IPC 9850 Table Of Contents

User Manual: 9850

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 4

IPC-9850

Surface Mount

Placement Equipment

Characterization

Developed by the SMT Component Placement Equipment Subcommittee

(5-41) of the Assembly Equipment Committee (5-40) of IPC

Users of this standard are encouraged to participate in the

development of future revisions.

Contact:

IPC

2215 Sanders Road

Northbrook, Illinois

60062-6135

Tel 847 509.9700

Fax 847 509.9798

ASSOCIATION CONNECTING

ELECTRONICS INDUSTRIES

®

September 16, 2002

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................ 1

1.1 Scope .................................................................... 1

1.2 Purpose ................................................................. 1

1.3 Background .......................................................... 1

1.3.1 Future Considerations .......................................... 2

1.4 Implementation .................................................... 2

1.4.1 Characterization Limitations ............................... 2

1.4.2 Binding Requirements ......................................... 2

1.4.3 Test Components ................................................. 2

1.4.4 Test Panels ........................................................... 3

1.4.5 Measurement ........................................................ 3

1.5 Forms ................................................................... 4

1.6 Data Methods ....................................................... 4

1.7 Terms and Definitions ......................................... 4

1.8 Units of Measurement ......................................... 5

2 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS ................................. 5

3 PLACEMENT PERFORMANCE METRIC ................ 5

3.1 Machine Performance Form IPC-9850-F1 ......... 5

3.1.1 General Performance ........................................... 5

3.1.2 Performance Validation ........................................ 5

3.2 Characterization Methodology ............................ 6

3.2.1 Background .......................................................... 6

3.3 Machine Performance Parameters ....................... 7

3.3.1 Test Conditions .................................................... 7

3.3.2 Time-Based Parameters ....................................... 7

3.3.3 CMM Measured Parameters ................................ 9

4 ATTRIBUTE DEFECT RATE AND RELIABILITY

PERFORMANCE METRIC—FORM IPC-9850-F2 .12

4.1 Attribute Defect Rate ......................................... 13

4.2 Reliability Parameters ........................................ 14

4.2.1 Mean Placements Between Assists (MPBA) .... 15

4.2.2 Mean Time To Recover from Assists

(MTTRa) ............................................................ 15

4.2.3 Mean Placements Between Failures (MPBF) ... 15

4.2.4 Mean Time To Repair Failures (MTTR

f

) ......... 15

4.2.5 Total Time .......................................................... 15

4.2.6 Non-Scheduled Time ......................................... 15

4.2.7 Operations Time ................................................. 16

4.2.8 Equipment Dependent Uptime .......................... 16

4.2.9 Preventative Maintenance (PM) Time .............. 16

4.2.10 Mispick Rate (in PPM) ..................................... 16

4.3 Reporting Sites ................................................... 17

4.3.1 Number of Machines ......................................... 17

4.3.2 Total Number of Placements ............................. 17

4.3.3 Total Pickup Attempts ....................................... 17

5 MEASUREMENT CAPABILITY VERIFICATION—

FORM IPC-9850-F3 ................................................ 17

5.1 Gauge Repeatability and Reproducibility

Capability ........................................................... 17

5.2 Accuracy Capability .......................................... 17

6 TEST VEHICLES .................................................... 19

6.1 Placement Verification Panel Specifications ..... 19

6.2 Placement Verification Panel Carrier

Specifications ..................................................... 20

6.3 Glass Slug Specifications .................................. 20

6.4 Sticky Media Application .................................. 20

6.5 Placement Program ............................................ 26

6.5.1 1608C Component ............................................. 26

6.5.2 SOIC-16 Component ......................................... 26

6.5.3 QFP-100 and BGA-228 Slugs ........................... 26

6.5.4 QFP-208 Slug .................................................... 26

7 FORMS AND DIAGRAMS ...................................... 31

APPENDIX A .............................................................. 35

APPENDIX B .............................................................. 36

APPENDIX C .............................................................. 37

APPENDIX D .............................................................. 39

APPENDIX E .............................................................. 44

APPENDIX F .............................................................. 48

APPENDIX G .............................................................. 49

APPENDIX H .............................................................. 50

APPENDIX I ............................................................... 51

APPENDIX J .............................................................. 52

Figures

Figure 3-1 Performance Parameter Description for

a Single Panel .................................................. 8

Figure 3-2 Performance Parameter Description for a

Four-Panel Build ............................................... 8

Figure 3-3 Maximum Lead Tip Error Due to Placement

Machine (Combined Xdev, Ydev and θdev .... 11

Figure 5-1 Accuracy Verification Panel ............................ 18

Figure 6-1 Placement Verification Panel .......................... 20

July 2002 IPC-9850

iii

Figure 6-2 QFP 100 Slug for White Background for

Leads on Chrome Background (Negative) ..... 21

Figure 6-3 QFP 100 Slug for Chrome Leads With No

Background (Positive) .................................... 22

Figure 6-4 QFP 208 Slug for White Background for

Leads on Chrome Background (Negative) ..... 23

Figure 6-5 QFP 208 Slug for Chrome Leads With No

Background (Positive) .................................... 24

Figure 6-6 BGA-228 Slug for White Background for

Leads on Chrome Background (Negative) ..... 25

Figure 6-7 BGA-228 Slug with No Background

(Positive) ......................................................... 26

