Pick and place machine (the internet told me so!) - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 09:31:42 pm
content: Hello there.a random person on a random YouTube video mentioned that if someone can make a pick and place machine for under $200 it'll revitalize the DIY electronic hobbyists.and since I read it on the internet it must be true!!all joking aside, this sounded like a challenge to me, and since I was planning to build a P&P machine anyways, why not give myself a challenge? (sub $500, not sub $200) (on top of the fact that I'm a full time student with a full time job... =D )My question is this. what would you like to see on a budget P&P machine? what could you live without?I have some Idea's, but since I'm at work right now I'll wait till I'm at home to draw it up and get you-guy's opinion on it.Lets hear your desires! (or rude opinions :p)

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 09:35:37 pm
content: I know another Nick here in Canada who could use a pick and place machine in around 10 days from now...

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 09:38:57 pm
content: lol, I'm a nick here in Canada, ^.^ but I won't have this project done for a few months :p (I mean, I could do a shoddy conversion of my cnc machine, but it would be terrible :p)

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 10:19:41 pm
content: A $200 P&P will be of absolutely no use to anyone.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 10:24:21 pm
content: Quote from: NickPerry on August 11, 2017, 09:31:42 pmThat is just BS and i tell you why.1-Any P&p machine to setup reliably for one design/product costs ten times more time than to place it manually. Ergo for hobbyists that do a few pcbs a p&p machine is no improvement.2- the XY p&p mechanics is common knowledge, tens of designs out there nothing new, openPNP sw available. The real problem is in the parts feeders. The low cost solutions are crap, the only good and reliable solutions are automatic pneumatic or electric feeders and they cost more than $100 each. A decent design you need about 50 to 100 feeders so go figure.What could be a nice niche product is a machine that is in between a fully automated P&P and a manual semi automatic P&P. What I mean with that is that the machine is guided by joysticks or sliders from the user and the user can see from the camera viewpoint exacly where the nozzle is what the orientation is etc. now if you build something like that for about $500 you might have a nice product for hobbyists.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 10:41:02 pm
content: As others have said, there is no reason to try to build even a $500 PnP machine. It's not like a 3D printer where having it lets you do things you could not otherwise do, even if the quality is shit.A PnP lets you do something you could do with your hands - put parts on a board. It only lets you do it with less human intervention - that's it. And they do that by being very reliable. A cheap machine isn't going to be very accurate and it's not going to be very reliable, so it's also not going to be very useful. The only reason to automate PCB parts placement is because you have a lot of it to do. That means you're almost certainly selling the product that you are placing. Which means you won't have time/inclination to "save" hours of placing boards which you instead spend babysitting and handholding a cheap machine.And the main thing....as was written above, everyone who gets into the PnP game totally misunderstands it. X/Y motion is trivial. The hard part is FEEDERS. Everyone thinks about the motion part. That's like designing a new car and focusing on the size of tires you will use. Feeders are the ONLY thing you need to solve. Only after that is in place should you even think about working on anything else.And the next things should be software (especially ease of use and programming), and flexibility.There is a reason commercial PnP machines cost so much. It's not because they are just ripping off everyone buying one. It's because it's much much more tricky than it seems at the outset.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 10:42:40 pm
content: Quote from: Kjelt on August 11, 2017, 10:24:21 pmFor small jobs, there may be scope to handle the feeder issue by using vision to pick loose parts from trays, as vision is extremely cheap nowadays.But you still won't build a machine for $200 that is useful enough to be worth doing.For $500 you might be able to make something that's useful for a narrow niche of applications, like placing large qtys of the same, not-too-critical part ( e.g. LED arrays), for which traditional machines are overkill.

author: KE5FX
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 11:46:54 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 11, 2017, 10:42:40 pmThis has always seemed like an obvious thing to ask for, but few people seem to agree. How hard could it be to design something that does the following, specifically for prototyping purposes?1)For each part to be placed, navigate to bin or tray containing parts of required type2)Pick up loose, unoriented part with vacuum pen of appropriate size/power3)Temporarily drop part on staging surface and capture high-resolution image of dropped part4)Part orientation recognized (i.e., it didn't land upside-down or on its side)? If YES, go to 5, else go to 25)Pick part up again, rotate X/Y axis as required, translate as required, and place on boardYes, a machine like this would be slow as hell, unusable for even low-volume production. (Imagine how long it might take before one of those aluminum electrolytics in the photo above landed on its feet.) But it would also be cheap as hell to purchase and operate, because it would require no feedersand no supervision. Put board on table next to part bins, start machine, go to bed, and in the morning a thousand parts have magically been placed as if by elves.Every time I ask if something like this exists, people laugh at me.Eventually, the laughter will stop and money will change hands. Who wants some?

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:27:11 am
content: wow! didn't expect to get this much feedback before my next break, awesome!so here are the points I see.-Figure out a way to have the feeders work automatically (so no taping strips of pats to the work surface and having the machine pick from that limited selection)-High REPEATABLE accuracy, so basically some form of optical encoder (or similar) that keeps track of any lost steps and corrects for them.-good software (no worries there, I plan to build my own software, I tend to find that easier than trying to integrate someone Else's soft.)KE5FX :I'm one of the many people on here with the knowledge to do that on here, but one of the few nut's enough to actually do it.HOWEVER, this would (most likely) not make as much money as you seem to think (it would only be useful to hobbyist, and hobbyist don't have much money usually)luckily I don't do things for the money, I do things for the challenge ^.^second of all, I wouldn't 'drop' the part and hope it lands right side up, I would use a 5 axis arm.third of all, programming an AI that can tell one part from another when they are overlapping and jumbled like that is EXTREMELY difficult. but I like a challenge (I already have some Idea's on how to remedy it)I have to many other projects on the go right now to look at this seriously right now, but when I finish the P&P machine, remind me again and I'll have a look.Thank you for all the input so far guys! I'm touched ^.^

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:38:29 am
content: Quote from: KE5FX on August 11, 2017, 11:46:54 pmyeah i thought the same, why use feeders at all but a single slow but precise robot arm with a rotatingvacuum pipet/s with inbuilt pressure sensor aided by some clever shape recognition software?Surely someone have thought about this long time ago? lets laugh together over the idea!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:41:04 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 11, 2017, 10:19:41 pmYep, guaranteed.

