JP2999585B2 - Circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system - Google Patents

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a computer aided design system (Computer Aid) for improving the productivity design of circuit boards.
ed Design System (hereinafter referred to as CAD system) based on the design information created using the design information to determine whether or not the designed structure of the circuit board is easy to produce, especially whether or not the structure is easy to assemble. The present invention relates to a circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system that automatically performs quantitative evaluation.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art As a first conventional method for evaluating whether or not a circuit board has a structure that is easy to make, a skilled person in design and manufacturing is referred to as a design review at the time of design. There is known a general method of judging the degree of improvement and pointing out a part requiring improvement. As a second conventional technique, FIG.
As shown in Fig. 7, a process plan is performed on the basis of the design drawings to calculate the estimated assembly costs and time. There is a method of judging the quality of a structure in consideration of experience. As a third conventional technique, there is a printed board package assembly evaluation method for automatically evaluating an automated assembly rate of a printed board package as described in Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 61-59900. In the method disclosed in this prior application, in order to evaluate the easiness of automation when inserting components in assembling a printed circuit board package, the standard mounting time of a standard-type inserted semiconductor integrated circuit is manually set to 100, The degree of difficulty of inserting parts is expressed as a deduction index, and the total deduction points of the manually inserted parts are calculated from this, and the total deduction value by hand is subtracted from 100 with 100 as the fully automatic case. The score of the value is used as an index for automation of assembly.

[0003]

The first conventional technique described above is qualitative and objectively determines how good or bad the structure of the product to be evaluated is and how effective it is when the structure is improved. There is a problem that it is difficult to express quantitatively and quantitatively and that only those who have sufficient experience in design and production technology can implement it. In the second conventional method, even if the assembly cost of the entire board, each component, or a part of a component can be estimated, it is determined from the value alone whether the design structure is good or bad and whether improvement is necessary. It is difficult to evaluate it because it requires much experience and knowledge and considerable calculation time to evaluate, and it is difficult to evaluate it if the design is not completed. However, once the design is completed, it takes a lot of time to change the design. Therefore, as shown in FIG. 27, the design is often shifted to production without making any design change, and the improvement in productivity and cost reduction are often not realized. was there. In the third conventional method, evaluation is possible without much experience, but the evaluation index is a method in which only the ease of assembling automation when a component is inserted into a circuit board is represented by a score. That is, assembling a normal circuit board involves mounting the circuit board, inserting inserted parts (*),
Circuit boards are manufactured through various processes such as board reversal, chip component mounting (*), drying, board reversal, odd-shaped component insertion (*), manual insertion (*), soldering, cleaning, retrofitting, and inspection. Therefore, the man-hour ratio for component insertion is about 10 to 30% of the entire board production, and it is easy to automate the component insertion (the ones marked with * in the above process). However, there is a problem that the quality of the ease of assembly cannot be accurately and comprehensively determined only by the above.

[0004] The above problems are summarized as follows: (1) The evaluation is qualitative and not quantitative. (2) Only an experienced person can evaluate, or requires some knowledge of evaluation methods. (3) It is difficult to judge whether the design is good or bad only by the cost of assembly. (4) Evaluation takes time or some time. (5) Unless the design is completed or nears the end, the evaluation cannot be performed, and it is difficult to improve the design after the judgment. (6) Since it is not easy to understand the quality of the design for each part, it is difficult to improve the product. (7) The evaluation index and cost are not linked. It turns out that.

[0005] Therefore, the technical problem to be solved by the present invention is to solve the problems of the above-mentioned technology, and the purpose is (1) quantitative evaluation, and (2)
No experience is required, and (3) not only the assembly cost but also the quality of the product structure can be easily understood by anyone. (4) The evaluation is easy and (5) Evaluation can be done at an early stage. (6) Can be evaluated at the component level. (7) It has a quality evaluation index, and this index is associated with cost. (8) Evaluation can be performed directly from CAD information during design. (9) Evaluation can be performed immediately during design. An object of the present invention is to provide a circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system that can be automatically performed.

