JP4718380B2 - Selection method - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to a method for selecting a component or material used for production of a component mounting board, and more particularly, to a method for selecting a component or material that can improve the quality of the component mounting board.

Conventionally, as a method of improving the quality of component mounting boards produced by component mounters, a history of the number of error occurrences is stored for each suction nozzle or component cassette of the component mounter, and based on the correlation with the component suction rate There has been proposed a method for identifying a suction nozzle or a component cassette that causes a reduction in the operating status or quality status in the production of a component mounting board (see, for example, Patent Document 1).
Japanese Patent No. 3421372

  However, according to the conventional method, when the operation status of the component mounting machine deteriorates, the cause analysis is performed on the assumption that the cause is the component member of the component mounting machine such as a suction nozzle or a component cassette.

  As described above, in the conventional cause analysis method, the cause is identified from the component parts of the component mounter and the setting conditions for the component mounter, and the cause causing the component mounter is removed from the beginning. Was.

  For this reason, if there are factors that can cause the operating status or quality status to deteriorate in the electronic components supplied by the component manufacturer or the adhesive provided by the material manufacturer, the cause is identified by the conventional method. I can't. For this reason, it will continue using the same components and materials, and there exists a subject that an operating condition and a quality condition cannot be improved. In addition, as a factor that may cause a decrease in the operating status and quality status of the electronic component, a variation in the dimensions of the component may be considered. Further, as a factor that may cause a decrease in the operating status and quality status due to the adhesive, a decrease in the viscosity of the adhesive may be considered.

  The present invention has been made in order to solve the above-described problems. For example, an electronic component supplied from a component manufacturer or an adhesive provided by a material manufacturer can reduce the operation status of the component mounting machine or reduce the component mounting substrate. It is an object of the present invention to provide a method for selecting a component or a material that can improve the quality of a component mounting board even when there is a cause of a deterioration in quality status.

  In order to achieve the above object, a selection method according to the present invention is a method for selecting a component or a material used in the production of a component mounting board. Alternatively, for each type of material, the component mounter has priority based on the status data acquisition step for acquiring status data indicating the quality status of the component or material or the operating status of the component mounter, and the acquired status data. And a candidate selection step for selecting candidates for parts or materials to be used.

  According to this configuration, based on the above-described situation data, a component or material candidate to be preferentially used by the component mounter is selected. For this reason, it is possible to produce a component mounting board by using a component or a material whose quality state or operation state is good. Therefore, it is possible to provide a method for selecting a component or material that can improve the quality of the component mounting board.

  Preferably, in the status data acquisition step, status data is acquired by scoring the quality status for each component type. For example, in the status data acquisition step, the quality status is scored based on the take-out rate, which is the rate at which the sucked component fails to be mounted on the board for each component type and the component is brought back. Get the data.

  A high take-out rate also means that the parts can be fixed more easily. That is, the adhesiveness varies depending on the material of the part. For example, in the case of a material having a high purity of tin, the portion becomes soft, so that it is easily caught by the suction nozzle, and the take-out rate increases. Therefore, when the take-out rate is poor, it is possible not to select such a part.

  The present invention can be realized not only as a selection method having such characteristic steps, but also as a selection device using the characteristic steps included in the selection method as a means, or included in the selection method. It can also be realized as a program that causes a computer to execute the characteristic steps. Needless to say, such a program can be distributed via a recording medium such as a CD-ROM (Compact Disc-Read Only Memory) or a communication network such as the Internet.

  According to the present invention, even if the electronic component supplied from the component manufacturer or the adhesive provided by the material manufacturer has a cause for a decrease in the operating status of the component mounting machine or the quality status of the component mounting board, It is possible to provide a method of selecting a component or a material that can improve the quality of a component mounting board.

  Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

  FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a component mounting board production system for realizing an embodiment of the present invention.

  The production system includes a plurality of mounting lines 200 provided in the component mounting board manufacturer 100 and a component quality management device 300.

  The plurality of mounting lines 200 is a system for producing a component mounting board in which components are mounted on a board.

  The component quality management device 300 is connected to all the mounting lines 200, and is a device that manages the quality of the component and selects a component that can improve the quality of the component mounting board for each component type. The part quality management apparatus 300 transmits a part ordering instruction to the computer of the selected part manufacturer among the parts manufacturer computers 500A to 500C.

  FIG. 2 is an external view of the mounting line 200 shown in FIG.

  The mounting line 200 is a system for transporting a substrate from an upstream production facility to a downstream production facility and producing a substrate on which components are mounted. The stocker 14 and 30, the solder printer 16, the conveyor 18, 26, an adhesive application device 21, component mounters 22 and 24, and a reflow furnace 28.

  The stockers 14 and 30 are devices for stocking substrates, and the stocker 14 is located on the uppermost stream of the production line, and the stocker 30 is located on the most downstream side of the production line. That is, the stocker 14 is stocked with a board on which no components are mounted, and the stocker 30 is stocked with a finished product board with components mounted thereon.

  The solder printing device 16 is a device that prints solder on a substrate. The conveyors 18 and 26 are apparatuses for transporting the substrate. The adhesive application device 21 is an apparatus that applies an adhesive on a substrate. The component mounters 22 and 24 are devices for mounting components on a board. The reflow furnace 28 is an apparatus for fixing a component on the substrate after melting the solder or the like by heating the substrate on which the component is mounted.

  FIG. 3 is an external view showing the configuration of the component mounter 22. The component mounter 24 has a similar configuration.

  The component mounter 22 includes two sub-equipment 130a and 130b that perform component mounting in cooperation with each other (or alternately). The sub-equipment 130a includes a component supply unit 124a having an arrangement of parts feeders 123 for storing component tapes, and a plurality of suction nozzles (hereinafter simply referred to as “ Multi-mounting head 121 having a nozzle ”), a beam 122 to which multi-mounting head 121 is attached, and a component for inspecting two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally the suction state of a component sucked by multi-mounted head 121 A recognition camera 126 and the like are provided. The sub-equipment 130b has the same configuration as the sub-equipment 130a.

