Chipsetter ONE: A desktop pick-and-place machine - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 12:29:48 pm
content: $5K PnP, quite a few backers already, and I'm surprised at that price point.Looks like it has real feeders, but seems a bit slow in the video.https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/chipsetter/chipsetter-one-a-desktop-pick-and-place-machine

author: batteksystem
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 12:47:21 pm
content: Look like it don't have OCR and cannot recognise fuicidal mark, my opinion is that it can only do small scale project, but not really a mass production unit.

author: Kean
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 12:48:55 pm
content: I bought/backed them a coffee. They're going to need it!

author: Kean
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 12:56:09 pm
content: Quote from: batteksystem on September 28, 2016, 12:47:21 pmOCR? Maybe not, but I'm pretty sure it will be able to recognise fiducials:QuoteAnd yes, it is clearly only being promoted for small scale projects, not for mass production. It is reasonably slow, but their selling points are accuracy and low setup time (presumably compared to manual or other low cost PnP). If it was available today I might have seriously considered it, but no way am I gambling that much $$$ for something that I *may* get in 9 months.

author: MicroBlocks
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 01:27:05 pm
content: Nice to see some desktop solution coming on the market.Will not back it up because it is 4000US$ to high to put on the line.Once it is available and reviews are available i will make sure to have a look at it again.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 01:33:24 pm
content: Quote from: Kean on September 28, 2016, 12:56:09 pmThat's the problem with big ticket items on Kickstarter, it's a lot of money to gamble.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 02:39:29 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 28, 2016, 01:33:24 pmExactly.More so when you can get pretty much the same functionality at a similar price right now from China. I'm surprised they got that many backers so far, but probably still marginal whether they'll fund.Some of their claims on speed are rather dubious - can't see how their setup will be any quicker than a similar machine. And no sign of their software.Their claim of "one-click import" is plain bullshit - that only happens once you've set up all your libraries to match vision data, feeder orientations etc.I wonder how many of their obviously 3d-printed parts will be come mouldings - 3D Printed feeders are unlikely to be durable enough.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 10:40:48 pm
content: I wouldn't back this project and, IMO, anyone who does is insane or likes betting on double zero in roulette.I have been in the electronics game for a long time and I "built" my first PnP machine... hell, I think it was back in 2004? 2003? I used an off-the-shelf X/Y/Z table. Figured it would be easy. It was really hard. Feeders were probably the hardest part. And that was using readily available Mach-3 CNC software and a purpose-built CNC platform.This project gives zero details on their software or their feeders or their mechanical system or their motion control system or - well, anything really. There are a LOT of aspects to picking and placing, and they all have to be achieved just right and in harmony to get a PnP machine working right. They don't give any support to any of their claims, really.I would say there is about a 99.9999999% chance that the creators of this project are members here - and the incredible lack of detail is inexcusable. Especially when they are asking people to give them thousands and thousands of dollars. I really don't want to hear "well, if you have questions, just ask". This is a pitch, and leaving such detail out of a sales pitch is inexcusable. Especially to the type of audience who needs such a machine.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 11:44:56 pm
content: I think they are at NY Maker Faire this weekend - anyone going ?

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2016, 01:28:15 am
content: USD 4700https://world.taobao.com/item/536218506934.htm?fromSite=main&ali_refid=a3_430620_1006:1123875541:N:%E8%B4%B4%E7%89%87%E6%9C%BA:326889a434d77756bc6c52b29d83010f&ali_trackid=1_326889a434d77756bc6c52b29d83010f&spm=a312a.7700714.0.0.39nzRu

author: Xenoamor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2016, 12:21:00 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on September 29, 2016, 01:28:15 amWe've got one pretty similar to this. The software is terrible but the machine is well built, accurate and fast

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 29, 2016, 12:32:05 pm
content: Quote from: Xenoamor on September 29, 2016, 12:21:00 pmProbably a good niche business to write some decent software for it and promote it an/or sell as a package?