[0006]

In order to achieve the above object, the present invention provides: (1) For quantitative evaluation, a component assemblability score reflecting the ease of assembly for each circuit component and circuit board. , A board assemblability score is calculated, and further, the assembling time and assembly cost of components and boards are calculated using the score. (2) In order not to require a wealth of experience in the evaluation, various assembling operations are classified into easy-to-remember basic elements and correction elements. The evaluation result can be calculated by extracting and designating a board or part assemblability score, as well as an assembling time and an assembling cost from the design information. (3) Focusing on the fact that many components to be mounted on the board are mounted from a direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the board and are mounted in a relatively similar mounting operation, the component shape and the mounting operation are noted. Categorized into similar parts groups that are easy to determine from the similarity, each part group is represented in advance by a combination of the basic element and the correction element necessary for assembling the part group, and stored in a computer memory, In addition, a program for calculating an assemblability score and an assembling man-hour of an index of ease of assembling from the basic element and the correction element is stored, and the design information in CAD is stored in a database relating to circuit design information and a database relating to component information. The information required for the evaluation of the board / parts is extracted and determined by referring to the memory of the target, and the product to be evaluated (substrate assembly) is composed of a number of parts of each part group. By automatically counting or were to the assembly easiness of the circuit board can be easily evaluated. (4) Regarding the manufacture of the circuit board, mounting the circuit board on an assembly table or an automatic assembling device, inserting an inserted part, inverting the board, mounting a chip part, drying, inverting the board, inserting a deformed part, inserting an inserted part, hand inserting, The assembling time of processes such as soldering, cleaning, assembling of retrofitted parts, and inspection is substituted into the workplace standard assembling time of a similar substrate, so that the assembling time of products and parts can be accurately calculated. (5) Automatic assembling and manual assembling are mixed in assembling a circuit board, and the tact time of automatic assembling is 1/15 to 1/20 of that of manual assembling in an automatic assembling workplace and a manual assembling workplace. Since the assembly time is greatly different as described above, by setting a coefficient for correcting the assembly time for each assembly environment condition such as whether the parts are automatically assembled or manually assembled, various automatic assembly times can be obtained. The assembling time of a board composed of assembled and manually assembled components is accurately estimated. (6) In order to evaluate quantitatively and to avoid the need for abundant experience in the evaluation, evaluate how easy it is to assemble based on the calculated assemblability score of individual components and the entire circuit board. I made it. (7) Adopting a method of calculating assemblability score and assembling cost from outline shape information of parts enables evaluation at a relatively early stage of design and output of mounting information from CAD information did.

[0007]

[Function] (1) Various assembling operations are classified into several tens of basic elements, and a basic element to be a reference, for example, a downward moving assembling in the reference state is determined, and relative difficulty to each of the basic elements is determined. The basic point deduction given to each basic element so that it does not change depending on the number of productions and the production means is given to each basic element, although the increase in the time and cost of assembling the parts appears as an increase in the deduction. In addition to the basic elements, factors that affect the parts assembly time and cost are further extracted and used as correction elements. (3) The board is configured based on the design information described in the drawings stored in the CAD. For each component to be automatically represented by a combination of the basic element and the correction element, and by correcting the basic deduction given to the basic element for each part by the correction element,
The increase in the time and cost of assembling parts will reduce the score,
The values are determined so as not to change depending on the number of productions or the production means, and this is set as the component assemblability rating. (4) Focusing on the component form and the assembling operation to be mounted on the board, classify them into similar parts groups that are easy to discriminate, add necessary assembly information to the parts belonging to each similar parts group, and store them in the memory. From the information stored and automatically counted as to how many of each component group the board assembly is composed of and the assembly information stored in the memory, an increase in assembling time and cost will decrease the score. A product assemblability score that is linked so as not to change depending on the number of products or production means is obtained. (5) Using the assemblability score and the number of parts for each of the products and parts to be evaluated and similar existing products and parts, and the time and cost of assembling the existing products and parts, By calculating the attached time and cost value, the assembly time of the process related to the manufacture of the circuit board is calculated,
Even if the assembly environment conditions for automatic assembly and manual assembly in the manufacture of circuit boards are different, by setting a coefficient to correct the workplace reference time for manual assembly for each of the assembly environment conditions for parts, Automatically calculates the estimated man-hours for assembling the board composed of the above components. (6) Basic deductions defined for reference elements and basic elements that classify various assembling operations of the parts, combinations of basic elements and correction elements for assembling operations of similar parts groups, evaluation formulas and calculations The result is stored in a storage device, and the above-described evaluation calculation is automatically performed by an arithmetic device that executes an operation based on the data from the storage device and the data from the input device, and the input data and the evaluation result are displayed or output. The above evaluation calculation is automatically performed and output by a computer system having an output device for print output. All or some of these devices may be shared with the devices constituting the CAD processing device.

