wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Roy J. Tellason
I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to do
wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
Thread
wire-wrap
Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Dave Mucha
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Roy J. Tellason"
<rtellason@b...> wrote:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cnc-wirewrap_PCBs
Only kidding : )
Dave
<rtellason@b...> wrote:
> I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNCsetup to do
> wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?yeah....
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cnc-wirewrap_PCBs
Only kidding : )
Dave
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by mpdickens
--- "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason@...> wrote:
setup similar to a sewing machine (With a sewing
needle). It would use small gauge enamel covered wire:
The type used for magnetic windings.
Wire wrapping is great for prototyping in conjunction
with bread boards, but that's about all it's good for.
It's much easier to etch than build and use the
Frankenstein I just described.
IMHO: What a nightmare...
Best
Marvin Dickens
=====
Registered Linux User No. 80253
If you use linux, get counted at:
http://www.linuxcounter.org
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
> I wonder if there's any feasibility to using someThe only model that I can think of would involve a
> kind of a CNC setup to do
> wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on
> this?
setup similar to a sewing machine (With a sewing
needle). It would use small gauge enamel covered wire:
The type used for magnetic windings.
Wire wrapping is great for prototyping in conjunction
with bread boards, but that's about all it's good for.
It's much easier to etch than build and use the
Frankenstein I just described.
IMHO: What a nightmare...
Best
Marvin Dickens
=====
Registered Linux User No. 80253
If you use linux, get counted at:
http://www.linuxcounter.org
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Roy J. Tellason
On Tuesday 27 April 2004 11:54 pm, mpdickens wrote:
some years back. You were supposed to be able to use this thing to sort of
wrap wire around component leads and similar stuff, and then solder right
through the insulation.
Then there's the regular "wire-wrap pencil" that I think Radio Shack sold for
a while (dunno if they still do). That had a small spool on the top of the
unit, and a little slider with one of the positions being "cut", I forget
what the other one is labeled. Maybe something working on that principle
might be feasible, though I'd rather go with more wire than with those
little bitty spools that thing used.
packages and any nontrivial number of discrete components I'd be inclined to
agree with you. OTOH, when you start talking about a lot of logic chips,
or even some processors and other LSI, etched boards start to require a lot
of jumpers or you end up needing a multilayer board, and I don't care to go
there, either.
I'm sure that it's possible, as I've seen ads for companies that would do
that sort of thing. Whether it's feasible for a homebrew setup is another
issue entirely, though. That's why I raised the question in the first
place. :-)
> --- "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason@...> wrote:This reminds me of a "wiring pencil" that somebody (Vector?) came out with
> > I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to
> > do wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
> The only model that I can think of would involve a setup similar to a sewing
> machine (With a sewing needle). It would use small gauge enamel covered
> wire: The type used for magnetic windings.
some years back. You were supposed to be able to use this thing to sort of
wrap wire around component leads and similar stuff, and then solder right
through the insulation.
Then there's the regular "wire-wrap pencil" that I think Radio Shack sold for
a while (dunno if they still do). That had a small spool on the top of the
unit, and a little slider with one of the positions being "cut", I forget
what the other one is labeled. Maybe something working on that principle
might be feasible, though I'd rather go with more wire than with those
little bitty spools that thing used.
> Wire wrapping is great for prototyping in conjunction with bread boards, butI'd say that depends on what you're building. For stuff involving odd
> that's about all it's good for. It's much easier to etch than build and use
> the Frankenstein I just described.
>
> IMHO: What a nightmare...
packages and any nontrivial number of discrete components I'd be inclined to
agree with you. OTOH, when you start talking about a lot of logic chips,
or even some processors and other LSI, etched boards start to require a lot
of jumpers or you end up needing a multilayer board, and I don't care to go
there, either.
I'm sure that it's possible, as I've seen ads for companies that would do
that sort of thing. Whether it's feasible for a homebrew setup is another
issue entirely, though. That's why I raised the question in the first
place. :-)
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by JanRwl@AOL.COM
In a message dated 4/27/2004 8:53:46 PM Central Standard Time,
rtellason@... writes:
I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to do
wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
SOMEwhere, aeons ago, I saw a video of a "professional" WW machine going TO
it. It'd strip the end, wrap it at about 3000 RPM, move "least number of
bends" to next pin, cut, strip, and wrap, and zip to next pin to do. Musta done 3
wires per second. HORRIBLY-dangerous looking contraption! But I now have NO
clue who/what that was.
BUT such a machine is kinda WAY out there in terms of complexity, etc. If
built so that such would work reasonably well, I am sure it'd cost at least a
couple $thousand, NOT counting the computer!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
rtellason@... writes:
I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to do
wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
SOMEwhere, aeons ago, I saw a video of a "professional" WW machine going TO
it. It'd strip the end, wrap it at about 3000 RPM, move "least number of
bends" to next pin, cut, strip, and wrap, and zip to next pin to do. Musta done 3
wires per second. HORRIBLY-dangerous looking contraption! But I now have NO
clue who/what that was.
