Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1035071
OCTOBER 2018 I SMT007 MAGAZINE 29 eters of processes across all technologies in a detailed, yet neutral, way. A breakthrough idea within the CFX team was to create groups of messages of related data content that were logi- cal base topics that defined a granular discrete system or machine capability rather than creat- ing specific messages for each machine type. The topics were created to be used as build- ing blocks, so that any machine or transac- tional process on the shop floor—past, pres- ent or future—could be precisely modelled by putting together the relevant topics. Kicking off the content definition for each of the defined topics, as well as the more detailed subtopics, was a challenge at first. Being the first to contribute to the message data creation was daunting, especially for those whose focus had been predominantly internal on specific areas of technology. In many areas, non-expert driven examples of parameters were created in order to set the precedent and stimulate feedback. It was easier to comment, correct, modify, and enhance something rather than create it from scratch. While it is expected that the CFX content definition will continue to evolve in terms of scope and detail, the first release is complete in the most important ways and ready for mainstream adoption. Demonstrations By the end of 2018, four IPC-sponsored demos of CFX will have taken place: IPC APEX EXPO, in San Diego, California U.S.; SMT Nuremberg (Germany); What's New in Electronics Live, in Birmingham U.K.; and LEAP Expo, in Shen- zhen (China). It has been satisfying to see so many people travelling from afar to see CFX for the first time. The look on people's faces is priceless when they read a simple QR code armed only with their smartphone and immedi- ately have live, multi-vendor standard produc- tion events and statistics on their screens with- out any software installation or configuration. As part of the design mantra, CFX messages deliver facts about production, which provide data to be used to create whatever produc- tion metrics and views are required. What is available in the cloud for the CFX demo is a simple sample to drive the imagination. CFX works equally well on a specific line within a factory, in a cloud environment, or all three simultaneously if desired. Flexibility is a key value. The preparation for the demos went very smoothly as participants were invited to use the open-source, .net-based CFX Software Development Kit (SDK) created alongside the detailed message documentation that is a part of the standard. The experience of creating CFX support for the trials has been revolutionary in itself. There is no need for business trips or difficult technical discussions. Simply follow the documentation and have the demo soft- ware in the cloud—provided everything that was needed for confirmation of correct opera- tion—with just a few hours work. The demos themselves worked the first time for everyone without any glitches throughout the events. This has contributed to building confidence in and familiarity with CFX for all involved. Applications With the creation and release of the initial version of the CFX standard now behind us, there is now some exciting work to continue. A great example of this is a triple closed-loop system I saw in China that featured feedback from solder paste inspection (SPI) to the screen printer for compensation of deviations in the printing process as well as related correc- tion for the placement of SMT parts on PCBs. This was all checked and confirmed by auto- mated optical inspection (AOI), which also provided accurate feedback and any compen- sation needed in the placement process. Use of the closed-loop software resulted in a tenfold decrease of defects occurring in the line—an incredible result. The software itself looked great and was highly responsive. The bad news was that this result was achieved using bespoke machine interfaces. A lot of time and effort had been spent work- ing with different machine vendors to create the interfaces required, which had signif- icant costs to all concerned. The person in charge of the software at the manufactur- ing company knew that for the rollout of the closed-loop solution to the other lines in their company—most of which had different