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2016, 02:45:46 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 29, 2016, 12:32:05 pmOpenPnP is probably the answer here. There is probably a small business opportunity for someone offering porting and support.

author: suku
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2016, 10:25:48 am
content: if I told by boss to gamble 5k on something like this he'd laugh... But once they are on the market, and we have decent feedback from users then it's a whole different story... If it actually works and i can buy it and they ship it the next day then 5k is not bad at all, but this is the typical project that shouldn't be on kickstarter in my opinion.

author: Kean
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 30, 2016, 10:40:24 am
content: Quote from: suku on September 30, 2016, 10:25:48 amI'm not sure about that. I understand you wouldn't back it, and neither will I (other than at the $5 level). But clearly there are 10 people willing to pledge/gamble that much money, and they probably have an idea of the risks as someone wanting a PnP isn't your average inexperienced consumer. They are all early birds mind you, and it is possible they may pull out before it ends, if it even reaches the goal.If this is a way for a new company to fund getting a product to market so others can later buy it under normal commercial terms, then isn't that a good thing. Of course, if they've seriously misrepresented anything, then that could be a problem. And it is somewhat doubtful whether they will be competitive when/if they do finally come to market in 12+ months.

author: Xenoamor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2016, 12:29:33 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 29, 2016, 12:32:05 pmIf anyone's interested it's the Borey pick and place machines. The image recognition side and the structure of the pick and place files required are the real issuesThere is certainly a market for what you speak of. Especially considering the cost of equivalent made machines in the western worldI'm not sure how universal it is but I feel this applies to a lot of chinese industrial equipment. We've got a range of things like CNC machines and reflow ovens that are great hardware but really lacking in the software department. I think a lot of china seem to work exclusivly on windows XP. Everything we seem to get is built and targetted for it

author: alan-chipsetter
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 07, 2016, 06:53:33 pm
content: Hi Everyone,Thanks for your feedback, we are very interested to hear it.Sorry for the delay in replying, we’ve been busy recovering from Maker Faire NYC, and much of the discussion here has also been addressed on the OpenPnP google grouphttps://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/openpnp/cMF9gNxmSV8Dave - Thanks for discussing us on the AmpHour. We were thrilled that you would consider us reasonable. We know you have seen desktop pnp attempts before, and that you’re waiting for someone to do it right. We caught up with Chris at the Maker Faire, and he says we changed his mind about it. If you have an opportunity to follow up with him on the next podcast we would really appreciate it.Re: Vision, we have top and bottom vision for picking up fiducials and aligning components.Feeders will be injection molded from ESD safe plastic.Corporate666: You’re right, there are many aspects to picking and placing. Rather than a wall of text, we thought our audience would appreciate a video. Our software is a working prototype that needs a new UI, but it seems that holding it back has been hurting us, so we will be making a video of it for an upcoming KS update. Our mechanical system is a stepper motor/belt drive cartesian system as one would expect, and we can achieve a 50-30 micron repeatability. We feel like we have given ample detail on commonly asked questions, but if you have further questions we would be more than happy to answer them.We have also announced our decision to release our communications protocol to enable compatibility with 3rd party software like OpenPnP.The common idea expressed here seems to be that a $4K USD Kickstarter pledge seems to risky given the increasing number of late/never delivered campaigns.Our best response to this is a detailed manufacturing fulfilment plan that describes the status of each sub-assembly. We will be posting that in our next KS update.We want our potential backers to understand that we are ready to manufacture, and that we waited to launch our campaign until we had arrived at this milestone.If you have any suggestions that we can do to help with this we would love to hear them.Please continue to offer your feedback, and any ask questions you have.Cheers,Alan