BUT such a machine is kinda WAY out there in terms of complexity, etc. If
built so that such would work reasonably well, I am sure it'd cost at least a
couple $thousand, NOT counting the computer!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Phil
actually, I think that this could be done with what is emerging as a
some what standard CNC PCB machine (3 axis basis plus "special"
axises (axees?)) with a wrap gun attachment. I see two problems that
need solution:
a) routing the wires. probably done by hand but you need to handle
the issue of binding and wire build up.
b) ww socket tails (i.e. the wire posts you wrap on) are not terribly
accurate in their position. I've used em and its inevitible that
they get bent a little. Finding the post to slide the wire spinner
onto would be tricky. maybe just have a funnel on the wrap tool to
guide the sleeve to the post.
Of course, this is kind of a moot point as WW appears to be
dissapearing. Guess those pesky SMDs dont wrap very well...
But this does bring up a kind of wild idea I've thought about during
episodes of low blood sugar. Why not just have a direct wire
machine? Stuff the components (TH, of course) into a predrilled
board. Invert the board (securing the components somehow) and then a
machine strips a wire, solders it to a lead, moves (er, routes the
wire) to the next lead, cuts the wire (if terminal run), solders it
to the lead and moves to the next lead. There was a company in the
70s (could still be around) called multiwire or some such that did
this for fast turn prototypes. It was quite expensive but it produced
some very complex boards fast. If I remember correctly, the first
intel 386 logic simulator (made out of random logic gates) was built
with this technology. I think fast turn PCB houses pretty much
killed their business.
some what standard CNC PCB machine (3 axis basis plus "special"
axises (axees?)) with a wrap gun attachment. I see two problems that
need solution:
a) routing the wires. probably done by hand but you need to handle
the issue of binding and wire build up.
b) ww socket tails (i.e. the wire posts you wrap on) are not terribly
accurate in their position. I've used em and its inevitible that
they get bent a little. Finding the post to slide the wire spinner
onto would be tricky. maybe just have a funnel on the wrap tool to
guide the sleeve to the post.
Of course, this is kind of a moot point as WW appears to be
dissapearing. Guess those pesky SMDs dont wrap very well...
But this does bring up a kind of wild idea I've thought about during
episodes of low blood sugar. Why not just have a direct wire
machine? Stuff the components (TH, of course) into a predrilled
board. Invert the board (securing the components somehow) and then a
machine strips a wire, solders it to a lead, moves (er, routes the
wire) to the next lead, cuts the wire (if terminal run), solders it
to the lead and moves to the next lead. There was a company in the
70s (could still be around) called multiwire or some such that did
this for fast turn prototypes. It was quite expensive but it produced
some very complex boards fast. If I remember correctly, the first
intel 386 logic simulator (made out of random logic gates) was built
with this technology. I think fast turn PCB houses pretty much
killed their business.
Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by ballendo
Hello Roy,
As a designer, builder and user of CNC machines for a couple decades
now, I'd say it's a no-starter. For all the reasons the previous
replies have stated...
Add to their replies my belief that the cost to do it reliably will
be so far in excess of the other choices we have available. Like
circuit milling, and TT. And quick turn board houses with reasonably
decent pricing.
I'm sure it can be done. I'm told Bill Lear had one at his place in
Reno (Stead AFB) doing it some many years ago (Like what Jan
described.) I remember seeing a video. But I won't be pursuing it as
a viable thing nowadays.
Ballendo
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Roy J. Tellason"
<rtellason@b...> wrote:
As a designer, builder and user of CNC machines for a couple decades
now, I'd say it's a no-starter. For all the reasons the previous
replies have stated...
Add to their replies my belief that the cost to do it reliably will
be so far in excess of the other choices we have available. Like
circuit milling, and TT. And quick turn board houses with reasonably
decent pricing.
I'm sure it can be done. I'm told Bill Lear had one at his place in
Reno (Stead AFB) doing it some many years ago (Like what Jan
described.) I remember seeing a video. But I won't be pursuing it as
a viable thing nowadays.
Ballendo
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Roy J. Tellason"
<rtellason@b...> wrote:
> I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNCsetup to do
> wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Roy J. Tellason
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 12:45 am, JanRwl@... wrote:
time-consuming portions of wire-wrapping...
around here, I'm sure I could come up with something that would do the job
if the rest of it were feasible.
The thing is, people are talking about mechanical component placement in
here. If they're through-hole components, then it's not *that* much more
complicated, is it?
> In a message dated 4/27/2004 8:53:46 PM Central Standard Time,You had to strip the wires yourself? Yikes. That's one of the more
> rtellason@... writes:
> I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to do
> wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
> SOMEwhere, aeons ago, I saw a video of a "professional" WW machine going TO
> it. It'd strip the end, wrap it at about 3000 RPM, move "least number of
> bends" to next pin, cut, strip, and wrap, and zip to next pin to do. Musta
> done 3 wires per second. HORRIBLY-dangerous looking contraption! But I
> now have NO clue who/what that was.
time-consuming portions of wire-wrapping...
