AOI SYSTEMS: MVP, TRI or CYBEROPTICS ?

Dominik,

Pixel size should not be the main criteria for selecting an AOI. I have a customer that has 2 MVP and they say the solder test are good but part reconigtion is not so good.

You also say you need some flexibility on software. I also have another customer that had special AOI requirements and needed an out of the box solution. Yestech worked with them and came up with hardware and software mods that worked perfectly for them.

Not sure if you meant that you are doing standard smt with 01005 products or you meant you have a product that is not standard and need different solutions.

Anyway I would contact different vendors and ask them 1. Can your standard system inspect this? (show them what defects would look like if they are not standard smt.) 2. Can you make a product that will do what I need?

reply »

Hello Dominik,

I recently ended up purchasing a MIRTEC MV-3 AOI System. In looking at different manufacturers I realized that there were two philosophies to inspecting boards, Image based and Rules Based. When I explored both technologies I found out that the rules based systems were very difficult to program, with little to no performance improvements to the process. I had to rule those systems out. I work in a low volume - high mix shop. We simply did not have the time or resources (a dedicated AOI Engineer) to create programs for small batch sizes. I know that MIRTEC has a lot of different lens options for their systems 18, 15 13, 9 micron lenses. The MIRTEC is easy to program, inspects the boards very fast, and finds the defects that it is supposed to. I would highly recommend you look at MIRTEC, since the other machines you mention here I think are all rules based Systems

reply »

Dominik, I have to agree with Andrew on his choice of Inspection Technology, but not the vendor. I looked at 2 of the 3 that you are asking about (TRI did not make my cut as I just didn't get a good feeling from them). I also looked at the Mirtec and YESTech because of the differences in technology that they provided. Both the Mirtec and YESTech were MUCH easier to program. I ended up choosing the YESTech because between the two, the YESTech platform was the fastest to program and provided the fewest false failures and false passes. Both Mirtec and YESTech put a demo system on my floor for me to evaluate for a month and I felt that the YESTech support was clearly more interested in me understanding the operation of their product. This was key to my decision as I found AOI to be a challenge initially. On the issue of solder, which is very important to my process, YESTech had the ability to inspect for 100% of my solder joints where the Mirtec had some shading issues and were not able to see all the joints.

I also looked at a couple of the super high end systems on paper, but cost ruled them out immediately.

Just my two cents�

reply »

Dominik,

We have also been looking at MVP locally for micro electronics applications. The 850G appears to have far greater capability with regard to all the backend semi processes, and provides real measurements for our stats systems.

I have seen that they have solved the programming issue with their latest software releases. So I would get a demo of this. I had the same feedback that they were hard to program, but this seems to be only older systems.

Also we did not see any issue with part markings, using the low light.

reply »

Hello Dominik,

If you are inspecting 01005 parts, than pixel size is important and should be considered in your evaluation. I think 6.5um may be a little over-kill and probably not necessary, especially based on the price. Why are you having to rent the system to evaluate it? Will they give you one to demo for a month or so? If not, than I wouldn't even bother with those companies. Any reputable company wouldn't mind leaving their system with you to evaluate. Another important feature of any AOI system is the lighting. Systems with RGB lighting will give you the most coverage than systems with just white/red or single light systems. The YesTech systems F1 and M1 have RGB and work really well.

reply »

> Dear Collegs! > > I would appreciate all responses > with opinions about the AOI manufacturers that > will be listed below. First of all maybe a short > description. In my company we are just starting > with the optical inspection of our products. We > use screen printers to manufacture our products > and want to introduce an AOI system for 100% > inspection. I'm going to rent two systems to > evaluate them. It costs money that's why I would > like to ask you guys for you opinion as users > what do you thing about MVP ULTRA 850G with 6,5�m > pixel size, TRI Test Research TR 7500 with 10�m > pixel size and the system from CyberOptics with > 17�m pixel size. The MVP system has a smaller > pixel size but automatically is 100% more > expensive than the TRI system. I decided to > evaluate definitely the CyberOptics system > because of its uncial software algorithm which > allows detecting anomalies in the structure (face > recognition principle). Because the system will > not be used in a standard application (eg. > placement of 01005 elements) we do need best > possible camera resolution on the market but also > a bit of flexibility from the manufacturer side > regarding the software platform. Did anyone have > an experience with both machines MVP Ultra 850G > and TRI system TR7500? The price difference is > vast and I'm wondering if MVP is so much better > to pay for it double the price of TRI > system. Thanks in advance for all your > responses.

> Dear Collegs! > > I would appreciate all responses > with opinions about the AOI manufacturers that > will be listed below. First of all maybe a short > description. In my company we are just starting > with the optical inspection of our products. We > use screen printers to manufacture our products > and want to introduce an AOI system for 100% > inspection. I'm going to rent two systems to > evaluate them. It costs money that's why I would > like to ask you guys for you opinion as users > what do you thing about MVP ULTRA 850G with 6,5�m > pixel size, TRI Test Research TR 7500 with 10�m > pixel size and the system from CyberOptics with > 17�m pixel size. The MVP system has a smaller > pixel size but automatically is 100% more > expensive than the TRI system. I decided to > evaluate definitely the CyberOptics system > because of its uncial software algorithm which > allows detecting anomalies in the structure (face > recognition principle). Because the system will > not be used in a standard application (eg. > placement of 01005 elements) we do need best > possible camera resolution on the market but also > a bit of flexibility from the manufacturer side > regarding the software platform. Did anyone have > an experience with both machines MVP Ultra 850G > and TRI system TR7500? The price difference is > vast and I'm wondering if MVP is so much better > to pay for it double the price of TRI > system. Thanks in advance for all your > responses.

As a developer of AOI systems with close to 20 years of experience, my recommendations are as follows:

a) There are a lot of �technological terms� thrown at users such as RGB lighting, multiple cameras, pixel sizes and so on, and so on. This type of information can be misleading. As a user, you need to concentrate on the overall performance of a system and not so much how it works or what type of technology is used. b) When it comes to selecting an AOI equipment, the system must be evaluated based on future and current requirements. The most important aspect is the programming or setup time. Realistically, if you cannot start with the CAD or similar data file and inspect a board in less than a few hours, then there is a problem. Some systems can read in the CAD or placement information very quickly but require extensive �fine-tuning� to get the inspection reliability where it needs to be. c) The cost of the system is an important factor but a more realistic indicator is the total cost of ownership and not just the initial cost. In particular, attention should be paid to upgradeability and adaptability of the system. Some systems use off-the-shelf sub-systems and can be upgraded easily. For example, the PC can be upgraded to faster units. Or, the camera can be exchanged with higher resolution alternatives, if needed. At the same time, some systems can be adapted to perform different checks with minimal (if any) hardware or software changes. These systems are more �valuable� because they can be deployed for solder paste, pre-solder or post-solder inspections. The other issue is that the cost of the system does not necessarily reflect the quality or technology used with the system. Often, it reflects the cost of manufacturing in the country of origin. d) Technical support must be one of the main factors, because you will NEED IT. Of course, I mean true Technical Support and not just Moral Support. You will need someone who can come in (fast) and address your problem. In the USA or Europe, it may make sense to buy from local suppliers because often the developers of the systems will be available to troubleshoot those �difficult problems/bugs�. e) Do NOT buy a system because it is cheap. Buy a system because it works well! Some of these so called �cheap� systems cost you more in the long run because of down-time, poor inspection performance (too many false calls and false accepts) and limited use (type of inspection, PCB sizes, etc.)

reply »