Interesting that for such an inexpensive but specialized hardware device it still has a "phone home on boot" feature.
Given what this device does compared to a 3d printer (xyz axis movement, suction head, part reel incrementer, webcam + identification software), it seems like a sufficiently motivated hobbyist could come up with something passably similar in the same price ballpark.
PnP doesn't make sense for a hobbyist though, that's the problem. A PnP is a tool for someone making a hundred or more of the exact same design, not something you usually do unless you're selling something. It's not worth the considerable time required to set up feed reels and all the other stuff required for a PnP if you're only making a few boards.
As a hobbyist, I'd like one. You could do projects using hundreds or thousands of devices that are -at the moment- out of reach not for reasons of price, but rather because it would take too long to assemble the devices in question. For instance, tagging and tracking wild animals, or getting really granular local climate data. Electronics just gets more interesting the more it moves away from the monolithic device approach, for me.
Hundreds or thousands of something is typically not a hobbyist venture. Also remember that placing parts is only one step of the process. If you're going to automate assembly by purchasing a P&P, you should also be ready to do high-volume stenciling and have a fast oven. In any case, the time spent aligning the machine and setting up reels can be a significant fraction of the time to just place parts manually. In some cases, you could have placed parts for your entire run by hand before you finished setting up the machine!
Depending on how complex your board is, building, say, 100 units by hand isn't time consuming. I've soldered literally thousands of through-hole boards and SMT is much faster and easier to do by hand.
> Hundreds or thousands of something is typically not a hobbyist venture.
But isn't this just begging the question?
If hobbyists can make use of it, then by definition it's a hobbyist venture. Bringing down size, cost, and complexity is exactly the path by which so much has become available to hobbyists these days.
Wasn't that long ago that a laser cutter, heaven forbid a 3d printer, was for pro shops only.
Yeah but I think there is a fundamental difference here. A 3D printer enables you to do things you can't do otherwise (fabricate custom mechanical parts). A pick-and-place enables you to do stuff you can already do with tweezers except in the most extreme cases. And likely do it faster than with a pick-and-place, because they require quite a lot of work to configure.
Edit: a good analogy is a homebrewer putting caps on beer bottles. You can do it by hand with a simple tool pretty easily - even capping 100 bottles at once is no sweat, really. It just doesn't make sense to have an automated bottle capping machine even if it was cheap, because it takes up space and ends up taking more effort to set up for a small run than it saves you. Pardon the pun, but the bottleneck lies elsewhere.
As far as bottle capping machines you end up having to make custom handling parts and those are not cheap. (The chucks alone run several hundred dollars each.) Then the parts to guide the bottles through the machine have to be made specific to the bottle diameter and height. this costs several grand. There is still a lot of adjustment even after this. And if you want to change bottles or caps then outlay a ton more cash.
Capping them by hand despite the time and effort makes sense until you can afford a significant outlay in cost.
(I work for a machine shop that makes handling parts and retrofits capping/filler machines for the bottling industry. I don't fully know our prices but most of them would be far outside the range of any hobbyist starting out.)
Well, you can actually do stuff a 3d printer does by other means. It just typically requires more skills, and often more equipment.
I think your analogy falls down because an automatic bottlecapper does the same thing as you'd normally do by hand.
The difference for me is that a pick-and-place machine is an enabler. It would enable hobbyists to take on large-scale, distributed electronics projects - for which, right now, assembly time is normally the bottleneck.
If all hobbyists were solely interested in producing consumer-style devices, like bad versions of phones, or home-automation systems, then a pick-and-place machine wouldn't be a good idea for anyone. But there are actually lots of hobbyists that do stuff like data logging, where assembly time is a major problem.
There are hobbyists who might want to, I don't dispute that, but what I'm saying is there aren't enough. You need a pretty big critical mass before the economics start to make sense and something like what happened with 3D printers becomes possible. Projects at the scale you're talking about take a massive investment of time and skill independent of how long it takes to assemble boards, putting them out of reach of the vast majority of people simply because they don't have the time. Not to mention the cost of such a project; if you can afford to invest a thousand or more dollars in a hobby project then you can probably afford the tools you need to do it, too. Maybe I'm underestimating and there are tens of thousands of people out there wanting to build complex data logging networks with hundreds of nodes just for fun or some other equally ambitious project, but I doubt it.
> I think your analogy falls down because an automatic bottlecapper does the same thing as you'd normally do by hand.
That was my point. A pick and place does the same thing you'd normally do by hand with a pair of tweezers in about 10 minutes for a board of moderate complexity. Doing surface mount work by hand with tweezers is pretty easy. The only thing a pick and place enables is for you to do things at a large scale, because they have a substantial overhead to use that you only start to recoup around 50-100 units or more. Now, if we had some revolutionary device that you could set up in 10 minutes to feed dozens of parts and cost $500 then hell yes, I'd want one too. But I don't think that's possible at present no matter any economies of scale or design optimization, because a pick and place is actually quite a complex machine by simple necessity.