> BUT such a machine is kinda WAY out there in terms of complexity, etc. IfI don't count computers as additional expense, Got plenty of boards and such
> built so that such would work reasonably well, I am sure it'd cost at least
> a couple $thousand, NOT counting the computer!
around here, I'm sure I could come up with something that would do the job
if the rest of it were feasible.
The thing is, people are talking about mechanical component placement in
here. If they're through-hole components, then it's not *that* much more
complicated, is it?
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Roy J. Tellason
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 01:38 am, Phil wrote:
that's why the ends of the pins are pointed...
way or the other.
Sounds like such a machine would be possible, but you'd need to have the
feeding of wire, stripping, soldering, and so forth all working right. I
guess we could lump most of this stuff under the heading of "automated
assembly", which seems like a pretty good topic to me. Even if we don't go
with your suggestion or with wire-wrap, something useful may come out of
this...
> actually, I think that this could be done with what is emerging as aI'm not real sure about how you'd handle this part.
> some what standard CNC PCB machine (3 axis basis plus "special"
> axises (axees?)) with a wrap gun attachment. I see two problems that
> need solution:
>
> a) routing the wires. probably done by hand but you need to handle
> the issue of binding and wire build up.
> b) ww socket tails (i.e. the wire posts you wrap on) are not terriblyIt couldn't be very big, as close as those pins are to each other. I guess
> accurate in their position. I've used em and its inevitible that
> they get bent a little. Finding the post to slide the wire spinner
> onto would be tricky. maybe just have a funnel on the wrap tool to
> guide the sleeve to the post.
that's why the ends of the pins are pointed...
> Of course, this is kind of a moot point as WW appears to beIs it? I can't say that I'm tracking things well enough to have seen that one
> dissapearing. Guess those pesky SMDs dont wrap very well...
way or the other.
> But this does bring up a kind of wild idea I've thought about duringBending the wires will usually do that.
> episodes of low blood sugar. Why not just have a direct wire
> machine? Stuff the components (TH, of course) into a predrilled
> board. Invert the board (securing the components somehow)
> and then a machine strips a wire, solders it to a lead, moves (er, routesI can't imagine anybody prototyping a 386 chip with random logic gates...!
> the wire) to the next lead, cuts the wire (if terminal run), solders it
> to the lead and moves to the next lead. There was a company in the
> 70s (could still be around) called multiwire or some such that did
> this for fast turn prototypes. It was quite expensive but it produced
> some very complex boards fast. If I remember correctly, the first
> intel 386 logic simulator (made out of random logic gates) was built
> with this technology. I think fast turn PCB houses pretty much
> killed their business.
Sounds like such a machine would be possible, but you'd need to have the
feeding of wire, stripping, soldering, and so forth all working right. I
guess we could lump most of this stuff under the heading of "automated
assembly", which seems like a pretty good topic to me. Even if we don't go
with your suggestion or with wire-wrap, something useful may come out of
this...
Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Phil
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Roy J. Tellason"
<rtellason@b...> wrote:
Given huge design time and 12 week turn around from tape-out to first
silicon they wanted to make sure the design was correct - errors
could set the product availablity by 6 months or more. This was
before the availability of sophisticated simulations and copious
cheap CPU cycles. And, it was far more complex than any chip ever
buil before. As it turned out, it was a big waste of money.
<rtellason@b...> wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 April 2004 01:38 am, Phil wrote:...
> If I remember correctly, the firstbuilt
> > intel 386 logic simulator (made out of random logic gates) was
> > with this technology. I think fast turn PCB houses pretty muchgates...!
> > killed their business.
>
> I can't imagine anybody prototyping a 386 chip with random logic
Given huge design time and 12 week turn around from tape-out to first
silicon they wanted to make sure the design was correct - errors
could set the product availablity by 6 months or more. This was
before the availability of sophisticated simulations and copious
cheap CPU cycles. And, it was far more complex than any chip ever
buil before. As it turned out, it was a big waste of money.
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-04-28 by Russell Shaw
Roy J. Tellason wrote:
sophistication. The wiring was pressed into epoxy about 1.6mm thick.
Reliability problems were a killer;)
> I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to doThis was done by an australian company to a high degree of
> wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
sophistication. The wiring was pressed into epoxy about 1.6mm thick.
Reliability problems were a killer;)
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-29 by Hugh Prescott
Actually I believe that the patent holders, Gardner Denver / Cooper Industries did produce an automated wire wrap machine years ago.
Was used to WW backplanes for big iron mainframe computer.
Having been in the computer business since 1976 I do recall one of the early now long gone micro manufacture that did an S-100 or ?? backplane with automated wirewrap.
Hugh
Was used to WW backplanes for big iron mainframe computer.