Figure 6-8 Component Location Layout for 1608C

Components ................................................... 27

Figure 6-9 Component Location Layout for SOIC 16

Components ................................................... 28

Figure 6-10 Component Location Layout for QFP-100

and BGA 228 Slug Components .................... 29

Figure 6-11 Component Location Layout for QFP-208

Slug Components ........................................... 30

Figure A-1 Cpk Graphic Representation .......................... 35

Figure H-1 Gauge R&R Spreadsheet Example ............... 50

Figure I-1 Placement Verification Panel Carrier ............. 51

Figure J-1 Termination-to-Land Calculation Example ...... 52

Tables

Table 3-1 Cpk for Termination-to-Land Coverag ............... 11

Table 4-1 Component Types

and Quantities for ‘Typical Kit’ .......................... 13

Table 4-2 Calculation Example ......................................... 15

Table 4-3 Terms Definition ................................................ 16

Table 6-1 Tool Kit Materials List

for Performance Evaluation .............................. 19

Table D-1 Mean and stdev using 2 fiducials ..................... 40

Table D-2 Mean and stdev per method using 4 fiducials .. 40

Table D-3 Mean and stdev vs. number of

measured leads ................................................. 42

IPC-9850 July 2002

iv

Surface Mount Placement Equipment Characterization

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Scope This standard establishes the procedures to

characterize the capability of surface mount assembly

equipment in specification documents, as well as in docu-

mentation used to verify a specific machine’s placement

capability conformance to the specification, while main-

taining a placement accuracy to placement speed relation-

ship.

1.2 Purpose IPC-9850 has been developed to standard-

ize the parameters, measurement procedures, and the meth-

odologies used for the specification, evaluation, and con-

tinuing verification of assembly equipment characterization

parameters. These standardized tools shall be used to

develop and report the information called out in this stan-

dard.

1.3 Background With the proliferation of Surface Mount

Technology (SMT), placement equipment users have

struggled with the question of which machine will perform

best in a given manufacturing environment. The advantage

of the SMT assembly process to rapidly place components

in precise alignment to the land patterns on the printed

wiring board (PWB) was the initial yardstick by which

machines were selected. Machines that could place compo-

nents the quickest and with the least amount of scrap were

considered the best.

Initially, the most common evaluation method was place-

ment yield. For this evaluation, a machine is made to popu-

late a large number of the user product where visible place-

ment errors are counted as defects. Machines with the least

defects and the most robust operation were considered best.

The high yield and reliability of modern SMT placement

systems require that very large amounts of data be col-

lected to meaningfully assess yield and reliability. This

standard provides new tools for gauging the yield and reli-

ability of placement equipment yet presents performance

results in the traditional metrics.

In addition to the high yield and reliability expected of

modern placement equipment, the SMT assembly process

has become significantly more demanding. Components

have decreased in size, component terminations are

smaller, and placement locations have moved closer

together. All this while the number of components on the

PWB and product volumes have increased significantly.

Placement equipment must now place components more

rapidly and with extreme precision to be financially viable.

This has made requirements on placement machines more

demanding.

Historically, placement equipment vendors have selected

their own parameters and methodologies to present the

specification of their machines’ throughput and placement

capabilities. The many representations of this information

have made the comparison between similar types of place-

ment machines very difficult. To obtain comparable data,

users have been forced to conduct on-location evaluations

of various machines under the same conditions. This type

of methodology is very time consuming for users and very

capital intensive for suppliers.

This standard simplifies the evaluation process by standard-

izing the performance parameters that describe the place-

ment machines’ capabilities. It also couples placement

throughput and placement quality so speed and accuracy

parameters are dependent on each other. This standard also

specifies the methodologies by which the capability param-

eters are measured. This reduces potential user-vendor fric-

tion created when the user believes the equipment is not

functioning properly. The methodologies specified herein

are consistent and verifiable, thus providing common-

ground-methodologies between users and vendors.

These methodologies were achieved by separating machine

performance from the rest of the SMT process variables,

which include paste printing, component quality, packaging

type and PWB quality. The speed and quality evaluation

methods of this standard specify that measurements will be

made by placement of standardized components into sticky

media on clear glass panels. Experience shows that surface

mount equipment must perform well on sticky media

before it can perform well in production. Furthermore,

improved process capability on sticky tape usually trans-

lates into enhanced process capability in production.

Although this method does not provide information that

can be utilized to perfectly predict production quality, this

methodology was selected in order to remove as much of

the variation as possible between facilities, products, pro-

cess, and operators.

While the ultimate goal is to evaluate a machine’s capabil-

ity to place components in paste on actual PWBs, it is not

currently possible to make such measurements at the

required precision and speed. It is anticipated that future

in-line inspection systems will improve in their ability to

measure component location and orientation. In the future

it may become possible to use in-line post-placement (pre-

reflow) automatic optical inspection (AOI) systems to mea-

sure the placement machine capabilities.

Due to the convergence of high-speed and fine pitch

machines, this standard makes no attempt to separate the

two types of machines. The user is empowered to decide if

July 2002 IPC-9850

1