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 01:09:15 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 12, 2017, 12:41:04 amwhich is why I mentioned.QuoteJust watch mewell... don't watch me.. I'm a slow worker and I'm sure you have much more productive things to do.. but now I'm very driven to do this, sub $500 machine, 'better*' than the neoden 4.*Smaller footprint, less reals, but good accuracy, and little to no fiddling out of the box.lol, I know I'm sounding hard headed now, but how can I say 'yeah you're right, I won't even try' now?

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:13:06 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 11, 2017, 10:42:40 pmThat's how the passives for the biggest jobs are handled now. Large vacuum sealed blocks of passives are simply torn open and poured into hoppers. From there a vision system pick them out, orients them, and places them.

author: Alex Eisenhut
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:28:33 pm
content: Make a 200$ this:

author: donotdespisethesnake
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:52:17 pm
content: Quote from: NickPerry on August 12, 2017, 01:09:15 amUnfortunately, this is the wrong forum to ask. Anything less than a professional quality machine is treated negatively, and you won't get much constructive advice.I have had a desire to build a cheap P&P project for a while, so I'm quite interested in a sub $500 build. I would buy one at that price, but not >$1000. If you are building hardware, it is pretty much impossible to beat cheap Chinese manufacturers. I think a practical budget for a "home build" might be $750.Of the recent DIY P&P machines, I think LitePlacer is the only one that is usable and can be bought, but at €1700 for a kit, it is not that cheap. At that price, buying a Neoden might be better.There are cheaper ways to handle reels than individual reel feeders, I've been looking at approx $10 per lane. But handling loose strips and bulk would be useful for hobby/prototype builds. I have some ideas how to reduce setup times as well.Unfortunately, vision systems are not a very good substitute for precision machinery, but at least vision recognition is getting cheaper and easier.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:59:07 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on August 12, 2017, 12:13:06 pm

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 01:04:40 pm
content: Quote from: Alex Eisenhut on August 12, 2017, 12:28:33 pmtypical problem with people around the globe including the jedi master is they expect to pay a dime for a ferrari... just as asking, make $50 this...

author: Skashkash
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 01:11:28 pm
content: Quote from: Kjelt on August 11, 2017, 10:24:21 pmThis has been my highly desired device for the last 10 years. Fills that niche between hobby and production.Been thinking about it a lot.I've been waiting for someone else to build it so I would not have to do it myself. Make it flexible enough, and you can also us it for watch repair.

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 02:56:20 pm
content: Before work today I kinda picked through some of my extra parts I had from my cnc machine (I know I have stepper controllers somewhere but I couldn't find them quickly)these steppers were to small for my mill, but should be just fine for this, and I'll use those bearings to make the slides.I'm low on angle Iron so I'll have to pick up some more. but I have plenty of aluminum sheeting to make it look pretty :p (it's for my E-bike project, but I should have plenty left over for this)REPLIES________________wilfred: just building a simple 2 axis part mover is indeed the first order of business (since I have the parts for that already :p) and I'll build up from there.coppice: I think I'll stay with reels for now since I have a good Idea what I want to do for thatAlex Eisenhut: lol, just the material cost for that is well over $200 :p pretty cool thoughdonotdespisethesnake: No worries, their comments may be a bit harsh, but not without information, which is the most important partI'll just have to actually build it, I completely understand that there are a lot of people claiming to do something crazy and then never following through. once I have the frame welded up and whatnot the conversation will shift, that's always the case ^.^ (Thank you though!)mikeselectricstuff: that's pretty cool! and uses some of the same techniques I was thinking for KE5FX's Idea (using a shaker plate to separate a small quantity making it MUCH easier for an AI to locate the different parts.) but no, I'll be using reels for nowMechatrommer: why? for hobby/small scale just use a normal soldering bath off Ali.Skashkash: mine should be able to do that (since I plan to have a camera on the nozzle end, and manually being able to control the axis is a given) but it would be much easier (for the end user) if it's automated.END_________________________________________-Just a note, I only have time to work on this project Monday's and Tuesdays, and also between the times I'm not working on my E-bike project. so expect a slow build.Thank you for all the feedback!

author: IanJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 04:26:37 pm
content: As my production requirements are pretty low (I'll do 25 pcb's as a batch run normally, once every few weeks)........I'll be happy with:-- Sub $1000 p&p.- Effective vision system.- Hopper for passives.- Tape for everything else (strip of tape).- Slow is fine, and I don't mind having it process say four 100mm pcb's at one go.- A nice GUI for setting up the job.Saying that, I think design & build of a p&p machine is easily under estimated.....there's a lot of tech to be mastered.....so good luck!Ian.