Having been in the computer business since 1976 I do recall one of the early now long gone micro manufacture that did an S-100 or ?? backplane with automated wirewrap.
Hugh
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil
To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:38 AM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: wire-wrap
actually, I think that this could be done with what is emerging as a
some what standard CNC PCB machine (3 axis basis plus "special"
axises (axees?)) with a wrap gun attachment. I see two problems that
need solution:
a) routing the wires. probably done by hand but you need to handle
the issue of binding and wire build up.
b) ww socket tails (i.e. the wire posts you wrap on) are not terribly
accurate in their position. I've used em and its inevitible that
they get bent a little. Finding the post to slide the wire spinner
onto would be tricky. maybe just have a funnel on the wrap tool to
guide the sleeve to the post.
Of course, this is kind of a moot point as WW appears to be
dissapearing. Guess those pesky SMDs dont wrap very well...
But this does bring up a kind of wild idea I've thought about during
episodes of low blood sugar. Why not just have a direct wire
machine? Stuff the components (TH, of course) into a predrilled
board. Invert the board (securing the components somehow) and then a
machine strips a wire, solders it to a lead, moves (er, routes the
wire) to the next lead, cuts the wire (if terminal run), solders it
to the lead and moves to the next lead. There was a company in the
70s (could still be around) called multiwire or some such that did
this for fast turn prototypes. It was quite expensive but it produced
some very complex boards fast. If I remember correctly, the first
intel 386 logic simulator (made out of random logic gates) was built
with this technology. I think fast turn PCB houses pretty much
killed their business.
Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and files:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
through hole P-n-P ? was Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-29 by ballendo
Roy,
I think it would be MUCH harder to make a homemade through hole pick
and place! (To the degree that I won't even be trying...)
Ballendo
In Homebrew_PCBs, "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason@b...> wrote:
I think it would be MUCH harder to make a homemade through hole pick
and place! (To the degree that I won't even be trying...)
Ballendo
In Homebrew_PCBs, "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason@b...> wrote:
>The thing is, people are talking about mechanical component
>placement in here. If they're through-hole components, then it's
>not *that* much more complicated, is it?
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 09:09:05 -0000, ballendo <ballendo@...> wrote:
in the holes.
I further see no reason why one should try such a thing.
If you can make a pick and place you can go smd and have the added benefit
of automatic soldering.
(yes i am aware this is possible too with throuhhole).
For i smd machine i would suggest using reeled parts, but maybe not really
using the reels.
just make an area at the side with little pegs holding the strips cut from
a reel, flat, straight.
then remove the plastic cover. the machine needs to know where to take the
part from and where to place
it. you only cut strips of the length you will need from your reels.
I think it would be much harder to make a sufficient number of "roll and
peel of the plastic cover"
pickup stations. I also think one can live without automatic placement of
the special parts
which you don't have on reels, maybe you could make a few "plase part
against that fixed edge by hand"
pickup stations.
It would be a help if the machine could precisely place all resistors and
capacitors, maybe diodes
and transistors too... because that is what you normally have in
machine-friendly reels.
I don't think the hardware would be that much of a problem, you need a
rotating vacuum holder of course.
(maybe one could replace the shaft of a stepper by a tube, or drill a hole
through it - this
way the work needed for this part would be minimal. a flexible hose to the
top with a "rotating" connector
and ready.
What i really wonder about is how it is possible to generate the needed
files.
I do not think this could be done automated from a layout file.
this is the reason why i most likely will never attempt such a machine.
It seems to make no sense for one-offs or only a few boards.
ST
> Roy,I agree, I have no clue how the industrial machines manage to get the legs
>
> I think it would be MUCH harder to make a homemade through hole pick
> and place! (To the degree that I won't even be trying...)
>
> Ballendo
in the holes.
I further see no reason why one should try such a thing.
If you can make a pick and place you can go smd and have the added benefit
of automatic soldering.
(yes i am aware this is possible too with throuhhole).
For i smd machine i would suggest using reeled parts, but maybe not really
using the reels.
just make an area at the side with little pegs holding the strips cut from
a reel, flat, straight.
then remove the plastic cover. the machine needs to know where to take the
part from and where to place
it. you only cut strips of the length you will need from your reels.
I think it would be much harder to make a sufficient number of "roll and
peel of the plastic cover"
pickup stations. I also think one can live without automatic placement of
the special parts
which you don't have on reels, maybe you could make a few "plase part
against that fixed edge by hand"
pickup stations.
It would be a help if the machine could precisely place all resistors and
capacitors, maybe diodes
and transistors too... because that is what you normally have in
machine-friendly reels.
I don't think the hardware would be that much of a problem, you need a
rotating vacuum holder of course.
(maybe one could replace the shaft of a stepper by a tube, or drill a hole
through it - this
way the work needed for this part would be minimal. a flexible hose to the
top with a "rotating" connector
and ready.