Not to mention that placing parts is only part of it - you still have to fabricate and drill the boards, load the machine, clean up any mis-places, reflow them in an oven, manually place any through hole or awkwardly shaped components and solder them, cut the boards, test them, program them, mount them, etc. A pick and place would definitely save you some time if you really want to do such a large project, but by itself I don't think it's gonna be enough to really make it accessible to an individual in their free time. I'm not disputing that they would be beneficial, just that they make sense for an individual working in their free time. Especially when you consider that contract manufacturing isn't that expensive, though it does come with its own set of hassles.
I do think that a pick-and-place machine is probably more compatible with the hobbyist world than home CNC - given that CNC inherrently requires robust construction, and robust, accurate components are inherrently expensive. I mean - this machine looks more or less like a 3d printer with some reels, and a scanner. Once 3D printing becomes a cheap technology, things that require accurate repetitive movement become cheaper too.
I wouldn't be entirely surprised if stuff like small robotic arms become available to the hobbyist in the next 50 years or so, simply because being able to do arbitrary tasks with a high degree of accuracy is incredibly useful.
At the point where CNC, not as in cutting, but as in general computer-controlled movement, is an ordinary part of the workshop, I wouldn't be surprised if things like this ended up in hobbbyist spaces.
I had actually just discovered those recently and with 0.2mm repeatability my first thought was a pick and place. But the complexity ends up being with the part feed and with configuration. It's really hard to build a machine that can reliably feed arbitrary parts automatically, and then programming it for each job is a pain so you'd also have to revolutionize the tooling so that a person could program one in a few minutes (and don't forget loading it ugh). The kinematics do share a lot with 3D printers, but it's the open-endedness in the feed system that makes them difficult. It's probably not impossible, just really hard, so there needs to be a considerable market to recoup the cost of designing such a machine that is accessible to a hobbyist.
I mostly agree with CNC, though it depends on how ambitious you are. I have a very cheap generic CNC engraver ($100 + shipping) that I use to engrave PCBs and it actually works quite well for that as well as it can do wood and soft materials remarkably nicely. Ditto for nicer machines like the Sienci, especially if you're doing woodworking. But a 5 axis machine capable of milling metal for <$500? It's not gonna happen. And even if it did, would you really want one? Milling metal is always gonna be complex and full of hassles.
I feel the same way about laser cutters. They're actually affordable now and I definitely want one, but I don't wanna deal with the considerable inherent hassle. Fires, toxic fumes, permanent blindness, focusing etc, just not worth it to me even for free.
Also this has been an interesting discussion, thanks.
You're almost certainly right about good metal-milling CNC machines never being cheap. I think the only possibility to make such a thing economical would be by re-purposing car parts (I think if you could work out a way to use common car parts and clever software, you could step around the fact that things manufactured to high tolerances out of steel are expensive - since car parts are both cheap, and well-made).
That said, the thing that really excites me about CNC is just how much it opens up a whole load of projects that I haven't had the tooling or the mechanical skill to take on. I'm a bad carpenter, so when I make things out of wood, I tend to have to allow massive tolerances in everything I do. Even a CNC that could only cut softwood would be really useful for me.
I've actually been ummming and ahhing about buying one of ali-express - where did you get your engraver from?
The tool isn't the issue. If a hobbyist wants to play with a Pick & Place, go for it.
My point was that the typical hobbyist isn't going to be manufacturing 1,000 units of anything, no matter how cheap is to do. Once you get into those numbers, it's far more likely to be a (small) business venture.
> I've soldered literally thousands of through-hole boards and SMT is much faster and easier to do by hand.
Sorry for going off-topic, but do hobbyists actually solder SMT's manually nowadays? Or does everyone use some kind of off-the-shelf/DIY reflow oven? And if so, are stencils obligatory or is it feasible to just apply paste manually?
I've been thinking of getting back (or well, properly starting if you will) my electronics hobby, but I've ever only done through-hole components. At least based on tutorials on the web, it's possible to hand-solder SMT's with some practice. But given how small e.g. 0603's are I guess that might involve an unhealthy amount of swearing..
We mainly do SMT at our hackerspace, as it is really is fast and easy to do by hand using a hot-air gun (e.g. [1]). Use a syringe to deposit solder paste (we have one which uses compressed air, very convenient! Something like [2]) and a binocular to see what you're doing and you will be golden.
How does this compare to doing it with a normal soldering iron? I just ordered a bunch of surface-mount components - just because they were so much cheaper, but I haven't really got any notion about good approaches yet.
I'd recommend that a beginner go with the iron. It's all too easy to overheat components with a hot air gun, unless you have one with excellent temperature control. Even then, you need to be aware of accidentally desoldering nearby components.
I've got pretty bad essential tremor (and bad eyeseight), so I was also wondering, what's a good way to keep the chips in place on the board? I was thinking of using a tiny dab of superglue.
I guess I figure you don't have to be good at something for it to be worthwhile. As a human, no matter how steady your hand or sharp your eye, you're always going to be inferior in manufacturing basically anything than our new robotic overlords.
The main thing I like about electronics is it makes me feel at home in a world of technology that's kinda crazy alien at least half of the time. Being able to interact with it in a proactive way makes it something I can get a grip on, even if, when we're frank, my soldering is shit.
