-
- News
- Books
Featured Books
- smt007 Magazine
Latest Issues
Current IssueComing to Terms With AI
In this issue, we examine the profound effect artificial intelligence and machine learning are having on manufacturing and business processes. We follow technology, innovation, and money as automation becomes the new key indicator of growth in our industry.
Box Build
One trend is to add box build and final assembly to your product offering. In this issue, we explore the opportunities and risks of adding system assembly to your service portfolio.
IPC APEX EXPO 2024 Pre-show
This month’s issue devotes its pages to a comprehensive preview of the IPC APEX EXPO 2024 event. Whether your role is technical or business, if you're new-to-the-industry or seasoned veteran, you'll find value throughout this program.
- Articles
- Columns
Search Console
- Links
- Events
||| MENU - smt007 Magazine
Component Reconditioning Adds to Bottom Line
December 31, 1969 |Estimated reading time: 8 minutes
This value-added service turns "scrap" into healthy parts ready for assembly.
By Joyce Laird
The tight profit margins of contract manufacturing (CM) mean that scrapped components go directly and irretrievably to cost. While this would not be a concern if the parts arrive damaged from the OEM or vendor, unfortunately, at least 98 percent of the rejections stem from mishandlings after delivery. This level of loss is critical because the success of a CM's business is based on high quality and fast turnaround.
Offering a SolutionProfitability relies on performance at or under the quoted price. It is a fact of business life, however, that it is impossible to completely avoid component damage. Even if the scrap adds to only 0.5 to 0.6 percent of the parts handled; 0.6 percent of thousands or millions of dollars on a monthly basis is intolerable and, sadly, not unrealistic.
CMs that have the time, money and extra personnel typically set up in-house component-lead reconditioning processes. Still, a case can be made for turning to outsourcing to handle the problem. For example, it is not unusual for a high-volume CM to lose from $5,000 to more than $8,000 per month in component scrap alone. Broken down and using a medium value of $5 per component, that works out to 1,000 to 1,600 parts per month parts that could be reconditioned from a single CM division. Multiply that by several contract shops with many divisions (plus the few OEMs still doing full assembly), and it is apparent that to do an efficient job, reconditioning service companies had to explore processes that did not base quality and turnaround on something as variable as operator talent.
Fig. 1
Service shops that handle wire-wrap, prototype and through-hole component issues, together with those who provide test and packaging services, have long been a valuable resource for all manufacturers. The work they do generally includes axial, radial and surface mount device preparation plus taping, trimming and forming leads (Figure 1). Other services include bake and dry pack, testing, inspecting, programming, marking, sorting and packaging. Many of these services also offer full lines of packaging products such as custom carrier tapes, while others add printed circuit board (PCB) coupon testing and fabricating. Like their growing CM customer base, speed and quality keeps them in business.Figure 1. Examples of the various component configurations and sizes that present multiple challenges to lead reconditioning.
It is only within the last few years, however, that component-lead reconditioning has become a high-volume area for these companies. The current trend for OEMs to outsource more of their production has created a market for shops servicing the component needs of CMs. This means they now face a growing challenge of reconditioning virtually thousands of different types of components in varying lot sizes on a daily basis.
Figure 2. An etched template with depressions for a device's feet visually inspects lead positions on finished parts.
Traditionally, the shops relied on highly trained personnel to perform reconditioning by hand using such tools as magnifiers, tweezers, artist knives and other devices. For the larger leaded devices, many used custom pliers designed for lead straightening and "dentist" picks over a printed template on a comparator fixture. Fine-pitch work could include video magnification over an etched template of the device's footprint, which, although highly labor intensive, worked well for the low to moderate volumes usually processed (Figure 2). Today, however, the sheer increase in volumes renders these methods impractical. Performing such tasks lead by lead, even by the best operators, just takes too much time on average, 20 minutes or more. And, as volume rises, accuracy drops because of operator burnout.
Component Reconditioning Starts at the DoorIdeally, parts should arrive at the shops in protected condition. Instead, components often arrive in tangled batches that must be inspected carefully and separated at special workstations before reconditioning can begin. Every shop takes certain steps to protect incoming devices from further damage. Additionally, all shops maintain electrostatic discharge (ESD)-controlled environments. Because damage basically is a handling issue, it is important that incoming parts are not further damaged after arrival. For example, vacuum devices pick up parts and component trays for transporting. Special packaging protects the final products.
Points important to understand when reconditioning components include:
- Not all components can be reconditioned (Figure 3). Just putting a part "cosmetically" back into shape is not the same as reconditioning.
- A fully reconditioned part should be equal in quality to a new part. A lead that has been manipulated too many times may appear correct but either will break during assembly or fail in the field (Figure 4).
- The handler must know "how much is too much." This is true regardless of the method used to recondition the parts.
Figure 3. Some examples of component-lead damage that cannot be reconditioned.
