatically rapidly diminishes.
You also need to consider that the market for a small P&P is quite small, as it lies between doing it manually and shipping the work to someone with a big machine.
-
You also need to consider that the market for a small P&P is quite small, as it lies between doing it manually and shipping the work to someone with a big machine.
Good point! I myself would see a niche market for hobbieists. For myself I would not mind having to wait 10 minutes for a hundred components to be placed instead of twp thousand, so speed is for me less important.
Accuracy can be gained by rehoming after a few pick and placements , yeah it costs time but as said less important for amateurs. So no camera, no need for enormous large pcbs just reliable.
But then this topic is about the semipros with larger pockets, so I will shut up now :-X
-
No camera means you place the part, at best, as it was positioned in the tape. That's not acceptable. If your board is that simple, do it by hand.
(Yeah, tweezers and other dreadful, slow, non-scalable solutions. Eww.)
(100 components, by hand, with a decent manual pnp machine, should be 100x3 seconds. That's 5 minutes. How much money are you willing to spend to get that time back, especially since machine setup time, feeder loading and general dicking about will be rather longer than your 5 minutes. Your brain, your eyes and your arms / hands, in conjunction with a decent manual machine to stabilise your hands and allow easy placement, trump any automated machine, until you're doing decent volume)
-
Cars have now been in existence for over a hundred years... everybody owns one.. they are a commodity.
Why are they as expensive as specialty industrial equipment?
They are as expensive as the sum of their parts + 30-40% which is a lot less than a P&P.
Are you sure a car costs + 30-40% over the sum of its parts? I maybe biased since I'm in the US but it seems to me a car cost LESS than the sum of its (retail price) parts....a new prius cost about $20K, while a medium range Trek bicycle here cost $2K. Considering the prius has thousands more components and complexity than a bicycle it truly is remarkable how cheap the modern car is. I recalled reading somewhere a long time ago that some car manufacturer only made a profit of about $20 per car....
-
As a designer and manufacturer of specialty commercial products that mix complicated mechanics with electronics, I regularly get the "Why is this so expensive?" question.
My answer is....design and manufacture it for yourself, sell a very small qty and then you will know. The sales channels cost 30-50% of most industrial products because they are a tough and time consuming sale that generally needs specialized and experienced sales people. The company has to go to various trade shows, make videos, documentation, etc. Those massive expenses are on top of the R&D costs.
This guy is nuts making his own PnP...it looks like he made everything from scratch except for the rails, servos and camera
https://www.vbesmens.de/en/pick-and-place.html (https://www.vbesmens.de/en/pick-and-place.html)
-
There really is no excuse whatsoever to not have vision these days. As vision tasks go, P&P vision is very easy - well-defined field of view, fixed focus distance, easy lighting and limited range of shapes.
You don't even need an exotic lens as you can just move a normal one further from the sensor to get closer working distance.
Without vision, it's just a toy.
The thing that really needs solving is feeders.
-
I recalled reading somewhere a long time ago that some car manufacturer only made a profit of about $20 per car....
You can not believe that? He can better stop and work in a supermarket then.
In my country you can with good negotiating get 9% off the MSRP, beyond tbat you see the guys desparity. They make money on the service and parts but they still have to make some decent margin on the car itself.
-
I get the sales pitch. In comparison, you can get decent german made cnc milling/routing tables that have much more expensive steppers and linear ballbearing guidance (due to the extreme forces milling metals) for less than €4k. Than look at a Polish made CNC machine and they ask starting prices (so not complete yet) from €15k.
You can tell me a lot of stories but no way that this is in balance.
Not many people need P&P machines, so the development cost has to be spread amongst a low number of units.
This is also a chicken and egg problem IMO, if that entry machine would cost <€5k many more hobbieists would order one and numbers would go up.
Oh well I just have to face it that a P&P is not going to be in my reach.
Years ago, we built a CNC machine in the shop. CNC machines are pretty simple... X/Y/Z and a spindle - the trick to getting it right is rigidity and speed. There are lots of truly shit CNC machines out there using acme screws, stepper motors and aluminum extrusions for the frame. That might be OK for routing out bits of acrylic, but CNC machines are all about side loads against the cutting tool, and that requires accuracy and rigidity, which means linear slides, ballscrews and servo motors at least. IMO, anything less is a toy.
With PnP's, it's all about speed and accuracy as far as the machine goes, and that's not really any less complicated than CNC machines, so it's not really much cheaper. You don't have the side loads of CNC cutting but you have to accelerate and decelerate pretty quickly and very accurately, which is not trivial. But then you also have the added complexity of component centering, vision and component feeding - none of which a CNC machine has.
We also built our own PnP machine. First one was incredibly tricky... the better solution was to buy a run down old PnP and just replace all the electronics, so that's what we did. Just the software was tricky because you have quite a few things going on between the pick and the place, and you're always trying to do it faster and faster to get good speed out of it.
The best solution is a used low-cost PnP (I mean one that was lost cost when new), still has factory support and parts, and is as simple as possible.
-
(As it turns out, they were building something that promised to be rather less half-arsed. Firepick or something? OpenPnP based software, and an interesting placement mechanism.)
I'm actually building a fire pick Delta.. I don't expect that it will be anything more than a curiosity, but its certainly got potentially to be a step in the right way.. I know Dave doe'snt like it, but i'm holding my breath. It might just be really good for Hobby DIY guys. Though i can't see it being faster than using a good manual PNP set up. ( i have a Dima FP-600 )
-
I think that there should be a distinction between wanting a basic P&P for hobby purposes and a basic machine for professional use. The big difference is reliability and good support - both of which cost quite a bit of money. I can find a lot of benefit in a low-end P&P that is relatively slow and has no vision. What I can't tolerate is a fussy machine that breaks regularly and hard to get serviced. Time is money in a business and it will cost me way more than the purchase price of a TM240A if was broken for 3 weeks. TM240A is about $6k USD with shipping, a similar DDM Novastar is triple that, but targeted to professionals with service and support.
