Error cause recognition device

Abstract

The error cause recognition device includes: a storage unit that stores operation satisfaction information indicating satisfaction of each operation result of a plurality of mounting operations performed in the component mounting device, and operation condition information indicating satisfaction of each operation result of the mounting operations; the operation condition information indicates two or more of a plurality of constituent parts of the component mounting machine participating in each of a plurality of mounting operations and the mounting work data; and a determination unit that determines whether the occurrence rate or the number of occurrences of errors in the mounting operation in at least one of the component mounting machine, the constituent component, and the mounting work data exceeds a predetermined value. Comparing two or more of the error participation rate of each component and the error participation rate of the installation work data calculated on the basis of the operation satisfaction information and the operation condition information, and specifying the component or the installation work data that is the cause of the error; and an estimation unit that uses a predetermined estimation logic that differs from the comparison of the error participation rates to estimate the component or installation job data that is the cause of the error.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This manual relates to an error cause identification device for identifying the causes of errors that occur during the installation process of a component mounting machine. Background Technology

[0002] The technology of mass-producing substrate products by performing substrate processing on substrates with circuit patterns is becoming increasingly common. A representative example of a substrate processing machine is a component mounting machine, which performs the component mounting operation. Typically, a component mounting machine includes a component supply unit such as a belt feeder for supplying components and a component mounting unit such as a nozzle for picking up components from the component supply unit and mounting them onto the substrate. When a component mounting operation fails, the machine discards the component and uses another component for the next mounting operation. Therefore, as mounting errors increase, the component rejection rate sometimes increases, leading to an increase in the defect rate of the substrate products.

[0003] Therefore, when errors in the installation process increase, measures are taken to maintain and reuse the component supply unit or component installation unit that is causing the error, or to replace it with a spare unit. At this time, by correctly identifying the unit causing the error and performing maintenance, the generation of errors and the discarding of components can be suppressed. Furthermore, maintenance can be performed efficiently, reducing operating costs. In addition, preventative measures have been implemented to suppress the increase in errors by performing regular maintenance instead of retroactively maintaining units that are experiencing an increase in errors. Patent Document 1 discloses a technical example for identifying the cause of errors when errors in the installation process increase.

[0004] Patent Document 1 discloses an installation error cause estimation device, comprising: an error history storage unit that summarizes and stores the occurrence of errors in the installation operation of a component mounting machine; a cause setting unit that sets a first cause and a second cause from the equipment and data used in the installation operation; a first determination unit that determines whether the error occurrence obtained according to the second cause, given the individual with the first cause, deviates from the second cause; a second determination unit that determines whether the error occurrence obtained according to the first cause, given the individual with the second cause, deviates from the first cause; and a cause estimation unit that estimates the individual cause of the error based on the determination results of the first and second determination units. Therefore, the cause estimation device can estimate the individual cause of the error with higher reliability than before, based on multiple determination results.

[0005] Existing technical documents

[0006] Patent Document 1: International Publication No. 2020 / 188774 Summary of the Invention

[0007] The problem that the invention aims to solve

[0008] However, in the technical example of Patent Document 1, when errors in the installation process increase, the cause of the errors may not be identified. Without identifying the cause, the system may remain idle for an extended period without taking countermeasures. This leads to an increase in component scrap rate or substrate defect rate, higher production costs, and lower production efficiency. Furthermore, because the target of maintenance is unclear, maintenance cannot be performed efficiently, increasing the operating costs required for maintenance. Moreover, the causes of installation errors are not limited to the component supply unit and component mounting unit; other components of the component mounting machine related to the installation process or installation operation data may also be contributing factors.

[0009] Therefore, the problem to be solved in this specification is to provide an error cause identification device that can reduce the situation where the cause of the error is not identified when errors increase in the installation operation of a component mounting machine.

[0010] Methods for solving problems

[0011] This specification discloses an error cause identification device, comprising: a storage unit storing operation success / failure information and operation condition information, wherein the operation success / failure information indicates the success or failure of the operation result of each of the multiple installation operations performed in a component mounting machine, and the operation condition information indicates two or more of the multiple components of the component mounting machine and installation operation data that participated in the multiple installation operations; a determination unit, which, when the error occurrence rate or number of occurrences of the installation operation in at least one of the component mounting machine, the components, and the installation operation data exceeds a predetermined value, compares two or more of the error participation rate of each component calculated based on the operation success / failure information and the operation condition information and the error participation rate of the installation operation data, to determine the component or the installation operation data as the cause of the error; and an estimation unit, which uses a predetermined estimation logic different from the comparison of the error participation rate to estimate the component or the installation operation data as the cause of the error.

[0012] Furthermore, this specification discloses the following technical ideas: in claim 5 of the initial application, the "error cause identification device according to claim 1" is changed to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 4"; in claim 6 of the initial application, the "error cause identification device according to claim 1" is changed to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 4"; in claim 7 of the initial application, the "error cause identification device according to claim 1" is changed to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 4"; in claim 8 of the initial application, the "error cause identification device according to claim 1" is changed to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 4"; and in claim 9 of the initial application, the "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, 5 to 8" is changed to "error cause identification device according to claims 1 to 8". The technical concept of "error cause identification device according to any one of the claims", the technical concept of changing "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-3, 5-8" to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-9" in the initial claim 10, the technical concept of changing "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-3, 5-8" to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-12" in the initial claim 13, the technical concept of changing "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-3, 5-8" to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-12" in the initial claim 14, and the technical concept of changing "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-3" to "error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1-14" in the initial claim 15.

[0013] Invention Effects

[0014] According to the disclosed error cause identification device, the storage unit stores information on the success or failure of each installation operation performed multiple times in the component mounting machine, as well as information on the operating conditions. Furthermore, when the error occurrence rate or number of occurrences in the installation operation exceeds a predetermined value, the determination unit compares the error participation rates of two or more units to determine the cause of the error. The estimation unit uses estimation logic different from that of the determination unit to estimate the cause of the error. Here, "determine" and "estimate" are equivalent to a method of "identification," so even if the determination unit cannot identify (determine) the cause of the error, the estimation unit can identify (estimate) the cause of the error, reducing the possibility of not being able to identify the cause of the error. Attached Figure Description

[0015] Figure 1It is a functional block diagram of the error cause identification device including the implementation method and a top view schematically showing a structural example of a component mounting machine that is the object of application.

[0016] Figure 2 This is a diagram illustrating the log data of a component installation machine, which includes information on whether the operation is good or bad and information on the operating conditions.

[0017] Figure 3 This is a diagram illustrating an example of a component mounting machine performing a mounting cycle.

[0018] Figure 4 This is a flowchart illustrating the operation of the error cause identification device in the implementation method.

[0019] Figure 5 This is a diagram illustrating the number of operations of the parent group when the component mounting machine performs mounting operations on a predetermined number of substrates, taking the component supply unit and component mounting unit as examples, and calculating the error rate of each individual unit.

[0020] Figure 6 This is a graph showing the number of errors, the error incidence rate, and the error participation rate in the first case.

[0021] Figure 7 This means that in Figure 4 The diagram shows the detailed sub-action flow of the determination process performed by the determination unit in step S6 of the action flow.

[0022] Figure 8 This is a diagram illustrating the error cause determination for the handling of the first case.

