MPA-V or IIIF Users?

Subscribe to Thread

Considering putting one of these into production. Any com... - Mar 03, 2001 by George Henning

Panasert machine is known for programming ease. Both machin... - Mar 03, 2001 by edmond

We are using an MPAG3 ( similar to MPA-V) in conjunction wit... - Mar 05, 2001 by SBRgetsitdone

Biggest problem with the IIF is placing components with vary... - Mar 13, 2001 by

I have been using an MPAV and MVIIF for about 3 1/2 years an... - Mar 22, 2001 by

George Henning

#5461

MPA-V or IIIF Users? | 3 March, 2001

Considering putting one of these into production.

Any comments as to reliability, accuracy, programming ease, etc. greatly appreciated.

Targeting small discretes (e.g. 0402), PBGA, CSP, & QFP (to 16 mil)

Thanks in advance...

reply »

edmond

#5464

MPA-V or IIIF Users? | 3 March, 2001

Panasert machine is known for programming ease. Both machines having U-axis indexing unit which may crash due to operator mishandling. Comparing the reliability and accuracy, the MPAV is more stable to MPA3F. MPAV using full vision for part regconition, either head or fixed camera whereas MPA3F using chucking and fixed camera vision.

reply »

SBRgetsitdone

#5467

MPA-V or IIIF Users? | 5 March, 2001

We are using an MPAG3 ( similar to MPA-V) in conjunction with a MVIIV. Machines were installed last December. Both machines are very reliable ( avg placement rates over 99% on both machines ). We use Panapro to program, overall it works well, but like any software, it has a few eccentric points, but they are easy to overcome. Biggest hurdle we had was developing the part library, but if you lean on the service guys, they can provide you with a basic library to start with.

Email me or post again if you'd like more info

reply »

#5535

MPA-V or IIIF Users? | 13 March, 2001

Biggest problem with the IIF is placing components with varying thickness (i.e. multpile vendors). We have to adjust production programs at start of each run to prevent excess scrap. Line Sensor tolerances can be adjusted to accept a wider range of part thickness, but then we begin to see missing component defects.

Problem could possibley overcome if you recieve single source parts with thickness tolerances within .15mm

I have placed .025" pitch TSOP's without issue, but haven't tried anything more "difficult."

reply »

williamh

#5704

MPA-V or IIIF Users? | 22 March, 2001

I have been using an MPAV and MVIIF for about 3 1/2 years and have had some difficulties, mainly with the MPAV. After only 2 1/2 years of use we had to replace the laser because we were having alot of QFP's being mismounted. That was an $8,000 expense. The MVIIF has been more reliable. One other thing to consider is that PFA had to come by and replace all of the drivers in all of the Panasert machines because they found a defect in the PCB. Question the seller about these drivers being replaced. Each driver cost between $2000~$3000. There are 11 drivers on the MPAV that need to be replaced if only using one tray supplier. More if using two tray suppliers. There are 6 drivers on the MVIIF that need to be replaced. PFA is doing this for free. Any time PFA does anything for free you know something is fishy.

Good Luck

reply »