So sorry to share the news that Jim McElroy, founding chief executive of iNEMI, has passed away.
I truly enjoyed Jim, and even though I probably ticked him off a time or two with things I wrote, he was such a gentleman he kept it to himself. He was a great choice by the iNEMI board to launch the consortium — technically knowledgeable and politically astute. A quintessential New Englander through and through, Jim wasn’t flashy. He just got things done.
An industry friend just reminded me I once told them I felt the reason that Jim was so successful at iNEMI was because he was able to put aside his ego. I don’t remember saying that, but I firmly believe it was true.
Obituary follows here: https://obits.csnh.com/james-mcelroy-sr
Walmart-Vizio Tie-up Poses Supply Chain Questions
Walmart’s just-announced acquisition of Vizio will draw plenty of attention, but not nearly what it deserves.
The spotlight is on the synergy between the world’s largest physical retailer and a Top 10 maker of smart TVs. Walmart, which already sells Vizio’s smart flatscreens by the boatload, is expected to benefit by expanding its ad-targeting capabilities to connected television, per Axios and other analysts.
But I find it intriguing for other reasons: It is an audacious revamping of the OEM-distributor relationship.
Walmart is in fact the world’s largest retailer, with annual revenues topping $635 billion. That’s well above that of Amazon ($350 billion range in retail; much larger if services are included). The margin grows if we subtract the billions in revenue Bezos and Co. collect selling their internally sourced brands, such as Eero routers, Kindle e-readers, Fire tablets and TVs, and of course Alexa and Echo smart home devices. And that’s just the electronics side of its vast private label businesses.
Walmart, of course, has its own private labels as well, but they tend to be in the home and sporting goods and automotive spaces. Electronics was an after-thought.
Adding Vizio, however, adds a $1.7 billion electronics arm, complete will all the requisite supply chain demands, from design to parts procurement to manufacturing to logistics. How will this affect Vizio’s sourcing strategy? Will Walmart overlay its procurement approach? Will Vizio’s competitors attempt to undercut their tie-up with Walmart by asserting that the new owners will give their own channels precious advantages on retail walls and shelves?
I’m not discounting the already robust Vizio supply chain practices, but there’s a learning curve both organizations are about to experience: Vizio with a new corporate overlord, Walmart with an outside team whose operational methods are almost certainly different than its own. Who will bend, and how?
What’s the Deal with the Altium Deal?
The masses are atwitter over the announced Renesas acquisition of Altium, and for good reason. The $5.9 billion price tag is some real coin.
What’s less clear to almost everyone outside the two companies, however, is the underlying strategy and how the merged entity will look going forward.
In announcing the acquisition, Renesas chief executive Hidetoshi Shibata called it “an important first step into our long-term future.” But what is that future?
Obviously, Renesas is not going to take Altium private, for use for its internal customers only. The two firms do have many overlapping markets: IoT, consumer, automotive, among others. Renesas also plays in higher-end areas such as high-performance computing that Altium has not to our knowledge penetrated. If OEMs want one-stop shopping for a systems program, a combined Renesas-Altium starts to make some sense. But the latter lacks the chip package tool to complete the proverbial – and literal – circuit.
Less clear, however, is why Altium is worth so much to Renesas. Yes, it likely has as large an installed base as any major PCB CAD company. Its revenue, however, puts it behind Zuken in fourth overall, well behind Cadence and Siemens. Shibata highlighted Altium’s growth rates and profitability. But neither its revenue nor its net income ($43 million in its last fiscal year) will move the needle for Renesas.
As for the price: Renesas will pay $5.9 billion in the all-cash transaction. That’s a healthy premium relative to other significant deals in the industry over the past decade. I’m not of the mindset every deal must pay off in direct financial ways, but given the price tag, on the surface I think this one will be a tough climb.
That said, big deals are nothing new to Renesas. Including the pending Altium check, it has spent some $22 billion on various chip and software companies over the seven years.