[0023] Figure 9 This is a graph showing the number of errors, the error incidence rate, and the error participation rate in the second case.

[0024] Figure 10 This is a diagram illustrating the error cause determination for the handling of the second case.

[0025] Figure 11 This means that in Figure 4 The diagram shows the details of the sub-action flow in step S8 of the action flow, which involves the estimated processing of the estimated final implementation time using maintenance.

[0026] Figure 12 The error cause identification device is in Figure 4 A diagram showing the action flow of the response and handling actions that follow the initial action flow.

[0027] Figure 13This is a diagram of the sub-action flow of the second presumption process executed by the presumption department, which uses the error occurrence rate.

[0028] Figure 14 This is a diagram of the sub-action flow of the third presumption process executed by the presumption department, which uses the maintenance implementation interval.

[0029] Figure 15 This is a diagram of the sub-action flow of the fourth estimated process executed by the estimated department, which uses the next scheduled time for maintenance. Detailed Implementation

[0030] 1. Example of the structure of component mounting machine 1

[0031] First, refer to Figure 1 The component mounting machine 1, which is the application object of the error cause identification device 8 in the embodiment, is illustrated by a top view. The component mounting machine 1 performs the mounting operation of mounting components onto the substrate K. From Figure 1 The horizontal direction from the left side of the paper to the right is the X-axis direction for transporting the substrate K, the horizontal direction from the bottom (front) side of the paper to the top (back) side of the paper is the Y-axis direction, and the vertical direction is the Z-axis direction. The component mounting machine 1 is constructed by assembling the substrate transport device 2, the component supply device 3, the component transfer device 4, and the control device 5 on the base 10.

[0032] The substrate transport device 2 has a pair of guide rails 21 that form the transport path for the substrate K. The substrate transport device 2 transports substrates from a substrate loading device or an external transport device to the loading end of the guide rails 21. Figure 1 The substrate K (located at the left end of the conveying path) is conveyed along guide rail 21 to a predetermined stop position. The predetermined stop position of substrate K is set approximately at the center of the conveying direction of the conveying path. The substrate conveying device 2 has a positioning mechanism 22 that lifts the substrate K at the stop position and clamps it between the substrate K and guide rail 21. The component mounting operation performed by the component transfer device 4 is then performed on the positioned substrate K. After the mounting operation is completed, the substrate conveying device 2 conveys the substrate K from the stop position to the delivery end (…). Figure 1 (The right end of the machine), and move it out of the machine.

[0033] The component supply device 3 is located at the front part of the upper surface of the base 10 in the Y-axis direction. The component supply device 3 is composed of a plurality of component supply units 31 arranged side by side in the X-axis direction. The component supply units 31 supply components during the installation operation, and are equivalent to the components participating in the installation operation. In this embodiment, the component supply unit 31 uses a belt feeder. The belt feeder delivers a carrier belt containing a plurality of components in a row to the supply position at the front end. Alternatively, the component supply unit 31 may also be a tray feeder that uses trays containing components in a grid-like arrangement of multiple receiving parts, or a rod feeder that contains components in a row inside a cylindrical rod.

[0034] The component transfer device 4 comprises a Y-axis moving body 41, an X-axis moving body 42, a mounting head 43, a rotating tool 44, multiple component mounting units 45, a substrate camera 46, and a component camera 47. The Y-axis moving body 41 is formed by a component that is longer in the X-axis direction and is driven by a Y-axis drive mechanism (not shown) to move in the Y-axis direction. The X-axis moving body 42 is mounted on the Y-axis moving body 41 and is driven by an X-axis drive mechanism (not shown) to move in the X-axis direction. The mounting head 43 is mounted on the front surface of the X-axis moving body 42. The mounting head 43 and the X-axis moving body 42 are driven together in two horizontal directions, moving above the component supply device 3 and above the substrate K.

[0035] A rotating tool 44 is rotatably provided on the underside of the mounting head 43. The rotating tool 44 is driven by an R-axis drive mechanism (not shown) to rotate about a vertical central axis. The rotating tool 44 holds multiple component mounting units 45 beneath it. The component mounting units 45 pick up components at the supply positions of the component supply unit 31 and mount them to the mounting positions of the substrate K, acting as components involved in the mounting operation. In this embodiment, the component mounting units 45 use nozzles. The mounting head 43 and the rotating tool 44 hold multiple nozzles and move them between the component supply unit 31 and the substrate K, acting as components involved in the mounting operation.

[0036] exist Figure 1In the example shown, the rotating tool 44 has 12 suction nozzles (component mounting units 45) equidistant from the vertical central axis. The nozzles are driven to move up and down by a lifting drive mechanism (not shown) and rotate around the vertical axis by a Q-axis drive mechanism (not shown). The nozzles are also selectively supplied with negative and positive pressure air from an air supply mechanism. Thus, the nozzles perform a mounting operation, picking up components from the component supply unit 31 and mounting them onto the substrate K. Multiple mounting heads 43, rotating tools 44, and component mounting units 45 are prepared and can be automatically or manually replaced as needed. Alternatively, the mounting head 43 can omit the rotating tool 44 and arrange the multiple nozzles 45 in a row or in a grid pattern. Furthermore, the component mounting unit 45 is not limited to nozzles and can also be a chuck for clamping and picking up components.

[0037] A substrate camera 46 and a mounting head 43 are arranged side-by-side downwards on an X-axis moving body 42. The substrate camera 46 captures images from above of a position reference mark attached to the substrate K. Image processing is performed on the acquired image data to accurately determine the stopping position of the substrate K. A component camera 47 is mounted upwards on a base 10 between the substrate transport device 2 and the component supply device 3. The component camera 47 captures images from below of components picked up by the component mounting unit 45 while the mounting head 43 is moving from the component supply device 3 to the substrate K. Image processing is performed on the acquired image data to determine the correctness of the component type, and then the position and orientation of the component relative to the component mounting unit 45 are detected and reflected in the mounting operation. The component camera 47 is equivalent to a component involved in the mounting operation. As the substrate camera 46 and the component camera 47, examples can be given of digital imaging devices with imaging elements such as CCD (Charge Coupled Device) and CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor).

[0038] The component transfer device 4 performs the installation operation by repeatedly performing an installation cycle. The installation cycle is described in detail as follows: First, the component transfer device 4 moves the mounting head 43 towards the component supply unit 31, picking up components from multiple component mounting units 45. Next, the component transfer device 4 moves the mounting head 43 above the component camera 47. Then, the component camera 47 captures images of the components held in the multiple component mounting units 45. Next, the component transfer device 4 moves the mounting head 43 towards the substrate K to mount multiple components. Finally, the component transfer device 4 moves the mounting head 43 back towards the component supply unit 31, thus completing one installation cycle.

[0039] The control device 5 is assembled on the base 10, and its location is not limited. The control device 5 is a computer device with a CPU that operates through software. Alternatively, the control device 5 may be configured with multiple CPUs distributed throughout the device and interconnected. The control device 5 has a storage device 51 for storing various information. The control device 5 is interconnected with the line management device 6. The control device 5 receives installation operation data 52 transmitted from the line management device 6 and stores it in the storage device 51. The installation operation data 52 is data used for installation operations and is manufactured according to the type of substrate K (substrate product).

