For the automation of PCBA electronic assembly production lines, do you think [assembly] is easier, or is [testing] the simpler task? Many assembly movements can now be aided by robotic arms, but can testing be automated as well?
However, to implement automation on the production line, there is a significant shortage of “people” and “engineers” capable of adapting the equipment. Whether utilizing robotic arms for assembly or testing, or employing modular methods, the tolerance and adaptability of the equipment and fixtures are crucial; otherwise, a single mistake could lead to poor product assembly or, in severe cases, damaged components.
Furthermore, a major concern during automation implementation is the notion of “automation for the sake of automation.” Shenzhen Grace Express suggests that, regardless of whether automation is adopted, return on investment (ROI) should serve as the benchmark for evaluating the decision to automate versus maintaining existing jobs. This approach ensures the most economical and cost-effective production, as ultimately, costs and benefits must be weighed.
Whole machine test automation
Taking the current production of “mobile phones” as an example, the automated testing of the finished product after PCBA assembly can leverage robotic arms to replace traditional manual tapping and touch screen scripting tasks.
The remainder of the process is handled by the self-test program (Diagnostic Test), which runs on the mobile phone, while the computer communicates via wireless transmission (WiFi or Bluetooth) commands.
The most challenging aspect is the actual plug test of the I/O connector. For mobile phone testing, you might consider omitting this step entirely, as modern mobile devices typically only feature a headphone jack and a micro-USB connector. If the board has already undergone testing, you may be able to skip this step, or you could design an “Auto-engage” device to facilitate the process.
The final cosmetic inspection can then be delegated to an image recognition system for execution.
**PCB Level Test Automation**
Automated testing at the circuit board level is currently regarded as a relatively mature area. Generally, circuit board testing is categorized into AOI, ICT/MDA, FVT, and other types of tests.
**Discussion on Various Test Methods Post-Circuit Board Assembly:**
– **AOI (Automated Optical Inspection):** Most AOI equipment is already integrated into the SMT assembly line, making AOI automation entirely feasible.
– **ICT/MDA:** Both ICT and MDA are inherently automated tests. The more complex aspect lies in the loading and unloading phases. Present automation efforts focus on designing robotic arms for automatic loading and unloading tasks.
– **FVT (Function Verification Test):** In this area, robotic arms can also be employed for automatic loading and unloading. Manual operations required in FVT can be managed through PCBA assembly, but utilizing additional test points and needle beds on the circuit board can enhance testing efficiency.
To facilitate the robotic arm in easily picking and placing circuit boards, it is generally advisable to implement a drawer-type suction/exit device, replacing the older clamshell devices.
**Circuit Board Level Automatic Assembly**
Currently, PCB assembly is the most developed area, as nearly all boards are produced using pure SMT, which boasts the highest level of automation in today’s electronics factories.
If traditional through-hole components are still in use, it is advisable to employ the PIP/PIH process, allowing these components to be soldered through the reflow furnace. Otherwise, consider using robotic arms for automatic soldering, although this approach requires ample space for maneuvering.
– **What is the difference and impact of transitioning SMD parts to through-hole solder paste (Paste-In-Hole)?**
– **Allow through-hole components/traditional plug-ins to also undergo the reflow furnace process (paste-in-hole).**
**Automated Assembly of the Complete Machine**
Currently, most assembly automation efforts focus on the “screw lock” segment, which is an area of considerable discussion among manufacturers. Many are concentrating on this aspect, utilizing systems that can automatically feed screws through suction and blowing mechanisms, while others employ robotic arms alongside traditional electric screwdrivers and screw feeding machines.
The most challenging part of PCBA machine assembly is actually the assembly of flexible cables (FPC), due to their delicate nature. Controlling the orientation of the flexible cable can be difficult, and the investment may not yield proportional returns.
Additionally, it is essential for PCB manufacturers to coordinate incoming materials with automation processes to modify packaging for automated loading and unloading designs. Otherwise, the purpose of automation is undermined by the need for employees to manually arrange components. While this may increase packaging costs, it has hindered the full implementation of assembly automation.