I got a laser marking machine from Epilog a number of years ago. It was way more expensive than the cheap Ebay options, but it has been very reliable and easy to service when needed. Still a low-end laser, but good low-end. My friend got the random Ebay offering that has twice the part size and double the laser power for a third of the up front cost. The only problem is that it was a complete POS that ruined parts, caused production delays, and a huge distraction while trying to get it working even half as good as the Epilog. I am sure that given enough time, it could be a reasonable hobby machine but I would have been put out of business if I had that project to deal with.
I am looking for the low-end of P&P that is still suitable for professional use. The 3 PCB's I am working on right now have a ton of passives and a couple of fine pitch components. I could totally make use of a non-vision machine to put down 0805 passives and SOIC's which is the bulk of the placements. After P&P, I can hand place the fine pitch parts which I am already doing with success. I would not say a no-vision P&P is a toy, but most of the ones I have seem (TM240A comes to mind) seem to be built to toy standards. The non-vision DDM Novastar offerings seem to fit the bill for non-precision, low volume PCB's and certainly seem to be targeted to professional use.
For me, there is not a practical way to jump directly to a $150k solution so I spent some time working out a good manual system on my own. The goal is to be able to make enough products manually to get a low-end P&P line, then consider from there. Just about anything will be faster than me manually placing about 250 components per PCB set. Even if time was not an issue, I going crazy in the process.
Hoping this thread can continue, it seems to be revealing some ideas and experience of others.
-
Why does even a medium P&P machine cost the equivalent of a car? It is not rocketscience anymore?
It has never been rocket science, but, like rockets, not many people need P&P machines, so the development cost has to be spread amongst a low number of units.
There will always be an entry cost due to precision mechanical stuff - it's never going to get below a few K for a useable machine.
The really fast PnPs are a bit like rocket science, and just as impressive to see fired up. The real question is why a simple TM240A is so much more expensive than an simple Chinese CNC, when the volumes are probably not a lot different and the complexity is not a world apart either. The head clearly costs a bit, but the feeders are the kind of simple mechanics they almost give away in China, even for modest volumes.
-
feeders seem to be a real killer line item thats for sure. $500 a pop for 8mm feeders.. Mmm
-
Options on my list now.
Mechatronika M10V. ( or its bigger brothers )
7740 from MDM ( Japan )
BS281 from http://www.autotronik-smt.de (http://www.autotronik-smt.de)
the $5k chinese machine isn't going to cut it. Just aint good enough.
Any other suggestions.
-
For me the more feeders, the better. the BS281 would allow me to run a few different PCB's in a single setup which is worth the extra cost. Fully loaded is certainly the most expensive, but without surprise the most capable.
For what seems to be about $20k USD less, a fully loaded 7740 (Manncorp FVX in USA) which is also enough to get me fairly far down the road.
The M10V seems nice but 40 feeders would be to small for my work.
$50k seems about right for a P&P with feeders intended for short runs and the 7740 meets the criteria. I have not seen anything else in the $50k USD range that any more compelling.
-
M10V does have a somewhat limited repertoire of feeder locations. Two feeder banks on either side of the machine frame good for a maximum of 36 8mm feeders
BUT...
It handles loose components, tray components, cut tape components ( mounted on double sided tape on a shelf within head locus in my experience) ski slope tube feeders so it is not a bad choice for low volume precision work. I have seen reports of M10Vs with cut tape feeders dispensing over a hundred different components.
-
I've just got pricing for the MV10's bigger brother the MX70.. Its 66 reels and its not a super lot more.. ( 22,600 Euro vs 14,600 Euro )..
Need to of course add feeders onto hat, but its the same price for both the MV10 and the MX70.
Seems like a pretty useful machine.
-
I've just got pricing for the MV10's bigger brother the MX70.. Its 66 reels and its not a super lot more.. ( 22,600 Euro vs 14,600 Euro )..
And the MX80 will be around €35k probably a bit less if I see your prices.
http://www.printtec.nl/contents/en-uk/d411.html (http://www.printtec.nl/contents/en-uk/d411.html)
-
As mentioned, precision and speed are the key.
One thing that could reduce cost substantially is if you could find a way to accurately measure the position of the tip of the tool in real time, so you could use cheap mechanics and discipline them with software.
Unfortunately visioning of the board isn't going to work as there's solder paste on the pads.
I think the feeder problem is solvable - it's just a case of designing something that can be made cheaply.
-
One thing that could reduce cost substantially is if you could find a way to accurately measure the position of the tip of the tool in real time, so you could use cheap mechanics and discipline them with software.
Surely any serious disciplining of the hardware would make is desperately slow. Simple offset compensation for measured play in a belt drive or lead screw would seem to be all that's possible in a reasonably nippy machine. It isn't just a matter of the time taken to perform any analysis and correction. If the mechanics are not inherently tightly controlled you have to wait for the shaking to die down.
-
I just spoke with Precision Placement Machines about the Quad 4C's they have. They just jumped to top of the list for me. They completely refurb Quads with new boards and software running on Win 7 and have full non-contract support available. $28k for machine plus feeders that are only a few hundred each which is amazing. A full ready to run machine for $50k with lots of feeders and full support. 120+ feeder capable.
These are not eBay machines, they can actually do 0201's, new linear scales, etc. Obviously the 4C's are proven, but I did not consider them thinking that a used machine is too much trouble. With this option, I could get a real industrial workhorse and support in the price range of a low-end new machine.
-
One thing that could reduce cost substantially is if you could find a way to accurately measure the position of the tip of the tool in real time, so you could use cheap mechanics and discipline them with software.
Surely any serious disciplining of the hardware would make is desperately slow. Simple offset compensation for measured play in a belt drive or lead screw would seem to be all that's possible in a reasonably nippy machine. It isn't just a matter of the time taken to perform any analysis and correction. If the mechanics are not inherently tightly controlled you have to wait for the shaking to die down.