[0008]

Embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to FIGS. FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an outline of a configuration of a circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system to which the present invention is applied.
The circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation device 30 shown in FIG.
Automatically based on the information necessary for the evaluation of the ease of assembly and the like extracted by the board / part evaluation information extraction unit 31 from the drawing data created by the AD processing device 21 or stored in the CAD database 22. In addition, the ease of assembly (called assemblability) of products and / or parts is quantitatively evaluated, and the evaluation result is displayed on the display device 3 or output by the printer 5,
Also, it is stored in the evaluation database 32.

As shown in FIG. 14, the contents of the CAD database 22 of the CAD processor 21 include a circuit block database 23, a component shape database 24, a board database 25, a component list database 26, and the like. Further, the evaluation information database 32 stores, for each elementary element used for evaluation, a symbol representing the elementary element, a constant value associated therewith, and a constant value of the correction evaluation element. The evaluation information database 32 also records the scores of products and / or parts evaluated previously by the present system, actual cost values, and the like.

FIG. 1 shows an outline of a configuration for executing basic processing until output of an evaluation result from drawing data.
4. That is, the evaluation method uses drawing data created by the CAD processing device 21 or stored in advance in the CAD database 22 by using the circuit block database 23, the component shape database 24, and the board database 2.
5. By referring to and comparing with the contents of the parts list database 26 and the like, the board / part evaluation information extracting unit 31 extracts information necessary for evaluating the ease of assembling the boards / parts, and sets the parts into their shapes and sets. An assemblability evaluation unit 33 having a parts group information database 34, which is classified into similar parts groups that can be easily distinguished from similarities in the attaching operation, determines in advance which part group each part used in the design department belongs to. Judging,
The classification information is stored in a database, and assemblability is calculated by referring to the contents of the component group information database for the type information of the components used for circuit design. The calculated result (evaluation result) and the like are displayed or printed out on the display device 3 or the printer 5 as shown in FIG.

FIG. 21 shows a process flow from system specifications to manufacturing and inspection of a circuit board in the circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system of the present embodiment, that is, from design to production. Here, the design evaluation / improvement process in the circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system is performed in a design process from functional design to circuit design and mounting design. In the function design, a function model level simulator simulates whether or not the discrete circuit should be integrated into an IC. Generally, even when designing a new circuit board, about 70% of it
Can use the existing circuit, so in the circuit design using CAD, a case that can be used from the existing circuit stored in the circuit database is called and the design is performed based on this, and the remaining 30% of the new part is newly designed. It is usual to design. Next, when the circuit design is completed, a circuit design evaluation is performed, an assemblability score and an assembling time are calculated as an assemblability index. The cost information and the mounting information are extracted by the method shown in FIG. 12, and from these results, it is determined whether the productivity of the circuit design is good or not.

At the mounting design stage, the layout of parts and wiring are determined and drawing is performed. If an existing layout design example can be used as it is, it is used, and a part which cannot be reused and designed is used. It is common to make a new design. In the mounting design using CAD, components are selected from a component database in which component information such as component cost information, shape, and dimensions are stored in advance. Even when the mounting design is completed, the assembling performance of the mounting design is evaluated, the assembling score and the assembling time are calculated as the assembling index, and the cost information and the mounting information are further calculated by the method of FIG. Based on the result, the quality of the productivity design of the mounting design is determined. When the mounting design is completed, the computer assisted manufacturing system (hereinafter referred to as CA
CAM data for automatic mounting and manual assembling work (hereinafter referred to as M) are prepared, and then manufacturing and inspection are performed.

FIG. 22 shows an example of a computer system to which the circuit board productivity design evaluation system according to the present embodiment for executing an assemblability evaluation process and the like is applied. As shown in FIG. The hardware configuration is very general. That is, the computer system shown in FIG. 22 includes an arithmetic device 1 for executing various arithmetic processes and the like, a storage device 2 for storing programs, basic data, input data and arithmetic results, a display device 3 for displaying various mode screens, It comprises an input device 4 such as a keyboard, a printer 5 for outputting calculation results (evaluation results) and the like. Although these devices are depicted as independent units in FIG. 22, some or all of them are shared with the devices constituting the CAD processing device 21 or partially connected to the CAD processing device 21 via a cable. May be used.