  FIG. 4 is a plan view showing a main configuration inside the component mounter 22.

  The component mounter 22 includes two sub-equipment 130a and 130b arranged in the front-rear direction (Y-axis direction) of the component mounter 22 therein. The sub-equipment 130a and 130b arranged facing each other in the front-rear direction (Y-axis direction) perform component mounting work on one board 20 in cooperation with each other.

  Each of the sub-equipment 130 a and 130 b includes a beam 122 and a multi mounting head 121. Moreover, the sub-equipment 130a and 130b are provided with component supply parts 124a and 124b, respectively. In addition, the component mounter 22 is provided with a pair of rails 129 for transporting the substrate 20 between the sub-equipment 130a and 130b.

  The component recognition camera 126 is not shown in the figure.

  The beam 122 is a rigid body that extends in the X-axis direction, and moves on a track (not shown) provided in the Y-axis direction (perpendicular to the conveyance direction of the substrate 20) while being parallel to the X-axis direction. Is something that can be done. Further, the beam 122 can move the multi-mounting head 121 attached to the beam 122 along the beam 122, that is, in the X-axis direction. The multi mounting head 121 can be moved freely in the XY plane by moving the multi mounting head 121 moving in the Y axis direction in the X axis direction. In addition, a plurality of motors such as a motor (not shown) for driving them are provided in the beam 122, and electric power is supplied to these motors and the like via the beam 122.

  FIG. 5 is a block diagram showing a functional configuration of the component quality management apparatus 300.

  The component quality management apparatus 300 includes an arithmetic control unit 301, a display unit 302, an input unit 303, a memory unit 304, a component quality management program storage unit 305, a communication I / F (interface) unit 306, a database unit 307, and the like. .

  The arithmetic control unit 301 is a CPU (Central Processing Unit), a numerical processor, or the like, and loads and executes a necessary program from the component quality management program storage unit 305 to the memory unit 304 in accordance with an instruction from the operator and the like. Each component 302 to 307 is controlled according to the result.

  The display unit 302 is a CRT (Cathode-Ray Tube), LCD (Liquid Crystal Display), or the like, and the input unit 303 is a keyboard, a mouse, or the like. 300 is used for dialogue between the operator and the operator.

  The communication I / F unit 306 is a LAN (Local Area Network) adapter or the like, and is used for communication between the component quality management device 300 and the component mounter 22 constituting the mounting line 200 or the computers 500A to 500C of the component manufacturer. . The memory unit 304 is a RAM (Random Access Memory) or the like that provides a work area for the arithmetic control unit 301.

  The database unit 307 obtains input data (mounting point data 307a, component library 307b, etc.), a deduction table 307c, a determination table 307d, an alternative list 307e, etc. A hard disk or the like for storing a mounting program or the like.

  The component quality management program storage unit 305 is a hard disk or the like that stores various control programs that implement the functions of the component quality management device 300, and is functionally a processing unit that functions when executed by the arithmetic control unit 301. As described above, the operation status calculation unit 305a, the component quality status calculation unit 305b, the mounting board quality status calculation unit 305h, the parameter totaling unit 305c, the component selection unit 305f, and the request transmission unit 305e.

  The operating status calculation unit 305a is a processing unit that calculates various parameters related to the operating status of each component mounter. The component quality status calculation unit 305b is a processing unit that calculates various parameters related to the quality status of components used for the production of a component mounting board by each component mounter.

  The mounting board quality status calculation unit 305h is a processing unit that calculates various parameters related to the quality status of the component mounting board produced by each component mounting machine. As parameters calculated by the mounting board quality status calculation unit 305h, for example, the occurrence rate of component mounting position deviation, the occurrence rate of missing parts on the board, the occurrence rate of poor connection between leads and lands, and the like can be considered. The mounted board quality status calculation unit 305h counts these parameters for each component type.

  The parameter totaling unit 305c totalizes the parameters calculated by the operation status calculation unit 305a, the component quality status calculation unit 305b, and the mounting board quality status calculation unit 305h for each component mounting machine or for the entire component mounting machine, and performs processing for scoring Part. However, the parameter totaling unit 305c may total the parameters calculated by the operation status calculation unit 305a and the part quality status calculation unit 305b. Instead of the parameters calculated by the operation status calculation unit 305a, The parameters calculated by the mounting board quality status calculation unit 305h may be aggregated.

  The component selection unit 305f is a processing unit that selects a component to be used in the component mounter based on the aggregation result in the parameter aggregation unit 305c. The request transmission unit 305e is a processing unit that transmits the order of the component selected by the component selection unit 305f to the computer of the component manufacturer.

  FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of the mounting point data 307a.

  The mounting point data 307a is a collection of information indicating mounting points of all components to be mounted. As shown in FIG. 6, one mounting point pi includes a component type ci, an X coordinate xi, a Y coordinate yi, a mounting angle θi, and control data φi. Here, “component type” corresponds to a component name in a component library 307b shown in FIG. 7 described later, and “X coordinate” and “Y coordinate” are coordinates of a mounting point (coordinates indicating a specific position on the board). The “mounting angle” is the rotation angle of the component at the time of component mounting, and the “control data” is the constraint information regarding the mounting of the component (type of usable suction nozzle, maximum movement of the multi mounting head 121) Speed, etc.).

  FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of the component library 307b.

  The component library 307b is a library in which unique information about all the component types that can be handled by the component mounter 22 and the like is collected. As shown in FIG. 7, the component size and tact (constant) for each component type are collected. And the other constraint information (a type of suction nozzle that can be used, a recognition method by the component recognition camera 126, a maximum moving speed of the multi mounting head 121, etc.). In the drawing, the external appearance of the components of each component type is also shown for reference.

  First, various parameters relating to the operation status of each component mounter calculated by the operation status calculation unit 305a will be described.

  FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a mounting rate and the number of errors for each suction nozzle, which is a kind of parameter relating to the operation status. FIG. 8 shows the mounting rate and number of errors for each suction nozzle in the multi mounting head 121 of a component mounting machine. Here, the “mounting rate” is a value indicating the rate of successful component mounting on the board. The “number of errors” is the number of parts that have failed to be mounted on the board. According to FIG. 8, the mounting rate of the 12th suction nozzle among the 16 suction nozzles is the smallest, and the number of errors is the largest. That is, FIG. 8 shows that component mounting errors frequently occur in the twelfth suction nozzle.

  FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating a mounting rate and the number of times of suction for each suction nozzle, which are a kind of parameters related to the operation status. FIG. 9 shows the mounting rate and number of suctions for each suction nozzle in the multi-mounting head 121 of a certain component mounting machine. Here, the “mounting rate” is the same as that described in FIG. The “number of times of suction” indicates the number of times of suction of the component by the suction nozzle. For example, the sixth suction nozzle and the fourteenth suction nozzle indicate that the number of times of suction is smaller than other suction nozzles.

  FIG. 10 is a diagram showing the mounting rate and the number of times of suction for each component cassette, which are a kind of parameters related to the operating status. FIG. 10 shows the mounting rate and the number of suctions for each component cassette in the component supply unit of a certain component mounting machine. Here, “mounting rate” has the same meaning as described in the description of FIG. However, here, the mounting rate for each component cassette, that is, for each component type is shown. Further, “the number of times of suction” indicates the number of times of suction of the component by the suction nozzle. However, here, the number of suctions by component cassette, that is, by component type is shown. For example, the component mounting rate of the 87th component cassette is lower than 99.7%, indicating that the component mounting rate decreases when the component is sucked from the component cassette and mounted on the board. .

  FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a recognition error rate of a component type, which is a kind of parameter related to the operating status. The “recognition error rate” is a rate at which a component sucked by the suction nozzle is erroneously recognized as another component when recognized by the component recognition camera 126. As indicated by the broken line in the figure, when the allowable value of the recognition error rate is 0.5%, the recognition error rates of the component types A and D exceed the allowable value.

  FIG. 12 is a diagram showing the suction rate for each component type, which is a kind of parameter related to the operation status. The “suction rate” is a rate at which the suction nozzle succeeds in sucking a component from the component cassette. Whether or not the suction nozzle is picking up a component can be determined by recognizing the component with the component recognition camera 126. As shown by the broken line in the figure, when the allowable value of the suction rate is 99.8%, the suction rate of the part A is lower than the allowable value.

  FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating the take-out rate of the component type, which is a kind of parameter related to the operating status. The “take-out rate” is a rate at which a component sucked by the suction nozzle fails to be mounted on the substrate and the component is brought back. Whether the component has been brought home is determined by measuring the amount of change in the vacuum pressure in the multi-mounting head 121 after the component mounting operation by the suction nozzle or by the component recognition camera 126. It can be determined by recognizing or not. As indicated by the broken line in the figure, when the allowable value of the takeout rate is 0.6%, the takeout rates of the component types B and C exceed the allowable value.

  Next, various parameters relating to the quality status of the component calculated by the component quality status calculation unit 305b will be described.

  First, a description will be given of a dimensional error, which is a kind of parameter relating to the quality status. “Dimensional error” indicates a variation in the size of a part, and specifically, a dispersion or standard deviation of the dimension of the part is used.

  FIG. 14 is a diagram for explaining the dimensions of a part. The dimension of the part includes a width x, a depth y, and a height t. When the component recognition camera 126 is a two-dimensional camera, the width x and depth y of the component can be obtained from the output of the component recognition camera 126. When the component recognition camera 126 is a three-dimensional camera, the width x, depth y, and height t of the component can be obtained from the output of the component recognition camera 126. Further, from the output of the component recognition camera 126, it is also possible to obtain a suction angle shift amount θ when a component is sucked. Here, for simplification of description, the component recognition camera 126 is a two-dimensional camera, and the width x, depth y, and suction angle deviation amount θ of the component can be obtained from the output of the component recognition camera 126. .

  Hereinafter, a result of recognizing 400 parts by the parts recognition camera 126 will be described.

  FIG. 15 is a graph showing the amount of deviation dX from the standard value of the width x for each component. The horizontal axis indicates the part number, and the vertical axis indicates the deviation dX [μm] from the standard value of the width x. FIG. 16 is a graph obtained by enlarging the graph shown in FIG. 15 in the vertical axis direction.

  FIG. 17 is a graph showing the amount of deviation dY from the standard value of the depth y for each component. The horizontal axis indicates the part number, and the vertical axis indicates the amount of deviation dY [μm] from the standard value of the depth y.

  FIG. 18 is a histogram showing the distribution of the deviation amount dX, and FIG. 19 is a histogram showing the distribution of the deviation amount dY. FIG. 20 is a histogram showing the distribution of the adsorption angle deviation amount θ [deg].

  FIG. 21 is a graph two-dimensionally showing the distribution of the shift amount dX and the shift amount dY. The horizontal axis indicates the shift amount dX, and the vertical axis indicates the shift amount dY. In the graph, the standard range is indicated by a rectangular frame 600. The “standard range” is a range of an allowable deviation amount for a component having a normal dimension. In the graph, a component whose deviation amount dX is a value between −50 μm and 50 μm and a deviation amount dY is a value between −50 μm and 50 μm falls within the standard range.