[0040] The mounting operation data 52 includes substrate data related to the shape of the substrate K and component data related to the shape of the components mounted on the substrate K. Here, there are multiple component data items, varying according to the type or size of the components. Each of the multiple component data items included in the mounting operation data 52 has the potential to cause an error in the mounting operation. This is similar to the possibility that the multiple component supply units 31 constituting the component supply device 3 may each cause an error, and the multiple component mounting units 45 held by the mounting head 43 may each cause an error.

[0041] In addition, the installation operation data 52 includes coordinate data of the supply position of the component supply unit 31 and coordinate data of the mounting position on the substrate K on which the component is mounted. Furthermore, the installation operation data 52 includes data related to the type and arrangement of the component supply unit 31 and component mounting unit 45 used, as well as detailed sequence data of the installation actions. Based on the installation operation data 52, the control device 5 controls the substrate conveying device 2, the component supply device 3, and the component transfer device 4 to repeatedly perform the installation cycle and carry out the installation action.

[0042] 2. Line management device 6 and log data LD

[0043] Next, the line management device 6 that manages the component mounting machine 1 and the log data LD that records the operation history of the component mounting machine 1 will be described. The line management device 6 manages the substrate production line 7, which includes multiple substrate mounting machines arranged together, including the component mounting machine 1. The line management device 6 is constructed using a computer device. The line management device 6 has an input device 61, such as a keyboard or touch panel, for receiving instructions and selecting operations from operators. In addition, the line management device 6 has a display device 62, such as a liquid crystal display, for displaying various information to operators.

[0044] The line management device 6 is communicatively connected to the feeder maintenance device 77 and the nozzle maintenance device 78. The feeder maintenance device 77 receives the component supply unit 31 (belt feeder) and performs its maintenance. The line management device 6 can obtain the implementation history of the maintenance performed on the component supply unit 31 by the feeder maintenance device 77. Furthermore, in the case of performing regular maintenance on the component supply unit 31, the line management device 6 can obtain the maintenance implementation interval and future implementation plan from the feeder maintenance device 77.

[0045] On the other hand, the nozzle maintenance device 78 receives the component mounting unit 45 (nozzle) and performs its maintenance. The line management device 6 can obtain the implementation history of the maintenance performed by the nozzle maintenance device 78 on the component mounting unit 45. Furthermore, in the case of performing regular maintenance on the component mounting unit 45, the line management device 6 can obtain the maintenance implementation interval and future implementation plan from the nozzle maintenance device 78. Additionally, the maintenance of the component supply unit 31 (belt feeder) and the component mounting unit 45 (nozzle) can also be performed by the operator. In this case, the operator can also use the input device 61 to input the maintenance implementation history into the line management device 6, and then input the maintenance implementation interval and implementation plan.

[0046] As multiple substrate assembly machines constituting the substrate production line 7, arranged sequentially from the upstream side are a solder printer 71, a printing inspection machine 72, a component mounting machine 1, a substrate appearance inspection machine 73, and a reflow soldering machine 74. These substrate assembly machines are communicatively connected to the line management device 6. Furthermore, the line structure of the substrate production line 7 can be modified in various ways. Additionally, the line management device 6 can manage multiple substrate production lines 7.

[0047] The line management device 6 receives log data LD, which records detailed operational history, from each substrate mounting machine in approximately real-time. The data format of the log data LD can vary depending on the type of substrate mounting machine, or it can be standardized. The log data LD of the component mounting machine 1 includes historical information for each mounting operation performed multiple times. The log data LD of the component mounting machine 1 can also include transport history information related to the transport operation of the substrate K and replacement history information related to the replacement operation of constituent components.

[0048] Figure 2 This represents an example of log data LD received by the line management device 6 from the control device 5 of the component mounting machine 1. Figure 2Each row corresponds to a log data LD. The log data LD related to the installation operation of the component mounting machine 1 has a data format that establishes a correspondence between six pieces of information. That is, the log data LD establishes a correspondence between time information, component type information, ID information of component supply unit 31, ID information of component mounting unit 45, installation position information, and whether the operation is good or bad. In addition, the row numbers 1 to 8 are conveniently labeled to distinguish and explain the eight log data LDs. Furthermore, the data format of the log data LD of the component mounting machine 1 can also be appropriately modified.

[0049] The timing information indicates the time (hour:minute:second) at which the installation action is performed, for example, by the time when the component mounting unit 45, which mounts the component on the substrate K, finishes rising. The component type information indicates the type of component that is the object of the installation action. The ID information of the component supply unit 31 is information identifying the individual component supply unit 31 that supplied the component. The ID information of the component mounting unit 45 is information identifying the individual component mounting unit 45 that picked up the component and mounted it on the substrate K. The ID information of the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 corresponds to the operation condition information of the constituent components that participated in each of the multiple installation actions. The mounting position information is information representing the mounting position on the substrate K on which the component is mounted using an XY coordinate system. The operation success / failure information indicates whether the result of the component installation action was good or bad (good or bad).

[0050] Figure 2 The log data LD in line 1 is the installation action data at time 10:31:02. This log data LD indicates that a component of type P1 was supplied from the component supply unit 31 of ID information F1 and installed onto the mounting position (x1, y1) of the substrate K through the component mounting unit 45 of ID information N1. In addition, this log data LD indicates that the installation action of this component was successful.

[0051] Additionally, the four log data LDs in rows 1-4 indicate that four components of type P1 are supplied from the component supply unit 31 of ID information F1 and mounted onto four locations on the substrate K via the four component mounting units 45 of ID information N1-N4. Furthermore, the log data LDs in rows 1, 2, and 4 indicate that the mounting operation at mounting positions (x1, y1), (x2, y2), and (x4, y4) on the substrate K resulted in a successful operation. The log data LD in row 3 indicates that the mounting operation at mounting position (x3, y3) on the substrate K resulted in an error. For this mounting position (x3, y3), a recovery mounting cycle is set to re-perform the mounting operation of the components of type P1.

[0052] Log data LD in lines 5 and 6 indicates that two components of type P2 are supplied from component supply unit 31 of ID information F2 and installed on two locations on substrate K via component mounting units 45 of ID information N1 and N2. Furthermore, it indicates that the mounting operation at mounting locations (x5, y5) and (x6, y6) on substrate K was successful. Similarly, log data LD in lines 7 and 8 indicates that two components of type P3 are supplied from component supply unit 31 of ID information F3 and installed on two locations on substrate K via component mounting units 45 of ID information N3 and N4. Furthermore, it indicates that the mounting operation at mounting locations (x7, y7) and (x8, y8) on substrate K was successful.

[0053] In component mounting machine 1, errors in the mounting operation rarely occur. As examples of errors in the mounting operation, the following cases 1) to 7) can be cited.

[0054] 1) The component camera 47 did not acquire image data.

[0055] 2) Situations where image data has not been properly processed.

[0056] 3) The result of image processing is that the component mounting unit 45 does not hold the component.

[0057] 4) The result of image processing is determined to be an incorrect type of component.

[0058] 5) The result of image processing is the determination of the component's posture error as large as possible, making installation impossible.

[0059] 6) When the component falls from the component mounting unit 45 while the mounting head 43 is moving from the component camera 47 to the substrate K.

[0060] 7) The component is held in the component mounting unit 45 and is not mounted on the substrate K.