What i really wonder about is how it is possible to generate the needed
files.
I do not think this could be done automated from a layout file.
this is the reason why i most likely will never attempt such a machine.
It seems to make no sense for one-offs or only a few boards.
ST
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
Just checked the "how do you get a pick and place file" question.
Asked the orcad help and it says go to "create component report" and you
get
a file like that:
REF DES VALUE PACKAGE
FOOTPRINT X LOC Y LOC ROTATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C1 1N C_ELECT
CYL/D.175/LS.100/.031 -63.50 mm 29.21 mm 90
C2 15P C
CYL/D.175/LS.100/.031 -33.02 mm 38.10 mm 180
C3 15P C
CYL/D.175/LS.100/.031 -33.02 mm 43.18 mm 180
D1 1N4617 1N4617
AX/.400X.100/.031 -36.83 mm 22.86 mm 90
So that seems not the problem.
You can change a part origin in the library.
Still - preparing the file, and especially preparing the components in a
"machine friendly" way
will most likely take you longer than just putting them where you want
them.
You would need to tell the machine where which part is located, and then
add a "fetch part" line
before each "place part" line.
But converting the above file to the "dop part" seems not the hardest
thing to do.
ST
Asked the orcad help and it says go to "create component report" and you
get
a file like that:
REF DES VALUE PACKAGE
FOOTPRINT X LOC Y LOC ROTATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C1 1N C_ELECT
CYL/D.175/LS.100/.031 -63.50 mm 29.21 mm 90
C2 15P C
CYL/D.175/LS.100/.031 -33.02 mm 38.10 mm 180
C3 15P C
CYL/D.175/LS.100/.031 -33.02 mm 43.18 mm 180
D1 1N4617 1N4617
AX/.400X.100/.031 -36.83 mm 22.86 mm 90
So that seems not the problem.
You can change a part origin in the library.
Still - preparing the file, and especially preparing the components in a
"machine friendly" way
will most likely take you longer than just putting them where you want
them.
You would need to tell the machine where which part is located, and then
add a "fetch part" line
before each "place part" line.
But converting the above file to the "dop part" seems not the hardest
thing to do.
ST
Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-29 by ballendo
Russell,
Do you remember the name of that company? I remember once seeing
something like that at Nepcon, or PcbWest...
Thank you in advance,
Ballendo
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Russell Shaw <rjshaw@n...>
wrote:
Do you remember the name of that company? I remember once seeing
something like that at Nepcon, or PcbWest...
Thank you in advance,
Ballendo
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Russell Shaw <rjshaw@n...>
wrote:
> Roy J. Tellason wrote:setup to do
> > I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC
> > wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
>
> This was done by an australian company to a high degree of
> sophistication. The wiring was pressed into epoxy about 1.6mm thick.
> Reliability problems were a killer;)
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by ballendo
>In Homebrew_PCBs, Stefan Trethan <stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:Stefan,
>What i really wonder about is how it is possible to generate the
>needed files.
>I do not think this could be done automated from a layout file.
>this is the reason why i most likely will never attempt such a
>machine. It seems to make no sense for one-offs or only a few boards.
PLEASE have a look at the ULP's used with Eagle. They ALREADY have
one for pick and place... (And if you're using OrCAD, I'd bet--with
every assurance of winning-- that you have access to making pick and
place files too...)
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
> PLEASE have a look at the ULP's used with Eagle. They ALREADY haveI did exactly that and you are correct...
> one for pick and place... (And if you're using OrCAD, I'd bet--with
> every assurance of winning-- that you have access to making pick and
> place files too...)
>
>
Could not find the eagle ULP, was not sure if it exists, i will try again.
A later post shows that orcad is just fine.
I hope you have read the "place cutoff stips of reels to one side of the
cnc, hold by pegs"
thing. i think it is a good idea, what do you think?.
I do no longer think the pick and place file is impossible, it is slightly
more
difficult than paste dispensing (because you have to fetch the parts)
but it is not undoable.
ST
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by ballendo
D@^# I typed a lot of replies this evening!
hobby and small shop group, after all. But I'll use the machine to
index even these short tapes, so the pickup point is the same for
each part at a given "tape slot". Something perhaps non-obvious to a
new cnc user is that the machine can do things in unusual ways. For
instance, motion can be programmed to "press a button" before trying
to pick up the part. The button can be ANYWHERE that ANY part of the
machine can reach... So you might not "press it" with the z axis, but
perhaps simply be moving the machine gantry to a certain place. This
movement hits the switch to index the tape/reel. You could also use
the needle of the vacuum pickup itself and an optical switch, firing
a "one shot" in your macro... or in external hardware... Lotta ways
to "skin this cat"...
tougher... And solder paste dispensing is EASY by comparison.
Ballendo
>In Homebrew_PCBs, Stefan Trethan <stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:Yep. saw that.
>
> I did exactly that and you are correct...
> A later post shows that orcad is just fine.
