Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design SMT Electronics Assembly Manufacturing Forum

Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design Forum

SMT electronics assembly manufacturing forum.


iPulse M4e Pick and Place Machine

Views: 3462

Mike

#37246

iPulse M4e Pick and Place Machine | 20 October, 2005

Hello,

we are evaluating to purchase a new machine for our smt production.

Our current favourites are

Samsung SM320

or

Yamaha/iPulse M4e

Please let me know what you think about those machines.

Best Regards

Mike

reply »

#37253

iPulse M4e Pick and Place Machine | 20 October, 2005

Mike, I was wondering why you are comparing a 6 head machine (Samsung) to a 3 head machine (i-Pulse). I sort of thought you would look at the M2 to compare to the SM320. Just curious. Darby.

reply »

Mike

#37262

iPulse M4e Pick and Place Machine | 21 October, 2005

Hello Darby,

because of the machine configuration it depents very strong on the feeder configuration and on the board if the 3 heads more give you so much more CPH. Realistic it will only be 1-2000 CPH more in realistic operation. On the other hand the M4e has a flyover vision which ist faster than the one Samsung uses. So from my point of view the machines are quite compareable.

Best Regards

Mike

reply »

#37282

iPulse M4e Pick and Place Machine | 24 October, 2005

Hi Mike, I use variations of both of these machines in a Tenryu FV-7100s and Samsung CP45/CP45Neos. Both have been very good machines - I would find it difficult to split them. I have personal dislikes of both tooling and support systems. I would talk to other users in your vicinity and see what the service and back-up has been like. The SM320 also utilises on the fly or Scan camera technology. It uses 6 cameras - one for each head. The M4 uses one camera attached to the gantry that travels underneath the components after pick up to do on the fly vision correction. I think your estimate of 1-2000CPH difference might be a liitle out - it would depend on the job. It is more likely to be 3000+ I would make a guess and say that you are looking at the similar feeder capacity, bar code reading "intelligent" feeders and price in comparing these two machines. Keep in mind that depending on the job there is going to be potentially a lot more nozzle changing happening on a three head machine than on a six. Wear and tear, increased cycle time etc. Both softwares are OK. The one advantage the M4/M2 has in this regard is that you could have any variety of boards, fids, bad marks etc on a panel and you do not have to progamme it as one big board. Great for a subbie. Maybe look at the M2 if the budget allows or, alternatively even a CP-45/Neo will save you some money, (particularly feeder cost), if you don't REALLY need the bar coding facility. This can, I believe, be added after market. I suppose it's the usual thing - see if you can run some product on any of the variations and see which one you and your people like. Remember to keep in mind tooling adaptability. Enjoy. Best Regards, Darby.

reply »

ii-feed SMD Intelligent Feeder

SMT Equipment