  FIG. 22 is a table summarizing the above results. According to the table, the number of measurement points of parts is 400, and the recognition error is 0. In addition, regarding the deviation amount dX of the width x of the component, the upper limit of the standard range is 50 μm and the lower limit is −50 μm. Furthermore, the average value of the shift amount dX is 11.0, the maximum value is 37.8, the minimum value is −18.2, and the range of the shift amount dX (= maximum value−minimum value) is 56. Furthermore, the standard deviation of the deviation amount dX is 9.51, and 3σ is 28.53. In the figure, process capability indexes (Cp, k, Cpk) are also shown. Similar values are shown for the displacement amount dY of the component depth y and the suction angle displacement amount θ. The dimension error here corresponds to the standard deviation of the deviation amount dX, the standard deviation of the deviation amount dY, and the standard deviation of the suction angle deviation amount θ.

  FIG. 23 is a diagram for explaining the bending of the lead, which is a kind of parameter relating to the quality status. In lead parts having leads as shown in FIG. 23 (a), lead bending 604 as shown in FIGS. 23 (a) and 23 (b) often occurs at the time of manufacturing or transporting the parts. The component recognition camera 126 can recognize such a lead bend 604 two-dimensionally or three-dimensionally at the time of component mounting. If a component with a bent lead 604 is mounted on a board, the lead may not be properly connected to a regular land on the board and cannot be conducted, or may contact other lands or leads that are not regular lands. , Short circuit. For this reason, it becomes a factor which deteriorates the quality condition of a component mounting board.

  FIG. 24 is a diagram for explaining the variation in the amount of solder, which is a kind of parameter relating to the quality status. In a part having a BGA (Ball Grid Array) as shown in FIG. 24, ball-shaped solder is applied in advance to electrode portions arranged on the array. However, in the case where the solder has an area or volume different from that of other solders, such as the solder included in the region 605, the electrodes may float from the substrate due to insufficient solder, or the electrodes may be separated due to excessive solder. There arises a problem of conduction. For this reason, it becomes a factor which deteriorates the quality of a component mounting board. Therefore, “variation in the amount of solder” indicates variation in the area or volume of the solder, and specifically, the variance or standard deviation of the area or volume of the solder is used. Note that the area or volume of the solder can be recognized by the component recognition camera 126.

  It should be noted that the “take-out rate”, which is a kind of parameter relating to the operation status described above, is also a kind of parameter relating to the quality situation. That is, in FIG. 25, the position of the part that is picked up by the suction nozzle is shown by hatching. However, if the sticking property of the part shown by hatching is strong, the take-out rate increases. For this reason, there is a correlation between the take-out rate and the sticking property. That is, the take-out rate is also a kind of parameter related to the quality situation. Note that the adhesiveness varies depending on the material of the component. For example, in the case of a material having a high purity of tin, the portion becomes soft, so that it is easily caught by the suction nozzle, and the take-out rate increases.

  Thus, there is a close relationship between the quality status of the component and the operating status of the component mounter. FIG. 26 is a diagram for explaining the above-described relationship, taking “dimension error”, which is a kind of parameter relating to the quality status, as an example. FIG. 26A is a graph similar to the graph shown in FIG. 21, and shows the distribution of the deviation amount dX from the standard value of the component width x and the deviation amount dY from the standard value of the component depth y. It is the graph shown in dimension. In FIG. 26A, the standard range is indicated by a rectangular frame 606. For this reason, the parts corresponding to the points plotted outside the rectangular frame 606 are parts outside the standard range. When the variation in component dimensions increases, recognition errors occur frequently in the component recognition camera 126. For this reason, the operation rate of a component mounting machine falls by the frequent small stop of a component mounting machine. For this reason, there exists a problem that productivity of a component mounting board will fall. In such a case, the operator re-teaches the component dimension standard value to the component mounter in order to prevent a recognition error, but if the dimensional variation is large, what kind of standard value should be re-teached? In both cases, a recognition error occurs.

  Moreover, if there are many dimensional variations, it will also lead to a reduction in the adsorption rate described above. This leads to an increase in the number of parts discarded during production. For this reason, the components of the component type to be discarded are insufficient, and in the worst case, the component mounting board cannot be produced, and the productivity of the component mounting board is lowered. Further, when the adsorption rate is reduced, there is a high possibility that the component is dropped on the substrate, which leads to a deterioration in the quality of the component mounting substrate.

  Furthermore, when there are many dimensional variations, the mounting accuracy is reduced because the positions of the component electrodes and the land of the board are difficult to match when the components are mounted. For this reason, as shown in FIG. 26B, the component is mounted at a position shifted from the true mounting position in the X direction and the Y direction, leading to deterioration of the quality of the component mounting board.

  Next, processing executed by the component quality management apparatus 300 will be described. FIG. 27 is a flowchart of processing executed by the component quality management apparatus 300.

  The operating status calculation unit 305a calculates a recognition error rate, a suction rate, and a take-out rate for each component type among the parameters related to the operating status described above (S1). The operating status calculation unit 305a calculates these parameters for each component mounter and also for the entire component mounter. As a result, the recognition error rate, suction rate, and take-out rate for each component type as shown in FIGS. 11 to 13 are calculated for each component mounter or for the entire component mounter.

  The component quality status calculation unit 305b calculates a dimensional error for each component type among the parameters regarding the quality status described above (S2). The component quality status calculation unit 305b calculates the dimensional error for each component mounter and also calculates the entire component mounter.

  The parameter totaling unit 305c totals the four types of parameters calculated in S1 and S2 for each component mounter, and scores the component types (S3). Further, the parameter totaling unit 305c totals the four types of parameters calculated in S1 and S2 as the entire component mounter, and scores the component types (S4). How to assign points will be described later.

  The operation status calculation unit 305a, the component quality status calculation unit 305b, and the parameter totaling unit 305c repeat the processes of S1 to S4 while a component mounting board is produced on any of the mounting lines 200 (loop A).