Not necesarily as you only need the accurate position for the placement, so you could wizz to close to the right position, then home-in with a tighter closed-loop position. However I have no idea how feasible it would be to measure this - laser TOF/interferometry is probably the only viable option, which maybe rather tricky to do in practice.
-
Not necesarily as you only need the accurate position for the placement, so you could wizz to close to the right position, then home-in with a tighter closed-loop position. However I have no idea how feasible it would be to measure this - laser TOF/interferometry is probably the only viable option, which maybe rather tricky to do in practice.
How about those capacitive guidance rails used in calipers, they can be had for cnc machines and are accurate within 0,01 mm, should be good enough for P&P.
They are not that expensive anymore. And you can also use closed loop stepper motors and drivers, also very affordable these days (<€300 for a motor and driver)
But as someone else said you do not know where exactly the head will pick up the component so the component placement should also be equally accurate and you're own remark about the cost of good feeders.
-
Linear scales on the X/Y accomplishes this already - at least as well as any other position sensing option. I have designed for this kind of thing before [I primarily design mechanics with a little electronics and software on the side]. The machine can deal with much more error since it always knows where the position is regardless of mechanical slop. There are obviously limits to this and the support and guide structure still needs to be rigid and tight to deal with accel/decel forces. This is true even if you used some other exotic from of position sensing. If the table and the head are twisting and moving the information from the scales becomes inaccurate. Backlash is a real challenge with all the motion reversals and high precision. Much easier and productive to have a super tight mechanical than deal with it in software.
You can always create an offset LUT in as fine of increments as your please, but it requires the machine to be repeatable to be worth anything. Loose mechanics are not repeatable so you could not expect the LUT to help much. The machine would be hunting for position.
On our laser marking machine that uses linear scales is still not rigid enough to deal with the vibration which makes the marking fuzzy. When the machine is bolted to a very heavy table, the marking quality is better.
-
The problem is if you do the feedback on the rails, you need rigidity on the gantry. If there was a way to measure the position of the tip in free space, then you could use a really cheap/simple drive with closed-loop feedback.
-
However I have no idea how feasible it would be to measure this - laser TOF/interferometry is probably the only viable option, which maybe rather tricky to do in practice.
Inkjet printers can do insane positioning with low cost mechanics. They're fairly fast too. I suspect there's a lot to learn there.
Just been mulling the comment about rocket science... I must be in the fairly small intersection of having home built a space satellite and also owning a P&P machine :o
-
great, now you guys are encouraging me to build a P&P just to see if I could do it. :-+
It would be a fun project to have a group of smart people work out a low-cost approach based on existing commodity tech. I have loads of ideas for feeders and placement but always short on time. Most of my ideas are based on commercially successful designs I have done in the past, not wishful thinking. I do have 5 axis CNC mills,
Back on topic...I need a P&P ASAP to get my regular work out the door.
-
great, now you guys are encouraging me to build a P&P just to see if I could do it. :-+
It would be a fun project to have a group of smart people work out a low-cost approach based on existing commodity tech. I have loads of ideas for feeders and placement but always short on time. Most of my ideas are based on commercially successful designs I have done in the past, not wishful thinking. I do have 5 axis CNC mills,
Back on topic...I need a P&P ASAP to get my regular work out the door.
Join the fire pick delta project. Its coming along nicely.. it will be a sub $500 project. Sure it will have lots of limitations, but its going to do a job.
-
Inkjet printers can do insane positioning with low cost mechanics. They're fairly fast too. I suspect there's a lot to learn there.
Horizontal is just watching optical marks as the head moves and firing ink at precisely the right time - it's not accurate positioning, it's firing ink when the head's in the precise position.
Vertical is accurate paper feeding - and that _is_ magic.
I fear that neither of these translate well to pnp, though, where managed acceleration while maintaining precision is the name of the game...
(That said, if we're going to degenerate this thread into 'things that would be cool in pnp-land...
How about a stacked component dispenser. Load it, possibly offline, with a tall stack of a component you use a lot of (decouplers, 1K pullups, whatever), then when you want to place them, just hold the dispenser in the right place, press the stack from the top, and have the bottom one stick to the paste. Lift off, and repeat on the next position. No need to go back to the feeder, no need for vision, since they're all held in the stack, and the bottom is 4 ptfe springy walls or something, so the parts are in the right place.)
Ah well, engineering hell, I suspect. I just get bored waiting for my head to go back to get yet another decoupler, and I can't begin to afford one of those multi-nozzle chipshooter machines that place faster than the eye can see...
And yes, join the fire pick project! I would, if I had any time at all.
-
they are going to make a kit some time soon, so it will be the IKEA of the PNP world. :-) Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
Not something that you would seriously use in a commercial set up, and i wonder how long parts printed on a 3d printer would work. but if your making 2 project boards per month.. it probably will last a long time. And theres just the "hey thats cool factor"
The quads are an interesting idea..
Space is a premium in our shop, the Autotronika 70 is looking good. Mmm. Decisions Decisions.
-
Join the fire pick delta project. Its coming along nicely.. it will be a sub $500 project. Sure it will have lots of limitations, but its going to do a job.
That looks fun and I need a hobby. I may look into what I could contribute. The options for small businesses are dismal since the market goes from toys to mega-machines with very little in the entry level area to kick start a business. We have painfully struggled to work up to being able to acquire a $50k P&P which is still low-end. Now I have all the resources and experience to build whatever I need/want, but it nearly killed me to get here.
For today's challenge, I have pretty much decided that the Quad 4000C from PPM [Updated Quad 4C] is the perfect solution for our modest needs with room to grow tomorrow. They now offer a way to do cut-tape which is very common for me doing small batches with parts that cost $7-$10 each means that I am always in a cut-tape world. Splicing onto reels or paying $7 for each Digi-Reel is not needed.
