First panels completed & some experiences with LitePlacer

[AnalysIR]

Just completed my first set of panels using LitePlacer (after starting the build just over 2 years ago, working on it sproadically )

Panelsx3.jpg (1.07 MiB) Viewed 13813 times

Still have a few more things to tune etc ... for reference

- Couldn't get the 10uF 0805 caps to pick-up at all, Not sure of the reason, too heavy or curved top surface???. Tried a range of nozzles. ...decided to place them manually after the run for now.
- 23-25 components per board = ~100 components per panel of 4 pcbs. Nice not having to place manually etc. Not as fast as expected/hoped, plus had a few stop/starts, when parts not picked up or released after placement.
- Some components get used up quickly, so will have to investigate DIY feeders for at least some components in future.
- UFL connectors are picked up fine, which is great as I was not expcting that. (perfect fit for for nozzle #2)
- A few pick-ups were missed, which I placed manually later.
- Seemed to be a slight offset on some but not all placements - will require investingation to improve.
- On completion, I did fine placement adjustment manually on each PCB before reflowing.
- I am using 3 clear different tapes (8x4 & 12x8). I haven't been able to get the vision settings to work for all 3 at the same time. The 10uF is one of them so I am using the other 2 for now and placing the 10uF manually. I will continue to refine if possible. It would be helpful to have multiple vision options/algorithms available for these clear tapes so that each could be tuned individually. It may also be related to ambient lighting which changes throughout the day. I will get some additional lighting to keep light levels more consistent.
- Overall effort in assembling, tuning, initial job set up is not insignificant, but now that it is operational it will get lots of use.
- The ultimate upgrade would be low cost & reliable DIY feeders as this could greatly reduce setup time for each job.


Looking forward to some of the enhancements that are on the list.



-

[robert@serve101.org]

This post inspired me to add a feature request. I suggest instead of having a list of "tape" types: clear, black, paper, etc. A better way would be to just use an index, type 1, 2,3,4, 5, ...
And along with that, expand the choices to more index numbers. I already "lie" about the tape types, to try to get enough choices for the various situations. I think once index numbers are used, there could be more types to chose from, perhaps 10 or so. Let the user decide what to call each tape type would be great, and finally make the selection via drop down lists.

[AnalysIR]

Great Idea...that would be very useful indeed!

[AnalysIR]

Addendum:

The main issue I encounter, is that the threshold level needs to be different between the different tapes of the same type (clear tape only).

So a much easier fix/hack might(?) be to allow a comma separated list of threshold levels ( or similar as there are multiple cols available in that grid in the camera Tab). So if a hole was not recognised with the first threshold value, it would then try the second threshold value in the list. This approach may be easier/faster to implement for Juha pending a more complete solution later on.

However Robert's suggestion is by far the best approach and more scaleable for the future.

[AnalysIR]

I already "lie" about the tape types,

Just realised...I don't use the Components 'filter' for anything currently...so I should be able to use that as an extra 'filter' for the clear tapes as a 'temporary' workaround to solve my immediate issue.
UPDATE: see below Components Filter cannot be used for tapes currently.

[AnalysIR]

Just at my LP machine now.....

Unfortunately, the components filter will not work, as it is not a drop-down option for Tapes config (Maybe Juha could add it in to act as an extra options?)

On my monitor, at least, there is enough space to add in another 'Generic' tape filter on the 'Setup Camera' tab, just below the Fiducials Panel (Juha?).

Alternatively, a drop-down list could be added in this position - as suggested by Robert above..

RE: Z Home back-off I mentioned above, I initially set the Z 0 position to be just above the top of the nozzle block...so I am sorted wrt backoff adjustment.

The 'Low Ceiling' mentioned above would still be an asset in speeding things up.

[JuKu]

FYI: I’m working on a new software, which has the vision processing interface totally rewritten. It has unlimited number of vision algorithms, and you can select which algorithm to use with a tape. (Terminology: Algorithm (such as “homing”, “black tape “ etc) is a collection of functions (such as zoom, treshold etc). So, you’ll get as many of the “tape types” as you wish and you can name them as you want.

I’m going to do a bug fix release for the current version this week. Next, I’ll do a public beta test release of the rewritten version, hopefully next week. If you are in a hurry, you can become an alpha tester, just send me email about it.

[AnalysIR]

great news!

Looking forward to the beta test release next week.



Terminology: Thanks for clearing that up, as it wasn't 100% clear to me. You may also want to create a label for the overall concept, similar to ones below:
visionFinder
viewFinder (also used with hand held cameras so could be ambiguous)
visionLocator
autoLocator
autoFinder

or just use VPI (vision processing interface), assuming this term refers only to vision algorithms and functions

[AnalysIR]

Ran another panel which has 28 sub-PCBs and a total of almost 500 SMD components.

This time i got issues with different black plastic tape holes (not) being recognized. As I was running out of time I just went with what I had placed and re-flowed that after some manual adjusting of placed parts.. Will have to place the remaining ~100 parts manually with the hot-air gun. (Note: I had to stop placing because of time issues...to be clear. I ran out of time because of tape hole recognition issues.)

So really looking forward to the pending beta release, which will hopefully avoid this in future.

PS: MY LP is in a room with poor natural lighting, which likely amplifies these hole recognition issues for me, particularly later in the day.

Q: Is there a way to manually do the hole recognition for 'Place fast' ?? If not might be a useful feature

FYI: One part is used 84 times. My max Tape size is ~68 components. Thus the place fast always fails because hole 84 cannot be found when the last hole is 68. In the end I just went with 'Place' as a workaround which is obviously much slower. If there is a better way to force 'Place Fast' in this situation, without say pretending that there are 2 different components in the job file, which I will try do the next time.

For example, If I set the last x,Y for this tape...the software could see/calculate that there are only components available up to position 68 available & not look beyond that.....

[wormball]

This time i got issues with different black plastic tape holes (not) being recognized.

I always paint black and transparent tapes with white paint marker.