  FIG. 28 is a diagram illustrating an example of parameters and points for each component type that are tabulated and scored as the whole component mounter. FIG. 28 shows the parameters and points of the entire component mounters constituting all the mounting lines 200. Based on the display instruction from the operator input unit 303, a screen (component quality) as shown in FIG. Display screen) is displayed on the display unit 302. The part quality display screen of FIG. 28 includes a part name, a manufacturer name, a dimensional error (X), a dimensional error (Y), a score, and a determination. The dimension error (X) indicates the standard deviation of the deviation amount dX, and the dimension error (Y) indicates the standard deviation of the deviation amount dY. For example, the part name “I” has a manufacturer name “XX”, a dimension error (X) “15”, a dimension error (Y) “20”, and a score of “55 points”. And the determination is “red”.

  FIG. 29 is a diagram illustrating an example of parameters and points for each component type that are tabulated and scored in units of component mounters. FIG. 29 shows parameters and points for a certain component mounting machine α, and a screen (component quality display screen) as shown in FIG. 29 is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. Is displayed. The part quality display screen in FIG. 29 includes a part name, a manufacturer name, a dimensional error (X), a dimensional error (Y), a score, and a determination. For example, the part name “I” has the manufacturer name “XX”, the dimension error (X) “14”, the dimension error (Y) “22”, and the score “55 points”. And the determination is “red”.

  FIG. 30 is a diagram illustrating an example of component parameters and scores that are tabulated and scored by component manufacturer. FIG. 30 totals the parameters and parts of all parts for each part maker, and a screen (part quality display screen) as shown in FIG. 30 is displayed based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. It is displayed on the display unit 302. The part quality display screen of FIG. 30 includes a manufacturer name, a dimensional error (X), a dimensional error (Y), a score, and a determination. For example, the integrated dimension error (X) for all parts of the manufacturer name “ZZ” is “8”, the dimension error (Y) is “6”, the score is “90 points”, and the determination is “ It is shown to be “green”. That is, the column of manufacturer name “ZZ” targets parts manufactured by all manufacturers “ZZ” including the part name “K” and the part name “L” shown in the part quality display screen of FIG. Dimensional errors, points, etc. are shown. As a result, it can be determined whether or not the manufacturer is a good manufacturer. In addition, you may not be every manufacturer but every factory of a manufacturer.

  FIG. 31 is a diagram illustrating an example of parameters and points for each component type that are tabulated and scored for each component mounter. FIG. 31 shows parameters and points for a certain component mounting machine α, and a screen (component quality monitor) as shown in FIG. 31 is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. Is done. The component quality monitor in FIG. 31 includes a component name, a recognition error rate, a suction rate, a take-out rate, a dimensional error, a manufacturer name, and a determination. For example, the recognition error rate of the component with the component name “A” is “1.8”%, the suction rate is “96.0%”, the take-out rate is “0.05%”, and the dimension error Is “16”, the manufacturer name is “XX”, the score is “50 points”, and the determination is “red”. Note that the determination is indicated by the difference in color on the display unit 302, and the part name “A” is indicated in red.

  FIG. 32 is a diagram illustrating an example of parameters and points for each component type that are tabulated and scored as the whole component mounter. FIG. 32 shows the parameters and points of the whole component mounters constituting all the mounting lines 200. Based on the display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator, a screen (component quality) as shown in FIG. Monitor) is displayed on the display unit 302. The part quality monitor of FIG. 32 includes a part name, a recognition error rate, a suction rate, a take-out rate, a dimensional error, a manufacturer name, and a determination. For example, the recognition error rate of the component with the component name “A” is “0.9”%, the suction rate is “96.2%”, the take-out rate is “0.04%”, and the dimension error Is “17”, the manufacturer name is “XX”, the score is “55 points”, and the determination is “red”.

  FIG. 33 is a graph in which the score is displayed for each component type out of the parameters and scores for each component type that are tabulated and scored as the whole component mounter shown in FIG. The graph is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. In the graph shown in FIG. 33, the horizontal axis indicates the component name, and the vertical axis indicates the score for each component type. Further, a score “70 points” indicating a separation between the determinations “red” and “yellow” and a score “90 points” indicating a separation between the determinations “yellow” and “green” are indicated by broken lines in the drawing. According to this graph, the judgment of the parts with the part names “I” and “J” is “red”, the judgment of the part with the part name “K” is “yellow”, and the judgment of the part with the part name “L” is determined. Is "green".

  FIG. 34 is a graph showing the dimensional error (X) for each component type out of the parameters and points for each component type totaled and scored as the whole component mounter shown in FIG. The graph is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. In the graph shown in FIG. 34, the horizontal axis represents the component name, and the vertical axis represents the dimensional error (X) for each component type. For example, it is indicated that the dimension errors (X) of the component types “I”, “J”, “K”, and “L” are “15”, “10”, “9”, and “8”, respectively. .

  FIG. 35 is a graph showing the dimensional error (Y) for each component type out of the parameters and points for each component type totaled and scored as the whole component mounter shown in FIG. The graph is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. In the graph shown in FIG. 35, the horizontal axis represents the component name, and the vertical axis represents the dimensional error (Y) for each component type. For example, it is shown that the dimensional errors (Y) of the component types “I”, “J”, “K”, and “L” are “20”, “31”, “10”, and “4”, respectively. .

  FIG. 36 shows the amount of deviation dX from the standard value of the component width x for the component type “I” out of the parameters and points for each component type totaled and scored as the whole component mounter shown in FIG. 5 is a graph two-dimensionally showing the distribution of the deviation amount dY from the standard value of the component depth y. The graph is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. The horizontal axis of the graph indicates the shift amount dX, and the vertical axis indicates the shift amount dY. In the graph shown in FIG. 36, the standard range is indicated by a rectangular frame 800. For this reason, the parts corresponding to the points plotted outside the rectangular frame 800 are out of the standard range. A similar graph can be displayed for other component types, for example, the component type “J”.

  FIG. 37 is a graph showing the bending rate of the lead in the component having the lead described with reference to FIG. The graph is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. In the graph shown in FIG. 37, the horizontal axis indicates the part name, and the vertical axis indicates the lead bending rate. The lead bending rate is a value indicating the proportion of parts bent beyond a predetermined standard range. In the graph, 0.5% is provided as a threshold value for the lead bending rate. When considering only the lead bending rate of a component, it is shown that the lead bending rate exceeds 0.5%, that is, the component types “I” and “J” are out of the standard range. Has been.