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
-
I'd suspect some combination of: unnecessary resolution (Pi-cam is 3 or 5 Mpixel?), naive coding (let's face it, there are a million ways to make image processing go slowly), and the word 'java' just won't leave my mind :)
If this ever becomes a real issue, I'm sure it'll be sorted pretty quickly. I'd rather people concentrated on getting a good design, than tuning a crappy design for speed...
-
Yeah, i'm sure it will get better and faster. It may be quite a few things that are contributing to it..
-
they are going to make a kit some time soon, so it will be the IKEA of the PNP world. :-) Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
I agree. If you have vision you can do the fine positioning based on the vision system instead of relying on accurate mechanics.
-
That looks fun and I need a hobby. I may look into what I could contribute. The options for small businesses are dismal since the market goes from toys to mega-machines with very little in the entry level area to kick start a business. We have painfully struggled to work up to being able to acquire a $50k P&P which is still low-end. Now I have all the resources and experience to build whatever I need/want, but it nearly killed me to get here.
For today's challenge, I have pretty much decided that the Quad 4000C from PPM [Updated Quad 4C] is the perfect solution for our modest needs with room to grow tomorrow. They now offer a way to do cut-tape which is very common for me doing small batches with parts that cost $7-$10 each means that I am always in a cut-tape world. Splicing onto reels or paying $7 for each Digi-Reel is not needed.
I did the exact same thing as you - looked at the market (in my case, I bought a few used machines) and after lots and lots of pain, trial and error and money wasted, I ended up with Quad 4C's. I know I keep shilling the machines like I have a stake, but I don't... the nice thing is that IF "the shit hits the fan", the people from PPM are always a phone call away. There are 2 Quad 4C's on eBay right now with a few dozen feeders each for the $4k range... I'm tempted to buy one of them just for the feeders, although I already have quite a few 5V feeders already.
Have you talked to PPM? May I ask what they quoted you for the 4000C? I am pretty close to their shop and I've been there a few times and talked to them lots. They want $7500 for the Windows upgrade to the 4C as a self-install kit, but they also want you to send back the old parts to them. And they want $26k for a 4C refurbed and converted to a 4000C, or $19k for a 'refurb' 4C. I got a machine that was just refurb'ed by them and used by the client for a few months for $6k. I also bought two other 4C's for around the same price... and frankly, other than the refurb machine, I probably paid way too much considering other 4C's are available on eBay for $4k.
I keep saying it but the nice thing about 4C's is they are dumb. You tell it to go to A, pick, go to B, place. So you can write all sorts of creative programs for dispensing or picking from different locations (waffle trays, strips, or even parts just taped to the table top). The whole table top is just an array of drilled/tapped holes so you can mount anything anywhere.
I am still very tempted to do the windows upgrade, just because the software/interface is a pain in the ass sometimes. But for $7500 and it doesn't even include new motor drivers or anything mechanical... IMO is ridiculously expensive.
-
The all-in 4000C is $28k. I also saw the machines on eBay and a few brokers that are, of course, as-is. Troubleshooting and replacing parts on a machine that has been around the block is not going to help me get PCB's out the door. I have no experience with these and I am sure the learning curve is not trivial. I did almost all of the maintenance on my big CNC's including repair/rebuilding a 400 volt vector drive for the 30hp spindle - but that was only because I had to.
I like the support that PPM can offer and if money is tight, I may ask for the older DOS version. I am well versed in a DOS world so that part does not scare me too much. If I can deal with the money end, I will just get the newer, updated 4000C that I would not likely need to fiddle with for a long time. The windows interface will also allow me to have operators up and running much faster than throwing someone half my age at a DOS machine.
This will be my first and only P&P machine so reliability and ease of use are very important. I hope its the right call. $50k is cheap for a P&P, but a lot to lose if it is a rotten decision. It seems like I should be safe though.
-
How about a stacked component dispenser. Load it, possibly offline, with a tall stack of a component you use a lot of (decouplers, 1K pullups, whatever), then when you want to place them, just hold the dispenser in the right place, press the stack from the top, and have the bottom one stick to the paste. Lift off, and repeat on the next position. No need to go back to the feeder, no need for vision, since they're all held in the stack, and the bottom is 4 ptfe springy walls or something, so the parts are in the right place.)
Pick & Pez...!
Should be viable to have it load itself from tape out of a feeder.
Sort of like a multiple head, but stacking parts vertically.
Speaking of double heads, it would seem sensible to look at having a dual head, as that would give the biggest delta speed vs. delta cost - more than 2 will have diminishing returns.
-
they are going to make a kit some time soon, so it will be the IKEA of the PNP world. :-) Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
I agree. If you have vision you can do the fine positioning based on the vision system instead of relying on accurate mechanics.
You can't do fine positioning with downward vision as here will be paste on the pads. You could use vision to calibrate out fixed errors, linearity issues etc. by imaging a reference grid
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
You beat me to it! Vision on a RasPi should be pretty instant, however once you get it down to a few hundred mS it is no longer in the critical path as you have the time between taking the image and travelling to the placement position before you need the results - delayed detection of a mis-pick is the only case where slower vision would waste a little time.
-
The all-in 4000C is $28k. I also saw the machines on eBay and a few brokers that are, of course, as-is. Troubleshooting and replacing parts on a machine that has been around the block is not going to help me get PCB's out the door. I have no experience with these and I am sure the learning curve is not trivial. I did almost all of the maintenance on my big CNC's including repair/rebuilding a 400 volt vector drive for the 30hp spindle - but that was only because I had to.
I like the support that PPM can offer and if money is tight, I may ask for the older DOS version. I am well versed in a DOS world so that part does not scare me too much. If I can deal with the money end, I will just get the newer, updated 4000C that I would not likely need to fiddle with for a long time. The windows interface will also allow me to have operators up and running much faster than throwing someone half my age at a DOS machine.