FIG. 23 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of operation symbols of basic elements of a similar part group and their contents. In FIG. 23, the first column shows an example of a group of easily distinguishable similar parts set by paying attention to the similarity of the part form and the assembling operation to be mounted on the circuit board 12. Each component group is provided with a combination of a basic element and a correction element of an assembling operation necessary for a component belonging to the group as assembly information, and this is stored in the storage device 2 in FIG. In the first column of FIG.
Hand soldering of the radial component 10 is shown as an example, and hand soldering of the retrofit connector 11 is shown as a second example thereof.
Each shows an example of an assembling operation of a similar part group. Although not described below, these similar component groups store the assembling operation in a memory in advance as a combination of a basic element, a correction element, and the like. The second column describes the contents of the basic elements of the assembling operation of each similar parts group. In the third column, an example of the operation symbol X corresponding to the basic element of each similar component group is described, and the manual soldering of the radial component 10 of the first example is performed as follows.
"↓" of lower moving assembly and manual soldering (Solder
ing) is a combination of two repetitions of "S" corresponding to the number of pins of the corresponding lead of "S", and the manual soldering of the retrofit connector 11 of the second example is performed during the downward moving assembly. "↓"
And "S" of manual soldering (Soldering) is repeated six times for "S" corresponding to the number of pins of the connector. The fourth column has indicated an example of the value of the component group score E _X of the similar component groups, these parts group score E _X has become a basic deduction ε groups of each basic element,
In this case, the basic deduction .epsilon. Is set to 0 for the basic element (reference element) of the lower moving assembly that is most easily assembled, and the basic element of the standard (reference element) for the other basic elements. Basic deduction ε as assembly becomes more difficult
In other words, the component assembling time T _X is determined to increase as the value of the basic deduction ε increases. In the fifth column, an example of the value of the component assembling time T _X of each such similar component group is described.

[0015] It is also possible to provide only the value of omitting to component groups score E _X operation symbols X component group as another embodiment. Further, as another embodiment, since the automation has been advanced in recent years and most of the automatic assembling is performed, an assembling symbol for the automatic assembling is automatically generated in advance, and AND /
A method of automatically correcting the assembly symbol from the OR logical expression may be used.

FIG. 24 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of correction elements of a similar part group and their contents. In FIG. 24, as the correction element items, correction coefficient values according to respective divisions of the values of the maximum dimension L and the mass M are described, and others are omitted.
Other items of the correction element include the shape of the part, the assembly accuracy, the repetition coefficient, the assembly element order coefficient, and the like. These correction factors are also specified in advance. In addition to the basic elements, items that affect the ease of assembling parts and that do not change depending on the number of products or production methods are listed. It is a thing.

[0017] As a result, the parts assembling efficiency rating E _i, the index representing the ease of quality assembly of parts. Also, the component assemblability score E _i obtained in this way is calculated as the basic deduction ε _X obtained in association with the assembling time T _X for each basic element for each component. This value is a function that is a constant function of the component assembling time T _i . E _i = f (T _i ) (1) Therefore, it is easily presumed from this value that the assembly time T _i and the assembly cost C _i are calculated. That is, the following equation is obtained. T _i = f _i (E _i ) (2) C _i = f ₂ (E _i ) (3) In this manner, the component assemblability score E for all the components is thus obtained.
_i , assembling time T _X , and assembling cost C _i are obtained, and then T, C, and E of the product are obtained from these average values. That is, T = ΣT _i = Σ [f _i (E _i )] (4) C = ΣC _i = Σ [f ₂ (E _i )] (5) From this, the product assemblability score E is given by the following equation. become. E = F ₃ (C) = F ₄ (T) = F ₅ [Σf (E _i )] (6) In this case, E _i is an index indicating how easy the part i is to be assembled. The product assemblability score E is an index indicating how easy the whole product is to assemble.