How does this one rank with other high-profile M&As? Let’s look at some measures:
| Company | Prior 4Q Revenue at Acquisition | Acquisition Price | Stock Premium | Revenue Multiple |
| Cadence | $1.33B | |||
| Sigrity | $20M | $80M | na | 4x |
| Siemens | €79.6B (US$88.4B) | |||
| Mentor Graphics | $1.18B | $4.5B | 21% | 3.8x |
| Synopsys | $6B | |||
| Ansys | $2.16B | $35B | 29% | 16x |
| Renesas | $9.94B | |||
| Altium | A$263M (US$171.6M) | $5.9B | 34% | 22x |
Cadence bought Sigrity in 2012 for what now seems like couch change: $80 million.
The Ansys acquisition announced last month reportedly will increase Synopsys’ total addressable market by a 50% to $28 billion. While Synopsys is strictly EDA, Ansys plays heavily in the automation space, with focus on large end-markets like automotive, aerospace and industrial. Semi makes up less than one-third of Ansys’ revenue. (Asked on a conference call for how the Altium deal would affect Renesas’ TAM, the company demurred.)
This all can be traced back to Siemens’ 2017 acquisition of Mentor Graphics. Under duress after multiple hostile takeover attempts, including one by Cadence, Mentor was acquired by the German conglomerate as less than 4 times annual revenue. Synopsys is paying 16 times revenue for Altium, Renesas is paying more than 22 times revenue for Altium. How the CAD company’s former shareholders must be wishing they were still on the block now!
Renesas hinted that Altium shouldn’t be viewed in a vacuum but as part of a larger strategy. Will Zuken be next? At $250 million in revenues over the past four quarters, and a market cap of $630 million, it would likely be a far cheaper buy. And Zuken could add chip package and high-end PCB tools to the suite, while also bringing several major military and aerospace customers. Zuken has danced with others through the years. Might it someday find a new home with Renesas?
Involution Revolution
Electronics design and manufacturing aren’t specifically mentioned in this report on China’s “involution“* in certain key sectors including solar, batteries and EVs, but the parallels and implications are clear. China commands a 50 to 99% share of those latter markets worldwide, and similarly dominates the electronics space.
Moreover, the conclusions brought forth — extreme efforts from the West to subsidize and block Chinese suppliers from their markets; China continues its race to the price bottom, making R&D spending all but impossible — clearly suggest a treacherous road ahead for those serving the electronics market.
*the act or an instance of enfolding or entangling; a shrinking or return to a former size
An Interview with Professor Patty Coleman
Dr. Ron: Professor Coleman, it has been quite a long time since we last chatted.
Professor Patty: I agree, too long! And please, Dr. Ron, call me Patty.
DR: As long as you call me Ron.
PP: That would be impossible! Everyone knows you as “Dr. Ron.”
DR: (Chuckles) OK, you win.
DR: Patty, in statistics you teach how to perform hypothesis tests on one sample and on two samples. But, what if we are faced with finding, say the best solder paste, when we have 3 or more samples ?
PP: It is strange that you should ask that–I just added it to my lectures in the stats class I teach at Ivy U. When faced with this challenge, you have to use analysis of variance (ANOVA). Let’s consider an example where you have three solder pastes and you are measuring transfer efficiency (TE). (See Figure 1.) Typically, the goal would be at TE of 100%.
Figure 1. Transfer Efficiiency (TE) for Three Solder Pastes
DR: So it is quite obvious, from Figure 1, that vendor A has a lower TE than vendors B and C, but is the difference statistically significant?
PP: This is where ANOVA helps. With Minitab, we can statistically compare the samples using ANOVA. The results are in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Minitab Output of TE Data Comparisons for Three Solder pastes
DR: It looks like the difference between the TE of vendor B and C is not significant, as seen in the lower graph in Figure 2. Am I reading it correctly?
PP: Yes! And the two upper graphs comparing vendors A and B and A and C show that these differences are significant.
DR: So, we might drop vendor A from our evaluation and focus on B and C for further testing?
PP: Precisely.
DR: Is the Tuckey technique used to make the comparisons?
PP: Yes, it is! Wow! I’m impressed that you know that!
DR: Well I have been a “student” of yours for some time now.
They both chuckle.
A Look at the Past, A Glimpse at the Future
I had the pleasure of I speaking to about 20 8th graders this month about careers in electronics.
It took me back to my first real introduction to the industry: the Summer Consumer Electronics Show in 1992. There I saw the prototypes for HDTV and widescreen TVs, and more interesting, the first foldable screens.