This will be my first and only P&P machine so reliability and ease of use are very important. I hope its the right call. $50k is cheap for a P&P, but a lot to lose if it is a rotten decision. It seems like I should be safe though.
I'm happy to help you out with programming and setting up your 4C if/when you get it.
As far as the Windows software version - the thing to keep in mind (other than pricing) is that it only replaces the firmware/software and the internal CPU of the 4C... so all of the vision, motor drivers, sensors and everything else stays the same. In other words, it's 100% about ease of use, not performance or reliability. They do have some features that aren't in the stock 4C like inventory management, but not much. That said, it is a nice upgrade... although it is not compatible with anything higher than Windows XP, which recently (or soon?) is having support ended for it, so in a few years might be like having a Windows 95 machine.
You definitely will not be unhappy with the 4C. Like I said, I've had several PnP's and the 4C just keeps chugging along. I haven't had any problems with mine. Only thing about PPM is boy, will they charge you for everything and to the max as well... so I'd make sure everything they promise you is 100% spelled out in writing. Not that they are dishonest, just their prices are sky high for parts and service.
Something else to keep in mind, if you decide to save a few bucks... they sell refurb machines, but really, it's just taking it all apart, repaint and new plastic guards, etc. They will also sell you a "gone through" DOS machine for substantially less than a full refurb DOS machine (like $9-10k). Just something to consider.
And it probably goes without saying, but get as many feeders as you can up front - they are cheap up front, expensive later.
-
You can't do fine positioning with downward vision as here will be paste on the pads. You could use vision to calibrate out fixed errors, linearity issues etc. by imaging a reference grid
With lots of processing, and a downwards-looking global shutter camera running at high frame rates, you might be able to do something useful. Sort of terrain matching as you go in - match on lots of pads, not just the one you're aiming at, and the effect of solder paste should be less. Some serious processing needed in real time, though, and I'm sure there would be cases where it failed - parts in the middle of nowhere, etc.
-
I'm happy to help you out with programming and setting up your 4C if/when you get it.
Thank you so much for the practical wisdom. I am definitely thinking about cost/benefit of the various options. I am planning on a bunch of feeders - enough for all the boards I regularly would do with some left over for prototypes.
Do you have any way to estimate programming time in the DOS version? Is is possible to look at the BOM lines and get a sense of the setup time? Obviously a newbie P&P question, but any wisdom in that area would help me understand what I am in for. Is editing an existing program reasonably easy - to accomodate a PCB revision where a few of the parts move.
Will the machine alarm on a mis-pick or does it try again and keep going?
Is it practical to machine place big parts like 16 position headers (44mm) tape, push-buttons (24mm tape), etc. We have been getting these parts on tape, but placing them manually.
-
We have been placing push button switches ( on tape ) from a cut tape feeder on our M10V.
-
I'm happy to help you out with programming and setting up your 4C if/when you get it.
Thank you so much for the practical wisdom. I am definitely thinking about cost/benefit of the various options. I am planning on a bunch of feeders - enough for all the boards I regularly would do with some left over for prototypes.
Do you have any way to estimate programming time in the DOS version? Is is possible to look at the BOM lines and get a sense of the setup time? Obviously a newbie P&P question, but any wisdom in that area would help me understand what I am in for. Is editing an existing program reasonably easy - to accomodate a PCB revision where a few of the parts move.
Will the machine alarm on a mis-pick or does it try again and keep going?
Is it practical to machine place big parts like 16 position headers (44mm) tape, push-buttons (24mm tape), etc. We have been getting these parts on tape, but placing them manually.
Sorry for the length, I type fast :)
A tip on feeders... there are 5V feeders and 12V feeders. Go with 12V if possible. The only real difference is the 12V feeders index faster, but if you place a frequently used component in a 5V feeder near the PCB, it's possible it may not have indexed to the next part by the time the head comes back. 12V is standard on anything recent, but sometimes the OEM's will try to offload 5V feeders on those who don't know better :)
As far as programming, the machine works as such... you program picks and places as two separate actions. So pick 1 might be a 10k 0805 resistor. You might have 10 of those on your board. So that would be 1 pick and 10 placements. Your program would be (literally)
PICKUP 1
PLACE 1
PICKUP 1
PLACE 2
PICKUP 1
PLACE 3
..
..
etc.
So as you can see, you can program picks independently of placements. With this setup, it is ideal to keep often used components in fixed locations on the machine, however if you wind up using more 20k 0805 resistors and want to give them the prime spot, you can just move your 10k 0805 feeder somewhere else, program it as a new PICKUP and edit your program in about 30 seconds. And as you can see, editing a program then becomes super simple. You can add lines, remove lines, edit pickups/placements, or you can easily globally edit all coordinates in a program. There are also board and panel pattern repeats for picks or places. So if you have (say) a line of 20 0805's in a row all spaces 0.250" apart, you don't need to program each individual placement. Likewise, if your boards are panelized, you program the first board and then tell the machine the X and Y distance to the next boards and how many in X and Y. I have a board with 12 different parts per board, 20 placements per board, 10 boards per panel. The program for all this is maybe 30-40 lines long and that includes a nozzle change.
As for programming, I do it with the handheld device. You program am offset (in X and Y) between the camera zero and the nozzle zero. The manual tells you how to calibrate this offset... you never really need to change it. Then you program your pickups and placements by moving the camera crosshairs over your pick and place locations - the machine takes care of factoring in the offset between the camera and nozzle. There is also a Z height value for picks and places, but Z generally won't change for a given component/feeder even if you remove the feeder and re-insert or change out the tape. Likewise, Z doesn't change for placements either. And since your PCB will be level, once you program the Z height for, say, an 0805 resistor on your board, you can just copy-paste the Z value for all other 0805 resistor placements. The Z nozzle is on a spring loaded assembly so it's not all that crucial.