[0061] In addition to the above, there are also errors identified based on the inspection results of the substrate appearance inspection machine 73. Specifically, the substrate appearance inspection machine 73 identifies errors as follows: excessive error in the actual mounting position of components mounted on the substrate K; excessive error in the orientation (rotation within the horizontal plane) of components; and excessive tilting of components during mounting. Furthermore, the substrate appearance inspection machine 73 sends log data LD containing the inspection results of the errors to the line management device 6. Based on the mounting position information of the components identified as having errors contained in the log data LD of the substrate appearance inspection machine 73, the line management device 6 extracts the corresponding log data LD of the component mounting machine 1 and rewrites its operation status from "good" to "error".

[0062] The causes of errors in the aforementioned situations are varied, including issues with the component supply unit 31 or component mounting unit 45 (components of the component mounting machine 1), and the mounting operation data 52. Additionally, components such as the mounting head 43, rotating tool 44, and component camera 47 could also be sources of error. To improve efficiency and reduce effort in handling such increasing errors, an error cause identification device 8 is used.

[0063] 3. Structure and function of error cause identification device 8

[0064] Next, refer to Figure 1 The structure and function of the error cause identification device 8 in the embodiment are explained using a functional block diagram. The error cause identification device 8 is configured as a management function unit of the line management device 6. Not limited thereto, the error cause identification device 8 may also be configured inside the control device 5 of the component mounting machine 1, or using other computer devices. The error cause identification device 8 consists of four functional units: a storage unit 81, a determination unit 82, an estimation unit 83, and a notification unit 84.

[0065] The storage unit 81 stores the log data LD of the component mounting machine 1 in a memory (not shown). In other words, the storage unit 81 stores information on whether the operation is good or bad, and information on the operating conditions. The information on whether the operation is good or bad includes... Figure 2 The illustrated log data LDs. The action condition information represents two or more pieces of information from the component installation machine 1 and installation operation data 52, representing various components involved in multiple installation actions. The information in the action condition information representing the component supply unit 31 and the component installation unit 45 is included in... Figure 2 The illustrated log data LDs. The information in the operation condition information representing the mounting head 43, rotating tool 44, and component camera 47 is obtained from the log data LD containing replacement history information of the components of the component mounting machine 1. The installation operation data 52 in the operation condition information has been stored in the storage device 51.

[0066] The determination unit 82 will perform error determination processing if the error rate EC of the installation operation in any one of the component mounting machine 1, its constituent components, and at least one of the installation operation data 52 exceeds a predetermined value E1, as a trigger condition. As a supplement, the parent group for calculating the error rate EC can be one or a combination of the total number of operations of the component mounting machine 1, the number of operations of the component supply unit 31 according to each component, the number of operations of the component mounting unit 45 according to each component, and the number of operations of the installation operation data 52 according to each component data. Furthermore, the predetermined value E1 can be set, for example, to 0.03% for the total number of operations of the component mounting machine 1 and 0.1% for other number of operations.

[0067] The determination unit 82 can also calculate the error rate EC of each component and installation operation data 52 whenever the component mounting machine 1 performs an installation operation on a predetermined number of substrates K or whenever the operating time of the component mounting machine 1 has elapsed for a predetermined time. This allows the time period of the parent group when calculating the error rate EC of each of the multiple components and installation operation data 52 to be consistent, while the size of the multiple parent groups can be different.

[0068] Furthermore, the determination unit 82 can also calculate the error occurrence rate EC separately for each of the multiple components and installation operation data 52, based on the number of times each component participates in the installation operation after a predetermined number of times. For example, the determination unit 82 can calculate the error occurrence rate EC separately for each component supply unit 31 in the multiple component supply units 31 after 20,000 operations, and separately for each component installation unit 45 in the multiple component installation units 45 after 10,000 operations. This allows the size of the parent group when calculating the error occurrence rate EC of each of the multiple components and installation operation data 52 to be consistent with the predetermined number of operations, while the time periods of the multiple parent groups are different.

[0069] Alternatively, the determination unit 82 may not use the error occurrence rate EC as the trigger condition, but rather use the number of errors exceeding a predetermined value as the trigger condition to perform the determination process. When calculating the number of errors, the determination unit 82 sets a parent group in the same way as when calculating the error occurrence rate EC, calculates the number of errors within the parent group, but does not calculate the cumulative number of errors across parent groups.

[0070] The determination unit 82 performs a comparison process to determine the error participation rate (ER) and the cause of the error. Specifically, the determination unit 82 first calculates two or more of the error participation rate (ER) for each component and the error participation rate (ER) for the installation work data 52 based on information about whether the operation was successful and information about the operating conditions. Next, the determination unit 82, having identified the component or installation work data 52 with a high error participation rate (ER) as the first cause, considers other types of component or installation work data 52 as the second cause and determines whether the error participation rate (ER) has deviated based on the individual cases. If no deviation has occurred, the determination unit 82 designates the individual case with the first cause as the cause of the error.

[0071] In cases where a deviation occurs, the cause of the error is uncertain. In this situation, the determination unit 82 further determines whether the error participation rate ER has deviated based on the difference between individuals with the first cause, provided that the second cause of the error has been identified. If no deviation has occurred, the determination unit 82 sets the identified second cause individual as the cause of the error. According to this determination process, when the error participation rate ER deviates based on the second cause individual provided that the first cause individual has been identified, and when the error participation rate ER deviates based on the first cause individual provided that the second cause individual has been identified, the cause of the error cannot be confirmed.

[0072] As options for the first and second causes, the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 can be used. Furthermore, regarding the mounting operation data 52, it is possible to treat multiple component data as separate entities. Also, regarding the mounting head 43 and the rotating tool 44, if multiple entities are used due to the existence of log data LD containing replacement history information, it is possible to use them. Additionally, regarding the component camera 47, if multiple shooting conditions are switched for shooting, it is possible to treat the multiple shooting conditions as separate entities. Furthermore, the error participation rate ER is expressed as the ratio of the total number of errors occurring as the denominator to the number of errors occurring in each of the multiple entities included in the first or second cause as the numerator.

[0073] Regarding whether the error participation rate ER has deviated, the determination in this embodiment is as follows: If the error participation rate ER of one of the multiple individuals included in the first or second cause is greater than or equal to a predetermined participation rate E2, the determination unit 82 determines that the error participation rate ER has deviated. Conversely, if the error participation rate ER of each of the multiple individuals included in the first or second cause is less than the predetermined participation rate E2, the determination unit 82 determines that the error participation rate ER has not deviated. The predetermined participation rate E2 can be, for example, set to 80%. The determination process of the determination unit 82 will be described in detail with specific examples in the following description of its operation.

[0074] The estimation unit 83 uses estimation logic different from that of the determination unit 82, in other words, estimation logic different from the comparison of the error participation rate ER, to estimate the constituent components or installation operation data 52 that may be the cause of the error. In this embodiment, the estimation unit 83 operates only when the determination unit 82 cannot determine the cause of the error. For example, if the determination unit 82 cannot determine the cause of the error by using the determination process of component supply unit 31 and component mounting unit 45 as the first and second causes, respectively, the estimation unit 83 operates. Alternatively, the estimation unit 83 may operate regardless of the success or failure of the determination process of the determination unit 82.