I was enthralled with some of the devices and innovations I saw there, some of which have yet to come to mass production. They were a far cry from what I was used to at that point: floor TV models as large as a desk and computer terminals the size of small ovens.
I like to remind folks that it takes a generation or more for most ideas to become mainstream. At this year’s CES, there were transparent TVs (thanks to LG and Samsung), foldable OLED PC monitors (Asus), and a portable rolling robot projector (Samsung again) that, well, you really to see to understand what it is capable of.
Of my cohort that January morning, two of them are already thinking in terms of engineering careers, but in my opinion what’s more important is that none of them rules out this path.
Mentoring peers is great and important, but I’m a big proponent of talking to youth and helping them connect the dots. After all, we are often reminded that if you want to see the future, take a look at your kids.
And if you agree that we need the next generation to consider careers in electronics design and manufacturing, are you doing what you can to encourage them?
New Zuken Tool Offers Look, and Questions, for Future
SANTA CLARA, CA – What role will artificial intelligence truly play in electronics design, and what will the impact be on hardware engineers?
Zuken took a step toward answering that question today with its announcement at PCB West of a new AI-based tool for printed circuit place-and-route. Yet the first public mention of AIPR for CR-8000 – the actual rollout will come in the first quarter next year – poses not only a dramatic vision for a highly automated future of design but a host of new questions as well.
The new tool itself is an extension of Design Force, Zuken’s layout, routing and verification tool within the CR-8000 platform. It’s AI, explained Kyle Miller, Ph.D., who architected the engine, involves all three basic types of machine learning: supervised, unsupervised and reinforcement. AIPR stands for Autonomous Intelligent Place and Route, and like previously announced AI-based CAD tools, it starts with routing. The “Basic Brain” performs so-called smart routing by means of exposure to Zuken’s database of PCB designs built in CR-8000. Over time, it mimics human routing, with channels organized in logical ways. Smart placement is next, at an undisclosed time.
According to Bob Potock, vice president of sales and marketing, Zuken will add IPC-2581 capability as part of the next-generation Dynamic Brain, allowing designs from other ECAD systems to be incorporated and learned.
The first two stages are working up to Autonomous Brain, a goal-based utility that the product designers, including Miller, say will use text-based inferencing whereby it detects descriptions of different parts of boards. According to Miller, four functionality levels will be used to inform local and planning decisions.
The system, notes Steve Watt, manager of PCB engineer, can learn from both good and bad designs. “The brain can be untaught if it is sent a dirty design,” he said. Zuken has tested it on about 100 designs, most of the high-speed, digital variety.
Adds Miller: “PCBs are complex. They involve numerical data, geometrical data, the layers in the board, text, constraints … Autonomous Brain is multi-modal; it combines all of these data and extracts the designer’s intent.”
With designers in high demand due to the aging out of many veterans and the length of time and amount of knowledge it takes to develop expertise, some of the concerns about AI replacing humans are eased. But can AI-based tools be realistically used in anything but local environments? Zuken is still working through the issues of cloud-based system, as users point to security concerns. (Miller will be among a group of experts tackling this issue on a free panel session titled AI in Electronics: What Can We Expect? on Sept. 20 at PCB West.)
And how are time-based licenses affected? Miller indicated it takes about five days to learn to use AIPR. But once mastered, Zuken tests showed it eliminated autorouter setup time, and cut autorouting time to 30 sec. from 15 min. Potock noted the conundrum of issuing licenses for products that, on paper, reduce the time of use from hours or days to mere seconds. At this time, it appears Zuken will make AIPR available as a perpetual license.
Given the broad industry resistance to using autorouters, it remains to be seen how tools like AIPR (and others, which are coming right behind) will be integrated into general industry use. That said, the trend in board design is away from the traditional dedicated specialist, toward layout and placement being a small function of engineers’ overall responsibilities. That shift may finally tilt the field toward automation, and if Zuken’s vision is correct, even near-complete abdication to the machine.
Zuken will exhibit AIPR at the PCB West exhibition on Sept. 20 (show hours are 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.) at the Santa Clara (CA) Convention Center. A webinar is planned for November.