I do have a side business building custom electronics, but I think I still qualify as hobbyist :-)
I do both: for small fixes I solder by hand. Complete boards I usually use an old toaster oven, but often if the boards are really small, I use a soldering iron. I try not to go below 0805, but 0603 isn't hard.
I typically won't get a stencil for custom one-off jobs since they tend to be small and ordering them introduces delay. When I do, I use oshstencils.com. Had great luck with them and they are very price competitive.
Thanks for your answers, I appreciate it. And same to the others who answered my original question!
> I do have a side business building custom electronics, but I think I still qualify as hobbyist :-)
Taking this even further off-topic, could you elaborate a little? What kind of stuff are you doing? I imagine there is a niche for one-off or small batch stuff, but OTOH on aliexpress (or whatever) you can find almost every electronic gimmick you can imagine (and plenty you couldn't imagine!) for ridiculously low prices.
I've been skilletting my boards (fabbed by OSHpark) for the last few months, and it's really easy. As another commenter mentioned, use a syringe to deposit solder paste. It only takes a few boards to dial in the right amount to lay, and is actually surprisingly quick to place the parts (even 0603) with tweezers and then throw 'em on the skillet.
You're not gonna be able to pick-and-place anything with hundreds/thousands of parts at a hobby price point. Those kinds of machines are massive by necessity and hugely complex; I just can't imagine it happening for the very small number of people who would want to do something like that. If it did happen by some miracle, it'd have to follow from some sort of major technical advance.
If you're one of the handful of hobbyists that want to do such complex projects I think contract manufacturing is probably a more realistic option. Not sure if you've ever set up a PnP before but it's a huge pain in the ass. I'd rather stencil and tweezer as long it was remotely practical. They are utterly mesmerizing to watch work once they're set up however...
You're not gonna be able to pick-and-place anything with hundreds/thousands of parts at a hobby price point.
LitePlacer is almost there. IMHO the key is recognizing that production-oriented machines need to be fast, while hobbyist/small-shop prototyping machines don't. If I need to stuff a complex prototype board with 500 parts, I literally don't care if it takes all day and all night as long as I don't have to do it. Obviously production shops don't have that luxury, but I do.
Really, the only unsolved problem (at least at the 0402 and up level) is loose part pickup and orientation.
Agreed. Being a human pick and place for anything more than low tens of parts is incredibly unfun, and paying someone to manufacture one or two doesn't really make sense. I don't care if it takes a few days, I'd rather not be sitting for hours wearing down my fine motor skills and eyesight.
That's not a big concern for prototyping. It will reflow just fine. There might be a few solder balls rolling around afterward, maybe a bridge or two. Most of the time, this means your stencil apertures were too big, or that the cut-rate Chinese solder paste wasn't the bargain that it looked like on AliExpress.
Slump is a problem if you're trying to run a six-sigma process in a factory, of course, but that's not what's being discussed here.
My guess is that as prices drop under $2500/machine and $10/PCB and safety issues are resolved PnP will become more popular. There's a lot of need for repeatable, low rate production. A PnP is kind of like Vagrant/Puppet/Chef for hardware. Instead of manually building the board each time, use a configuration managed automated build.
I'm the founder/author of OpenPnP, which exists to do exactly this. I've been working on the project for about 6 years now and I'm happy to say that lots of hobbyists, small companies, maker spaces, etc. have built and are running OpenPnP based pick and place machines.
It's a harder problem than it seems, as I've found out over the past 6 years. While the basics are quite similar to a 3D printer, PnP has some unique challenges. 3D printing can be relatively inaccurate but still produce a good output since you are working with a pretty "oozy" substance to begin with. PnP has to be pretty accurate across it's entire work surface, though. If the machine is 0.1mm off at any point in it's travel that creates a likelihood that a part will be placed incorrectly. Feeders are also, mechanically, a lot more difficult to get right than it seems like they would be.
In any case, we're having good luck and a lot of success, so if you are interested in DIY / Open Source / Hobby pick and place, please come check it out!
No way is that the same Aussie chap from SuperHouse? (he used to [?] do excellent video guides on DIY hacking those cheap Sonoff wi-fi enabled electrical relays)
Looks interesting (to me anyway) for this type of project. I can’t tell if the precision you need for PnP is there yet, but it looks like the speed is.
Maybe that "feature" is because of the 'inexpensive + specialized' thing.
PnP seems like a hard problem. I thought the same thing as you awhile ago, looked at some efforts that others were putting together, and was surprised at how many opted for complex things like computer vision to verify part positioning.
And it did not take long for me to decide that, like most problems I take a cursory look at, there was no flippin' way I'd be able to make anything workable on my own in a reasonable cost/time-box.
If I had an affordable plug-and-play design, I might take steps to protect it. Personally I'd think twice about a 'phone home' solution because I hate that shit as a consumer - or just open source it outright - but I can understand the stance.
There are definitely somewhat mature DIY alternatives such as LitePlacer [1] and there is ongoing effort towards an open-source software stack for PnP machines [2], but for this area to really pick up, sub-$500 kits are probably necessary. One could argue that hobby-level 3D printing would have gone nowhere if 3D printers were at a ~$3,000 level.
Has anyone seen a Liteplacer in action? All the info I can find on it is from the seller.