[0075] In one example of the presumption logic, the presumption unit 83 compares the final implementation time of maintenance performed on the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45, which are likely to be the cause of the error, and identifies the unit with the earlier final implementation time as the cause of the error. In other words, the presumption unit 83 makes a presumption based on the basic idea that "the unit that has been in operation for a longer period since maintenance is more likely to experience performance degradation and become the cause of the error" (a rule of thumb-based approach). Furthermore, even when the mounting head 43 or the rotating tool 44 is selected as one of the first and second causes, the presumption unit 83 can still make a presumption based on the comparison of the final implementation time of the maintenance. Additionally, the presumption logic of the presumption unit 83 can also use variations described later.

[0076] The notification unit 84 notifies the determination unit 82 of the cause of the error and the estimation unit 83 of the cause of the error. The notification unit 84 may also notify the user of the use of the display device 62, or, as another notification method, notify the user of the error via wireless communication to their portable terminal. Additionally, sometimes two of the following are selected as the first cause and the second cause: the component supply unit 31, the component mounting unit 45, the mounting head 43, and the rotating tool 44. In this case, the notification unit 84 provides maintenance instructions regarding the cause of the error determined by the determination unit 82 and the cause of the error estimated by the estimation unit 83.

[0077] Here, the functions of the determination unit 82 and the estimation unit 83 are not perfect, and the cause of the error may be incorrect. That is, even if maintenance is performed on one of the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45, which corresponds to the cause of the error notified by the notification unit 84, and the unit is reused, it is not impossible that the error occurrence rate EC will not be improved to below the predetermined value E1. If the error occurrence rate EC is not improved, the estimation unit 83 corrects the cause of the error to be the other of the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45, which should continue to be used. Furthermore, the notification unit 84 notifies the unit of maintenance performed to correct the cause of the error. Alternatively, the function of the estimation unit 83 in correcting the cause of the error can be omitted.

[0078] 4. Operation of error cause identification device 8

[0079] Next, consider examples and refer to Figures 3-12 The operation of the error cause identification device 8 in this embodiment will be explained. Before explaining the operation, the mounting operation on the substrate K is envisioned as follows: The substrate K is equipped with a total of 11 components, specifically 4 components of type P1, 2 components of type P2, 2 components of type P3, 2 components of type P4, and 1 component of type P5. To accommodate this, the component mounting machine 1 performs... Figure 3 The installation actions of the three installation cycles are shown.

[0080] like Figure 3 As shown, the component mounting machine 1 uses a first suction nozzle N1, a second suction nozzle N2, a third suction nozzle N3, and a fourth suction nozzle N4, which are equivalent to four component mounting units 45 (suction nozzles). Additionally, the component mounting machine 1 uses five component supply units 31 (belt feeders), as shown in parentheses. Specifically, the component mounting machine 1 uses a first feeder F1 for supplying components of type P1, a second feeder F2 for supplying components of type P2, a third feeder F3 for supplying components of type P3, a fourth feeder F4 for supplying components of type P4, and a fifth feeder F5 for supplying components of type P5.

[0081] In the first mounting cycle, component mounting machine 1 performs a mounting operation by picking up four types of components P1 from the first feeder F1 using the first nozzle N1 to the fourth nozzle N4 and mounting them onto the substrate K. In the second mounting cycle, component mounting machine 1 picks up two types of components P2 from the second feeder F2 using the first nozzle N1 and the second nozzle N2, and picks up two types of components P3 from the third feeder F3 using the third nozzle N3 and the fourth nozzle N4, and performs the mounting operation. In the third mounting cycle, component mounting machine 1 picks up two types of components P4 from the fourth feeder F4 using the first nozzle N1 and the second nozzle N2, and picks up one type of component P5 from the fifth feeder F5 using the third nozzle N3, and performs the mounting operation. However, component mounting machine 1 does not use the fourth nozzle N4 in the third mounting cycle.

[0082] Furthermore, it is envisioned that the determination unit 82 selects the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 as the first and second causes, respectively. Additionally, it is assumed that whenever the component mounting machine 1 performs a mounting operation on 5000 substrates K, the determination unit 82 simultaneously calculates the error occurrence rate EC of each component in the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45. Furthermore, as a trigger condition for the determination unit 82 to perform the determination process, a predetermined value E1 is set to 0.1%. Additionally, a predetermined participation rate E2 for determining whether the error participation rate ER has deviated is set to 80%.

[0083] Based on the above assumptions, and with reference to Figure 4 The illustrated action flow explains the operation of the error cause identification device 8. Figure 4In step S1, the component mounting machine 1 sequentially performs the mounting actions of the first to third mounting cycles, and then replaces the substrate K to continue the mounting action. In the next step S2, the storage unit 81 acquires and stores log data LD related to each mounting action of the component mounting machine 1. As described above, the log data LD contains information on whether each mounting action was successful and information on the operating conditions. The execution frequency of this storage process can be any one of the following: after each mounting action is completed, after each mounting cycle (3 to 4 mounting actions), or after each of the 11 mounting actions of the substrate K is completed.

[0084] In the next step S3, the determination unit 82 determines whether the calculation period for the error occurrence rate EC has arrived and branches the operation flow. If the production of substrate K has started or the installation of 5000 substrates K has not been completed since the last calculation period, the calculation period has not arrived. In this case, the determination unit 82 returns the operation flow to step S1. Furthermore, during the period before the calculation period arrives, the operation cycle of steps S1 to S3 is repeated, accumulating log data LD. When the calculation period arrives in step S3, the determination unit 82 causes the operation flow to proceed to step S4.

[0085] In step S4, the determination unit 82 calculates the error rate EC of the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 according to each individual. Figure 5 The number of operations for the parent group is shown when calculating the error rate EC. As shown, the total number of operations for the component mounting machine 1 is 55,000 (= 5,000 substrates × 11 operations). Furthermore, regarding the component supply unit 31, the number of operations for each component is as follows: the first feeder is 20,000, the second feeder F2, the third feeder F3, and the fourth feeder F4 are 10,000, and the fifth feeder F5 is 5,000. On the other hand, regarding the component mounting unit 45, the number of operations for each component is as follows: the first nozzle N1, the second nozzle N2, and the third nozzle N3 are 15,000, and the fourth nozzle N4 is 10,000.

[0086] Here, in Figure 6 In the first example shown, it is assumed that a total of 25 errors occurred in the component mounting machine 1. The number of errors in the component supply unit 31, detailed by individual unit, is as follows: first feeder F1: 1 error, second feeder F2: 22 errors, third feeder F3: 1 error, fourth feeder F4: 0 errors, and fifth feeder F5: 1 error. The determination unit 82 divides these number of errors by... Figure 5The error rate EC is calculated based on the number of actions performed by the parent group shown. Specifically, the error rate EC is 0.01% for the first feeder, 0.22% for the second feeder F2, 0.01% for the third feeder F3, 0% for the fourth feeder F4, and 0.02% for the fifth feeder F5 (rounded up if less than 0.01%).

[0087] On the other hand, the number of errors occurring in the component mounting unit 45, according to the details of each component, is as follows: first suction nozzle N1: 9 times; second suction nozzle N2: 13 times; third suction nozzle N3: 2 times; and fourth suction nozzle N4: 1 time. The determination unit 82 divides these occurrence numbers by... Figure 5 The error rate EC is calculated based on the number of actions performed by the parent group shown. Specifically, the error rates EC are: 0.06% for the first nozzle N1, 0.09% for the second nozzle N2, 0.01% for the third nozzle N3, and 0.01% for the fourth nozzle N4.