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 05:54:12 pm
content: I've made a simple hand assembly jig. A simple wooden table with a hovering armrest sliding horizontally with two linear bearings.*When building this, I noticed how incredibly expensive good linear bearings are. For $200, you'll have a hard time getting the bearings.I also thought of why there isn't a vision based PNP with tray loading for all parts. But then I thought it would be too expensive anyway.You, as end user, would have to save time or money using the machine. Saving on outsourcing or manual assembly time.I think you'd be busy configuring the expensive machine, so you're not saving time. It would need very comprehensive software to work. Expensive software.Assembling high tech small electronics is just an expensive business. It costs ~€5K for 25 board prototype with an 8 week turnover.Better be right first time!*Similar tothis, except you are the Y axis and hold the tweezer.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 09:21:43 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 12, 2017, 12:59:07 pmThe video you posted from ASM is usable for 0402 and smaller. For resistors this means there is no value printed on them so either side is ok to place.For 0603 and larger relatively more of the components can not be picked.Besides any dirt, hairs or other contamination could bring havoc.For a starter hobby P&P where reels are to expensive there should be some kind of sorted stock. Like the ics that are placed in a tube and vibrated I was thinking of placing passives (if the same size)in order of placement in a tube so the p&p head can pick them up from one place instead of looking somewhere in a tape that is sticked. However one mispick would ruin all and the shift is to how to efficiently pick and order the components for filling the tube.I guess the unsolvable feeder issue is what stops efficient low budget P&P machines.

author: hlavac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 03:02:45 pm
content: I would be interested in working on such a hobbyist level p&p - my hands are too shaky to do smd manuallyHere are some ideas:- Tape reels / cut tape are much better for storage and easy pickup. Forget hoppers- I would split pickup and placing to two independent processes that run in parallel using sort of ammo clips for specific component shapes. One part deals with loading the clips with correct sequence of components from tapes while other moves over the pcb and dispenses components in optimal order

author: hlavac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 03:42:18 pm
content: Also it would be great if the machine was able to put solder paste on.I imagine something like putting the paste on the component when placing it instead of the pcbIt would do away with expensive stencils and shelf time limitations of pasted pcb.Or, alternatively, microsolder the components to the pcb

author: ejeffrey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 04:11:59 pm
content: Quote from: donotdespisethesnake on August 12, 2017, 12:52:17 pmPlenty of people here would be happy for a hobbyist grade PnP. But unlike a lot of other tools such as a soldering iron where even a $10 firestarter will do more than nothing, to be useful a PnP has to compete against "nothing" which is a perfectly viable option. Building a placement tool for fun and to learn about motor control and machine vision is great, but if you want to make something that is useful as a product it has to be better than hand placement and cheaper than commercial assembly in some niche. A lot of people here are skeptical that you can do PnP that is useful on its own merits for that kind of budget. And the reason is that it is a really attractive idea. PCB manufacture is now stupidly cheap, but small volume assembly is still relatively expensive, and a lot of the cost is labor / set up. A hobbyist grade PnP is really attractive and a lot of people have tried and come to the conclusion that it is really hard to do on such a tight budget.

author: fcb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 04:40:18 pm
content: Back a few year ago I spent well over a 1000 hours working on a low-cost P&P machine. I have also owned a couple of Versatronics machines, but now use sub-contractors. Here are some pointers:1. Don't start like everyone else with a bunch of steppersTackle the show stoppers first!2. Go round a real SMT production lineEven go and work there for a week. If it doesn't put you off - it will give you some valuable insight.3. It's all about the feedersI tried loose pick up from a tray - forget that, really too complex at this stage, or you end up with vibratory mechanisms to try and space out the parts and turn them over. The feeder is everything - get that right and you are 7/10th's there. Build a 100% mechanical feeder that can be injection moulded and is triggered by the head - hint: most of the complexity is in the cover tape spool mechanism. You must have a really cheap feeder that can stay with the reel.4. Consider SCARA armsThis looked like the lowest cost method to get a wide reach, the maths is harder - but very little to go wrong.5. Forget wood & plastics for the bodyThey are prone to warping and very temperature dependent. I even looked at using concrete and composite stone.6. Use someone elses nozzlesDon't waste your time designing your own, there is a fair bit to it.7. Forget doing it for $500You'll struggle to make something usable for less than $5K, and even if you can get away with $500 for the materials, you'll never sell enough to break even let alone make a profit. And if you can do it - the Far East will just clone it. Or just take one the cheap Chinese machines and make them work properly.