However, to implement automation on the production line, there is a significant shortage of “people” and “engineers” capable of adapting the equipment. Whether utilizing robotic arms for assembly or testing, or employing modular methods, the tolerance and adaptability of the equipment and fixtures are crucial; otherwise, a single mistake could lead to poor product assembly or, in severe cases, damaged components.
Furthermore, a major concern during automation implementation is the notion of “automation for the sake of automation.” Shenzhen Grace Express suggests that, regardless of whether automation is adopted, return on investment (ROI) should serve as the benchmark for evaluating the decision to automate versus maintaining existing jobs. This approach ensures the most economical and cost-effective production, as ultimately, costs and benefits must be weighed.
Whole machine test automation
Taking the current production of “mobile phones” as an example, the automated testing of the finished product after PCBA assembly can leverage robotic arms to replace traditional manual tapping and touch screen scripting tasks.
The remainder of the process is handled by the self-test program (Diagnostic Test), which runs on the mobile phone, while the computer communicates via wireless transmission (WiFi or Bluetooth) commands.
The most challenging aspect is the actual plug test of the I/O connector. For mobile phone testing, you might consider omitting this step entirely, as modern mobile devices typically only feature a headphone jack and a micro-USB connector. If the board has already undergone testing, you may be able to skip this step, or you could design an “Auto-engage” device to facilitate the process.
The final cosmetic inspection can then be delegated to an image recognition system for execution.
**PCB Level Test Automation**
Automated testing at the circuit board level is currently regarded as a relatively mature area. Generally, circuit board testing is categorized into AOI, ICT/MDA, FVT, and other types of tests.
**Discussion on Various Test Methods Post-Circuit Board Assembly:**
– **AOI (Automated Optical Inspection):** Most AOI equipment is already integrated into the SMT assembly line, making AOI automation entirely feasible.
– **ICT/MDA:** Both ICT and MDA are inherently automated tests. The more complex aspect lies in the loading and unloading phases. Present automation efforts focus on designing robotic arms for automatic loading and unloading tasks.
– **FVT (Function Verification Test):** In this area, robotic arms can also be employed for automatic loading and unloading. Manual operations required in FVT can be managed through PCBA assembly, but utilizing additional test points and needle beds on the circuit board can enhance testing efficiency.
To facilitate the robotic arm in easily picking and placing circuit boards, it is generally advisable to implement a drawer-type suction/exit device, replacing the older clamshell devices.
**Circuit Board Level Automatic Assembly**
Currently, PCB assembly is the most developed area, as nearly all boards are produced using pure SMT, which boasts the highest level of automation in today’s electronics factories.
If traditional through-hole components are still in use, it is advisable to employ the PIP/PIH process, allowing these components to be soldered through the reflow furnace. Otherwise, consider using robotic arms for automatic soldering, although this approach requires ample space for maneuvering.
– **What is the difference and impact of transitioning SMD parts to through-hole solder paste (Paste-In-Hole)?**
– **Allow through-hole components/traditional plug-ins to also undergo the reflow furnace process (paste-in-hole).**
**Automated Assembly of the Complete Machine**
Currently, most assembly automation efforts focus on the “screw lock” segment, which is an area of considerable discussion among manufacturers. Many are concentrating on this aspect, utilizing systems that can automatically feed screws through suction and blowing mechanisms, while others employ robotic arms alongside traditional electric screwdrivers and screw feeding machines.
The most challenging part of PCBA machine assembly is actually the assembly of flexible cables (FPC), due to their delicate nature. Controlling the orientation of the flexible cable can be difficult, and the investment may not yield proportional returns.
Additionally, it is essential for PCB manufacturers to coordinate incoming materials with automation processes to modify packaging for automated loading and unloading designs. Otherwise, the purpose of automation is undermined by the need for employees to manually arrange components. While this may increase packaging costs, it has hindered the full implementation of assembly automation.