All X/Y/Z coordinates are just numbers in thousands. So a pick might be X = 8564 Y = -12345 Z =5483. Those numbers are in 1/1000th's of an inch from the origin, so if you ever notice a component is slightly off, it's super easy to move it 0.010" to the left, for example.
There is also an auto-programming utility... it's a simple DOS based utility that takes either GERBER data or perhaps standard PCB output files (I forget, I never use it) and outputs your PnP program in coordinates. Because the programming is just in 1/1000th of an inch, you should be able to export the data from your CAD software also, and easily add in the offset from the machine home position to the X/Y zero position of your PCB.
As for mis-picks.. you set the X/Y/Z size of your component and 2 tolerance values, in absolute 1/1000" and in percentage. So an 0805 might have a tolerance of 20 and 10 and 10%/10%. If the vision system does not measure the part in this range, it moves the head to an X/Y location on the table (that you set) and drops the part. So I just have it go home, and put a small plastic tub in that area. It will try to re-pick the component 3 times on it's own. Then if it still fails, it will re-set the Z height of the nozzle (basically it re-homes the Z height using the same laser used to center components) and try to re-pick. If it fails to pick successfully again it will move the camera over the component it can't pick and start beeping. You hit stop - machine goes home... fix the problem - then hit start, it will pick up where it left off. It will even pick up where it left off if you shut the machine off overnight.
Sorry for the length - any other ??'s, just ask.
-
Oh, as for placing large or odd shaped parts... no problem. That is one of the advantages of a gantry type PnP as opposed to a chip-shooter style machine. Gantry is slower, but less acceleration/deceleration so they can work with larger parts. You can also adjust traverse speed if you find a large part is coming loose when the head moves... but if that happens, you almost certainly have the wrong nozzle.
There are different nozzles spec'ed to work with different size parts. For bigger stuff like TQFP's, the nozzle is of course larger and has a rubber seal to maintain maximum vacuum against the part. It uses a venturi to create vacuum from air pressure, so you can crank up the air pressure for more suction as well. You can also buy (or have made at a local machine shop) custom nozzles if necessary. I needed to place PLCC-4 LED's with a dome lens, so it was easy to get a nozzle made with a conical opening in the tip which came down and auto-centered over the LED and also held it flat against the base instead of trying to pick it from the domed portion.
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
You beat me to it! Vision on a RasPi should be pretty instant, however once you get it down to a few hundred mS it is no longer in the critical path as you have the time between taking the image and travelling to the placement position before you need the results - delayed detection of a mis-pick is the only case where slower vision would waste a little time.
A few hundred ms might be a bit long, if you aim to place a part per second, which I think is a reasonable minimum rate for a serious project. 100ms might be a reasonable goal.
The firepick project page makes it look like a project going nowhere. Instead of using the best available free stuff they seem to be working hard on the development of a wheel. Presumably this wheel has to be a complete new design so it can be in pure Java. :) Are they really starting from scratch with vision, and is it really being developed by people who consider this a really really hard problem, like the web site page says?
-
Sorry for the length, I type fast :)
Wow! That is very useful information. I am going to look at the less expensive DOS versions knowing that I can always upgrade myself. The concept sounds very easy. I am totally comfortable in a DOS world and 3.5" floppies, I have spent 6 years programming my 5 axis milling machines that will tear my arm off if I push the wrong button, so I should be able to deal with [PICK(X,Y)] [PLACE(X,Y)]
These machines sound very flexible and certainly capable of doing what I need them to do. Cant wait to put my vacuum pen away for a while.
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
The SoC on the Pi is optimised to be a setup box. So it is just good at decoding video. Not processing it. The CPU in the Pi isn't very beefy so I'm not surprised it is slow. The algorithm on your old P&P is probably better optimised as well.
-
Just wondering: is there a universal programming language to control P&P machines, such as the G-codes for CNC machines, or is it every manufacturer has its own standard?
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
The SoC on the Pi is optimised to be a setup box. So it is just good at decoding video. Not processing it. The CPU in the Pi isn't very beefy so I'm not surprised it is slow. The algorithm on your old P&P is probably better optimised as well.
It has a (I think) 700-odd MHZ ARM, so plenty of horsepower for simple image recognition tasks.
Video decoding is mostly dome by dedicated hardware
-
Just wondering: is there a universal programming language to control P&P machines, such as the G-codes for CNC machines, or is it every manufacturer has its own standard?
Not really because it is about far, far more than just moving stuff around - you need to integrate part library management, feeder allocation, vision parameters, component height fiducial data etc. in a way that makes sense for the way it needs to be used efficiently.
-
Thats a shame, it would make things much easier.
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
The SoC on the Pi is optimised to be a setup box. So it is just good at decoding video. Not processing it. The CPU in the Pi isn't very beefy so I'm not surprised it is slow. The algorithm on your old P&P is probably better optimised as well.
I think the reason its slow is because none of the developers have experience in machine vision coding, from their own website:
"custom computer vision software to ensure that the parts are being placed correctly. Computer vision is really hard. Especially if you're not a math major."
there's alot of machine vision and image segmentation algorithms published academic journals, but actually understanding the algorithm is hard, coding it efficiently is also hard. Im sure there are graduate students and professors out there working on this subject who can implement this in a trivial manner for them, but they are probably too busy with their research and probably also dont want to give away their IP for free.
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
The SoC on the Pi is optimised to be a setup box. So it is just good at decoding video. Not processing it. The CPU in the Pi isn't very beefy so I'm not surprised it is slow. The algorithm on your old P&P is probably better optimised as well.
I think the reason its slow is because none of the developers have experience in machine vision coding, from their own website:
"custom computer vision software to ensure that the parts are being placed correctly. Computer vision is really hard. Especially if you're not a math major."
Vision in a pick/place is far from hard as vision goes. Once you have the lighting set right, it's little more than thresholding and boundary detection. All you need to know is X/Y centroid position, size & rotation.