FIG. 25 is a flowchart showing an example of a processing procedure in a computer system for performing an assemblability score using the basic element and the correction element. In FIG. 25, in step 1, the assembling operation of the similar parts group is manually performed in advance in the memory by a combination of the basic element and the correction element. In step 2, products (circuits) to be evaluated during CAD
The parts inside are classified into similar parts groups, and the total number of the parts is automatically counted for each part group by a general integration program. The following steps are internal processing of the computer. In step 3, the number data of each component group input from the CAD processing device 21 to the assemblability evaluation section 33 is displayed on the display device 3. In step 4, the basic deduction ε and the correction coefficient for the basic element, the correction element, and the like used for expressing the assembling operation of the evaluation target component group are read from the storage device 2. In step 5, the basic deduction point ε is corrected by the correction coefficient by the arithmetic unit 1, and the sum thereof is set as a component group deduction point. In step 6, which was a component assembly of score E _i by subtracting the component groups deduction at the reference point, that scale from the normal 100 points, the calculated component assembly of score E _i is stored in the memory.
In step 7, checks were performed for all the parts of the above operations, the process returns to step 3 if incomplete to complete the calculation processing part assemblability score E _i for all the parts. In step 8, or an average value by using a component assembly of score E _i of all the parts constituting the target product, or an average value or making any correction, or such as by determining the median value, which the product assemblability Score E. In step 9, an estimated value of the assembling time T or assembling cost C of the target product is calculated using the assemblability score E and the number of parts N of the target product, the assemblability score and the number of parts of the similar product, and the assembling time and the assembling cost. I do. Alternatively, other factors affecting the assembly cost C, such as the production quantity and the cost per work hour, that is, the division, may be input as data in advance, and the calculation of the assembly cost may be corrected using these data. As described above, the component assemblability score E _i is calculated based on the basic deduction originally associated with the assembling time T _i , so the product assemblability score E itself is also reduced to the average assembly cost C for all parts. It becomes the associated value. Therefore,
If the average value E and the component numerical value N are obtained, or a slight correction is made thereto, an assembly cost (cost) C is obtained, and the coefficients for this correction include the production quantity and the cost per hour in the workplace. . Note that the assembly time T is the assembly cost C
Divided by the cost per unit time in the workplace.
In step 10, the evaluation result is displayed on the display device 3 and output by the printer 5 to complete the evaluation process.

FIG. 26 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of the output of the evaluation result. In FIG. 26, PCB and C are used as a part group.
ON is an abbreviation indicating hand soldering of the board and the retrofitting connector, respectively. The basic elements and correction elements of the PCB and CON are stored in the memory of the component group information database 34 in advance. When the design information of the board A is called from the CAD and given to the board / part evaluation information extracting unit 31,
The component evaluation information extraction unit 31 reads out the component types in the circuit diagram one by one, compares them with the component shape database 24, determines which component group belongs, and uses the same for each similar component group. The number of parts is automatically integrated by the integration program. When the number of parts of each similar parts group used in the entire board is obtained, these information are obtained by the assemblability evaluation unit 3.
3, the basic element and the correction element of each part group are called from the data in the part group information database 34, the assemblability evaluation is automatically performed, and the result is displayed on the display device 3 or the printer 5 Print out and Figure 25
The result is given in the form of a table such as

Regarding the manufacture of the above-mentioned circuit board, mounting of the circuit board, insertion of inserted components, board reversal, chip component mounting, drying, board reversal, insertion of odd-shaped components, manual insertion, soldering, cleaning, retrofitting, inspection, etc. The assembly estimated time T _i in the process (1) is accurately calculated by substituting the workplace reference assembly time T _oi in the following equation (7). _{T i = f (T oi,} E i, u i) (7) where Then T _OIH hand assembly reference assembly time ratio referred to u _i and workplace standards assembling time ratio, the following formula (8) Is represented by u _i = T _oi / T _oih (8) In circuit board assembly, automatic assembling and manual assembling are mixed, and the automatic assembling workplace is 1/15 to 1/20 of the manual assembling workplace. Since the assembling time differs greatly, the above equation (8) is used so that the evaluation can be performed collectively even if the production environment conditions differ.
, A coefficient for correcting the workplace reference assembling time _Toi is set for each part assembling environment, thereby assembling a board composed of various parts. The estimated man-hour T is calculated with high accuracy from the equation (4).

FIG. 3 shows the structure of the circuit board cost. The circuit board cost includes a bare board manufacturing cost, a circuit component purchase cost, and a circuit board assembly cost. The circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system of the present embodiment is designed to automatically calculate such a circuit board cost. Has become.

FIG. 2 shows a process example of the circuit board productivity design in the flow from the circuit board design to the production shown in FIG. ing. FIG. 2 also shows the expected effects of the mounting information in the function design, circuit design, and mounting design. Among them, regarding digital IC,
It is well known that the number of components can be reduced by making discrete components into ICs, and that the adjustment of analog circuits becomes easier by making them into digital ICs. Hereinafter, the significance of each item of the mounting information will be described.