[0088] In the next step S5, the determination unit 82 determines whether there is an error occurrence rate EC exceeding a predetermined value E1 (=0.1%), and branches the operation flow accordingly. If the number of errors is low and the error occurrence rate EC does not exceed the predetermined value E1, the determination unit 82 returns the operation flow to step S1. Then, steps S1 to S5 are repeated. In the first example, the error occurrence rate EC of the second feeder F2 is 0.22% and exceeds the predetermined value E1, so the determination unit 82 moves the operation flow to step S6. Alternatively, as a trigger condition for the determination unit 82 to perform the determination process, the entire number of operations of the component mounting machine 1 can be considered, and the predetermined value E1 can be set to 0.03%. In this case, the error occurrence rate EC of the component mounting machine 1 is 0.05% (=25 / 55,000×100), which exceeds the predetermined value E1, so the determination unit 82 moves the operation flow to step S6.

[0089] In step S6, the determination unit 82 performs a process to determine the cause of the error. Here, it is possible to make an error if the second feeder F2, which has the highest frequency of errors, is simply identified as the cause of the error. Therefore, the determination unit 82 performs... Figure 7 The sub-action flow shows the determination process. Figure 7 In step S11, the determination unit 82 calculates the error participation rate ER of the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 according to each individual. For example... Figure 6As shown, in the first example, regarding the component supply unit 31, the error participation rate ER for each component is 4% for the first feeder, 88% (=22 / 25×100) for the second feeder F2, 4% for the third feeder F3, 0% for the fourth feeder F4, and 4% for the fifth feeder F5. Furthermore, regarding the component mounting unit 45, the error participation rate ER for each component is 36% for the first nozzle N1, 52% (=13 / 25×100) for the second nozzle N2, 8% for the third nozzle N3, and 4% for the fourth nozzle N4.

[0090] In the next step S12, the determination unit 82 identifies the individual with a high error participation rate (ER) as the first cause. In the first example, the determination unit 82 selects the component supply unit 31 as the first cause, the component mounting unit 45 as the second cause, and identifies the second feeder F2 as the first cause with an error participation rate (ER) as high as 88%. In the next step S13, given that the second feeder F2 has been identified, the determination unit 82 determines whether there is a deviation that corresponds to the individual with the second cause. Given that the second feeder F2 has been identified, the total number of errors is 22, with 9 errors occurring with the first nozzle N1 and 13 errors with the second nozzle N2.

[0091] The determination unit 82, based on the condition that the second feeder F2 has been determined, calculates the error participation rate ER of the second cause according to each individual. The result is as follows: Figure 6 As shown in square brackets, the error participation rate (ER) of the first nozzle N1 for the second cause is 38% (=9 / 22×100), and the error participation rate (ER) of the second nozzle N2 is 62% (=13 / 22×100). Both error participation rates (ER) are less than the predetermined participation rate (E2) (=80%), and there is no deviation corresponding to the individual differences in the second cause. Therefore, the sub-action flow branches to step S14.

[0092] In step S14, the determination unit 82 identifies the individual cause of the first error, namely the second feeder F2, as the cause of the error. In other words, the second feeder F2, which has the highest frequency of errors, is naturally the most likely cause of the error. However, the possibility that one of the combined component mounting units 45 is the cause of the error cannot be ruled out. Here, it is clarified that the error does not occur biased towards either the first nozzle N1 or the second nozzle N2, but rather occurs in both cases. Furthermore, it is extremely rare for both the first nozzle N1 and the second nozzle N2 to simultaneously experience performance degradation, thus becoming the cause of the error. Therefore, the determination unit 82 can determine that the error is caused by the performance degradation of the second feeder F2, and the possibility of misjudging the determination result is virtually nonexistent.

[0093] The processing content of the above-mentioned determination is in Figure 8The error cause determination diagram is illustrated in the diagram. In the error cause determination diagram, the vertical axis represents the error participation rate ER of the component supply unit 31, and the horizontal axis represents the error participation rate ER of the component mounting unit 45. The error cause determination diagram is divided into four regions by the predetermined participation rate E2 (=80%) shown by the dashed line. Specifically, the region where the error participation rate ER of both the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 is less than the predetermined participation rate E2 is the first region A1. The region where the error participation rate ER of the component supply unit 31 is greater than or equal to the predetermined participation rate E2 and the error participation rate ER of the component mounting unit 45 is less than or equal to the predetermined participation rate E2 is the second region A2. The region where the error participation rate ER of the component supply unit 31 is less than or equal to the predetermined participation rate E2 and the error participation rate ER of the component mounting unit 45 is greater than or equal to the predetermined participation rate E2 is the third region A3. Furthermore, the region where the error participation rate ER of both the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45 is greater than or equal to the predetermined participation rate E2 is the fourth region A4.

[0094] The determination unit 82 calculates the error participation rate ER of the first nozzle N1 and the error participation rate ER of the second nozzle N2 under the condition that the second feeder F2 has been determined as described above. This calculation result is plotted as P1(F2, N1) and P2(F2, N2) in the error cause determination diagram. For example, P1(F2, N1) is plotted at the intersection of 88% of the error participation rate ER of the second feeder F2 and 38% of the error participation rate ER of the first nozzle N1 under the condition that the second feeder F2 has been determined. As shown in the figure, when the plotting of P1(F2, N1) and P2(F2, N2), etc., representing the processing content of the determination unit 82, is included in the second area A2, the determination unit 82 can determine one of the component supply units 31 as the cause of the error. Furthermore, when considering the duality of the component supply unit 31 and the component mounting unit 45, if the plot representing the processing content of the determination unit 82 is included in the third area A3, the determination unit 82 can determine one of the component mounting units 45 as the cause of the error.

[0095] Next, as an application example, the case of switching between the first cause and the second cause will be explained. In step S12, the determination unit 82 can also select the component mounting unit 45 as the first cause and the component supply unit 31 as the second cause, determining the second nozzle N2 as the first cause with an error participation rate ER as high as 52%. Therefore, in the next step S13, the determination unit 82, having determined the second nozzle N2, determines whether there is a deviation that corresponds differently to the individual of the second cause. With the second nozzle N2 determined, the total number of errors is 13. Furthermore, the number of errors of the second feeder F2 as the second cause is 13, with an error participation rate ER of 100%, while the number of errors of the first feeder F1 and the fourth feeder F4 is 0, with an error participation rate ER of 0%. That is, the error participation rate ER of the second feeder F2 is higher than the predetermined participation rate E2, resulting in a deviation. Therefore, the sub-action flow branches to step S15. This processing content is in Figure 8 The cause of the error is determined and is plotted in the figure as Q1(N2, F1), Q2(N2, F2), and Q3(N2, F4).

[0096] In step S15, the determination unit 82 identifies the second feeder F2 as the individual responsible for the second cause of the error deviation. In the next step S16, given that the second feeder F2 has been identified, the determination unit 82 determines whether there is a deviation that corresponds differently from the individual responsible for the first cause. With the second feeder F2 identified, the total number of errors is 22. Furthermore, the error participation rate ER of the first nozzle N1 (the first cause) is 38%, and the error participation rate ER of the second nozzle N2 is 62%. Therefore, the error participation rate ER has not deviated, and the sub-action flow branches to step S17.