I don't know much about OpenCV but I'd be very surprised if it couldn't do most if not all of the job.
-
Vision in a pick/place is far from hard as vision goes. Once you have the lighting set right, it's little more than thresholding and boundary detection. All you need to know is X/Y centroid position, size & rotation.
I don't know much about OpenCV but I'd be very surprised if it couldn't do most if not all of the job.
The 'thresholding' part is the tricky bit. I've quickly scanned FireSight which is the firepick implementation based on OpenCV and I see they have various feature detection routines like Hough transforms and a hole feature detector.
https://github.com/firepick1/FireSight/wiki
They could probably optimise their pipeline better for speed, and also they use a JSON pipeline management implementation, not sure if thats the standard or fastest way to do embedded hardware programming.
-
Its amazing that a raspberry PI can do the Vision. It does it, its just slow.. ( couple of seconds per part ).. but hey it will be $300!!
WTF? My 15yr old P&P visioning is almost instantaneous on a Pentium MMX 233MHz. With the GPU goodies that a Pi has ... that is criminal!
The SoC on the Pi is optimised to be a setup box. So it is just good at decoding video. Not processing it. The CPU in the Pi isn't very beefy so I'm not surprised it is slow. The algorithm on your old P&P is probably better optimised as well.
I think the reason its slow is because none of the developers have experience in machine vision coding, from their own website:
"custom computer vision software to ensure that the parts are being placed correctly. Computer vision is really hard. Especially if you're not a math major."
Vision in a pick/place is far from hard as vision goes. Once you have the lighting set right, it's little more than thresholding and boundary detection. All you need to know is X/Y centroid position, size & rotation.
I don't know much about OpenCV but I'd be very surprised if it couldn't do most if not all of the job.
I have done some projects with OpenCV. Thresholding etc is not easy to get right and almost never a solution in itself. In one of the projects I used a combination of methods to detect objects based on faint color boundaries.
-
I have done some projects with OpenCV. Thresholding etc is not easy to get right and almost never a solution in itself. In one of the projects I used a combination of methods to detect objects based on faint color boundaries.
Were you using OpenCV in something like a pick and place machine? In an arbitrary environment vision can be tough, because you have to live with arbitrary conditions. In a pick and place machine you control the lighting, you control the background, and the colours of the objects lie within a reasonably well defined set. That massively constrains the problem. Pick and place machines and chip bonding machines are very much designed to reduce the vision problem to some simple - in fact to something simple enough to run on a small box in the 1980s.
-
Computer vision in Pick and Place is an easy computer vision task the environment is very controllable. The chips are high contrast objects, illumination is controlled, distances are very controlled, registration marks are a basically a given, pads are very visible and so on. Even the parts all should look very similar and you don't normally have squishy objects that try to run away or eat other objects in the system while your imaging.
An example of a hard computer vision problem is doing automatic classification in biological images which can look different every day. It is like asking a computer to circle a flat circle in an image and then asking the computer to then circle a cancer/malaria/... cell out of a billion plus cells based on morphology alone or count the number of birds in a image of millions of them in a natural landscape with the sun at a low angle and tons of other wild life/trees/...
A pick and place machine just does template matching and orientation detection on golden templates. Template based systems don't work very well outside a well controlled environment. Not only that the vision system has a ideal copy of the board as a map to guide it very few vision systems in real life uncontrolled situations have that luxury.
-
What I don't understand is why camera's are used in the first place. I mean, they are not easy to calibrate and the mount is very prone to vibrations and ambient light also poses a problem.
Why not simply use a simple flatbed scanner, get rid of the casing and glass plate, slap some wide soft brushes on the sides of the sensor to get rid of the influence of the ambient light and then mount it upside-down in the P&P machine.
Because the distance between the sensor and the pcbs is very small it is also very tolerant to vibrations.
Pro's:
- Low price
- Vibration tolerant
- High resolution
- Easy to calibrate
Con's:
- ?
-
Why not simply use a simple flatbed scanner, get rid of the casing and glass plate, slap some wide soft brushes on the sides of the sensor to get rid of the influence of the ambient light and then mount it upside-down in the P&P machine.
Because the distance between the sensor and the pcbs is very small it is also very tolerant to vibrations.
For what? You are looking at parts, not the PCB.
-
I have done some projects with OpenCV. Thresholding etc is not easy to get right and almost never a solution in itself. In one of the projects I used a combination of methods to detect objects based on faint color boundaries.
Were you using OpenCV in something like a pick and place machine? In an arbitrary environment vision can be tough, because you have to live with arbitrary conditions. In a pick and place machine you control the lighting, you control the background, and the colours of the objects lie within a reasonably well defined set. That massively constrains the problem.
Not so much. What looks like an equally lit surface to our eyes can easely have a 3 to 1 difference in luminance depending on where you are. Daylight and lamps with a weird spectrum can also be a nuisance.
-
Why not simply use a simple flatbed scanner, get rid of the casing and glass plate, slap some wide soft brushes on the sides of the sensor to get rid of the influence of the ambient light and then mount it upside-down in the P&P machine.
Because the distance between the sensor and the pcbs is very small it is also very tolerant to vibrations.
For what? You are looking at parts, not the PCB.
I was indeed talking about a cheaper and more precise way of determining the exact location of the pads on the pcb. Because it is the added position/orientation error of both the pcbs and the component that counts, the exact position/orientation of the component before it gets picked up can be less accurate in order to produce the same end result.
-
Why not simply use a simple flatbed scanner, get rid of the casing and glass plate, slap some wide soft brushes on the sides of the sensor to get rid of the influence of the ambient light and then mount it upside-down in the P&P machine.
Because the distance between the sensor and the pcbs is very small it is also very tolerant to vibrations.
For what? You are looking at parts, not the PCB.