FIG. 4 shows the relationship between the number of gates and the manufacturing period in an ASIC (application-specific IC). A PLD (Prograble Logic Devise) having a small number of gates can be manufactured in a short period of time. However, as the number of gates increases, the manufacturing time increases, and the cost increases accordingly. FIG.
The relationship between the number of gates and the number of pins in an LSI memory, microcomputer, and gate array is shown. FIG. 6 shows that even if the number of wiring patterns is the same due to the component arrangement of the LSI, the wiring length can be shortened and the effective area on which components can be mounted can be increased. (A) of FIG.
FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing an example in which another board (generally called a daughter board) is connected to the board by a connector. In the case of a connector, when a component fails in the daughter board, there is an effect that maintenance can be performed by removing the daughter board. In this case, the daughter board substrate is considered as one functional block as shown in FIG.
By using an ASIC, the number of components can be reduced, and the number of connectors can also be reduced. FIG. 2 shown above
The total number of gates, total number of pins, pin density,
The total number of functional blocks, the pattern density, and the like serve as indices when integrated into an IC. In this case, the number of gates in FIG. 4 and the relationship between the number of gates and the number of pins in FIG.
Can be

FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram showing that the number of interstitial channels can be increased by reducing the diameter of the through hole. FIG. 9 shows a multi-layer substrate capable of increasing the number of layers by a sandwich structure including a power supply layer and a signal layer and an IVH (Integer).
FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing inner layer signal holes by rstitial via holes. As shown in FIG. 9, it can be seen that the density of the substrate can be increased by using the multilayer substrate and the IVH. FIG.
FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing the relationship between planar densification from a double-sided substrate to an ultra-high multilayer board by a high-performance computer or the like and multilayering of the substrate. With such a high degree of integration, the functions are enhanced, but the cost is increased. In the mounting information shown in FIG. 2 described above, the number of connectors, the number of board layers, the number of channels /
By optimizing the lattice and the number of through holes, etc.,
High-density mounting of the substrate, that is, the efficiency of removing the substrate can be improved without lowering the function.

FIG. 11 shows a 14-pin insertion IC having the same function.
FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing a comparison of the relationship among the area, height, and weight of a surface-mounted IC. As shown in FIG. 11, high-density mounting of a substrate is possible, such as 1/2 in area, 1 / 2.5 in height, and about 1/6 in weight, and has recently been used frequently. I have. Therefore, it can be seen that the surface mounting ratio in FIG. 2 greatly contributes to the area reduction. Others
It is well known that the component mounting rate, the automatic assembly rate, and the retrofitting rate in the mounting information of FIG. 2 contribute to cost reduction. Since the cost of the circuit board can be reduced by the method described with reference to FIGS. 2 to 11, such information is automatically calculated and generated from the CAD circuit information and the board / part evaluation information. , Output system.

FIG. 12 is a diagram showing a flow of evaluation of the present embodiment in function design and / or circuit design. In functional design and / or circuit design, after designing using a circuit database that incorporates component information to which cost and mounting information have been added in advance,
The component evaluation information extracting unit 31 extracts information on mounting such as similar component group / component cost, digital IC ratio, pin density, etc., and processes it by the assemblability evaluating unit 33, thereby assembling score such as assembling efficiency and man-hour ratio. In addition to calculating the index, other cost information such as a bare board manufacturing cost, a circuit component purchasing cost, and a circuit board assembly cost, and the mounting information shown in FIG. 2 are output.

FIG. 13 is a diagram showing a flow of evaluation of the present embodiment in mounting design. In the mounting design, after designing based on the component list database 26, the component shape database 24, and the substrate database 25 to which cost information has been added in advance, the board / component evaluation information extraction unit is extracted from the same database as in the case of circuit design. 31, the similar component group / component cost and mounting information are extracted, and the assemblability evaluation unit 33
By processing as described above, assemblability index such as assemblability score and man-hour ratio, other cost information such as bare board manufacturing cost, circuit component purchase cost and circuit board assembly cost, and the mounting information shown in FIG. 2 are output. Has become.

FIG. 15 is a diagram showing the contents of the circuit block database 23 referred to in the function design and / or the circuit design. The circuit block database 23 includes a sub-circuit in the CAD design circuit as shown in FIG. 19 described later and a parts list database as shown in FIG. 18 described later corresponding to the sub-circuit.

FIG. 16 is a diagram showing the contents of the component shape database 24 referred to in the mounting design. As shown in FIG. 16, the part shape database 24 includes a part number, a part size, a digital / analog type, an insertion type / surface mounting type, an automatic mounting / manual mounting type, a gate number, a pin number, a group. Built-in man-hours are included.

FIG. 17 is a diagram showing the contents of the board database 25 referred to in the mounting design. As shown in FIG. 17, the board database 25 includes the size of the board, the number of layers, the number of signal lines, the number of channels / grid, the number of through holes, and the like.

FIG. 18 is a diagram showing the contents of the component list database 26 referred to in the mounting design. FIG.
As shown in (1), the part list database 26 includes a part number, a part group number, a part purchase cost, and the like.