Highly efficient, fast, automated component-reforming machines are available to assist the operator. Most, however, are too expensive and dedicated. Most shops invested in less expensive equipment and systems as a solution. The goal was to find methods that would simplify the reconditioning process while providing consistency and repeatable high quality.
Fig. 4
A New Process Many component-lead reconditioning services are adopting a process that, while still manual, is said to remove 90 percent of the variables of "hands-on" reconditioning. Consisting of two moderately sized benchtop machines, the equipment takes the process away from operator interpretation, which tends to eliminate accidentally overworking the leads. Parts still must be examined and, if necessary, prepared by hand-separation of twisted leads (Figure 5); however, from that point only two steps remain. The component first is placed in one machine that restores its gull-wing form, then is moved to a second unit to correct the side-to-side deviation pitch, sweep and coplanarity with a precise combing action (Figures 6a and b). Figure 4. Crossed or twisted leads must be separated gently by hand before reconditioning can be completed.
Fig. 5
Component movement from pick up to the various machines is accomplished via a vacuum wand so that leads are never touched. Lead reconditioning then is completed with a lever action operated manually. Tooling is inexpensive, component specific, and consists of a nest for specific component body sizes and a comb with the correct pitch.Figure 5. The manual lead-conditioning system consists of two lever-operated units that use part-specific nests and comb sets.The equipment must be adjusted precisely for each device type. This requires a measure of technical skill for initial setup, usually performed by a trained operator or shop engineer. An average setup takes four to five minutes, after which any worker typically can be trained to do the actual processing. Average pass-through rate for a lead-reconditioned part (including fine-pitch): one to one-and-a-half minutes, making the process a routine shop task.
Fig. 6a
Resulting ProblemsThe fact that each basic device style requires a specific nest is problematic in that a CM will feel that the volume of devices requiring reconditioning cannot justify the additional expense. Accordingly, even though a full library of nests and combs is readily available, almost all shops tend to "buy as needed." In the long run, however, the shop will accumulate a larger library of nests and combs so that the problem tends to disappear.Other issues cover a range of small items. For example, there are times when the lead properties and thickness variations may require special attention. Or there may be a chance that a truly unusual component configuration is encountered for which there is no matching, thus requiring a custom nest to be made. Those problems, however, seem to be the exceptions rather than the rule. Overall satisfaction with the equipment is very high.
Fig. 6b
The Bottom LineConsistent quality and increased yield are two main benefits expressed for efficient lead reconditioning. Additionally, the ability to use basic shop labor reduces cost while the increased throughput expands the amount of reconditioning jobs the shop can handle. However, the quality of the reconditioned component is the most important issue.Figures 6a and 6b. The Universal Reformer (a) restores the component leads' gull-wing shape, then is moved to the Lead Reconditioner (b) to correct lead spacing, sweep and coplanarity deviations. Every shop desires to save money but never at the expense of a customer. If product life were shortened and traced back to components weakened by aggressive rework (lifted leads, leads breaking, etc.) it would rebound negatively to the bottom line for the CM and the reconditioning service. While most devices whose leads are reconditioned by these machines pass automated vision inspection the first time, it still varies by shop how it must deal with components that fail. Some feel that the latter are not salvageable and quickly set them aside as scrap. Others will do a second reconditioning run. For this part, the equipment manufacturer recommends that no more that two reconditionings be attempted lest hidden lead damage occur.
Even considering the percentage of components that cannot be saved, shops using lead-reconditioning equipment have reported throughput increases from 70 to 200 percent. Of course, this wide variance depends on the component type and volume processed. All, however, have reported a consistent 80 percent or higher increase in quality.
Lead reconditioning in service shops was once a bottleneck typically handled by a few skilled workers at specialized work centers. Use of semi-manual reforming machines, however, has moved this process into the mainline production area where reconditioning can be done "on the fly" at the inspection machines. Once a shop has most of the common configurations of nests and comb sets in house, it can recondition numerous devices efficiently and with little or no tooling cost to their customers. And for handling the ultra-fine pitches of advanced packages, the equipment has made it possible to recover those devices deemed too delicate for hand reconditioning and that would have been scrapped.
Conclusion The CM's main goal is to create handling methods that concentrate on eliminating component damage in the first place. Obviously, this will never be 100 percent. On the other hand, there is no reason to accept the losses associated with damaged components. When damage occurs to component leads, outsourcing their reconditioning is a fast and viable alternative in solving the problem. New processes used by the value-added lead-reconditioning service shops guarantee that regardless of volume or mix, the majority of components can be reclaimed, removing a healthy percentage of loss from the CM's profit margin.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTThe author thanks the following for contributing to this article: Bruce Zarek, Alltemated Inc.; Mario Donato, Belmont C.S.D. and Steve Hoover, Fancort Industries Inc.
JOYCE LAIRD, industry journalist, may be contacted at 13207 Wentworth St., Arleta, CA 91331; (818) 768-1832; E-mail: jlcms@eathlink.net