author: Smallsmt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 09, 2016, 03:39:50 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 29, 2016, 12:32:05 pmWe have soon a software package working on different machines by writing a new machine controller DLL.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 10, 2016, 02:00:48 am
content: Quote from: alan-chipsetter on October 07, 2016, 06:53:33 pmI don't see how you can feel you have given ample detail. You are asking people to give you $4k of their money and all you provided was a few minutes of video. At the time I made my post, you had added some detail in the comments (I see you have since added more), but you are using all proprietary parts and designs with nothing open sourced or off-the-shelf assemblies. You aren't even using standard G-code.That makes device an *incredibly* risky proposition. A backer is not only gambling on your ability to develop the software with the funds collected, but also to produce the units (assuming you're truthful that the hardware is 100% developed), and then also to exist as an ongoing concern as a business for spare parts and feeders and software updates. If any of that fails to happen, the unit is a paperweight.I also think your numbers are unworkable. We manufacture commercial products using off-the-shelf components that are all individually UL/CE certified and fall under a rapid-approval program that UL/ETL have adopted for the specific market we're in. It's $10k per product for approval. Your product would require substantially more testing at substantially more cost, and add in the cost of FCC testing? Approvals alone would eat up half of your $100k budget at least. And the cost of injection molds for your feeders are going to eat up substantially more of your total $100k budget.Then you mention in the KS campaign your 30 micron placement repeatable accuracy. I can see just from the picture of your board placed with the device that you're nowhere near that. How are you measuring this claim? Here you say 30-50 microns. Are you guaranteeing that a customer using this device will be able to place parts on a board with sub 50 micron repeatability, and if the unit cannot do that, it would be considered a defect that would be fixed at no cost under warranty?You give no detail on your feeders, other than claiming they are three times faster to setup than any other desktop system. Feeders are the most difficult part of picking and placing, and this is a bold claim. I would expect that whatever breakthrough you have developed would be something you would want to brag about as it would be the major selling point to most potential buyers experienced with PnP machines. I don't see any detail on your feeders at all. I am curious what makes them so quick to set up? How are they actuated? What life cycle testing have you done on them? Are they rebuildable? What is the cycle error rate? The tape is wobbly in the KS page.. how come? Are they separate units for paper and plastic tape?And the same with the software. You claim it is 6 times faster than other systems, but there is zero detail on it anywhere in the video. You say it just needs a new UI, but if you have function without a pretty face on it, why not explain what function is possesses that allows it to be 6 times faster than the alternatives?I realize it sucks when someone craps on your product - but I would very much like to see a low budget PnP machine succeed. However, in order to be successful, I think such a machine must:1) Use open source softwareand/or2) Support G-code3) Use as many off-the-shelf parts as possible, especially on the electronics side (things like motor drivers, vision)4) And the holy grail of PnP is feeders. That is the problem that needs solved. The best PnP design would use an open-source feeder that was simple, reliable, used as many off-the-shelf parts as possible, and whatever parts were custom would probably consist of a 2D machined aluminum plate so that there were no up-front tooling costs required and it would use off-the-shelf bearings, wheels, pulleys and such to operate.I think the business opportunity is being the first people to solve the feeder issue and put together the above parts together in a plug-and-play system that works out of the box and has support from a US company and good software with a good interface and good availability of parts.My .02.

author: l0wside
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2016, 10:28:23 am
content: I have put the data which I could find into my PnP overview athttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1s9YmD-L69UXG5paMiz0pwO06J9nptdcopGrSa_s9t_EA number of questions remains open: maximum component size and height (can you place 10mm capacitors?), tray capability, and SW (do you need an external PC to run, which I suppose, or is the machine running on its own once it has been programmed?). Please use the comment function, which is publicly availably, I will then update the data.The key feature of the machine seems to me that changing parts is a matter of seconds as the machine auto-detects the new feeder, its position, and the part it provides. This makes the limitation to 40 feeders a lot more bearable.Still, I have no real clue how the machine would place five FPGA samples that came in a JEDEC tray.