FIG. 19 is a diagram showing evaluation results according to the present embodiment after designing a circuit diagram. As shown in FIG. 19, the circuit diagram is divided into several sub-circuits, and which sub-circuit is worse is evaluated for assemblability, and the results of the man-hour ratio and the assemblability score, cost evaluation such as parts cost, and mounting information are used. Using a non-illustrated multi-window or relational database system, it is possible to determine which sub-circuit is bad by comparing them with each other, and to evaluate the entire substrate as a whole. In this way, if a part requiring improvement is extracted and a sub-circuit part having a low score is improved, the score of the whole substrate is improved, and the improvement can be efficiently performed.

FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation result of mounting information and cost information. According to FIG. 20, since the evaluation results of the sub-circuits and the entire board can be automatically output, matters requiring design improvement during the design in the functional design, circuit design and mounting design stages can be clarified. It is not necessary to repeat the trial design for the determination of the manufacturability as in the prior art shown in FIG. In FIG. 20, the mounting information and the cost information shown in FIG. 2 can be seen in a bar graph or the like.
The circuit diagram of FIG. 9 and the evaluation result of the assemblability of FIG. 26 are simultaneously displayed in a multi-window, and further, in the method of dividing and evaluating the circuit diagram of FIG. It can be easily analogized that the usability can be improved by adding a function for coloring or adding points. Further, as another embodiment, when a component is registered in the library, the assemblability basic element and the correction element required for the component may be described in the library at the same time without being divided into the similar component group. Then, the assemblability can be automatically evaluated during the design.

[0034]

As described above, according to the present invention, it is easy to assemble products and parts of a circuit board because (1) immediately during design using a CAD device, (2) knowledge and (3) The quality of the product structure can be quantitatively evaluated without any experience, in terms of parts, subassemblies such as sub-circuits, and the whole, in a manner that is easy for anyone to understand. Also, which parts are difficult to assemble due to the quality score,
It is easy to understand immediately, and the circuit board cost or the assembling time can be calculated, so that the economic effect of the improvement can be grasped. Furthermore, the designer himself can evaluate and improve his own design from the evaluation results of the mounting information during the design, and can quickly produce a high-quality design from the viewpoint of ease of production, that is, from the viewpoint of productivity design. Obtainable. Furthermore, since the reasonable assembly order of parts is automatically clarified at the time of design, it is possible to estimate what and how many assembly equipment will be required prior to production, and draft equipment plans. It is also convenient. Further, CAM data can be created directly from CAD mounting design information.

As a result, the following effects can be obtained. (1) Improvement of productivity (a) Reduction of assembly man-hours Since it is easy to extract the parts requiring improvement, improvement is promoted, and the ease of assembling parts and products (assemblability) is improved, and the number of assembly man-hours is reduced. Is done. Because quantitative evaluation that is easy for anyone to understand is possible, designers, production engineers, and managers can use evaluation indices as management targets in common, facilitating diversified improvements and dramatically improving assemblability. In addition, the number of assembly steps is reduced. (B) Early realization of the FA Since the assemblability of the product is improved, the assembling work is simplified, and the mechanization and automation of the assembling process can be easily and quickly realized. (C) Reduction of Design Time Since the evaluation of the assemblability and the design improvement are promoted at the initial stage of the design, the time required for the improvement design such as the repetition of the trial production and the redesign is greatly reduced. Since the designer can easily evaluate the cost of the improvement plan of the assemblability, it is not necessary to request a cost estimation for the design evaluation from a specialized department. for that reason,
The period for preparing materials for estimation (preparation of detailed assembly drawings, etc.) and the waiting time for estimation are greatly reduced, and the design period is shortened. (2) Reduction of purchase cost and management cost (a) Simplification of product / part shape reduces part purchase cost and its management cost. (3) Improvement of reliability of products and automatic machines (a) By simplifying product structure and assembly work,
Product reliability is improved. (B) The simplification of the assembly operation improves the reliability of the automatic assembly machine.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing an outline of a configuration of a circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of mounting information items and expected effects according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing the contents of a circuit board cost.

FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing gate sizes and manufacturing periods of various ASICs.

FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing the number of gates and the number of pins of various LSIs.

FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram showing optimization of LSI component pin assignment.

FIG. 7 is an explanatory diagram showing the necessity of a connector and high integration by an ASIC substrate.

FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram showing an increase in wiring capacitance due to a reduction in the diameter of a through hole.