[0097] In step S17, the determination unit 82 determines the individual entity identified as the second cause, namely the second feeder F2, as the cause of the error. Thus, even if the determination process for the first and second causes is swapped in the application example, the determination unit 82 can obtain the same determination result as in the first example. By executing step S14 or step S17, the sub-action flow of the specific process ends.

[0098] Next, regarding the Figure 9The determination process of the determination unit 82 in the case shown in the second example will be explained. In the second example, it is assumed that a total of 25 errors occurred in the component mounting machine 1. The details of the number of errors in the component supply units 31 according to each individual are as follows: the first feeder has 1 error, the second feeder F2 has 22 errors, the third feeder F3 has 1 error, the fourth feeder F4 has 0 errors, and the fifth feeder F5 has 1 error. Therefore, regarding the error occurrence rate EC of the component supply units 31 according to each individual calculated by the determination unit 82 in step S4, the first feeder has 0.01%, the second feeder F2 has 0.22%, the third feeder F3 has 0.01%, the fourth feeder F4 has 0%, and the fifth feeder F5 has 0.02%.

[0099] Furthermore, the number of errors occurring in each component of the component mounting unit 45 is as follows: 2 times for the first nozzle N1, 20 times for the second nozzle N2, 2 times for the third nozzle N3, and 1 time for the fourth nozzle N4. Therefore, regarding the error occurrence rate EC of each component of the component mounting unit 45 calculated by the determination unit 82, the error rate EC is 0.01% for the first nozzle N1, 0.13% for the second nozzle N2, 0.01% for the third nozzle N3, and 0.01% for the fourth nozzle N4.

[0100] In the next step S5, since the error rate EC of the second feeder F2 is 0.22%, which is above the predetermined value E1, the determination unit 82 causes the operation flow to proceed to step S6. The determination process corresponding to step S6... Figure 7 In step S11, the error participation rate ER of the component supply unit 31 calculated by the determining unit 82 for each component is as follows: 4% for the first feeder, 88% (=22 / 25×100) for the second feeder F2, 4% for the third feeder F3, 0% for the fourth feeder F4, and 4% for the fifth feeder F5. Furthermore, regarding the error participation rate ER of the component mounting unit 45 for each component, the error participation rate ER is as follows: 8% for the first nozzle N1, 80% (=20 / 25×100) for the second nozzle N2, 8% for the third nozzle N3, and 4% for the fourth nozzle N4.

[0101] In the next step S12, the determination unit 82 selects the component supply unit 31 as the first cause and the component mounting unit 45 as the second cause, and determines the second feeder F2 as the first cause with an error participation rate ER as high as 88%. In the next step S13, under the condition that the second feeder F2 has been determined, the determination unit 82 calculates that the error participation rate ER of the first nozzle N1 as 9% (=2 / 22×100) and the error participation rate ER of the second nozzle N2 as 91% (=20 / 22×100). Since the error participation rate ER of the second nozzle N2 deviates from the predetermined participation rate E2 (=80%) or higher, the determination unit 82 causes the sub-action flow to proceed to step S15.

[0102] In step S15, the determination unit 82 identifies the second suction nozzle N2 as the individual entity responsible for the second cause of the error deviation. In the next step S16, given that the second suction nozzle N2 has been identified, the determination unit 82 calculates that the error participation rate ER of the second feeder F2, which is the first cause, is 100% (=22 / 22×100), while the error participation rates ER of the first feeder F1 and the fourth feeder F4 are 0%. Therefore, the error participation rate ER of the second feeder F2 deviates from the predetermined participation rate E2, and the determination unit 82 proceeds the sub-action flow to step S18. In step S18, the determination unit 82 determines that the cause of the error cannot be determined and terminates the sub-action flow.

[0103] The content of the determined processing in the second case is... Figure 10 The error cause determination diagram is illustrated. Specifically, the processing details of steps S12 and S13 of the determination unit 82 are plotted as P4(F2, N1) and P5(F2, N2) in the error cause determination diagram. Furthermore, the processing details of step S16 of the determination unit 82 are plotted as Q4(N2, F1), Q5(N2, F2), and Q6(N2, F4) in the error cause determination diagram. As shown, when the plotting of P5(F2, N2) and Q5(N2, F2), etc., representing the processing details of the determination unit 82, is included in the fourth region A4, the determination unit 82 cannot determine the cause of the error.

[0104] Furthermore, it is not entirely uncommon for a significant number of errors to be distributed across multiple component supply units 31 and multiple component mounting units 45. In such cases, the plot representing the processing content of the determination unit 82 is contained in the first area A1, and the determination unit 82 is unable to determine the cause of the error. This situation may occur, for example, when multiple units in the multiple component supply units 31 and multiple component mounting units 45 simultaneously experience performance degradation, which becomes the cause of the error. In the illustrated case, the determination unit 82 is unable to determine the cause of the error, but the estimation unit 83 can estimate the first unit as the cause of the error. Moreover, after the first unit is maintained and reused, or a backup unit is used to replace the first unit, the determination unit 82 can determine the second unit as the cause of the error in the next determination process.

[0105] return Figure 4 In step S7, the estimation unit 83 branches the operation flow based on whether the determination unit 82 can determine the cause of the error. If the determination unit 82 can determine the cause of the error, the estimation unit 83 skips step S8 and proceeds to step S9. On the other hand, if the determination unit 82 cannot determine the cause of the error, the estimation unit 83 executes the following steps in step S8: Figure 11 The presumed processing is shown in the sub-action flow.

[0106] exist Figure 11 In step S21, the estimation unit 83 identifies the component supply unit 31 and component mounting unit 45 as potential causes of the error. For example, in the second case, the estimation unit 83 identifies the second feeder F2 and the second nozzle N2, which have experienced errors. In the next step S22, the estimation unit 83 obtains the final implementation time for maintenance of both units. That is, the estimation unit 83 obtains the final implementation time MAF for maintenance of the second feeder F2 from the feeder maintenance device 77. Additionally, the estimation unit 83 obtains the final implementation time MAN for maintenance of the second nozzle N2 from the nozzle maintenance device 78.

[0107] In the next step S23, if the final implementation time MAF of the second feeder F2 is earlier than the final implementation time MAN of the second nozzle N2, the sub-action flow proceeds to step S24; otherwise, it proceeds to step S25. In step S24, the estimation unit 83 estimates that the second feeder F2 (component supply unit 31) is the cause of the error. Furthermore, in step S25, the estimation unit 83 estimates that the second nozzle N2 (component mounting unit 45) is the cause of the error. In other words, the estimation unit estimates the unit with the earlier final implementation time as the cause of the error. Thus, the sub-action flow of the estimation process ends.

[0108] return Figure 4In step S9, the notification unit 84 notifies the implementation determination unit 82 of the maintenance of the cause of the error. Furthermore, if the determination unit 82 cannot determine the cause of the error, the notification unit 84 notifies the implementation estimation unit 83 of the maintenance of the cause of the error estimated by the implementation estimation unit. Therefore, Figure 4 The indicated action flow ends, and the error cause identification device 8 moves towards... Figure 12 The response measures are shown below. The response measures will be explained using the following example: Notification unit 84 notifies the second feeder F2 (one side) and the second nozzle N2 (the other side) of maintenance based on the estimation results of estimation unit 83, which indicates the error caused by the deviation.

