Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1496727
APRIL 2023 I DESIGN007 MAGAZINE 61 connector compared with a pin-in-paste, press fit, or THD will be evaluated in real-time con- sidering all the aspects of the manufacturing. is calculation tool is partially available, but is not integrated in the design soware and divided in BOM or manufacturing costs. Since the information is available, it will just be a matter of time until the function will be avail- able and the manufacturing cost calculation becomes a transparent process. DESIGN007 Paul Carpine is a technical marketing engineer at Siemens EDA. Supporting the PCBFlow from Siemens, Paul works with PCB design- ers to improve their projects for more efficient manufactur- ing. He started his career as an SMT process engineer at Flextronics more than 15 years ago, and for the past 12 years has worked for important players in the automotive industry. SPONSORED LINK: PCBflow platform. Aer displaying the available com- ponents, the cost is added to the total product cost. is is updated aer each component change or when the quantity is modified. e PCB dimension and outline will influ- ence the fabrication cost and panel design. Each PCB fabricator works with big FR-4 pro- duction panels and the goal is to utilize the entire panel, otherwise the waste is reflected in the PCB cost. If we can set the production panel inside the calculation tool, it is possible to simulate utilization and therefore, estimate the PCB cost. It is enough to see how the PCB price will change by modifying the dimen- sions. Sometimes, if the PCB surface increases by 5%, the price stays the same, but 5.5% could have a big impact because the fabricator can- not optimize the panel usage as well. In the assembly phase, some costs can be eas- ily estimated. Moving one component from one side to another will change the manufacturing cost and this should be visible in our new cal- culation tool, letting the designer decide what's best for the project. A decision to use an SMD Robots can be useful as mental wellbeing coaches in the workplace, but perception of their effectiveness depends in large part on what the robot looks like. Researchers from the University of Cambridge conducted a study in a tech consultancy firm using two robot wellbeing coaches, where 26 employ- ees participated in weekly robot-led wellbeing sessions for four weeks. Although the robots had identical voices, facial expressions, and scripts for the sessions, the physical appearance of the robot affected how participants interacted with it. Participants who did their wellbeing exercises with a toy-like robot said that they felt more of a connection with their "coach" than participants who worked with a humanoid-like robot. Participants who worked with the toy-like Misty robot reported that they had a better working connection with the robot than participants who worked with the child- like QT robot. Participants also had a more positive perception of Misty overall. "It could be that since the Misty robot is more toy-like, it matched their expectations," said Spitale. "But since QT is more humanoid, they expected it to behave like a human, which may be why par- ticipants who worked with QT were slightly under- whelmed." (Source: University of Cambridge) Robots Can Improve Mental Wellbeing at Work, If They Look Right