FIG. 9 is an explanatory view showing the formation of a multi-layer substrate and IVH.

FIG. 10 is an explanatory view showing planar mounting and multilayering of a circuit board.

FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram showing a comparison of physical characteristics between an insertion type IC and a surface mount type IC.

FIG. 12 is an explanatory diagram showing a flow of evaluation in function design and / or circuit design according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram showing a flow of evaluation in the mounting design according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 14 is an explanatory diagram illustrating a schematic configuration of a configuration for executing a basic process from outputting drawing data to an evaluation result according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 15 is an explanatory diagram showing contents of a circuit block database according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 16 is an explanatory diagram showing contents of a part shape database according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 17 is an explanatory diagram showing the contents of a board database according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 18 is an explanatory diagram showing contents of a parts list database according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 19 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of an output of an evaluation result after designing a circuit diagram according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 20 is an explanatory diagram illustrating an example of output of an evaluation result of mounting information and cost information according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 21 is an explanatory diagram showing a process flow from design to production of the circuit board according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 22 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a configuration of a computer system to which a circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention is applied.

FIG. 23 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of basic elements of a similar parts group and the contents thereof according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 24 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of correction elements of a similar part group and their contents according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 25 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of a processing procedure inside the computer for performing the assemblability evaluation according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 26 is an explanatory diagram illustrating an example of an output of an evaluation result according to the embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 27 is an explanatory diagram illustrating a flow of evaluation and improvement of conventional product design and manufacturing.

[Explanation of symbols]

 DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Computing device 2 Storage device 3 Display device 4 Keyboard 5 Printer 10 Radial component 11 Retrofit connector 12 Substrate 21 CAD processing device 22 CAD database 23 Circuit block database 24 Component shape database 25 Board database 26 Parts list database 30 Circuit board productivity Automatic design evaluation apparatus 31 Board / part evaluation information extraction unit 32 Evaluation information database 33 Assemblability evaluation unit 34 Parts group information database

──────────────────────────────────────────────────続 き Continuing on the front page (72) Inventor Masatake Miyagawa 292 Yoshida-cho, Totsuka-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa Prefecture Within Hitachi, Ltd. Production Engineering Laboratory (72) Inventor Mitsuharu Hayakawa 890-12 Kashimada, Saiwai-ku, Kawasaki-shi, Kanagawa (56) References JP-A-61-59900 (JP, A) JP-A 64-5100 (JP, A) JP-A-2-5599 (JP, A) Hei 2-219179 (JP, A) (58) Fields investigated (Int. Cl. ⁷ , DB name) H05K 13/00

Claims (7)

(57) [Claims] 1. A circuit block database for storing a functional diagram, a mounting design drawing of a circuit diagram, and a component list, and a component number, component size, digital / analog, insertion type /
A component shape database that stores information related to component shapes such as surface mounting, automatic assembly / manual assembly, number of gates, number of pins, and number of assembly steps, and the size of the board, the number of layers, the number of signal lines, and the number of channels A board database for storing information related to board design information such as / grid, number of through holes, etc., and a parts list database for storing parts list data such as part numbers and part group numbers. Boards that extract information necessary for evaluating the ease of assembly of boards and parts from each database
A component evaluation information extraction unit, and an assemblability evaluation unit having a component group information database storing combinations of basic elements and correction elements of the assembly operation of each component as assembly information,
The assemblability evaluation section refers to the information extracted by the board / parts evaluation information extraction section with reference to the contents of the parts group information database, and assembles the ease of assembly, the number of man-hours, and the part assemblability score reflecting the assembly cost. A circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system, wherein the circuit board productivity is evaluated based on at least the part assemblability score. 2. The circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein a product assemblability score is obtained from each of the component assemblability scores to comprehensively evaluate the productivity of the circuit board. 3. The circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein an estimated assembly time or an estimated assembly cost is automatically calculated based on the assemblability score. 4. The functional diagram according to claim 1, wherein
A circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system, which is connected to or included in a computer-aided design processing system (CAD system) for creating circuit diagrams, mounting design drawing data, and the like. 5. The automatic evaluation of circuit board productivity design according to claim 2, further comprising a data table of purchase cost, wherein an estimated total cost of the product is automatically calculated from the assembly cost and the purchase cost. system. 6. A circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein mounting evaluation information such as a surface mounting rate and an automatic assembly rate of an entire circuit or a partial circuit is automatically calculated. . 7. The circuit board productivity design automatic evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein a part assembly information program is created.