>I hope you have read the "place cutoff stips of reels to one side ofA good idea to use the less than full reels? Definitely. We are a
>the cnc, hold by pegs" thing. i think it is a good idea, what do you
>think?.
hobby and small shop group, after all. But I'll use the machine to
index even these short tapes, so the pickup point is the same for
each part at a given "tape slot". Something perhaps non-obvious to a
new cnc user is that the machine can do things in unusual ways. For
instance, motion can be programmed to "press a button" before trying
to pick up the part. The button can be ANYWHERE that ANY part of the
machine can reach... So you might not "press it" with the z axis, but
perhaps simply be moving the machine gantry to a certain place. This
movement hits the switch to index the tape/reel. You could also use
the needle of the vacuum pickup itself and an optical switch, firing
a "one shot" in your macro... or in external hardware... Lotta ways
to "skin this cat"...
>I do no longer think the pick and place file is impossible, it isExactly. Doing it is pretty easy. Doing it WELL is quite a bit
>slightly more difficult than paste dispensing (because you have to
>fetch the parts)but it is not undoable.
tougher... And solder paste dispensing is EASY by comparison.
Ballendo
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
> A good idea to use the less than full reels? Definitely. We are a"indexing" means you are going to move the strips, right?
> hobby and small shop group, after all. But I'll use the machine to
> index even these short tapes, so the pickup point is the same for
> each part at a given "tape slot". Something perhaps non-obvious to a
> new cnc user is that the machine can do things in unusual ways. For
> instance, motion can be programmed to "press a button" before trying
> to pick up the part. The button can be ANYWHERE that ANY part of the
> machine can reach... So you might not "press it" with the z axis, but
> perhaps simply be moving the machine gantry to a certain place. This
> movement hits the switch to index the tape/reel. You could also use
> the needle of the vacuum pickup itself and an optical switch, firing
> a "one shot" in your macro... or in external hardware... Lotta ways
> to "skin this cat"...
I wonder how you plan to peel off the tape, i think it is definitely WAY
harder
to do this than fixed, "static" pickup bays.
I would simply peel the tape off the whole length.
Of course the file must look different, the part is on another position
each time.
But i do not think it is impossible, or any harder than moving the strips.
You can drill the holes for the "pegs" which hold the strips with the CNC,
thus make sure
everything is dead on spot and parallel.
ST
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-29 by Russell Shaw
ballendo wrote:
at my last job, before i even worked there.
> Russell,It sounded vaguely like pcbwest. The boards were made for gear
>
> Do you remember the name of that company? I remember once seeing
> something like that at Nepcon, or PcbWest...
at my last job, before i even worked there.
> Thank you in advance,
>
> Ballendo
>
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Russell Shaw <rjshaw@n...>
> wrote:
>
>>Roy J. Tellason wrote:
>>
>>>I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC
>
> setup to do
>
>>>wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
>>
>>This was done by an australian company to a high degree of
>>sophistication. The wiring was pressed into epoxy about 1.6mm thick.
>>Reliability problems were a killer;)
>
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Dave Mucha
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
found one that detailed how they did P-n-P.
First, forget thru-holes. no reason. SMT caps and resistors are non-
polarity (most anyway) so that is a non-issue.
Anyway, they had one machine with 16 reels that pulled parts to
another reel that was for the board. In other words, they made their
own single reel for a board and then the board stuffing machine only
had to deal with one source of all chips.
Dave
Dave
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 09:09:05 -0000, ballendo <ballendo@y...> wrote:pick
>
> > Roy,
> >
> > I think it would be MUCH harder to make a homemade through hole
> > and place! (To the degree that I won't even be trying...)the legs
> >
> > Ballendo
>
> I agree, I have no clue how the industrial machines manage to get
> in the holes.In my search for a shop to do small runs of assembling boards, I
found one that detailed how they did P-n-P.
First, forget thru-holes. no reason. SMT caps and resistors are non-
polarity (most anyway) so that is a non-issue.
Anyway, they had one machine with 16 reels that pulled parts to
another reel that was for the board. In other words, they made their
own single reel for a board and then the board stuffing machine only
had to deal with one source of all chips.
Dave
Dave
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by ballendo
Stefan,
What you're suggesting CAN work. It just comes back to your original
concern. Because it will now take a LOT of extra programming to
account for the "moving" location of the "same" component. MUCH
harder to deal with IMO.
A bigger concern IMO, is that by doing it this way you have severely
limited the capability/expandability of the machine.
Since you are using discrete locations, you can only have as many as
your machine travel allows. The more SMD parts you have, the less
room for the board itself! By "solving" the indexing "problem", you
can have the parts COUNT of a given SMD footprint entirely variable.
whether your strip is 5 or 500 parts, it takes up the same SMALL
space in your machine work area... If you have a board with 20 caps,
you've used up 20 caps worth--in tape length, not part length!-- of
machine travel.