author: george graves
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2016, 11:05:35 am
content: Love the idea, and the product does look slick! Hat off to you and your crew. (besides some 3d printed parts that I assume could be improved upon)As someone else said, the feeders and software are the two killer parts. OpenPNP is about 90% there for being a real solution to a DIY PNP, and their "reference machine" is only like $917 USD in parts - it's on my wish list!I think it would be worth getting in early on, much like 3d printing or home-brewed computers - some times getting in early on the DIY version give you an bonus education that helps later on, even when the machines get easier/cheaper to make. And when you build a tool, you know how to fix it. That's a big plus. Down side is time of course.For example I went with a Chinese made laser cutter, at that price point the software was good enough, and the machine was less then it would cost of make my own (even though I had started collecting parts) - I can't help but to see desktop PNPs going the same way.I would love to see a cutaway of your feeder design. As that's really the only part that interested me. A Cartesian robot with steppers, even a dual pick up head is the easy part.BTW Dave - what happened to that PNP that was given to you? Is it just sitting in a corner?

author: mrpackethead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2016, 06:39:58 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on September 29, 2016, 12:32:05 pmTheres a great project going well called OpenPNP, and its being used for all sorts of hardware.. its free, and open. . what more do you want.

author: Koen
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2016, 01:45:13 pm
content: Good questions Corporate666. I'd just like to make the point he expressed 0.03-0.05mm repeatability, not accuracy. Repeatability is measured by doing the same cycle in the same conditions over a certain lapse of time and should naturally tend to 0.00mm.http://blog.robotiq.com/bid/72766/What-are-Accuracy-and-Repeatability-in-Industrial-Robots

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 11, 2016, 08:34:55 pm
content: Quote from: Koen on October 11, 2016, 01:45:13 pmYou are correct, of course, however on the KS page they say in the specs "Placement accuracy: 30 microns repeatability". As a mechanical engineer by education, this somewhat makes my brain squirm, but I know what they are trying to say.One of the problems I have with all of these companies and creators developing 3D printers or any other motion systems is the ever-more ridiculous claims about how precise their machines are. I've heard numbers like 5 microns or 10 microns. In my business we own and operate "real" CNC machines and in many of our parts are often machined with tolerances of 0.0001 (2.5 microns). This is a standard tolerance for a press or interference fit or for a bearing bore, etc. I know how difficult it is to maintain such a tolerance... it requires a well built and well maintained machine with ball screws and precision encoders and precision drives, and you have to account for thermal growth of the machine - even in a temperature controlled shop, being in sunlight will throw off such tolerances. And you gotta check it with the right equipment - gage pins and bore mics and such.Anyway, when some 3D printer manufacturer on KS talkes about their 5 micron or 10 micron abilities... using ACME screws and belt drives, it's bullshit. Especially when they are then squirting out a blob of melted plastic.In terms of PnP... it matters in terms of really fine pitch components, especially BGA and QFN. And most especially when you get into rotational errors. If the placement isn't "dead nuts accurate", then it can really be a problem. I am not saying these guys are lying - but the claim of 30-50 microns is impressive. Very impressive. I don't think my Quads can achieve that and they use ballscrews and a better/more rigid overall setup with a more 'advanced' nozzle system that would have less flex. So I am skeptical of the claim. And my feeling towards claims is the only ones that matter are those that the manufacturer is willing to stand behind.So if they will consider a machine that isn't placing parts repeatably in the same location within 50 microns to be suffering a problem that is covered under warranty, then my hat is off to them and I am curious how they have achieved this level of performance. If it's just a calculated number based on stepper resolution combined with gearing, then it is a worthless metric in the real world and users may be in for a rude awakening when they go to place fine pitch QFNs or BGA's or such and the machine can't do it - hence the query about whether it would be a warranty issue.

author: Koen
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2016, 08:49:07 pm
content: We agree. I made a similar rant here about DIY CNC builders claiming extravagant figures without even a dial gauge in the toolbox. Anyway, this is always a valuable indicator of the manufacturer's knowledge and truthfulness.