  Here, description will be given of how to assign the “score” shown on the component quality display screens of FIGS. 28 to 32, that is, the component type scoring process (S3, S4). The number of parts types is given by a deduction method from a maximum of 100 points. FIG. 38 is a deduction table 307c showing how many points are deducted. 307 c is stored in the database unit 307 of the component quality management apparatus 300. The deduction points are determined for each of the recognition error rate, suction rate, take-out rate, and dimensional error. For example, paying attention to the deduction of the dimensional error, when the dimensional error is 0 or more and 4 or less, the deduction is “0 point”. If the dimensional error is greater than 4 and less than or equal to 8, the deduction is “5 points”. When the dimensional error is greater than 8 and less than or equal to 10, the deduction point is “10 points”. When the dimensional error is greater than 10 and 15 or less, the deduction point is “15 points”. When the dimensional error is larger than 15, the deduction point is “30 points”.

For example, when attention is paid to the part name “I” shown in FIG. 28, the dimension error (X) is “15”. Therefore, the deduction points are “15 points” based on the deduction table shown in FIG. The dimensional error (Y) is “20”. Therefore, the deduction points are “30 points” based on the deduction table shown in FIG. From the above, the score of the part name “I” is
100 points−15 points−30 points = 55 points According to the formula, “55 points” is obtained.

  Next, the “determination” determination process (determination process) shown on the component quality display screens of FIGS. 28 to 32 will be described. The “determination process” is a process that is performed in the component type scoring process (S3, S4) and obtains a determination result for the component type score. FIG. 39 is a determination table 307d showing the relationship between the number of points used in the determination process and the determination result. The determination table 307d is stored in the database unit 307 of the component quality management apparatus 300. Based on the determination table 307d, the parameter totaling unit 305c determines that both the operating status and the quality status are good when the score is greater than 90, and sets the determination result to “green”. In addition, when the score is greater than 70 and less than or equal to 90, the parameter totaling unit 305c determines that attention is required for the operation status and the quality status, and sets the determination result to “yellow”. Further, when the score is 70 or less, the parameter totaling unit 305c determines that there is a problem in the operation status and the quality status, and sets the determination result to “red”.

  The processing executed by the component quality management apparatus 300 will be described again with reference to FIG. In all the mounting lines 200, after the production of the component mounting boards is completed (loop A), the component selection unit 305f reads price information and delivery date information of all the component types (S6). The price information and the delivery date information may be input from the input unit 303, may be read in the database unit 307 or the memory unit 304, or may be read via the communication I / F unit 306. Then, it may be read from the component mounting machine 24 of the mounting line 200 or the like.

  The component selection unit 305f reads the alternative list 307e from the database unit 307 (S8). The component selection unit 305f groups all types into groups of replaceable component types based on the replacement list 307e (S10).

  Next, the part selection unit 305f determines an ordering priority for each group that has been grouped so that the part type included in the group has a higher priority as the score is higher (S12). Further, the part selection unit 305f determines the ordering priority so that the priority is higher as the delivery date is earlier for the part types having the same score (S14). Further, the part selection unit 305f determines the order priority so that the priority is higher as the unit price is lower for the part types having the same score and delivery date (S16).

  That is, in the same group, the part selection unit 305f determines the order priority in consideration of these values in the order of the score, the delivery date, and the unit price. Note that the ordering priority may be determined so that the priority becomes higher in the order of “green”, “yellow”, and “red” using the determination instead of the score.

  The component selection unit 305f performs the processing of S12 to S16 for each group (loop C).

  Next, the part selection unit 305f displays a list of parts whose ordering priority has been determined as described above, that is, an ordering candidate list, on the display unit 302 (S20).

  FIG. 40 is a diagram showing a list of ordering candidate lists displayed in the process of S20.

  The order candidate list displays a part name, a maker name, a score and determination for the part accuracy, the number of past defects, a delivery date, a unit price, and an order priority.

  Here, it is assumed that the parts having the part names “A”, “A1”, “A2”, and “A3” are substitutable substitute parts. In addition, it is assumed that the parts having the part names “B”, “B1”, and “B2” are substitutable substitute parts. Furthermore, it is assumed that the parts with the part names “C”, “C1”, and “C2” are substitutable substitute parts. The list of substitute parts is assumed to be stored in the database unit 307 as the substitute list 307e.

  For example, the manufacturer name of the part with the part name “A” is “XX”, the result of scoring the part accuracy, that is, the dimension error is “95 points”, and the determination is “green”. It is shown. In addition, the number of defects that have occurred using the part in the past is “0”, the delivery date of the part is “1 week”, and the unit price is “0.1 yen” per piece. Has been. Further, it is indicated that the order priority of the part is “No. 1”.

  Next, the request transmission unit 305e receives a part order request from the operator via the input unit 303 (S22). In response to the part order request, the request transmission unit 305e transmits the part order request information to the computer of the part manufacturer of the part via the communication I / F unit 306 (S24).

  As described above, among the substitutable parts group, the ordering priority is set high for parts with small dimensional variations, quick delivery, and low unit prices. For this reason, the operator can select and order parts with good accuracy, quick delivery, and low unit price. Therefore, even if electronic components supplied from a component manufacturer have a cause for a decrease in the operation status of the component mounting machine or a deterioration in the quality status of the component mounting board, an appropriate component can be selected. The quality of the mounting board can be improved.

  Although the production system according to the embodiment of the present invention has been described above with reference to the drawings, the present invention is not limited to this embodiment.

  For example, the request transmission unit 305e may transmit a request for quality improvement of a component to a computer of a component manufacturer that is marked with “red” in the component determination result.

