Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1479191
SEPTEMBER 2022 I PCB007 MAGAZINE 13 sizes because you put additional axes on the loader zone and make conveyor width optimi- zation to improve quality via perimeter con- tact untenable. Loaders can have adjustable panel sizes that adjust on demand—or you manually do it, which then offsets the purpose of the automation. With 24 inches as your common access, for example, you could go from 18"x24" to 24"x36". Maybe you could go for a smaller substrate type stuff and have 12"x18", 16"x18", 18"x24", some- thing like that. That covers line cards, HDI, and substrates. Having a strategy for the panel sizes will reduce the automation costs. Reduce the size of the equipment, because the more panel sizes you have, the bigger the automa- tion kit gets. What kind of loaders/unloaders are you looking at? There are robotic systems, and systems that are based on fixed axes. These systems also have high, low, and no-code inter- face options. Cobots are also popular nowadays. We have recently evolved from free-standing units to units in an enclosure like the Kuttler model from 20 years ago but with lower cost of owner- ship, with added sensors for more safety factors so you don't double-feed slip sheets, pick up two things at once, etc. You can maybe check a 2D code and make sure it's the right job, too. Beyond that you get into higher end robotics, or systems with a mechanical clock approach to things. But once you get into the higher end systems, you become beholden to suppliers to do the coding for you, which is part of their strategic matrix to take your money. You need to understand that. If I step into that space, will I have to pay the supplier a premium to do all the work for me and maintain my equipment? Am I willing to go there? If you're an older shop, you don't go this far; you stop at the cobot and the enclosure. If you're a greenfield OEM, you typically go all the way, and you have an internal engineering team. Some go with the code from the auto- mation supplier, while others want to code it themselves. The internal code capability is the safest, most sustainable route long term, because you never know what could happen to a supplier. Strategically, this is how it looks to me. Full Industry 4.0 is not in the cards as a first step if you're an older shop that doesn't have any mechanization. You must go through these phases first, get your payback, and then let's just see if you want to do anything more. Matties: What's the roadblock? Stepinski: What I've found in the past year is that the system architect in a given fab shop does not normally have the combination of technical, financial, and sales skills to do these kinds of things. You don't have one person who does it all. at makes it hard when you need teams of people. In a smaller place, these teams may not exist; people are too busy. To me, that's the biggest roadblock. A solid CTO role is probably the highest ROI invest- ment and leading the pareto frontier for orga- nizational value in 2022, because if you're an older shop trying to hire young people right out of school, it will be hard to retain them. Current estimates say that anyone coming out of school right now will go through 10 to 14 jobs by the time they're age 35. at's the pre- diction I heard from one of my professors at London Business School, which is based upon a recent Princeton study. So, it's a very thought-provoking path. Hir- ing younger people into an apprenticeship program might have been the way you did it Current estimates say that anyone coming out of school right now will go through 10 to 14 jobs by the time they're age 35.