LitePlacer is designed for one-off jobs. It gets its parts from cut tape, not reels. It uses its vision system to line up on the parts tapes, so the tapes don't have to be precisely positioned. It's quite slow for a pick and place machine, but far faster than doing it by hand.
Doesn't put down solder paste, though.
There are a lot of low-end pick and place machines, but few critical evaluations of them.
I've seen it in action - it works but you have to be quite careful when building it. There's a bunch of gotchas and it changes over time so you have to be very very sure you're looking at the instructions for your actual kit. Also it isn't self-contained - you need a computer attached to it the entire time you run it. Still, the price point is amazing and it does what it says on the tin. (I don't own one but I've seen it in use).
To me, here are the most relevant bits of why they chose the CHMT36VA over others:
Let me say that the needs or SparkX are slightly odd.
We need to build 10-50 of a design and see how it
sells. As it sells we may need to build 100-500pcs.
If a design needs more than 500 pieces then it
immediately gets moved over to our proper SMD
production lines with much more capable machines.
SparkX needed something small and quick to setup.
After evaluating all the various vendors we decided
on the CHMT36VA. It seemed to be the best fit of
low-cost and most flexible while being able to get
the job done.
Right before it:
... the nail in the coffin for the Neodyn 4 in my eyes
... he says the feeders aren’t that great, they are
challenging to load, and machine makes mispicks quite
often. Why spend ~$10k on a machine when I can have a
cheaper machine with less hassle? The CHMT36VA is far
from perfect but I can work around the problems.
It's not that the CHMT36VA (the $2.8k PnP machine in question) is great or competes with "industrial" pick and place machines, it's that it's optimized for small to medium runs. To me, this is very much in line with "fail fast" or "lean startup" philosophy but for electronics. SparkFun can make a small experiment with minimal risk.
I am waiting for the emergence of nano factories. Basically vertically integrated businesses like Sparkfun that can design and manufacture a very wide range of products on site, sufficient to capture the value at the exploratory front end of product design and development.
Seeed is wonderful. I’ve run over $80k of boards through them and while I have experienced one big error in a build they worked with me to fix it and in general they have wonderful service considering I’m one person working out of my apartment. Bigger shops charge way more or don’t work with me, and smaller shops don’t do as much as Seeed does.
Can you tell me some details on what exactly they do? I've designed and ordered my own PCBs from DirtyPCBs (recommended, I love them) but I've only assembled them myself (I only needed one or two pieces) and I have no idea how I would scale that to larger production.
Can you tell me what the basic steps are? Pricing information would be appreciated!
I’d like to see that but I think the turnaround and unpredictability of third parties adds a lot of risk to a product development cycle. If you look at lead times for PCBs and population for example it can be a 30 day turnaround minimum for every cock up you make on a prototype. During that time your engineers may be dead in the water. To get around that you can pay a 20x premium to have your boards shipped fast. Two iterations will pay for a pick and place machine and a basic PCB fab environment and fill the boards yourself. You should already have the rework tools in house. Same with plastics where a 3d printer will get you close enough to get the production tooling done.
The big issue is really setting up manufacturing and supply chain on a large scale when you do get it working.
I'm curious, what prices are we talking about? Around here I'm seeing prices of PCBs in 2 working days for under 70€/PCB - it doesn't seem that expensive if you only need a few boards for development.
Those are likely pretty trivial boards which you place parts yourself. I do that at home with crap equipment. It's not quite as easy if you have to have someone to place parts for you, which is required without significant investment if you are placing BGA / 0201 / 0402 packages reliably etc.
I'm betting that's a 2 sided board? PCB process technology seems to have a fundamental time limit that's a multiple of the number of layers.
We're building prototypes of a complex bit of consumer electronics for consumer testing. We can do full industrial design, mechanical design, electronic design get the components made, assembled and delivered in 6 weeks. The fundamental limiting factor on how fast we can do it is the time it takes for the PCB to be made. From an electronics point of view, schematic capture and layout can be done in a week, and board assembly can be done in a day (if you're in a hurry) but there's nothing we can do about the 3 week lead time on the PCB because it's 8 layers with blind laser drilled vias.
It is unlikely to happen. Software makes it easier to reconfigure things. It will almost always make sense to rent time on a better machines. Few people run their own public facing arm servers at home, because you can rent better performing and easier to manage servers online.
Proximity and flexibility still matters somewhat though, so there might still be a market for a pick and place machine between this type of machine and a professional one. In China there are pcb factories offering assembly for a low fee. They have a multiple pick and place machines with common components after each other.
The reason it seems like a good idea is people don't see things like the time spent tweaking as a cost. It is also to some extent true for laser cutters and 3d printers.
I'll be interested to see if they are using it a year from now. Everyone I know who got the previous generation of similarly priced machines (like the Neodyn TM220/240A) no longer use them. Mostly due to the accuracy being not good enough for 0603 or similar sizes.
Computer vision really is the answer, but from reading the article it sounds like the CV on the CHMT36VA isn't great for parts that aren't 0603 and it's not open/easily hackable to be better.
Buying your own pick&place is quite similar to buying an FDM 3D printer. It doesn't make any sense at low scale, unless you want to spend endless time tinkering with the machine proper.
