Tag Archives: electronics assembly

GKG: Westward Ho?

Posted on by

Southeast Asian assembly process equipment companies have approached Western markets in fits and starts.

A few have made inroads: From time to time, we have seen JT and Fulongwin soldering equipment at US plants, usually smaller ones (Flextronics is an exception) and often on the US West Coast. But while we’ve been reporting for more than a decade on the availability of literally scores of Chinese-made brands, some of which are very popular in Taiwan and China, it’s still highly unusual to see any make it across the ocean.

Many have been stymied by patent issues that effectively have blocked them specifically from the US and European markets. Another problem is finding good channel partners. From time to time, firms ranging from independent reps like FHP Reps and Bill West to solder paste vendors like Qualitek have tried, with limited success. Service and access to spare parts have been limiting factors.

That’s what makes Friday’s announcement from GKG so interesting. GKG has named Juki as exclusive distributor of its screen printers in the Americas. Known primarily for its placement equipment, Juki has been inching toward a full-line offering for the past couple years, having begun distributing Intertec’s selective soldering equipment in 2009.

For years, DEK and Speedline have dominated the Western printer markets, with Asys/Ekra in third with an estimated 10% share. Juki’s track record and never-say-die approach to selling makes it a formidable competitor. However, Juki has many of the same distributors as Speedline, and it is unclear that they will give up the latter for a new player.

But the real prize may be the emerging South America market. As Juki CEO Bob Black told us, “In Latin America, out major competitors are offering complete lines. To be competitive, we need to do the same.” And Juki has the breadth and depth in its service department that many standalone reps have not.

Keep an eye on this.

The Media (Us) Gets Social

Posted on by

Besides this blog, we at CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY are active in a number of other social media related forums.

You can follow Editor-in-Chief Mike Buetow’s steady stream of late-breaking news on Twitter (@mikebuetow).

Or join our LinkedIn groups: CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY, SMT Processing, PCB Test and Inspection, PCB Cleaning, and EMS — Electronics Manufacturing Services.

Finally, you could friend us on Facebook: search CIRCUITS ASSEMBLY.

Each vehicle is different, and each offers access to a somewhat different audience. Twitter tends to be a one-way, or two-way at most, type of communication. We use it more to relay important breaking stories, both reported by us and others. The LinkedIn groups, most of which are new, are more expansive, and intended to drive in-depth technical and market-related conversations. Facebook is less formal, in my opinion, than LinkedIn. The discussions there tend to be simpler in nature.

They all have their place, however, and we’d love to see you engaged in any one of them.

 

 

 

Is Flat the Next Big Thing?

Posted on by

The Human Media Lab at Queen’s University, Canada and Arizona State University’s Motivational Environments Research group have teamed up to create what’s been dubbed the “PaperPhone.”  The phone was created with the same e-ink technology found in the Kindle e-book reader and in flexible printed circuits featuring an array of bend sensors.

E-history: the world is flat, but bendy. The first electronic paper, developed in the 1970s in Palo Alto, was called Gyricon and consisted of polyethylene spheres between 75 and 106 micrometers across. In the 1990s another type of electronic paper was invented by Joseph Jacobson, who later co-founded the E Ink Corporation.

In an electrophoretic display, particles with a diameter of one micrometer are dispersed in a hydrocarbon oil with a dark-colored dye with surfactants and charging agents. This mixture is placed between two parallel, conductive plates. With applied voltage, the particles will migrate electrophoretically to the plate bearing its opposite charge.  Arranging this movement into patterns — in this case pixels — is the basis for a paper thin display.

Although called the “PaperPhone”, the name doesn’t quite do the prototype justice. “SmartPaperPhone” may be more fitting. The device can perform several tasks, depending on what shape you form it into.  Want to make a phone call? Bend the paper into a concave shape. Have a favorite e-book? Bend the page corner to turn to the next page. You’ll even have an mp3 player that’s much thinner than your current iPod.

E-regulatory compliance. As far as regulating something like this is concerned “the electronic components and lithium batteries are not regulated as hazardous waste. The entire electronics assembly is RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) compliant and marked as such on the printed circuit board in the cover. All of it can be recycled through your local municipal waste program in the same manner as you dispose of household batteries. (Check local regulations for any further restrictions.) The paper can go in your paper recycling, and the protective foam in your plastic recycling.”

E-exciting or e-issues? While exciting, there are some issues with the PaperPhone. Batteries are still fairly clunky and won’t easily bend. The memory has to be kept somewhere as well. What good is a flexible electronic paper phone if most of is has to stay stationary to accommodate the required working innards?

It could be that buying a ream of cellphones at your local big-box retailer may not be that far off.