My way, I'll use perhaps 2 caps worth. (and you have to reload
your "tray" for each board. not a problem at first, but after awhile
it'll get old. I'll just use a longer tape and make more boards...
My way it's parts TYPES which use up my space. Your way it's NUMBER
of parts using up your space. Looked at that way, it should be easy
to see that its worthwhile to do the indexing...
Ballendo
P.S. I DO have "static" pickup bays. They just have a tape which
indexes underneath them... Peeling off the thin plastic cover is not
hard. It's just part of the index to the next part position.
Funny though, In electronics I thought we wanted to avoid static
pickup<G> Which DOES bring up the concern about grounding the vac
pickup needle, as the air moving through it can make a pretty good
electrostatic machine. Wimhurst or van de graff anyone?<G>
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
What you're suggesting CAN work. It just comes back to your original
concern. Because it will now take a LOT of extra programming to
account for the "moving" location of the "same" component. MUCH
harder to deal with IMO.
A bigger concern IMO, is that by doing it this way you have severely
limited the capability/expandability of the machine.
Since you are using discrete locations, you can only have as many as
your machine travel allows. The more SMD parts you have, the less
room for the board itself! By "solving" the indexing "problem", you
can have the parts COUNT of a given SMD footprint entirely variable.
whether your strip is 5 or 500 parts, it takes up the same SMALL
space in your machine work area... If you have a board with 20 caps,
you've used up 20 caps worth--in tape length, not part length!-- of
machine travel.
My way, I'll use perhaps 2 caps worth. (and you have to reload
your "tray" for each board. not a problem at first, but after awhile
it'll get old. I'll just use a longer tape and make more boards...
My way it's parts TYPES which use up my space. Your way it's NUMBER
of parts using up your space. Looked at that way, it should be easy
to see that its worthwhile to do the indexing...
Ballendo
P.S. I DO have "static" pickup bays. They just have a tape which
indexes underneath them... Peeling off the thin plastic cover is not
hard. It's just part of the index to the next part position.
Funny though, In electronics I thought we wanted to avoid static
pickup<G> Which DOES bring up the concern about grounding the vac
pickup needle, as the air moving through it can make a pretty good
electrostatic machine. Wimhurst or van de graff anyone?<G>
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
> "indexing" means you are going to move the strips, right?definitely WAY harder to do this than fixed, "static" pickup bays.
> I wonder how you plan to peel off the tape, i think it is
> I would simply peel the tape off the whole length.position
> Of course the file must look different, the part is on another
> each time.strips.
> But i do not think it is impossible, or any harder than moving the
> You can drill the holes for the "pegs" which hold the strips withthe CNC,
> thus make sure
> everything is dead on spot and parallel.
>
> ST
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by ballendo
Hello,
Yep. Called tape reel part sequencing. You can order reels pre-
sequenced for your boards from the larger distributors.
Ballendo
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Mucha" <dave_mucha@y...>
wrote:
Yep. Called tape reel part sequencing. You can order reels pre-
sequenced for your boards from the larger distributors.
Ballendo
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Mucha" <dave_mucha@y...>
wrote:
> Anyway, they had one machine with 16 reels that pulled parts totheir
> another reel that was for the board. In other words, they made
> own single reel for a board and then the board stuffing machineonly
> had to deal with one source of all chips.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> Dave
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
> First, forget thru-holes. no reason. SMT caps and resistors are non-agreed.
> polarity (most anyway) so that is a non-issue.
>Hmm how did they manage to fit different-size chips on one reel?
> Anyway, they had one machine with 16 reels that pulled parts to
> another reel that was for the board. In other words, they made their
> own single reel for a board and then the board stuffing machine only
> had to deal with one source of all chips.
>
> Dave
>
Anyway, seems to complicated for me.
I think my approach with the "small strips" is not too bad, it would be
fairly quick
to "stick up" new strips on the holding pegs.
A thing to consider is how the software is going to be told where which
part is deposited.
This must be fairly easy otherwise you will never do it for only one board.
No matter what, it is definitely a thing for me to consider, but not put
any effort in.
I will first build a simple drilling machine, then add a paste dispenser,
then maybe add a pick and place if i still want.
It is goo to know the option is there because now i will most likely make
one axis a bit
longer than initially planned to allow for some parts space.
ST
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-29 by Roy J. Tellason
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 11:46 pm, Hugh Prescott wrote:
those backplanes got wire-wrapped, they're that straightforward. Some of
the plug-in boards, on the other hand...
Do you happen to remember what mfr. it was?
> Actually I believe that the patent holders, Gardner Denver / CooperGot more than one S100 box here, and it would rather surprise me if one of
> Industries did produce an automated wire wrap machine years ago.
>
> Was used to WW backplanes for big iron mainframe computer.
>
> Having been in the computer business since 1976 I do recall one of the
> early now long gone micro manufacture that did an S-100 or ?? backplane
> with automated wirewrap.
those backplanes got wire-wrapped, they're that straightforward. Some of
the plug-in boards, on the other hand...