I was indeed talking about a cheaper and more precise way of determining the exact location of the pads on the pcb. Because it is the added position/orientation error of both the pcbs and the component that counts, the exact position/orientation of the component before it gets picked up can be less accurate in order to produce the same end result.
Visioning the PCB is no use as it will have paste on it
-
Fiducials. They don't get paste and that is what they are for.
-
Fiducials. They don't get paste and that is what they are for.
And why would you dick around with scanner parts when a camera can easily do the job perfectly well?
Spotting fids is even easier than measuring component offsets
-
I will agree with that. The nice thing about a line scanner head is that it has little to no distortion compared to a camera single sensor/lens combo.
I am definitely in the camp that understands that this is not a real challenge, even for very modest hardware. In 1990, I was coding software to capture/analyze 3D space for motion analysis. Similar to what animators use today for character movement capture. Reversing geometric aberrations was not particularly difficult and we were scanning an entire 3D room with 286 computers at our disposal.
Having control of lighting and using a bandpass optical filter really limits what you are needing to process. Using a line scanner is cheaper and simpler than a camera and would not require any geometry correction. In the case of a P&P, the geometry errors are fixed and predictable, so that is not much of a reason to re-invent the wheel.
-
Having control of lighting and using a bandpass optical filter really limits what you are needing to process. Using a line scanner is cheaper and simpler than a camera
Nonsense.
-
ok.
-
I will agree with that. The nice thing about a line scanner head is that it has little to no distortion compared to a camera single sensor/lens combo.
I am definitely in the camp that understands that this is not a real challenge, even for very modest hardware. In 1990, I was coding software to capture/analyze 3D space for motion analysis. Similar to what animators use today for character movement capture. Reversing geometric aberrations was not particularly difficult and we were scanning an entire 3D room with 286 computers at our disposal.
Having control of lighting and using a bandpass optical filter really limits what you are needing to process. Using a line scanner is cheaper and simpler than a camera and would not require any geometry correction. In the case of a P&P, the geometry errors are fixed and predictable, so that is not much of a reason to re-invent the wheel.
Line scanners are complicated and to get a distortion free image you need a distortion free sweep across the plate and if you want to do it at both a high resolution and high speed on a rapidly moving machine your going to get mechanical distortion in the scanned images.
An optical camera can be made distortion free using very simple calibration grids and in some cases you can just spend the money and get basically no distortion optics.
A line scanner head still needs optics and try getting a cylindrical lens for your required working distance.
Another fatal problem with a line scanner is that if your processing a panel your going to need a massive line scan head to do it or cover it in multiple passes and have enough accuracy to stitch the image back together.
A line scanner is going to be more vulnerable to mechanical disturbances because the motion has to be controlled for the scan to work properly vs. a fixed camera which is not only going to be more compact is going to be mechanically one piece so it can shake all it wants but the pixels won't move relative to each other and with a fast enough exposure you can negate any vibration (Which both cameras will still have to deal with)
Also because your using a line scanner you need a similar uniform illumination system to follow it around, this is going to add a ton of bulk to the system vs a ring light around the lens of a regular camera.
Also telecentric lenses are super neat lenses.
-
Fiducials. They don't get paste and that is what they are for.
And why would you dick around with scanner parts when a camera can easily do the job perfectly well?
Spotting fids is even easier than measuring component offsets
Using reference markers and scanning the entire board doesn't make any sense once you got the references in you have the entire board lined up and periodic checks for alignment are easier than scanning the whole board again.
Area scan cameras are easy to get and use and work fine for pick and place. Line scan cameras are meant for constant velocity belt inspection systems not XY pick and place.
-
so with all that said, the firepick is slow at vision because of crappy programming with massive software overhead?
-
That all makes sense. To clarify, my project from the 90's and all of my subsequent experience with single and stereoscopic cameras is with a traditional full field sensors and lenses. I have worked primarily in the entertainment industry, but got started in industrial imaging. My post was written in a way that may look like I was using line scanners which I have no experience with.
Measuring and correcting for geometric distortions is what we had to do on our 3D capture systems to capture people [athletes] moving. All of the corrections were post-processed but it was near real-time. I have also designed and built 360 camera systems for the military which of course required piles of corrections to make usable images. The good news is that we were able to get all that in real time via a single GPU - 8 streams of RGB 1920x1080. The final product had to be geometrically accurate because a separate system would composite 3D digital elements like people and vehicles onto our raw images. A training simulator system...
Anyway...
With today's tech, a global shutter monochrome camera is super fast and easy to interface. I have done a number of mirror and prism systems that could allow a single camera to do both top and bottom which would be nice. Maybe that is already how it's done with other machines.
-
Firepick is $300 bits and some people hobby. So go easy on it.
I'm looking very favourable at the MV10.
-
Anyway...
With today's tech, a global shutter monochrome camera is super fast and easy to interface. I have done a number of mirror and prism systems that could allow a single camera to do both top and bottom which would be nice. Maybe that is already how it's done with other machines.
You don't need global shutter as you can hold the part still for vision - doubt you'd gain much by imaging while moving.
My RV4 has a mirror which, when the head moves to the top of its travel, flips down to vision the part with a horizontal camera under the arm. Considering how small & light cameras are these days, something either like this, or even a tiny cellphone type camera on an arm that swings under the nozzle would seem pretty easy to do, and could make use of either the rotation or Z-axis motors to avoid the need for an additional actuator.
Not having to go to an upward-looking camera can give a x2 improvement in speed.
You probably still need an upward cam for larger parts, and very large parts that need to be imaged in multiple shots, but cameras are cheap.
As cameras are cheap, I'm not sure it would be worth the effort of making a single camera do both upward for parts and downward for fids.
-
For the topic starter: there is a pick&place line for sale in the 'Buy, sell & wanted section'.
-
For the topic starter: there is a pick&place line for sale in the 'Buy, sell & wanted section'.
This :
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/331365865522?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/331365865522?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649)
My guess is it will go for £2-3k based on previous sales.