Pick&place, as well as 3D printing, begins to make sense at industrial scale, with huge expensive machines. Sparkfun might be a borderline case, but I suspect even they won't use these cheap pnp machines in the longer term.
If you are a hobbyist or a low-scale manufacturing operation, you are much better off using MacroFab, PCBNG, Small Batch Assembly or AISLER.net for electronics production, and Shapeways for 3D printing (SLS). Alternatively, for quantities of ~10 of electronics devices, it makes sense to order your boards and stencils from OSHpark or AISLER, place components yourself using tweezers, and either use a modified oven or a hot air soldering iron for reflow.
This is speaking from experience (as a hobbyist/maker, electronics design engineer designing proof-of-concept and small-scale production devices, and https://PartsBox.io/ founder).
> It doesn't make any sense at low scale, unless you want to spend endless time tinkering with the machine proper.
For 3D printing this is becoming less true every day. 3D Printers are now extremely cheap, where sub-$300 printers make sense at low scale usage. A typical print from an outsourced printer like Shapeways might cost you about $20, and once you factor in the cost of the material when you print yourself, it only takes about 20 prints for the printer to pay for itself, and you have the added benefit of having your print in an hour rather than a week.
Exacly! I have an FDM printer (~$300) and it's great to have it at home. When I design something, I can do a partial print at low quality to check for clearances within an hour. Then I can modify the design and print an optimized version. It makes for a really short feedback loop and if I mess something up, I don't need to pay the base fee again. And I'm a true hobbyist, I don't do anything hardware or CAD related professionally.
Also, it's just lots of fun to work with the printer.
That is still, as you say, a hobby though. The future of hardware design is decreasing the difference between prototype and production. Similar to what containers have done for software.
3d printed parts and PCBs can be done in as little as 12 hours. You can then without any modification do small production runs anywhere from ten to a thousand pieces (which isn't unrealistic outside consumer hardware). You could even 3d print moulds and do injection moulding.
I think partly why people say that hardware isn't iterative enough is that they are doing it the wrong way. They spend too much time on prototyping, which means they then have to make everything perfect for a large production runs to average out the costs.
I think you may he missing the parent's point, which is he's using the printer to speed up his design loop. This has heen one of the biggest driving forces I've seen in the commercial use of 3d printers. Sure you can outsource your 3d printing to get much better and higher volume printing, but when you're designing you don't need volume, and often don't need quality either. Quick turn around often is key in design work, and having an in house printer can really reduce total turnaround time.
I am disagreeing with the parents point (or not really because they were talking about doing it as a hobby, which is great).
Yes, you can do design prototype revision A, B and C, then do production prototype A, B and C, and finally production version A, B and C. But then you have spent a significant amount of time and money refining prototypes and adding features. That forces you to large production runs with huge risk, because you have already made the investment. What I am saying is that you should just make the production prototype with less features and ship that. Because that is how you go to market quickly, which is usually the larger point of such development.
This is also why Shenzhen wins over hackerspaces (which are also great btw) but that is another story.
Extremely agreed. I wanted to make a SCARA arm and it would basically be impossible without a printer. Basically, you can't make something efficiently if you don't know how the fabrication technique works and what its strengths and weaknesses are.
This would also have not been possible without the printer next to me. I constantly had to print segments to see how parts fit. With a week-long turnaround time instead of ten minutes, I wouldn't even have bothered.
Sure, if I already know how to design and print, maybe I could have designed something without owning a printer, but even that is not very likely (I generally have to make alterations a lot). For $300 (and a bunch of time spent), it's a no-brainer if you want to get into the hobby.
Put solder on the pads. This can be done with a solder mask - a thin sheet of metal with holes cut where the pads are. Solder paste is scraped over it and then the mask is lifted off, leaving solder on the pads.
Place components. This can be done manually or with the pick and place machines described here. The solder paste is sticky so there is something to hold the components in place once placed.
Reflow. This is done by putting the now populated board into a special oven. This oven will put the board through a particular temperature curve ('profile') which melts the solder then lets it cool. The surface tension of the solder on the pads helps here - it pulls components that are a fraction off into perfect position (assuming the pick and place got it close enough and that solder is on pads where it is meant to be).
Just a note - the solder mask is actually part of the PCB, in the past often green but now all sorts of colours. It covers up the tracks and copper fills etc. that you don’t want solder on.
What you’re referring to in the first paragraph is just called a stencil.
I worry about phoning home if the company goes offline. When phoning home, sniff the packets. I wonder if mother China is sending exactly the same authorization packets back to the device every time? If so it should not be terribly difficult to spoof the DNS on your own network and set up a small server to provide the necessary answer to turn on the machine.
78 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 145 ms ] threadGiven what this device does compared to a 3d printer (xyz axis movement, suction head, part reel incrementer, webcam + identification software), it seems like a sufficiently motivated hobbyist could come up with something passably similar in the same price ballpark.
This is one of those things that sounds trivial but has tons of hidden gotcha's.
EEVBlog usually breaks it down pretty well but I can't find any of the recent ones he's reviewed.
to support your point, from 2 weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16184255
There are open source PnP designs though:
https://hackaday.io/project/9319-diy-pick-and-place
it's really just that not many hobbyists need or even want one.
