Posts Tagged OvenCHECKER
Heat Flow Happens
Posted by Paul Austen in M.O.L.E. MAP, OvenCHECKER, OvenRIDER, Profiling, Reflow Oven Verification, Reflow Profiling, Thermal Musings, Thermal Profiling on May 24th, 2011
An often misunderstood concept is heat flow and how it can influence the temperature of the product being heated so here is Wikipedia’s definition of heat flow, followed by a discussion of our own on the subject.
Energy needs a conductor in order to flow
1) An energy difference between two objects.
and
2) There is a conductor to act as a bridge enabling the energy to flow.
Energy always flows through a conductor from an object of high energy to an object of low energy. In this illustration, the high-energy object is a moving hammer, the low energy object is the table and the conductor is a block sitting on the table.
When you hit the block with the hammer, the energy contained in the moving hammer is transferred to the block when it hits. Some is also conducted through the block and transferred to the table it is sitting on. However, because the block is not a perfect conductor, which is true for most things, some of the energy stays in block. That energy bounces between the molecules of the block like balls on a pool table.
Because the molecules rub up against each other, and there is friction between them, some of the moving energy of the hammer is converted to heat energy, which causes a rise in the block’s temperature. It all comes down to molecular motion in an imperfect conductor creating friction that raises its temperature. Therefore, temperature increase is a way of observing energy flow, and energy flow that causes a temperature rise is called heat flow. Read the rest of this entry »
Diverse Needs, Diverse Solutions – We’ve got an App for That!
Posted by Paul Austen in M.O.L.E. MAP, MegaRIDER, OvenCHECKER, OvenRIDER, Reflow Profiling, Thermal Profiling on March 29th, 2010
How many different MOLE profilers and Test Pallets does it take to monitor a reflow solder machine? It depends on who you are and why you are monitoring it? We just want to make sure there are as many tools as there are reasons for running a thermal profile. Here are a few good reasons:
1. “I’m from the Metrology lab and it’s time for the annual calibration of your reflow oven.” We’ve got an app for that. After you’ve finished with the oven’s calibration procedure, you can run the MegaRIDER-20 with a Process Test Pallet to see if the machine is uniform across the conveyor width and has the same heating capacity as it did the last calibration or maintenance.
2. “I’m the Manufacturing Engineer and our QC Department wants me to show that this oven is in control.” We’ve got an app for that. You probably need more information than the once a year Metrology profile can provide. So weekly you can an OvenRIDER and see that every zone in the oven is performing the same using X-Bar R charts to prove it.
3. “I’m on the New Product introduction team and I need a good recipe to solder a new board without killing the parts.” We’ve got an app for that. The Super M.O.L.E.® Gold thermal profiler will let you connect T/Cs to the board to see exactly what’s going on, thermally, on the areas where you and the designer have the most concern. Use the Prediction tools in the new MAP software to lock in the perfect recipe.
4. “I’m a Line Technician and I have to know my reflow oven is ready to run product without all the wires and circuit board stuff.” We’ve got an app for that. OvenCHECKER is one pallet loaded with the most powerful profiler on the market today. It takes no more time to run than the first production board and it lets you know if the reflow oven is ready or not. No downloading, no comparing numbers on a chart, just Go, or No-Go.
GR&R as it applies to ECD products – OvenCHECKER™, OvenRIDER®, WaveRIDER® and MEGARIDER®
Posted by Paul Austen in G R&R, M.O.L.E. MAP on November 6th, 2009
Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility (GR&R) studies are designed to show the amount of variation certain portions of the measurement system contribute to the total variation in measurement, often expressed in percent. There are many ways and products available to help you calculate these numbers, which range from a piece of graph paper to full blown software packages costing 1000s of dollars.
So let’s take a look at the values produced by a typical G R&R study and then see how they could fit with the data produced by the OvenRIDER® or OvenCHECKER™ software:
Appraiser Variation (AV%) – This is the percent of the total variation which we humans introduce because the measurement method may vary due to physical or subjective interpretation issues. Things like value interpolation between two tick marks on a ruler or how hard they squeeze a caliper around a part. This is the “Reproducibility” part of a measurement. The lower the measurement variation caused by the appraiser, the better its reproducibility and so almost anyone can do it and get the same or very close answer. If it is more than 30%, then there is too much variation from one person’s measurements to another’s. You will want to make sure they are following the procedure and not taking some shortcut.