  In the above-described embodiment, scoring is performed using the dimensional error of the component. However, it is not always necessary to use the dimensional error of the component, and scoring is performed using the various parameters introduced above. May be. For example, scoring may be performed using the lead bending rate, or scoring may be performed using variations in the amount of solder of the BGA.

  Alternatively, the parts may be prioritized by scoring using the recognition error rate, suction rate, and take-out rate. However, the recognition error rate, the suction rate, and the take-out rate are not parameters related to the quality status of the component but parameters indicating the operating status of the component mounting machine. The quality of these parameters does not directly represent the quality status of the parts, but indirectly. For this reason, scoring is performed using these parameters, and if the parameter value has deteriorated, determine whether the cause is a problem in the quality of the component or a problem on the component mounter side. There is a need. Specifically, if the parameter value has deteriorated in a specific component mounter, the cause is identified as a problem of the component mounter, and the parameter value has deteriorated in all component mounters. If it is, the cause can be identified as a quality problem of the parts. In this way, if it is found that there is a problem with the quality of the part, the ordering priority of the part may be lowered.

  In the above-described embodiment, the number of points used for the component mounting machine is assigned and the method for selecting the component has been described. However, the selection target does not necessarily have to be the component mounting. It may be a substrate or material used in a machine, a material used in other production facilities, or the like. For example, a substrate, cream solder, adhesive, or the like may be used.

  For example, when there is a problem with a substrate, a list of substrates that can be replaced may be displayed, and an operator may determine another substrate from the list. Specifically, the component quality management device 300 aggregates and analyzes the board mark position or the individual mark position at the time of production of the board recognized by the component mounter, and the distortion and variation of the mark position in the X and Y directions. Etc. may be calculated and a list of substitutable substrates may be displayed when distortion and variation are large.

  If there is a problem with cream solder, a list of replaceable cream solders may be displayed, and the operator may determine other cream solders from the list. The solder is scored according to the clogging state of the solder to the screen plate during solder printing by the solder printing device 16 and the quality of the solder separation from the screen plate. The component quality management apparatus 300 displays a list of solders that can be replaced with solders with low scores. Whether the solder is clogged or whether the solder is separated or not can be determined by measuring the degree of contamination of the screen plate with a sensor or inspecting how the solder is attached.

  Further, when there is a problem with the adhesive, a list of adhesives that can be replaced may be displayed, and the operator may determine another substrate from the list. Specifically, the component quality control device 300 scores the adhesive based on the variation in the threading state of the adhesive and the variation in the amount of applied adhesive when the adhesive is applied by the adhesive applying device 21, and the adhesive having a poor score. A list of adhesives that can be replaced may be displayed.

  Further, in the above-described embodiment, the components are selected using the parameters and points for each component type that are tabulated and scored as a whole component mounting machine as shown in FIG. 28. Instead of performing the selection, a manufacturer may be selected. Specifically, the component quality management apparatus 300 executes the processing according to the flowchart of FIG. 27 using the component parameters and scores that are tabulated and scored for each component manufacturer shown in FIG. It is also possible to select a manufacturer to be used and to order parts from the manufacturer. It should be noted that the request transmission unit 305e may transmit a request for improving the quality of the parts to the manufacturer's computer given “red” in the determination.

(Modification)
In the above-described embodiment, the number of parts is scored based on the scores for various parameters of the entire component mounter. However, when the score for a specific component type is seen on a component mounter basis, The score may vary. This is because although there is no problem in the accuracy of the component itself, there is a case where the compatibility between the component and the component mounter is poor, so that the operation status of the component mounter may be deteriorated. Such a poor compatibility occurs, for example, when the surface of the component is curved or the surface of the component is slippery, making it difficult to attract with the suction nozzle.

  Therefore, when the score for various parameters is viewed in units of components, a component for which a component determination result for a certain component mounter is “red” may not be used in the component mounter.

  FIG. 41 is a diagram illustrating a process for identifying a component that is not compatible with the component mounter. Similarly to the processing executed by the component quality management device 300 shown in FIG. 27, the component quality management device 300 repeats the processing of S1 and S3 while the component mounting board is produced on the mounting line 200 (loop A). . Here, it is assumed that the parameter calculation process (S2 in FIG. 27) relating to the quality status of the component and the aggregation and scoring process (S4 in FIG. 27) of various parameters as the entire component mounter are not performed.

  FIG. 42 is a diagram showing parameters and points related to the operating status of a component mounter for a certain component mounter α. 42 is displayed on the display unit 302 based on a display instruction from the input unit 303 of the operator. The part quality monitor in FIG. 42 includes a part name, a recognition error rate, a suction rate, a take-out rate, a manufacturer name, and a determination. For example, the recognition error rate of the component with the component name “A” is “3.2”%, the suction rate is “93.0%”, the take-out rate is “0.5%”, and the manufacturer name Is “XX”, the score is “65 points”, and the determination is “red”. Note that the determination is indicated by the difference in color on the display unit 302, and the part name “A” is indicated in red.

  The processing executed by the component quality management apparatus 300 will be described again with reference to FIG. In all the mounting lines 200, after the production of the component mounting boards is completed (loop A), the component selection unit 305f determines whether the component determination result is “red” for each component type (S32). For a component with a component determination result of “red”, the component is removed from the order candidate list so that the component mounter with a component determination result of “red” does not use that component ( S34). Such processing is repeated for all component types (loop B).

  As a result, a component that is not compatible with a specific component mounter can be excluded from the order candidate list, and the component can be prevented from being ordered.

  Note that the function of the component quality management apparatus 300 may be provided in any of the component mounters.

  Further, in the above-described embodiment, in the process executed by the component quality management apparatus 300 as shown in FIGS. 27 and 41, the process of identifying the cause and selecting the component is completed for the production of the component mounting board. The process is performed later (loop A), but the process may be performed during production, for example, periodically every three hours.