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 05:49:48 pm
content: I think most jump on hardware first for position. All with no or limited feedback.When you place a part, you use vision for feedback. Poor hardware(your arm) gets corrected by vision. Your arm can not place a part with out your vision.I would suggest working on vision first. When vision can tell you what to do with your arm to pick & place a part, then you have a chance of cheap hardware.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 06:19:27 pm
content: what i would like to have is an assisted arm. kind of like a suspended nozzle with a video camera on it.there would be a sorting box holding parts ( loose parts, no tapes ) a keypad allows me to tell the arm what box to go to. the video camera shows me what is there , i can now fine position using a small joystick or touchpad and pick the part.the arm now comes back to hover above the last position on the board. during this travel the camera looks at the part and rotates it with smallest edge towards camera.i have buttons to rotate left / right 90 degreesagain : jostick touchpad allows me to fine position part and a button 'places' itmucking around with tweezers and microscopes is VERY time consuming.having a simply mechanism that goes to the tray and allows me to pick a part ( i will do the picking using touchpad and a click ) , then spins it always in same direction. and i will do the fine positioning of placing it.it would be nice to be able to feed a bom so on the video overlay it shows a single line : Cxxx , 100nFi would teel it what bin it can find th 100nf part. so i dont have to deal with that.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 06:42:04 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 11, 2017, 10:42:40 pmI agree. A systems which can use components in small bins like these (with all lids open) should be feasible:.A simple vacuum pick-up and some way to flip components which are upside down could be very usefull and it doesn't need complex & bulky feeders. With machine vision this isn't hard to do.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 06:56:09 pm
content: Quote from: fcb on August 13, 2017, 04:40:18 pmAbsolutely - you really do have to use a P&P to understand all the issues. P&P is not one big problem., it's LOTS of small ones, that have to ALL be right for it to be useful.QuoteJust like I've been saying forever, again it's multiple small problems. Even a low-end machine has to be able to do many thousands of operations with reliably minimal care & feeding, otherwise it's just a big time-suckQuoteyes and no. Although mechanically simpler, the thing about X/Y is you can get everything off the shelf, and the inverse kinematics are trivial. SCARA has all sorts of issues like varying resolution over the working area, and the need to sometimes to go from A to B via C. Somewhere I have a video of "movement trails" made by my RV with a LED on the arm -need to find some software to process it into a timelapse that shows the flow nicely.QuoteFibreglass (e.g. 3.2 or 4.8mm PCB material) might be worth exploring.If you can come up with a way of really accurately sensing the nozzle position, that would allow cheap mechanics. I think some sort of laser interferometer, or a combination of interferometry and time-of-flight might be viable

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 06:58:52 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 13, 2017, 06:42:04 pmThat would be too hard - you need to get a few parts onto a flat surface and be able to shake them, so you can easily see individual parts and measure their position and rotation

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 07:04:45 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 13, 2017, 06:58:52 pmIt might be hard, but if you can figure out a way to solve the pick up and selection, wouldn't it provide a fantastic solution? Those trays of closely packed passive values would avoid much of the usual configuring for each project. A massive plus for prototyping and small runs.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 07:22:12 pm
content: I suppose one way would be to pick "some" ( vacuum + oversized meshed nozzle) , drop them on a glass plate shaker for vision & picking, then put the unused ones back in the right compartment (without droppping any on the way)

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 07:45:29 pm
content: I would personally first investigate the vision system I would use. Can I properly code and interface to a moving camera on a head & correct to Z-axis errors, adapt to different height of components on my source tray? Can I do this with relative speed? Remember, focal length come into effect here as well as scale correction. Yes, graphic processing power exists today to do so with ease, but, programming it isn't easy... If I cannot work and respond with vision at my work head, everything else falls apart.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 07:53:50 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 13, 2017, 07:45:29 pmI agree. I think the key to anything interesting that might be done from this point on is going to be based on the innovation that cheap vision can bring to the problem. That means your priority is to work out how convoluted a mess of parts can be sorted out by the visual system, and how effectively they can be manoeuvred by the elementary manipulators you can afford to use.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 08:04:14 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 13, 2017, 07:45:29 pmCompared to the travel times. vision time will be pretty negligible. As vision problems go, many of those in pick/place are relatively "easy". You have complete control over lighting, well defined distances, controllable background and a very finite range of things you need to identify and measure. A RasPi camera, with the lens screwed out to get close focus, and a LED illuminator should be capable of good results.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 08:09:07 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 13, 2017, 07:22:12 pmWell, if they are passives, you probably want a few of the same value across a board. Even more so if you are stuffing a repetitive panel. So, this gathering a bunch of bits, and putting surplus back, might not be as much of a drag on performance as it might appear at first sight. If the shuffling of individual bits is performed in a small scoop, the whole scoop can be moved back to the original bin, and tipped in, so I don't think the reliable return of surplus bits to the bin should be too big an issue.... as long as people don't overfill the bins.

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 08:11:38 pm
content: wow, this thread is blowing up, I'm holding off on a full reply till monday when I have something to show. but reading this between breaks at work I wanted to add my 2c.about the 'use a nozzle to grab from a bin'there are things computers are good at that humans are terribly slow at. (like calculating the position for a SCARA arm system.)there are things that humans are great at, but computers have a terrible time with (like recognizing that 2 over lapping parts aren't just 1 funny shaped part)now seeing individual parts in a bin is easy for us humans, for a robot it is incredibly difficult (and slow). which is why me, Mike'selectricalstuff and those auto feeder, they take a small quantity, place it on a shaker table, and separate the pieces, this makes it much more feasible, but also more expensive & complicated. it's not just a few lines of code.this is also why I won't be doing this for this build. (at least not until I have everything else working smoothly)

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 08:13:58 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 13, 2017, 08:04:14 pmThis is true if you limit yourself to the kind of pick and place of yesteryear. If you want to follow something like the ASM SIPLACE route, I suspect the vision issues are considerably more challenging.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 08:24:40 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on August 13, 2017, 08:13:58 pmI don't think anyone's planning on competing with the big guys, but once you remove the requirement to do it at crazy speeds with microscopic parts, I think the pricniple could be a way to at least partially solve the problem of making cheap, useable feedersQuoteTrue, but with something like OpenCV, and some effort by one person, it then becomes very cheap to reproduce. The key is finding the right balance between software and hardware - once you have parts in one layer on a plate, all you are doing is finding outlines and measuring their size, position and and orientation, which isn't that hard.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 08:31:26 pm
content: Quote from: NickPerry on August 13, 2017, 08:11:38 pmYou don't need to make it complicated. You know what kind (shape/size) of part is in the bin and object recognisition is far beyond it's infancy so even if parts overlap you can pick the one which is on top. The OpenCV library offers are huge amount of ready-to-go algorithms. Apply these cleverly and you can probably program this needing only a few lines of code. In addition chips could be spread out on a tray and the camera can be used to read the part numbers and select the right chip. For me a machine which can use bins and loose chips would be interesting because it means I don't need to mess with reels and feeders. It will be slower but if the machine can run on it's own I wouldn't care.