Depending on how complex your board is, building, say, 100 units by hand isn't time consuming. I've soldered literally thousands of through-hole boards and SMT is much faster and easier to do by hand.
But isn't this just begging the question?
If hobbyists can make use of it, then by definition it's a hobbyist venture. Bringing down size, cost, and complexity is exactly the path by which so much has become available to hobbyists these days.
Wasn't that long ago that a laser cutter, heaven forbid a 3d printer, was for pro shops only.
Edit: a good analogy is a homebrewer putting caps on beer bottles. You can do it by hand with a simple tool pretty easily - even capping 100 bottles at once is no sweat, really. It just doesn't make sense to have an automated bottle capping machine even if it was cheap, because it takes up space and ends up taking more effort to set up for a small run than it saves you. Pardon the pun, but the bottleneck lies elsewhere.
Capping them by hand despite the time and effort makes sense until you can afford a significant outlay in cost.
(I work for a machine shop that makes handling parts and retrofits capping/filler machines for the bottling industry. I don't fully know our prices but most of them would be far outside the range of any hobbyist starting out.)
So lets figure out ways to bring down the amount of work required to configure it! ;)
I think your analogy falls down because an automatic bottlecapper does the same thing as you'd normally do by hand.
The difference for me is that a pick-and-place machine is an enabler. It would enable hobbyists to take on large-scale, distributed electronics projects - for which, right now, assembly time is normally the bottleneck.
If all hobbyists were solely interested in producing consumer-style devices, like bad versions of phones, or home-automation systems, then a pick-and-place machine wouldn't be a good idea for anyone. But there are actually lots of hobbyists that do stuff like data logging, where assembly time is a major problem.
> I think your analogy falls down because an automatic bottlecapper does the same thing as you'd normally do by hand.
That was my point. A pick and place does the same thing you'd normally do by hand with a pair of tweezers in about 10 minutes for a board of moderate complexity. Doing surface mount work by hand with tweezers is pretty easy. The only thing a pick and place enables is for you to do things at a large scale, because they have a substantial overhead to use that you only start to recoup around 50-100 units or more. Now, if we had some revolutionary device that you could set up in 10 minutes to feed dozens of parts and cost $500 then hell yes, I'd want one too. But I don't think that's possible at present no matter any economies of scale or design optimization, because a pick and place is actually quite a complex machine by simple necessity.
Not to mention that placing parts is only part of it - you still have to fabricate and drill the boards, load the machine, clean up any mis-places, reflow them in an oven, manually place any through hole or awkwardly shaped components and solder them, cut the boards, test them, program them, mount them, etc. A pick and place would definitely save you some time if you really want to do such a large project, but by itself I don't think it's gonna be enough to really make it accessible to an individual in their free time. I'm not disputing that they would be beneficial, just that they make sense for an individual working in their free time. Especially when you consider that contract manufacturing isn't that expensive, though it does come with its own set of hassles.
I do think that a pick-and-place machine is probably more compatible with the hobbyist world than home CNC - given that CNC inherrently requires robust construction, and robust, accurate components are inherrently expensive. I mean - this machine looks more or less like a 3d printer with some reels, and a scanner. Once 3D printing becomes a cheap technology, things that require accurate repetitive movement become cheaper too.
I wouldn't be entirely surprised if stuff like small robotic arms become available to the hobbyist in the next 50 years or so, simply because being able to do arbitrary tasks with a high degree of accuracy is incredibly useful.
At the point where CNC, not as in cutting, but as in general computer-controlled movement, is an ordinary part of the workshop, I wouldn't be surprised if things like this ended up in hobbbyist spaces.
https://www.sparkfun.com/products/14342
I had actually just discovered those recently and with 0.2mm repeatability my first thought was a pick and place. But the complexity ends up being with the part feed and with configuration. It's really hard to build a machine that can reliably feed arbitrary parts automatically, and then programming it for each job is a pain so you'd also have to revolutionize the tooling so that a person could program one in a few minutes (and don't forget loading it ugh). The kinematics do share a lot with 3D printers, but it's the open-endedness in the feed system that makes them difficult. It's probably not impossible, just really hard, so there needs to be a considerable market to recoup the cost of designing such a machine that is accessible to a hobbyist.
I mostly agree with CNC, though it depends on how ambitious you are. I have a very cheap generic CNC engraver ($100 + shipping) that I use to engrave PCBs and it actually works quite well for that as well as it can do wood and soft materials remarkably nicely. Ditto for nicer machines like the Sienci, especially if you're doing woodworking. But a 5 axis machine capable of milling metal for <$500? It's not gonna happen. And even if it did, would you really want one? Milling metal is always gonna be complex and full of hassles.
I feel the same way about laser cutters. They're actually affordable now and I definitely want one, but I don't wanna deal with the considerable inherent hassle. Fires, toxic fumes, permanent blindness, focusing etc, just not worth it to me even for free.
Also this has been an interesting discussion, thanks.