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2016, 09:28:02 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on October 11, 2016, 08:34:55 pmI come from a similar place. Mechanical engineer that owned/operated 5 axis CNC shop and designed high precision motion systems. It is very easy to get 'paper performance' of a motion system that does not account for all the real world details. I also have Quads like @Corporate666 has and they would likely struggle with these numbers even though the motion system is vastly more sophisticated and mechanically sound. Before I got my own P&P machine - I was totally naive of the process. It is remarkably unforgiving. What seems like a small problem at first, becomes a huge delay where the machine is doing nothing and 3 people are fiddling with it for an hour. That means the reliability has to be amazing. You will not have useful reliability without amazing feeders, accuracy, repeat-ability, rigidity, and more.Just as a reference, my Quad is rated for 3600cph in which it's actual placement is significantly lower since I do not perfectly optimized the feeder layout. My best burst speed on hand placing is about 100cph or so after taking all elements into account (I know you can place the same 0805 passive much faster). After all is said and done - the P&P is only about 3-5x faster overall for small runs of boards assuming the programming is all ready to go and most of the feeders are ready. So, the placement speed is 26x faster but the process is at best about 5x faster. That will vary for each user and different design, but it does illustrate the importance of reliability. If anything on the machine is fiddly, or not accurate, or not reliable in some way - it will very quickly eat the time benefit of having a P&P machine. It took me a while to get my system reliable enough to be useful and it is a commercial machine. It only takes a tiny problem to be a big problem and that is the challenge of low-cost desktop machines.the nature of the P&P process means it is almost exclusively a business tool - not sure why a hobbyist would need 100's or 1000's of PCB's made if they were not for sale. Being a business too, it needs to be highly reliable since you will be making promises to customers based on the expected performance of the P&P system. I am skilled in the art of mechanical design and motion systems, very high accuracy CNC, electrical engineering, and of course the practical every day reality of running an in-house P&P line for small volume. I have not yet seen anything in the desktop class that would make much sense for anything other than the most basic projects. These days, a 'basic' project can use very tiny parts - 0201, 0402, BGA, .4mm QFN, etc. Personally, I would not bother with anything that cannot guarantee success with those parts with very high reliability. It would be lower cost to spend $20k on a machine that gets it done perfect every time than a $4k machine that sort of gets it done. I did not have $20k, so I went with a used eBay machine and slowly added feeders - all in cost $10k although it is a fluke that cannot easily be repeated.None of this is intended to discourage anyone. The goal is to put the practical reality in perspective. P&P machines do NOT assemble boards. They merely help in the process. Even an amazing machine needs a lot of work and skill to make it practically useful. A fiddly machine needs even more work and skill and the end result may in fact be worse than manual assembly. The entire process requires perfection at every stage.

author: mrpackethead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 11, 2016, 10:29:26 pm
content: Quote from: rx8pilot on October 11, 2016, 09:28:02 pmI was lucky to get my 2 Yamaha machiens for a similar song..For business, i just dont' think that i coudl risk spending $5k on a machine that is just going to cause me a lot of fustration.

author: Xenoamor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2016, 03:09:41 pm
content: Quote from: Smallsmt on October 09, 2016, 03:39:50 pmI'm not sure what you mean by this but if you have a better software package we'd almost certainly buy it from you

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 15, 2016, 02:14:08 am
content: Quote from: rx8pilot on October 11, 2016, 09:28:02 pmThat's actually a really amazing quote that very succinctly sums up PnP machines. I think a lot of hobbyists think they will buy a PnP machine and, suddenly, they will be cranking out prototypes like nobody's business. But that's sort of like thinking you'll buy a $10k 4k pro level video camera and be a YouTube sensation. It's just a tool.QuoteAnd this hits the nail on the head. Any tool that is designed to perform a complex task requires substantial amounts of setup and configuration. And the less reliable any single part of the complex task is, the more time you spend dicking with the tool rather than having the tool let you go work on something else. The more I think about it - the more I think the people promoting these hobby level PnP machines really are being outright disingenuous by glossing over any technical details, and most especially by making claims about ease of setup and programming without anything whatsoever to back it up. And error rate really needs to be an honestly tested and properly disclosed metric. For an average demo program with varied part sizes, rotations, picking from multiple feeders... what percentage of placements fail for any reason?With my Quad, it's about 1 in maybe 20,000 placements that I need to do "something" on the machine, with the most common problem being the placement nozzle getting clogged with solder paste, or a feeder having the plastic cover tape get sucked into the pickup area. But at least I know I can reliably run my machine for a full day and have maybe one issue requiring my attention. That's a very important number.