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 09:10:10 pm
content: I still think you're underestimating, about 5... or was it 10 years ago now? anyways, I worked with a small team coding a program to read 'fuzzy text' it was somewhat successful, and quite slow (could take full seconds at times) and that was in a 2d space. (Think of the security questions, they are chosen for humans to be easy to read, but difficult for computers) now I admit, there are a lot of tools out there, and there may be some that can make this task easier. but I'm very skeptical. I think I'm gonna K.I.S.S it until I have a good foundation to work off of. then I may dive in (and even then, using the vibration method)but I will have a 2 camera system for picking and placing.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 09:26:03 pm
content: Sure, pick and place at $200 is possible, but only if those $200 are used to pay somebody else to assemble the boards.Otherwise, with $200 in parts is hard to build even a decent 3D printer.It reminds me of this one:http://hackaday.com/2014/06/04/thp-entry-a-300-pick-place-3d-printer/At $200, maybe something that moves and buzz can be built, nothing more.For sure, not a usable pick and place machine.OpenCV is not magic. A single frame can take seconds to process, and this happens at very low resolutions. At high resolution, it can easily go to minutes. Not all parts with the same part number are visually identical. Don't count on recognizing the parts visually. Since a human can hardly do that under a microscope, a machine vision will never do it reliable. In theory, it's easy, in practice, it will just not work.This is not a one man weekend job.Sure, we can talk about it and come up with crazy ideas, but that's pretty much all it can be done at $200.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 09:42:31 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 13, 2017, 09:26:03 pmYou would not attempt to figure out what part it is ( at least not to start with). If you can get a bunch of known parts laying flat on a plate with the right lighting, the vision task isn't even going to take seconds. Threshold it to produce outlines, then look for outlines of the approximate size you already know the parts should be and measure the rotation.The only time that matters is the time to find thefirstsuitable part to be able to pick it, and you can be looking for the next one within the image during the time the head is placing the first ( even with a head-mounted camera).If a consumer camera can recognise and track faces in real time, and read QR codes, finding rectangles of known size in a thresholded image should be pretty straightforward and fast.As I said, the trick is finding the right balance between hardware and software.

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 09:44:54 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 13, 2017, 08:24:40 pmWhy measure with vision, why read text?If the computer has reference images, a part is just a "this photo matches this reference photo". This can also be basis of navigation and position of part.A PC board on a table is where is the table not the table photo. This lets you find outline of PC board. You can build a photo map of bare PC board for reference.Solder paste is again where is PC board not PC board due to paste.A new P&P job is just using what you can get from cad and adding & comparing photo references.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 10:06:42 pm
content: So how are component tapes made then? I guess we need the tech that those tape component fillers have, they align the components correct side up and stick it in the tape. It looks like they do it with shaking rotating and probably vision check , we need a smaller version of thishttps://youtu.be/dbhD8JTOqf0

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 10:15:27 pm
content: With <500$ of cameras & electronics & lighting & mechanics, you will be stuck with doing a lot of positioning correcting on the X&Y&Z axis at every point in the game. Unless all your mechanics are as sturdy and good as the expensive machines which are built to BIG$, your only hope to position a QFN 0.4mm pin pitch IC from above, with a questionably centered cameras and where the IC may be on the suction head may come down to judging by vision as you lower the IC down to the PCB. Like I said, square off your vision issues first before anything else. Investigate as if you will only have 1 camera mounted with the head to work off of. A second camera may be a later added feature, but if you begin relying on a multi-camera solution from the start, you are only dividing focus away from the most difficult aspect of your project.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 10:19:16 pm
content: Might it be worth an investigation with linear encoders and possibly DIY linear motors?I've considered for a while, the making of linear motors using a multi-layer PCB for the motor itself and a simple row of neodymium magnets along the plate.Linear encoders with 0.244um resolution can be had over here for 'fuck all'https://www.rls.si/rlb-linear-component-magnetic-encoder-system

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 10:48:35 pm
content: CM800At beginning Hard drives used optical encoders and servos to position the heads. Disk space id not increase greatly until the actual heads were the position sense.An axis will have slop past and costs more and more to try to make slop small. Cameras are directly looking at PC board to part., Axis slop will just slow the process.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 11:03:44 pm
content: If you will be using stepper motors with your own driver, I recently done a project with this guy: A4985SLPTR-Thttps://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/allegro-microsystems-llc/A4985SLPTR-T/620-1344-1-ND/2237998Handles all your micro-stepping, current limiting & adaptive drive power needs...