Equipment Variation (EV%) – This is the percent of the total variation which is caused by the measurement equipment or tools used to make the measurement, like a ruler for length or thermometer for temperature. This is the “Repeatability” part of a measurement. The lower the variation caused by the equipment, the better its repeatability. Again, more than 30% means a good portion of the variation lies with the measurement tools.
Reproducibility and Repeatability (R&R%) – This is the combination of the AV and EV and is the percent of the total variation due to the tools and the people used to measure the parts. The measurement system, people and tools should produce a percent of less the 10% to know you have a good measurement system. Between 10% and 30% and you should work to improve the component(s) contributing the majority of the variation.
Part Variation (PV%) – This is the percent of the total variation which is caused by the parts being measured. This is where most of the variation should be found no matter how small the variation. After all, the part variation is what you are trying to measure, no matter how small. So expect to see this number in the 90% range, which means your parts are what is varying.
Total Variation (TV) – The TV is typically not given in percent and is a “standard deviation” like number where one can expect 99.73% of all the measurements to fall between +/-3 times the TV.
The form shows a typical example of a GR&R with sample data one way the values can calculated. How the numbers are calculated is not too important at this point. What they mean and how one can apply them to the data captured from an OvenRIDER® or OvenCHECKER™ is the real question.
So what does it take to do a GR&R?
- Two or more Appraisers – These are the people who are going to use the measuring tools to measure the parts.
- At least 5 sample parts – These are the things the manufacturing process is designed to produce.
- At least two trials measurements – This means measuring the same value from the same part at least two times.
How do these three things map into to the data produced by the OvenRIDER® or OvenCHECKER™:
- We have two or more appraisers, no problem!
- How about at least 5 sample parts? Well, what is the “part” we are making? We have an oven, and the oven has a recipe which was characterized to melt solder without killing the parts on your boards. So, the oven is set up to make … thermal profiles, or time vs. temperature graphs of a specific shape. We assess the shape in many ways, just like we could assess a bolt made by a screw machine. On the bolt we could measure its length, diameter, thread pitch, hardness, etc. On a profile, we measure the initial ramp slope, soak time, time above liquidous, peak temperature, etc. So the profile is the sample part, and one of the profile measures is the value we want to study. Let’s say, peak temperature. Then you run the RIDER through the oven at least five times to make at least 5 sample parts (profiles). So far so good.
- Now each appraiser is to take at least two trial measurements of the same value off the sample parts. So for a given profile, instruct each appraiser to measure the same value off the part (profile) at least two times. How? The software, which takes the data out of the profiler which was recorded from the RIDER, extracts that data from the profiles automatically. No matter how many times or who you instruct to ask the software to give you the peak temperature for a given profile, it will produce the exact same value. If you wanted to do it the hard way, and have each appraiser look at the profile graph using a straightedge and pen, and interpolate the peak value from the graph, you would likely get some appraiser caused variation. But no one in their right mind would do this.
What does this mean? It means that no matter what version of GR&R you use to run the math, the AV and EV will be 0%, leaving all the variation in the parts, which does not make for a very practical GR&R study.
But wait, could you just run the RIDER through the oven again to take a second trial measurement of the SAME profile (or part)? That is NOT a second measure of the same part. That would be producing another new sample part, not a second trial measure of the same part.
This is a typical problem with over half of the measurements we are asked to take in industry these days. It can only be measured once, and then it’s gone. If you want to pull to failure test a bolt as the GR&R studied value, you can only do it once, and then the bolt is broken. You can’t put it back together to make a second or third trial measure. It is the same with a profile. It happens in time and once the profile is produced, that specific profile at that instant in time cannot be measured again. It’s gone! You can only produce another profile (or part), which is not the same as measuring the same profile value twice.
So GR&R is not really the best method of assessing a RIDER product’s variation. The real question is, what is the accuracy of the instrument (the MOLE® thermal profiler), which is stated in the specification, and the variation in the RIDER sensors?
Great care is taken to manufacture sensors to a tight tolerance and tested to show that they have consistent response time to temperature changes. That, coupled with the fact that the materials do not break down or alter properties with use, makes it reasonable to accept any variation measured by the RIDER products lies most completely with the machine producing the profiles.
References and Tables:
“DataMyte HandBook Sixth Edition – A practical guide to computerized data collection for Statistical Process Control” by DataMyte Business, Allen-Bradley Company, Inc.
Understanding Gage R&R by Rick Sloop, Quality Magazine, September 2009
Recent Comments