author: mrpackethead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2016, 05:04:19 am
content: Quote from: Xenoamor on October 12, 2016, 03:09:41 pmSadly lots of talk and not a lot of actual delivery, and you can't figure out who these guys are.. Still waiting for one of his "many" customers to write a review here, but as yet, there has't been one... From the demo i saw online, the software was pretty much on par with what the open pnp guys are doing..

author: mrpackethead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2016, 05:06:50 am
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on October 15, 2016, 02:14:08 amI hope that one day Desktop PNP actually comes to the party.. I've looked at it long and hard, and i can't in my head get it to work for use in business, where i just don't have the time to be farting around with it. When the opporutnity came to buy a 2nd hand Yamaha Line, i jumped.

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 15, 2016, 07:16:46 am
content: The first step, in my opinion, is to make a machine that is very reliable and easy to setup, program, and change to an all new setup. After that is accomplished, make it as affordable as possible without messing all that up.It seems all the effort is on making the system cheap as the highest priority. The 2nd priority is getting a high CPH number.Sent from my horrible mobile....

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2016, 03:04:40 am
content: Quote from: mrpackethead on October 15, 2016, 05:06:50 amA lot of guys have a dream of owning a CNC machine. At least a CNC milling machine can do things that you literally cannot do with a manual machine - so even if the machine is light duty and slow as shit, you can let it run all afternoon and have something usable.People have the same dream with PnP machines, as I did. But there is the catch-22 that there's nothing a PnP machine can do that you can't do by hand. So you don't need a PnP machine unless you need to build boards in some quantity. And if you need to build boards in some quantity, then you can't afford to have a PnP machine that requires constant dicking with to make it work right.I think a lot of the would-be desktop PnP sellers grossly underestimate the customer support costs. People buying these machines aren't going to want to fiddle with them themselves and be happy to learn and fix on their own. It's not like a 3D printer where it's letting you do something you otherwise couldn't do. It's sole function is to achieve a (generally) business task - manufacturing something faster than you could by hand. So when the machine is placing every 10th part 0.5mm off or it's dropping parts too frequently or feeders are jamming or the vision system isn't recognizing SOT23-5's or some similar problem, people are going to want a phone number to call or they are going to want a speedy response to their email. Online peer support forums and email-only support aren't going to cut it. I think when people look at the cost of pro level PnP machines, one of the main reasons they cost so much is the level of engineering for reliability, and the other part is because of the huge amount of support the manufacturer engages in (tweaking, tuning, replacement parts, etc).Anyway, it doesn't look like this one is going to fund. I don't think the creators 'get it'. They weren't interested in open software, disclosing hardware for ongoing supply of parts and selling feeders separately until the funding didn't materialize, and then they were all about those things - except they haven't been responsive to inquiries on the place where it matters - Kickstarter. They keep saying "we'll cover that later", except they are asking for money now.The winning play for a desktop PnP supplier will be feeders. Make and sell a generic feeder first. Then sell a generic hardware system that works with off-the-shelf parts and (of course) their aforementioned feeder and OpenPNP (or their own software if they want to sell it as an option or a fork of OpenPNP). If it's really better than what's out there, it will sell on its own. There's no need to make it a closed/proprietary system to capture sales. Let it sell based on merit. A newcomer doesn't have the track record/street cred or ongoing stability to start out as a closed system.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2016, 08:25:31 am
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on October 19, 2016, 03:04:40 amAbsolutely. A "cheap" P&P really needs to be starting at something in the $1-2k range to bring it into a "nice toy" price range.Entry cost could potentially be hugely reduced by having a "starter" configuration that can pick loose parts from trays using vision.They also unnecessarily increased their entry cost with the whole cover/enclosure thing, which could easily have been made an option.QuoteI'm not sure that's the case - anyone buying at the low end is not going to expect the same level of support as Mydata etc. Also, the people buying will generally be fairly technically skilled, unlike someone buying for a routine production line to be operated by semi-skilled staff.QuoteOf all the attempts so far this has had a lot more clue than others in terms of spec, and the first to understand the importance of feeders, however I think they've missed the boat on entry price - it's just too big a risk on an unknown. ISTR reading they had some other sources of funding, so if they do produce it and people see it in the wild it might concievably turn out to be competitve with the Chinese machines.QuoteNice, but not a big deal, if it's been done right. My biggest criticism is that it's a PC peripheral, which immediately brings a ton of support issues. Considering how little processing power is needed and how many cheap SBCs are out there, making a machine be standalone is a no-brainer.QuoteA good feeder design could probably bootstrap the development of a full machine.