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 11:07:25 pm
content: Quote from: CM800 on August 13, 2017, 10:19:16 pmI would probably just use a cheap pair of digital calipers(But for this project I'm thinking optical encoders.. but that's still up in the air.)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 11:31:21 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 13, 2017, 09:26:03 pmMaybe on a 386 @20 MHz but I've used OpenCV for demanding vision jobs with multiple operations on a modern ARM SoC and it did just fine.

author: NickPerry
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2017, 11:52:47 pm
content: nctnico: you may be scoffing, but don't forget many hobbyist do not have great computers, so making sure the software can run on older PC's is typically a good idea. (this is a problem a lot of game creators also run into)that being said, I've never used OpenCV before, but it looks intriguing, and since so many people use it, I might use it as well (I like keeping my code accessible for everyone)

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 12:23:51 am
content: Someone else's DIY pick and place machine:

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 01:07:15 am
content: Some Open PNP machine with camera action selecting and placing components randomly scattered loose parts on a tray:

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 04:07:26 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 13, 2017, 11:03:44 pmthis is much cheaper with everything ready plug and play to arduino or whatever...http://www.ebay.com.my/itm/A4988-Stepper-Motor-Driver-Module-StepStick-3D-Printer-Polulu-RAMPS-RepRap-/172229894670?hash=item2819b3a20e:g:6tEAAOSwOyJX4K7n

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 07:28:30 am
content: Quote from: NickPerry on August 13, 2017, 11:07:25 pmWell at £40 for an encoder, that's not a bad price... (Actually the best damned price in the market. I've used them, they work a treat.)

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 03:54:29 pm
content: what i am talking about is something like thisorbut : with a bit more intelligence.on the left side you would have a tray with compartments. ( like a waffle with 1inx1in compartments)you tell the machine A1 holds this part, a2 holds this part a3 holds this part.you load the bom.for strength : 8020 frames.C1 is 100nf and found in tray a8if it is time to place c1 , the machine moves to a8. you fine position and pick the part using a track pad (position) and a button (drop nozzle and turn on vacuum , lift nozzle.the arm now moves back to last known position on the pcb. you now spin the part , position it and place it..a video feed shows you camera and pick data.all i want is a track pad / joystick to do x/y operations , a button to pick / release parts and a piece of code to move between the correct tray and the board.left hand would do x/y operations, right hand would do pick and drop and rotation operations.so you would need an x/t able , a vacuum needle on a stepper to rotate and a stepper for z motion.the pick operation would be- move to correct tray- drop to slightly above part- human positions needle and presses button.- needle drops , vaccum on, lift needle move to last know board position , needle drops to slightly above board. if vacuum fails we go back to tray and redo operation- human rotates part using rotary encoder and x/y positions. press button- part is now gently placed.two buttons now exist : next , or replace. replace lifts part again and allows for x/y and rotation again.if next is pressed : allow for x/y movement over board so human can select next placement position.button press : go to tray to pick next part eetcvideo overlay shows the camera and the current part to be picked and next 5 parts to be picked.a 'skip' button allows you to skip (as in we wont place this part at all), a part a 'later' button allows you to put the current part at the end of the queue.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 06:42:12 pm
content: https://www.robotdigg.com/product/43/Nema8+Hollow+Shaft+Stepper+MotorA hollow shaft NEMA 8 would be a great choice, this company even offers one with a nipple on the end for a tube to attach.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 08:25:54 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on August 14, 2017, 03:54:29 pmAlthough I like the eurocircuits/Elektor solution it still has a major drawback that a lot of (semi) manual p&p's have: the cameravision is under an angle. In the video you can not even see how the soc8 is placed on the other side let alone place some major component.The automated p&p solve this by having the camera mounted on a fixed x,y offset to the nozzle.For a manual p&p two cameras should be mounted or perhaps better mount the camera under 90 degrees and the nozzle under a 45 degree angle below the camera. Anyway that needs to be solved.

author: briandorey
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 08:34:13 pm
content: This video shows my DIY pick and place machine which uses second hand commercial feeders for the components.There are more photos of the parts used on my blog athttp://www.briandorey.com/post/DIY-Pick-and-Place-V2-Project-Completeand it uses the robotdigg hollow shaft steppers for the nozzles.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 08:40:51 pm
content: This will cheapen things up for the hollow shaft stepper motor:https://www.banggood.com/39MM-Hollow-Shaft-Hybrid-Stepper-Motor-4-Phase-5-Wire-Square-1_8-Degrees-Stepper-Motor-p-978459.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc_elc&utm_campaign=ds-indu-mechanicalpart1&utm_content=george&gclid=Cj0KCQjwlMXMBRC1ARIsAKKGuwgzws_0tQhhn8Frx6dKfDq_P74_1cko9ht0g5VrQTaCxADqGUU76K4aAnBiEALw_wcB

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 09:29:21 pm
content: Coincidentally I spoke to someone from a rapid prototyping / small batch PCB assembly service. The guy explained they use some kind of semi-automatic pick and place machine which doesn't need feeders or endless programming but does help to place parts quickly.

author: zeqing
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 08:37:21 am
content: a pick-n-machine is intended to help users on placing the components, with lower cost and ensured quality; do not think a 200$ would be really helpful for a real project. i believe it would be even slow and worse quality than placing them by my hand...

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 10:08:41 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 14, 2017, 09:29:21 pmWell that is a major teaserDo you have manufacturer and product details or is it the known manual pick and place machine with rotating storage compartments ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 12:27:24 pm
content: Quote from: Kjelt on August 15, 2017, 10:08:41 amI didn't ask. I wanted to keep the conversation short due to my dinner getting cold. Maybe I'll pay them a visit. I usually visit the assemblers I'm using to see what their setup is like.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 06:34:00 pm
content: Anyone know any good stepper controller ic's? ( i'm not talking the bridge drivers, but the actual controllers that do the ramp and velocity control . and i don't want any arduino stuff or software algorithms : i need real ic's )Essentially a chip where you tell it : go there. And the chip does the rampup, rampdown, velocity control, and corrects for any overshoot. Agilent had those HCTL1101 . or the TMC5130 . anyone know any others ?