Acceleration Factors in Life Testing of Electronics
Folks,
You are the project manager for a PCB that must function in an environment from -10° to 80°C. The PCB will experience one thermal cycle per day in this range in its application. It must function for 20 years. The customer requires less than a 5% failure rate. You want to perform an accelerated test to duplicate this experience in less than 2 months. Your thermal cycle chamber can cycle through -20° to 140° in 4 hrs, or 6 cycles in one day. So, in the field, the board will experience 365.25 days/year x 20 years = 7305 days, or cycle at one cycle per day. Your chamber can provide 6 cycles/day x 30 days/month x 2 months = 360 cycles in two months.
In the book Practical Reliability Engineering, author Patrick O’Connor proposes an acceleration factor (p. 334). Using this formula, we can calculate the acceleration factor to be 23.67. Therefore, 7305 field cycles will be 309 lab cycles. See Figure 1.
Figure 1. The calculation for the number of lab cycles to be equal to the number of field cycles.
The experiment is performed in the lab for 360 cycles on 100 samples. Of the 100 samples, 3 fail at thermal cycles below 309. These samples failed at 303, 305 and 307 cycles. Using confidence intervals on portions, we see that the 95% confidence interval is 6.4%, slightly higher than the 5% we had hoped.
Figure 2. The confidence interval on portions to calculate the 95% confidence limit of projected failures
We will need to perform root cause failure analysis to understand what causes the failures and take corrected action.
Add Wisconsin to the List of Failed Foxconn Bettors
The ink was barely dry on the lawsuit filed by Lordstown Motors against would-be savior Foxconn when the next round of news hit: the world’s largest ODM/EMS company is pulling out of Wisconsin.
If we go back to 2019, we will recall Lordstown opened the doors of its plant, formerly owned by GM and seen as critical to its hometown’s economic future, to Foxconn, which came bearing (the promise of) much-needed cash. In return, the ODM was to obtain access to Lordstown’s electric vehicle technology, which Foxconn sought as it reportedly focuses on building electronics and other products for what is seen as the future platform for individual and fleet transportation.
That dream ended in a crash, unfortunately but unsurprisingly. The investment never really materialized, Lordstown went bankrupt, and the winners will be the lawyers.
Some 30 miles south of Milwaukee, Foxconn’s much-ballyhooed splash into the Wisconsin cornfields is resolving with the sale of its 315-acre campus to Microsoft.
That’s a far cry from the $10 billion in investment and 13,000 jobs the company forecast — and lots of politicians touted — as longtime homeowners were hit with eminent domain mandates to make way for the 200,000 sq. ft. plant. Some $500 million of taxpayer money later, the prairie landscape is left with a mostly vacant shell. Likewise, company plans to build innovation centers in Madison, Milwaukee, Green Bay, Eau Claire and Racine have mostly been shelved, and the properties are going on the block.
What both deals had in common was that they took place in states that of late are highly contested in federal elections. That’s no surprise: Foreign companies have often (always?) tried to influence the outcome of US elections to suit their strategic interests. (The constraints foreign entities should have on such maneuvers, if any, are for others to decide.)
Experienced bettors know when to fold their cards, however, and Foxconn is well-known for exiting the table when it doesn’t like the stakes. When the trade winds blew cold, the company headed for warmer climes.
So a shout out to Georgia, Arizona and Nevada, among others: If Foxconn comes calling, look hard at the cards before asking for a hit.
Online Component Market Ideas Never Die, But Can They Prosper?
More than 30 years ago, one of the first stories I reported on in the electronics industry was a startup whose founder wanted to create a marketplace for electronics components.
Called FastParts, the idea was based loosely on the US stock exchange. Sellers of excess parts could come together with buyers, and FastParts would act as the intermediary — much like the NYSE — providing a trusted guarantor of one company’s inventory and another company’s monies.
Depending on your perspective, founder Gerry Haller was either ahead of his time, or a solution in search of a problem. FastParts never panned out, but over the years we’ve seen several other companies attempt the same thing.
Today, the supply chain has rebounded more or less back in balance after the Covid shortages. In fact, there’s probably more inventory than buyers right now. Right on queue, another startup has entered the fray, offering safe harbor for buyers and sellers.
I’m not entirely sure what separates BidChip, the latest entrant, from its predecessors. But I do know this: Sooner or later, Amazon will recognize that the electronics components industry is one of the largest in the world and jump in with its both of its very oversized feet. And when that happens, will any of the others be left upright?