  The embodiment disclosed this time should be considered as illustrative in all points and not restrictive. The scope of the present invention is defined by the terms of the claims, rather than the description above, and is intended to include any modifications within the scope and meaning equivalent to the terms of the claims.

  The present invention selects components that improve the operating status of a component mounting machine or the quality status of a component mounting board produced by the component mounting machine in a mounting line including a component mounting machine for mounting electronic components on a board. It can be applied to a selection device.

It is a figure which shows the production system of the component mounting board | substrate for implement | achieving embodiment of this invention. It is an external view of the mounting line shown in FIG. It is an external view which shows the structure of a component mounting machine. It is a top view which shows the main structures inside a component mounting machine. It is a block diagram which shows the functional structure of a component quality management apparatus. It is a figure which shows an example of mounting point data. It is a figure which shows an example of a component library. It is a figure which shows the attachment rate and the number of errors for every adsorption nozzle which are 1 type of parameters regarding an operating condition. It is a figure which shows the mounting rate according to adsorption nozzle and the frequency | count of adsorption | suction which are 1 type of parameters regarding an operating condition. It is a figure which shows the mounting rate and the frequency | count of adsorption | suction by component cassette which are 1 type of the parameter regarding an operating condition. It is a figure which shows the recognition error rate of a component classification which is a kind of parameter regarding an operating condition. It is a figure which shows the adsorption | suction rate of component classification which is a kind of parameter regarding an operating condition. It is a figure which shows the take-out rate of a component classification which is a kind of parameter regarding an operating condition. It is a figure for demonstrating the dimension of components. It is the graph which showed deviation | shift amount dX from the standard value of the width | variety x about each component. It is the graph which expanded the graph shown in FIG. 15 to the vertical axis | shaft direction. It is the graph which showed deviation | shift amount dY from the standard value of depth y about each component. It is the histogram which showed distribution of deviation | shift amount dX. It is the histogram which showed distribution of deviation | shift amount dY. It is a histogram which showed distribution of adsorption angle shift amount theta [deg]. It is the graph which showed distribution of deviation amount dX and deviation amount dY two-dimensionally. It is the table | surface which put together the experimental result regarding deviation | shift amount. It is a figure for demonstrating the bending of a lead which is a kind of parameter regarding a quality condition. It is a figure for demonstrating the variation in the amount of solder which is a kind of parameter regarding a quality condition. It is a figure for demonstrating adhesiveness. It is a figure for demonstrating the relationship between the quality condition of a component mounting board | substrate and the operation | movement condition of a component mounting machine, taking "dimensional error" which is a kind of parameter regarding a quality condition as an example. It is a flowchart of the process which a components quality management apparatus performs. It is a figure which shows an example of the parameter and score for every component kind totaled and scored as the whole component mounting machine, respectively. It is a figure which shows an example of the parameter and score for every component kind totaled and scored by the component mounting machine unit, respectively. It is a figure which shows an example of the parameter and score of a component totaled and scored according to component manufacturers. It is a figure which shows an example of the parameter and score for every component kind totaled and scored by the component mounting machine unit, respectively. It is a figure which shows an example of the parameter and score for every component kind totaled and scored as the whole component mounting machine, respectively. It is the graph which displayed the score for every component kind among the parameter and the score for every component kind which were totaled and scored as the whole component mounting machine shown in FIG. FIG. 29 is a graph in which a dimensional error (X) is displayed for each component type among parameters and points for each component type that are tabulated and scored as the whole component mounter shown in FIG. 28. It is the graph which displayed the dimension error (Y) for every component type among the parameters and the scores for each component type that were respectively tabulated and scored as the whole component mounting machine shown in FIG. Of the parameters and points for each component type totaled and scored as the whole component mounting machine shown in FIG. 28, the deviation dX from the standard value of the component width x for the component type “I” and the depth of the component It is the graph which showed two-dimensional distribution with deviation | shift amount dY from the standard value of y. It is the graph which showed the bending rate of the lead in the components which have the lead demonstrated using FIG. It is a deduction table showing how many points are deducted. It is the determination table | surface which showed the relationship between the score used for determination processing, and a determination result. It is a figure which shows the list of an order candidate list. It is the figure which showed the process for pinpointing a component with bad compatibility with a component mounting machine. It is a figure which shows an example of the parameter and score for every component kind totaled and scored by the component mounting machine unit, respectively.

Explanation of symbols

14, 30 Stocker 16 Solder printing device 18, 26 Conveyor 20 Substrate 21 Adhesive application device 22, 24 Component mounting machine 28 Reflow furnace 100 Component mounting substrate manufacturer 121 Multi mounting head 122 Beam 123 Parts feeder 124a, 124b Component supply unit 126 Components Recognition camera 129 Rails 130a, 130b Sub-equipment 200 Mounting line 300 Component quality management device 301 Operation control unit 302 Display unit 303 Input unit 304 Memory unit 305 Component quality management program storage unit 305a Operation status calculation unit 305b Component quality status calculation unit 305c Parameters Aggregation unit 305e Request transmission unit 305f Component selection unit 305h Mounting board quality status calculation unit 306 Communication I / F unit 307 Database unit 307a Mounting point data 307b Component library 307c Deduction table 307d Schedule 307e Alternative list 500A-500C Computer

Claims (1)

A method of selecting a component or material used for production of a component mounting board,
A status data acquisition step for acquiring status data indicating the quality status of the component or material or the operating status of the component mounting machine for each type of component or material for the component or material used for the production of the component mounting board;
A candidate selection step of selecting a candidate of a component or material to be preferentially used by the component mounter based on the acquired situation data,
In the status data acquisition step, for each component type, the status data is acquired by scoring the operating status of the component mounter on a component mounter basis,
In the candidate selection step, if there is a component type that does not satisfy the predetermined standard in the specific component mounting machine, the component type that does not satisfy the predetermined standard in the specific component mounting machine of by excluding the part from the purchase target, measuring method selection you characterized by selecting a candidate of the component.

Images