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 06:46:05 pm
content: Think ST has what you want.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 07:03:34 pm
content: For everyone's info, I worked out some prices for a linear motor, encoder & drive (would only require mechanics e.g. linear rails) comes to about £500 per axis. This could be brought down quite a bit with volume.The price covers:-Servo drive-20N Linear motor (68mm long)-210mm Linear magnet Rail- 0.244 micron resolution magnetic encodergives 142mm of stroke, however if you add another linear magnet rail that bumps it to 352. (and the price up by like... £180)Could make for a great PnP machine if you build it out of Aluminium rigidly, you could place all the way down to the tiny components.Servo drives can take pulse direction input, or RS485 position / velocity commands, or even interpolated / cyclic sync position from CAN given by an Arduino Due or RPiIt's out of budget a good chunk... but an interesting idea.

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 07:32:27 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on August 14, 2017, 03:54:29 pmThis is insane! What you describe is a fully automated machine being run in manual mode. WHY? If you have the capability of running the machine under computer control, why not have it do the board totally automatically from CAD data?Jon

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 07:45:32 pm
content: Quote from: jmelson on August 15, 2017, 07:32:27 pmLikely because all of the parts that the person has a hand in (does manually) are the ones that take a lot of expensive programming, development & R&D costs.

author: hlavac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 09:12:30 pm
content: Here is a nice semi-automatic approach. It tells you what to do, and places a little guide for you to precisely put the part in. It even has a part flipper!

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 09:27:44 pm
content: Quote from: hlavac on August 15, 2017, 09:12:30 pmhttps://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/SM-902-SMT-manipulator_105722634.html$20K...30K really?

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 09:37:53 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 15, 2017, 09:27:44 pmI can see the benefit of such a unit if you specialise in custom single pieces day-in-day-out.Should pay itself off reasonably well.

author: KE5FX
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 09:52:59 pm
content: Quote from: CM800 on August 15, 2017, 09:37:53 pmI don't get it.They've done all the hard stuff. Why not add the necessary camera(s) and linear motors to automate the process?

author: hlavac
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 10:25:29 pm
content: For cheap, precise, quiet and fast linear axis positioning we could use linear encoder chip likeAS5311with suitablemagnetic strip, and useBLDCmotor instead of stepper + GT2 belt to create a closed loop servo

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 10:55:56 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on August 15, 2017, 06:34:00 pmProbably rare, at least as an IC rather than a board, as you can do it in software, so any system that needs it can usually run the motion control on the same processor as everything else.

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 01:55:26 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on August 15, 2017, 06:34:00 pmLook at ST drivers with an SPI connection.The L6470 device, realized in analog mixed signal technology, is an advanced fully integrated solution suitable for driving two-phase bipolar stepper motors with microstepping. It integrates a dual low RDS(on)DMOS full bridge with all of the power switches equipped with an accurate on-chip current sensing circuitry suitable for non-dissipative current control and overcurrent protection. Thanks to a unique control system, a true 1/128 steps resolution is achieved. The digital control core can generate user defined motion profiles with acceleration, deceleration, speed or target position, easily programmed through a dedicated registers set. All commands and data registers, including those used to set analogue values (i.e. current control value, current protection trip point, deadtime, PWM frequency, etc.) are sent through a standard 5-Mbit/s SPI. A very rich set of protections (thermal, low bus voltage, overcurrent, motor stall) allows the design of a fully protected application, as required by the most demanding motor control applications.Their are others.

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 03:12:37 am
content: Quote from: CM800 on August 15, 2017, 07:45:32 pmExpensive programming? The recent video shows what a very simple machine can do. My machine has centering jaws that make the positioning of parts more accurate. There is NO programming involved on small passives. The CAM system provides the coordinates and rotation for each part, that goes straight to the P&P computer.But, I don't do one-offs on a P&P machine, it is easy to do those by hand. After a couple boards, it starts to make sense.Jon

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 03:18:07 am
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 15, 2017, 09:27:44 pmUmmm, I set up my P&P in my basement for about $8000. A big chunk of that was having double doors installed on the basement to accomodate the P&P machine. I have a very nice Philips CSM84 without vision. it has 3 nozzles, which I have loaded for small, mid-sized and large parts. It can do about 3600 parts/hour, except the bigger parts need to go over to the mechanical alignment station that adds a couple seconds. I can't IMAGINE paying $20K+ for a manual machine!Jon

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 08:22:20 am
content: Quote from: hlavac on August 15, 2017, 09:12:30 pmI really like that part flipping "flipping station" , that is something simple I want to build or buy onlineA different version can be seen here:https://www.fritsch-smt.de/en/manual-pick-place/features/flipping-station-for-loose-components/Should be supported with openPNP much more reliable than just vibrating tens of parts and wait till one flips correctly and afterwards placing the superfluous parts back in the tray.I also like the rotating disc storage compartment but then I would like to have a seperate disk for each project making it really expensive.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 09:16:27 am
content: Quote from: jmelson on August 16, 2017, 03:18:07 am

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 01:32:26 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on August 15, 2017, 06:34:00 pmnot a chip, but a board is being discussed here...https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/smart-steppers/msg1281162/#msg1281162....among mentioned are elmo, omron, panasonic and whatnot. i'm sure you dont mind big pocket price since you mentioned not to have arduino algorithm crap...