author: Holmes34
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2016, 12:10:48 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on October 11, 2016, 08:34:55 pmDoes it really need to be "dead nuts accurate" when you are going to be reflowing the board anyway? There can be plenty of movement during reflow so if you're mucking around getting super high placement accuracy, is it not like polishing a shovel before you dig a hole?Not to mention you have to physically transport from PNP to reflow oven!

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2016, 03:03:27 pm
content: QuoteFor chip compments no, but heavy parts with small legs like QFPs won't pull very far onto the pad. For larger QFPs, rotation accuracy is also increaingly important.QuoteSolder paste is sticky and has surface tension. Once it's placed it won't go anywhere unless it's big & heavy.

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2016, 04:21:23 pm
content: Quote from: Holmes34 on October 19, 2016, 12:10:48 pmI pick up the PCB, and carry it to the oven. Like Mike said - the parts stay in place unless you are very rough.Yes - dead-nuts accuracy is important. Not many boards are only 0805 passives. Anything useful these days will have bigger challenges than big chip passive parts. Once you make 100 PCB's and each one need repairs - you will appreciate the why that is true. Re-work will very quickly eat up any time the the P&P machine 'saved' you. Tiny mistakes cost large amounts of time. Time is really what you are purchasing with a P&P line. The only thing that counts is how many parts you can place per hour ALL-IN. The speed of the machine is sort of interesting - but the whole process is what really counts. If re-work of bad placements is needed, that kills all the other benefits.

author: l0wside
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 11:22:27 am
content: Couldn´t agree more. With a .5mm QFN, placement accuracy needs to be better that 150µm, rather 100µm (or 4mil). For the open-loop machines in the sub-10k range, this is a major challenge.

author: mrpackethead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2016, 11:27:50 pm
content: Quote from: l0wside on October 24, 2016, 11:22:27 amOur turn of the century vintage Yamahas run in the order of 50um..

author: l0wside
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 08:51:12 am
content: But they will neither fit into your basement nor on your desk. And a couple of feeders will already cost more than an open-loop machine.You get what you pay for, and what you are willing to sustain. Getting a 20 years old machine to run like rx8pilot did is not necessarily fun either.

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 07:29:53 pm
content: Quote from: l0wside on October 25, 2016, 08:51:12 amThat is all true. The thing to consider though is this: Will the addition of the machine be faster and lower cost than hand assembly or outsourcing. I would LOVE to have a super small, cheap, easy to use machine where the feeders all cost $10 that could accurately place nearly any component really fast. The reality is that the current offering of low cost small machines have so many limitations that they don't really fit into a business.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 10:49:27 pm
content: Quote from: rx8pilot on October 25, 2016, 07:29:53 pmTrue but for how long?If Neoden or whoever were to really get their act together, a contract assembler buying a few Chinese machines could become a serious alternative to one $50k low-end machine from the established players, with more flexibility.

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2016, 11:06:29 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on October 25, 2016, 10:49:27 pmI don't think it will take much longer, but the winner will be the one that focuses on a business solution - not a price point. It would be nice to have 4 small machines over a single large machine for the type of work I do. A few years down the road and we will probably see that a lot of small businesses were enabled by in house assembly. Neoden has the bones of a good product - they just need to deal with the details.At this exact moment - there is a lot of pain and suffering in assembly.