You're almost certainly right about good metal-milling CNC machines never being cheap. I think the only possibility to make such a thing economical would be by re-purposing car parts (I think if you could work out a way to use common car parts and clever software, you could step around the fact that things manufactured to high tolerances out of steel are expensive - since car parts are both cheap, and well-made).
That said, the thing that really excites me about CNC is just how much it opens up a whole load of projects that I haven't had the tooling or the mechanical skill to take on. I'm a bad carpenter, so when I make things out of wood, I tend to have to allow massive tolerances in everything I do. Even a CNC that could only cut softwood would be really useful for me.
I've actually been ummming and ahhing about buying one of ali-express - where did you get your engraver from?
The tool isn't the issue. If a hobbyist wants to play with a Pick & Place, go for it.
My point was that the typical hobbyist isn't going to be manufacturing 1,000 units of anything, no matter how cheap is to do. Once you get into those numbers, it's far more likely to be a (small) business venture.
Sorry for going off-topic, but do hobbyists actually solder SMT's manually nowadays? Or does everyone use some kind of off-the-shelf/DIY reflow oven? And if so, are stencils obligatory or is it feasible to just apply paste manually?
I've been thinking of getting back (or well, properly starting if you will) my electronics hobby, but I've ever only done through-hole components. At least based on tutorials on the web, it's possible to hand-solder SMT's with some practice. But given how small e.g. 0603's are I guess that might involve an unhealthy amount of swearing..
[1] http://www.aoyue.eu/aoyue-int998-smd-rework-station-hot-air-... [2] https://www.aliexpress.com/item/220V-AD-982-Semi-Auto-Glue-D...
Even with practice I'm orders of magnitude slower than people with steady hands.
The main thing I like about electronics is it makes me feel at home in a world of technology that's kinda crazy alien at least half of the time. Being able to interact with it in a proactive way makes it something I can get a grip on, even if, when we're frank, my soldering is shit.
I do both: for small fixes I solder by hand. Complete boards I usually use an old toaster oven, but often if the boards are really small, I use a soldering iron. I try not to go below 0805, but 0603 isn't hard.
I typically won't get a stencil for custom one-off jobs since they tend to be small and ordering them introduces delay. When I do, I use oshstencils.com. Had great luck with them and they are very price competitive.
> I do have a side business building custom electronics, but I think I still qualify as hobbyist :-)
Taking this even further off-topic, could you elaborate a little? What kind of stuff are you doing? I imagine there is a niche for one-off or small batch stuff, but OTOH on aliexpress (or whatever) you can find almost every electronic gimmick you can imagine (and plenty you couldn't imagine!) for ridiculously low prices.
https://www.sparkfun.com/tutorials/60
https://www.sparkfun.com/tutorials/59
I've been skilletting my boards (fabbed by OSHpark) for the last few months, and it's really easy. As another commenter mentioned, use a syringe to deposit solder paste. It only takes a few boards to dial in the right amount to lay, and is actually surprisingly quick to place the parts (even 0603) with tweezers and then throw 'em on the skillet.
If you're one of the handful of hobbyists that want to do such complex projects I think contract manufacturing is probably a more realistic option. Not sure if you've ever set up a PnP before but it's a huge pain in the ass. I'd rather stencil and tweezer as long it was remotely practical. They are utterly mesmerizing to watch work once they're set up however...
LitePlacer is almost there. IMHO the key is recognizing that production-oriented machines need to be fast, while hobbyist/small-shop prototyping machines don't. If I need to stuff a complex prototype board with 500 parts, I literally don't care if it takes all day and all night as long as I don't have to do it. Obviously production shops don't have that luxury, but I do.
Really, the only unsolved problem (at least at the 0402 and up level) is loose part pickup and orientation.
Slump is a problem if you're trying to run a six-sigma process in a factory, of course, but that's not what's being discussed here.
My guess is that as prices drop under $2500/machine and $10/PCB and safety issues are resolved PnP will become more popular. There's a lot of need for repeatable, low rate production. A PnP is kind of like Vagrant/Puppet/Chef for hardware. Instead of manually building the board each time, use a configuration managed automated build.
OP said:
> Interesting that for such an inexpensive but specialized hardware device it still has a "phone home on boot" feature.
It's a harder problem than it seems, as I've found out over the past 6 years. While the basics are quite similar to a 3D printer, PnP has some unique challenges. 3D printing can be relatively inaccurate but still produce a good output since you are working with a pretty "oozy" substance to begin with. PnP has to be pretty accurate across it's entire work surface, though. If the machine is 0.1mm off at any point in it's travel that creates a likelihood that a part will be placed incorrectly. Feeders are also, mechanically, a lot more difficult to get right than it seems like they would be.
In any case, we're having good luck and a lot of success, so if you are interested in DIY / Open Source / Hobby pick and place, please come check it out!
http://openpnp.org
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9BGVYnaOs8
(great project by the way!)
https://odriverobotics.com/
Looks interesting (to me anyway) for this type of project. I can’t tell if the precision you need for PnP is there yet, but it looks like the speed is.
PnP seems like a hard problem. I thought the same thing as you awhile ago, looked at some efforts that others were putting together, and was surprised at how many opted for complex things like computer vision to verify part positioning.