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 03:07:24 pm
content: Quote from: Kjelt on August 16, 2017, 08:22:20 amWow that looks seriously over-engineered... Should be easy nowadays to knock something up with a couple of servos & some 3d-printing

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 03:34:28 pm
content: Quote from: jmelson on August 15, 2017, 07:32:27 pmNo because i don't use tape ! my parts are loose.my hand is no longer steady. tweezers are cumbersome. ( 0402 parts you know ... )i will do the rotation and fine tuning. ( later that can be handled by machine. initially this is a good setup.once a board has gone through teach in the machine remembers coordinates for placing. the software can be expanded to use the coordinates from a pick and place file later.This is just a brain experiment. start with something like this. it gives you the x/y gantry and the pick head. once we got that working we can thinka bout software improvement.My idea is not to make a fully automated volume machine.think 10 boards per run , 5x5 cm boards 20 to 30 parts per board.I would start simple. get some sliders and steppersUse hollow axis stepper and a paste dispenser needle for pickup ( or a real pick head. samsung heads are like 20$.I would use a cheap usb cameras (endoscope cameras) mounted on the pick head. Looks at a 45 degree mirror that has a hole in it ( for the needle )a joypad allows me to do x-y motions. a rotary dial allows me to spin the part.NEXT button : start process of next part : stage moves above correct spot in parts tray- i fine position stage using joypad and hit the PICK/PLACE button. machine picks part.- i hit ok -> next step- i hit redo -> machine puts part back down and i can repick a component.- i hit reject -> machine drops part in 'reject' bin' and comes back to trayafter 'OK'-> move stage to last position over board.-> drop head to about 2mm above pcb-> i fine tune the rotation ( downward looking image showing part and board ) and x-y and press PICK/PLACE button-> machine places part down on pcbif-> i hit OK -> move back to tray ( next line item)-> i hit REDO : lift part of board and allow me to adjust x/y and rotate -> hit place again to finish-> i hit reject -> machine moves to reject bin , spits out part and goes back to last tray so i can pick it againSmart software : upon Place the absolute position is recorded for that line item. so on next pcb the x/y doesnt need to be redone. only rotationA SKIP button allows me to mark a part as non-installa QUEUE button allows me to move this line item to the end of the pick program ( i don't want to place this guy right now... )so i have very few controls- a rotary dial for theta- a joypad for x-yPICK/PLACE button to pick or place a part ( dpeending on what phase we are in )REDO button to repick or replaceOK button to go to next stepEJECT button to throw away part and retrySKIP button for non-installQUEUE button for 'place later'software and features can be developed laterGantry style system . two Z steppers running in sync , one X stepper. one Z stepper , one hollow axis theta stepper , one endoscope usb camera side looking at a 45 degree mirror.these guys seems to have a collection of all that is neededhttps://www.robotdigg.com/

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 05:03:52 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 16, 2017, 03:07:24 pmIf you look at the first video on page two at three quarters they show a simpler version (2nd gen costdown?) that is more plastick and small servo like you mentioned.

author: jmelson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 08:13:13 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on August 16, 2017, 03:34:28 pmOK, I have not worked with 0402, and they ARE tiny! But, I do some 0603 and lots of 0805 parts by hand. My hands are no longer as steady as they once were. But, resting the heel of my hand or wrist on something makes them a lot more steady. A good microscope is CRITICAL! I have a stereo zoom microscope with relatively long working distance, I couldn't do this stuff without it.I get practically all my parts on tape, and if I only need a few, i get them on cut tape.QuoteMy commercial, high-end full-auto P&P machine has a teach function, I have NEVER used it, ever!QuoteWhen I started out with this machine, I did small runs like that, and still do from time to time. The programming effort for a moderately dense small board was not that great. I wrote a little C program to read in the P&P file from my CAD/CAM software and convert it to the form the P&P machine used, and then loaded that into the P&P via a serial comm program. It took me a little while to get the whole thing perfect, but within 2 WEEKS of the machine arriving, I was cranking out boards! I'd guess that it now takes me 15 minutes to program a board with 100+ parts of 30 or so types. Mostly, I have to look at the list of parts and decide what feeder location I want them in. Most used parts go closest to the board, to minimize head travel. I write a file that tells what parts go in what feeder location, run my converter program and make sure it matched all the parts to a feeder, and then send the output file to the P&P machine.It takes longer to track down all the parts and load onto feeders, put into machine and makes ure they are all in the right slot.Jon

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 08:38:15 pm
content: Quote from: jmelson on August 16, 2017, 08:13:13 pmmy idea is NOT to run production.it is a semi automatic machine that allows me to assembly MY boards in a quick way.no need for tweezers, no need for feeders, no need for tape , no need for a microscope. a small PC ( or an rPi ) can do the thing.programming is minimal ( my coding skills are not that great and i am lazy . i could never do a vision recognition system)i think it would work faster than fully by hand.it is a man-assisting machine.

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 09:20:55 pm
content: free_electronFor the next step up from what you have stated, do you really need a vision recognition system?If you have a photo of bare board & a current photo from camera.Then Position is just overlaying the two photos, Would be like a focus step to get great position. Instead of moving focus ring on camera you would be adjusting the X & Y relation of the the two photos.Over time, you could have a large number of photos to use.If you added a step where you placed the fiducial, then the software could handle the problem of PC board position.I see little things with photo( storing & Using) use helping greatly with with what you propose.For example you said to"machine remembers coordinates for placing"Just by capturing a photo, you could have optical coordinates for placing. This could allow less precise machine coordinates as need would only be to get in fine tune optical position.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 05:01:41 am
content: There is still rotation .... the part i pick lays in random angle ...

author: C
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 11:15:02 pm
content: On way to pick a part take a photo.pick up partposition over photo & difference of current photo and photo is part.If you use the take a photo a lot then things get easer.You could build a photo map of bare pick & place area.Adding a tape would let you isolate a tape.Your parts photo data base lets you position on part in tape.I see it just building if you use photos.