Learn more about the technology below:

http://www.hml.queensu.ca/paperphone
http://www.circuitsassembly.com/cms/magazine/209/9557/
http://www.esquire.com/features/how-e-ink-was-made
http://supply-chain-data-mgmt.blogspot.com/2011/05/green-chemistry-sleeper-hit-in-supply.html

Adam Baer (guest-blogger for Kal Kawar) manages materials regulation data and reports at Actio Corp.  He holds a B.A. in Journalism from the University of Maine.

The Free Flow of Fakes

Posted on by

While it’s true that counterfeit parts are pervading all aspects of the electronics supply chain (not to mention consuming all amounts of oxygen from industry pundits such as yours truly), is it possible our sense of fear is overblown?

By fear, I don’t mean “risk” — that’s the inherent chance of failure taken by, knowingly or not, using a fraudulent part. Rather, I mean the “if I do this I might get someone hurt and/or lose my job” feeling.

Yesterday, the SMEMA Council, a group of electronics assembly equipment OEMs, admonished customers to use only authorized channels for replacement parts and service. By using fake parts, SMEMA said, the risk (there’s that word again) users take is that the assembly equipment OEM could void their warranty. That’s a tough nut to swallow, considering the price tag of new placement machines, testers and screen printers.

The question I have is, why would SMEMA even feel compelled to issue such a statement? Faked parts (one old friend says in China, copyright means the “right to copy”) are ubiquitous and systemic. Two US senators this week accused China of blocking a probe into counterfeit electronics by refusing visas to investigators, but it’s hard to know whether the US is truly wants to stop the flow of knockoffs goods or just put pressure on China in order to exact other reforms or negotiating leverage. Indeed, so-called fourth shifts are not only common, they have been for years. So forgive me for being cynical when a few bureaucrats say they want to do something about it now.

In my opinion, there’s no end in sight to the free flow of fakes because, in fact, America and Europe don’t really fear the potential outcome. For a decade, manufacturing programs have been shuttled en masse to China. And while OEMs pay lip service to the notion that their IP is their livelihood, they aggressively seek out the manufacturing partners of their competitors, thus simultaneously ensuring their IP will be shared and that their products will be commoditized.

Let’s put it another way. If company ABC contracts to China and learns a few months later that every Chang, Wang and Li is walking around with a cheap duplicate of their widget, ABC may snort and snarl a few times, but will it fire the folks involved in outsourcing? Highly unlikely. But if that widget never gets built, or ships late because a machine is down or an oscillator is unavailable, heads will roll. Supply chain employee is thus naturally emboldened to take risks that they otherwise might be unwilling to contemplate. The wheel is set in motion.

SMEMA is trying to reorient customers as part of a much-welcome attempt to demand accountability, and I wish them luck, but I don’t think it will make much difference. The corporate buyer culture has changed.

Don’t believe me? Just go to the EMSInsider group on LinkedIn and look at all the listings by members looking for spare parts. Utilizing only approved vendors is nice and all, but when product needs to be shipped before the quarter’s up, the AVL is an industry anachronism.

CyberOptics’ Coup

Posted on by

It’s always a good deal when you can simultaneously supply an end-product to end-customers and critical components from said end-product to competitors.

And that’s the situation CyberOptics now finds itself in after inking a deal last quarter to put its sensors in erstwhile AOI competitor Viscom’s solder paste inspection products. (CyberOptics acknowledged a deal in February but did not disclose the company until today.)

It’s a great move for CyberOptics, which continues to impress under Kitty Iverson’s leadership. The company, which by most accounts trails privately held Viscom in terms of annual revenue in the uber-competitive electronics assembly AOI market, has rebounded steadily from the market slide of 2008-09 and the tragic death of founder Steve Case. Sales doubled in 2010 to $57 million, and by becoming a supplier to its AOI competitors, CyberOptics triangulates its customer approach. Given that CyberOptics also supplies sensors to DEK for printers and Juki for placement machines, the modest company is positioning itself to become a true bellwether of the electronics assembly market health.

Out of Place?

Posted on by

I probably am getting ahead of myself — in fact, I hope I am — but the epic war over the world’s placement equipment business is more and more looking like it won’t include Siemens. The Munich-based OEM, which last year put its electronics assembly business on the block, today announced another difficult quarter.

On the bright side, the placement equipment unit narrowed its first-quarter loss, but sales for Siemens’ discontinued businesses (of which electronics assembly equipment makes up the major share) for the period ended Dec. 31 fell 69% year-over-year.

Perhaps worse, the loss was €15 million on €62 million in sales. Obviously, that’s not sustainable.

I know lots of people at Siemens, and I have tremendous respect for CEO Guenter Lauber. But with only modest improvement expected in the sector this year, it doesn’t look good.