And it did not take long for me to decide that, like most problems I take a cursory look at, there was no flippin' way I'd be able to make anything workable on my own in a reasonable cost/time-box.
If I had an affordable plug-and-play design, I might take steps to protect it. Personally I'd think twice about a 'phone home' solution because I hate that shit as a consumer - or just open source it outright - but I can understand the stance.
[1] https://www.liteplacer.com/ [2] http://openpnp.org/
LitePlacer is designed for one-off jobs. It gets its parts from cut tape, not reels. It uses its vision system to line up on the parts tapes, so the tapes don't have to be precisely positioned. It's quite slow for a pick and place machine, but far faster than doing it by hand.
Doesn't put down solder paste, though.
There are a lot of low-end pick and place machines, but few critical evaluations of them.
Can you tell me what the basic steps are? Pricing information would be appreciated!
The big issue is really setting up manufacturing and supply chain on a large scale when you do get it working.
We're building prototypes of a complex bit of consumer electronics for consumer testing. We can do full industrial design, mechanical design, electronic design get the components made, assembled and delivered in 6 weeks. The fundamental limiting factor on how fast we can do it is the time it takes for the PCB to be made. From an electronics point of view, schematic capture and layout can be done in a week, and board assembly can be done in a day (if you're in a hurry) but there's nothing we can do about the 3 week lead time on the PCB because it's 8 layers with blind laser drilled vias.
Having an engineer who would otherwise be billed out at $150 - $200/hour hand placing parts and soldering boards is a waste of our in-house resources.
Proximity and flexibility still matters somewhat though, so there might still be a market for a pick and place machine between this type of machine and a professional one. In China there are pcb factories offering assembly for a low fee. They have a multiple pick and place machines with common components after each other.
The reason it seems like a good idea is people don't see things like the time spent tweaking as a cost. It is also to some extent true for laser cutters and 3d printers.
Computer vision really is the answer, but from reading the article it sounds like the CV on the CHMT36VA isn't great for parts that aren't 0603 and it's not open/easily hackable to be better.
Pick&place, as well as 3D printing, begins to make sense at industrial scale, with huge expensive machines. Sparkfun might be a borderline case, but I suspect even they won't use these cheap pnp machines in the longer term.
If you are a hobbyist or a low-scale manufacturing operation, you are much better off using MacroFab, PCBNG, Small Batch Assembly or AISLER.net for electronics production, and Shapeways for 3D printing (SLS). Alternatively, for quantities of ~10 of electronics devices, it makes sense to order your boards and stencils from OSHpark or AISLER, place components yourself using tweezers, and either use a modified oven or a hot air soldering iron for reflow.
This is speaking from experience (as a hobbyist/maker, electronics design engineer designing proof-of-concept and small-scale production devices, and https://PartsBox.io/ founder).
For 3D printing this is becoming less true every day. 3D Printers are now extremely cheap, where sub-$300 printers make sense at low scale usage. A typical print from an outsourced printer like Shapeways might cost you about $20, and once you factor in the cost of the material when you print yourself, it only takes about 20 prints for the printer to pay for itself, and you have the added benefit of having your print in an hour rather than a week.
Also, it's just lots of fun to work with the printer.
3d printed parts and PCBs can be done in as little as 12 hours. You can then without any modification do small production runs anywhere from ten to a thousand pieces (which isn't unrealistic outside consumer hardware). You could even 3d print moulds and do injection moulding.
I think partly why people say that hardware isn't iterative enough is that they are doing it the wrong way. They spend too much time on prototyping, which means they then have to make everything perfect for a large production runs to average out the costs.
Yes, you can do design prototype revision A, B and C, then do production prototype A, B and C, and finally production version A, B and C. But then you have spent a significant amount of time and money refining prototypes and adding features. That forces you to large production runs with huge risk, because you have already made the investment. What I am saying is that you should just make the production prototype with less features and ship that. Because that is how you go to market quickly, which is usually the larger point of such development.
This is also why Shenzhen wins over hackerspaces (which are also great btw) but that is another story.
For another example, I made this case:
https://www.makerfol.io/project/8ycrZ9t-case-for-the-dp30v5a...
This would also have not been possible without the printer next to me. I constantly had to print segments to see how parts fit. With a week-long turnaround time instead of ten minutes, I wouldn't even have bothered.
Sure, if I already know how to design and print, maybe I could have designed something without owning a printer, but even that is not very likely (I generally have to make alterations a lot). For $300 (and a bunch of time spent), it's a no-brainer if you want to get into the hobby.
You put the PCB in a reflow oven afterwards.
Put solder on the pads. This can be done with a solder mask - a thin sheet of metal with holes cut where the pads are. Solder paste is scraped over it and then the mask is lifted off, leaving solder on the pads.
Place components. This can be done manually or with the pick and place machines described here. The solder paste is sticky so there is something to hold the components in place once placed.
Reflow. This is done by putting the now populated board into a special oven. This oven will put the board through a particular temperature curve ('profile') which melts the solder then lets it cool. The surface tension of the solder on the pads helps here - it pulls components that are a fraction off into perfect position (assuming the pick and place got it close enough and that solder is on pads where it is meant to be).
What you’re referring to in the first paragraph is just called a stencil.