Do you happen to remember what mfr. it was?
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
> Since you are using discrete locations, you can only have as many asThat is all nice and true.
> your machine travel allows.
But for me it seems a reliable indexing mechanism with a sufficient number
of bays
is so much work it is not worthwile.
You can hardly make a complete indexing mechanism the size only one part
on a strip consumes
and you often will need less than 10 parts, mabe even only 1.
You can place a impressive number of smd parts on half a A4 page and
nobody prevents me
from making the axis 20cm longer than needed for the boards.
I find it much simpler and surely will try it first, if i come to trying
it after
completing the other stuff.
I understand it is no good for series production, as each board would
require reload,
or entering/calculating new parts position. With indexing you only repeat
the exactly same
thing ever and ever again.
It's just my demands are not that high and i have enough other problems to
solve
before even thinking about indexing...
ST
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] through hole P-n-P ? was Re: wire-wrap
2004-04-29 by Roy J. Tellason
On Thursday 29 April 2004 05:09 am, ballendo wrote:
start! :-)
> Roy,Yeah, it'd be a real challenge all right. Not that I'd even know where to
>
> I think it would be MUCH harder to make a homemade through hole pick
> and place! (To the degree that I won't even be trying...)
start! :-)
> Ballendo
>
> In Homebrew_PCBs, "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason@b...> wrote:
> >The thing is, people are talking about mechanical component
> >placement in here. If they're through-hole components, then it's
> >not *that* much more complicated, is it?
>
>
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and files:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Roy J. Tellason
On Thursday 29 April 2004 09:39 am, Dave Mucha wrote:
here, that was how they did it. They had one machine with a bunch of reels
on it (I think 8), which pulled different parts to put on to one reel, and
that one was used, with the required parts in proper sequence, on the
machine that did the actual P&P. That last one was pretty awesome to
watch...!
> Anyway, they had one machine with 16 reels that pulled parts toThe one time I got to visit an actual manufacturing facility not far from
> another reel that was for the board. In other words, they made their
> own single reel for a board and then the board stuffing machine only
> had to deal with one source of all chips.
here, that was how they did it. They had one machine with a bunch of reels
on it (I think 8), which pulled different parts to put on to one reel, and
that one was used, with the required parts in proper sequence, on the
machine that did the actual P&P. That last one was pretty awesome to
watch...!
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Phil
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
look for smt-coordinate.ulp
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
>with
> > PLEASE have a look at the ULP's used with Eagle. They ALREADY have
> > one for pick and place... (And if you're using OrCAD, I'd bet--
> > every assurance of winning-- that you have access to making pickand
> > place files too...)again.
> >
> >
>
>
> I did exactly that and you are correct...
> Could not find the eagle ULP, was not sure if it exists, i will try
look for smt-coordinate.ulp
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Stefan Trethan
> look for smt-coordinate.ulpYour search - smt-coordinate.ulp - did not match any documents.
smd-coordinates.ulp finds 5 or so, but nothing useable.
thanks
ST
Re: Pick/Place (was:through hole P-n-P ?)
2004-04-29 by Phil
yes, coordinates. sorry for the typo. its in the base eagle install.
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
>
> > look for smt-coordinate.ulp
>
>
> Your search - smt-coordinate.ulp - did not match any documents.
>
> smd-coordinates.ulp finds 5 or so, but nothing useable.
>
> thanks
>
> ST
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-05-01 by Leon Heller
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:54 AM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
> I wonder if there's any feasibility to using some kind of a CNC setup to
do
> wire-wrapping? Any of you guys have any thoughts on this?
CNC machines used to be made for wire-wrapping. It's not used very much now.
I last used it about 15 years ago.
Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] wire-wrap
2004-05-01 by Ron Amundson
"least number of
too. Really cool, but I don't think any one uses wire wrap anymore.
The old Texas Instrument 48 channel seismic recorders were all wire wrap.
Something like 250 wire wrapped plug in boards. Simulataneous sampling up to
200Hz, and stored on mag tape on a real cool reel to reel tape deck with
spinning tape heads like on a VCR.
Ron
> bends" to next pin, cut, strip, and wrap, and zip to next pin to do.Musta done 3
> wires per second. HORRIBLY-dangerous looking contraption! But I now haveNO
> clue who/what that was.least a
>
> BUT such a machine is kinda WAY out there in terms of complexity, etc. If
> built so that such would work reasonably well, I am sure it'd cost at
> couple $thousand, NOT counting the computer!I would tend to think around 10-100 times that, and yes, I've seen those
>
too. Really cool, but I don't think any one uses wire wrap anymore.
The old Texas Instrument 48 channel seismic recorders were all wire wrap.
Something like 250 wire wrapped plug in boards. Simulataneous sampling up to
200Hz, and stored on mag tape on a real cool reel to reel tape deck with
spinning tape heads like on a VCR.
Ron