What is Your Real Output?


Reading time ( words)

How should you define your output? Highest area productivity, lab speed, actual speed, optimum speed, IPC speed, or maximum speed? And is it speed or throughput we should be looking at? Neither is clearly defined, and we all have our rules of thumb (e.g., actual speed is 60% of IPC speed, which is 60% of maximum speed).

Currently, there is only one standard representing a fair comparison between pick-and place equipment: IPC-9850. It measures equipment speed (providing that components are placed within the specified accuracy of the equipment itself). IPC established IPC-9850 in 2002, defining the measurement procedures for specifying, evaluating and verifying surface mount placement equipment. With machine manufacturers producing a wide range of accuracies and outputs, it details how measurements must be made consistently, and is therefore the only real way to compare them. It has become a basic industry reference, but unfortunately doesn’t tell the whole story. Several pick-and-place machine manufacturers, for example, currently claim the industry’s fastest placement speeds on the basis of the IPC reference speed.

One key difference lies between the IPC-9850 speed and the actual speed you will reach in a particular application. And that is where IPC-9850 falls short.

For this reason, IPC published an updated version in January 2012: IPC-9850A. Since the release of this update, it has been adopted by…practically nobody. Admittedly, the new standard is far from perfect, as applications are usually still more complex than even it allows for. It is a step closer to the truth, though. Why have so few adopted it? Why do most manufacturers avoid publishing the results? It seems that this minor change in specification degrades output results so drastically that it is commercially too sensitive.

IPC-9850 and IPC-9850A: The Differences

IPC-9850 speeds are measured by placing a simple matrix of components (for example 80 SOIC-16s or 400 identical 0603 capacitors) on a 200 x 200 mm substrate. However, the standard says nothing about the electrical value of these 400 capacitors, for example. That allows sequential placement machines to use gang pick (simultaneous pick by multiple placement heads) using an optimized placement path. Gang pick, however, artificially inflates the performance figure since it can virtually never be used in an actual customer application. You just don’t get many circuits incorporating hundreds of identical 27-nF capacitors on a board in a small matrix in a 200 x 200 mm area.

Read the full column here.


Editor's Note: This column originally appeared in the March 2014 issue of SMT Magazine.

Share

Print


Suggested Items

IPC: Trump’s FY2020 Budget Plan Kicks Off U.S. Policy Debates

03/22/2019 | Ken Schramko, IPC Government Relations
Within the last week, U.S. President Trump released his $4.7 trillion fiscal 2020 budget plan, kicking off the annual federal budget process. IPC is watching several budget debates that could impact the electronics industry and its supply chain.

2019 IPC EMS Management Meeting Wrap-up

03/19/2019 | Tracy Riggan, IPC
At the recent EMS Management Meeting during IPC APEX EXPO 2019, EMS leaders gathered to discuss issues critical to EMS providers today, including supply chain issues, customer contracts, labor optimization and talent shortages. The highlight of the day was a supply chain challenges panel and discussion featuring supplier, distributor, and end-user perspectives on addressing component supply and lead time challenges.

Industry Outlook from IPC's Sharon Starr

03/18/2019 | Patty Goldman, I-Connect007
Sharon Starr, IPC's director of market research, provides updates on the EMS and PCB industry outlook, benefits of IPC membership and participation, plans to expand the EMS statistical program, and new studies being published.



Copyright © 2019 I-Connect007. All rights reserved.