[0109] exist Figure 12 In step S31 of the handling procedure, the operator interrupts the operation of the component mounting machine 1 and removes the second feeder F2, which has been notified for maintenance. In the next step S32, the operator moves the second feeder F2 into the feeder maintenance device 77 for maintenance. In the next step S33, the operator equips the maintained second feeder F2 back onto the component mounting machine 1 and reuses it, restarting the operation of the component mounting machine 1. In the next step S34, the operation is performed... Figure 4 In steps S1 to S4, the determining unit 82 calculates the error occurrence rate EC of the second feeder F2 according to each individual component. The estimation unit 83 determines whether the calculated error occurrence rate EC has been improved to a predetermined value E1 (=0.1%) or less, and then branches the operation flow.

[0110] In most cases, the cause of the error is correctly identified and appropriate maintenance is implemented, thus improving the error rate (EC). Therefore, component mounting machine 1 can continue to perform good mounting operations. The response process then concludes. On the other hand, in step S35 where the error rate (EC) has not been improved, the estimation unit 83 corrects that the second suction nozzle N2 (the other party) is the cause of the error. In the next step S36, the notification unit 84 notifies the implementation of maintenance for the second suction nozzle N2, which is now identified as the corrected cause of the error. The response process then concludes.

[0111] The operator removes the second suction nozzle N2, which has been notified for maintenance, from the component mounting machine 1, allowing the nozzle maintenance device 78 to perform maintenance. After maintenance, the operator reassembles the second suction nozzle N2 onto the component mounting machine 1 and reuses it, restarting operation of the machine. Thus, maintenance is performed on both the second feeder F2 and the second suction nozzle N2, both of which may be the cause of errors, thereby reducing the likelihood of errors occurring in most cases.

[0112] Alternatively, in other methods of step S33, the operator may equip the prepared sixth feeder F6 on the component mounting machine 1 instead of the second feeder F2 that was notified for maintenance, and restart the operation of the component mounting machine 1. In this case, if the cause of the error is the second feeder F2, the error rate EC is improved, and the operation flow proceeds from step S34 to the end. However, if the cause of the error is not the second feeder F2, the error rate EC is not improved, and the operation flow proceeds from step S34 to step S35. In step S35, the estimation unit 83 corrects that the second suction nozzle N2, which is intended to continue use, is the cause of the error. In the next step S36, the notification unit 84 notifies the implementation of maintenance for the second suction nozzle N2. Thus, the response process ends.

[0113] 5. Variation of the estimation process of estimation unit 83

[0114] The estimation process of estimation unit 83 can be transformed into Figure 13 The second presumption treatment shown Figure 14 The third presumption treatment shown and Figure 15 The fourth presumption process is shown. In the second to fourth presumption processes, steps S21, S24, and S25 are related to the use of... Figure 11 The presumption process is the same as described, but the processing content of steps S22 and S23 is changed.

[0115] exist Figure 13 In step S22A of the second estimation process shown, the estimation unit 83 obtains the error occurrence rate (ECF) of the second feeder F2 (component supply unit 31) and the error occurrence rate (ECN) of the second nozzle N2 (component mounting unit 45) from the determination unit 82. In the next step S23A, if the error occurrence rate (ECF) of the second feeder F2 is higher than the error occurrence rate (ECN) of the second nozzle N2, the estimation unit 83 proceeds to step S24; otherwise, the sub-operation process proceeds to step S25. That is, the estimation unit 83 makes estimations based on the basic idea that "the unit with a high error occurrence rate is more likely to be the cause of the error." Alternatively, the estimation unit 83 may obtain the number of errors from the determination unit 82 instead of the error occurrence rates (ECF, ECN), compare the number of occurrences, and proceed to step S24 or step S25.

[0116] exist Figure 14In step S22B of the third estimation process shown, the estimation unit 83 obtains the maintenance implementation interval MBF of the second feeder F2 (component supply unit 31) from the feeder maintenance device 77. Additionally, the estimation unit 83 obtains the maintenance implementation interval MBN of the second nozzle N2 (component mounting unit 45) from the nozzle maintenance device 78. In the next step S23B, if the maintenance implementation interval MBF of the second feeder F2 is shorter than the maintenance implementation interval MBN of the second nozzle N2, the sub-action flow proceeds to step S24; otherwise, the sub-action flow proceeds to step S25. In other words, the estimation unit 83 makes estimations based on the fundamental idea that "for units with a high probability of causing performance degradation and becoming a cause of errors, it is recommended to perform maintenance with shorter intervals."

[0117] exist Figure 15 In step S22C of the fourth estimation process shown, the estimation unit 83 obtains the next predetermined time (MCF) for maintenance of the second feeder F2 (component supply unit 31) from the feeder maintenance device 77. Additionally, the estimation unit 83 obtains the next predetermined time (MCN) for maintenance of the second nozzle N2 (component mounting unit 45) from the nozzle maintenance device 78. In the following step S23C, if the next predetermined time (MCF) for maintenance of the second feeder F2 is closer than the next predetermined time (MCN) for maintenance of the second nozzle N2, the sub-operation flow proceeds to step S24; otherwise, the sub-operation flow proceeds to step S25. In other words, the estimation unit 83 performs estimations based on the fundamental idea that "units with longer elapsed time since the last maintenance and closer next predetermined time are more likely to experience performance degradation, thus becoming the cause of errors."

[0118] According to the error cause identification device 8 of the embodiment, the storage unit 81 stores information on whether the installation operation was successful or not, as well as operation condition information, for each installation operation performed multiple times in the component mounting machine 1. Furthermore, when the error occurrence rate EC of the installation operation exceeds a predetermined value E1, the determination unit 82 compares two or more error participation rates ER to determine the cause of the error, and the estimation unit 83 uses estimation logic different from that of the determination unit 82 to estimate the cause of the error. Here, "determine" and "estimate" are equivalent to "identify," so even if the determination unit 82 cannot identify (determine) the cause of the error, the estimation unit 83 can identify (estimate) the cause of the error, reducing the possibility of not being able to identify the cause of the error.

[0119] 6. Other applications and variations of the implementation method

[0120] Furthermore, the error cause identification device 8 in this embodiment functions the same way under actual operating conditions other than the first and second hypothetical examples, and also functions the same way under conditions different from the hypothetical ones. For example, the number of components mounted on the substrate K, the number of component supply units 31, and the number of component mounting units 45 used are usually greater than in the hypothetical example. In addition, the parent group when calculating the error occurrence rate EC may not be 5000 substrates K. Furthermore, the predetermined value E1 and the predetermined participation rate E2 may also be set to values ​​different from those in this embodiment.

[0121] Furthermore, in a mode where the estimation unit 83 operates independently of the success or failure of the determination process of the determination unit 82, the determination result of the determination unit 82 and the estimation result of the estimation unit 83 may not always be consistent. If they are consistent, the notification unit 84 only needs to notify the reason for the consistent error. If they are inconsistent, the notification unit 84 prioritizes notifying the reason for the error determined by the determination unit 82, or notifies both inconsistent reasons. Additionally, the processing content of the determination process of the determination unit 82 can be appropriately modified, and it is necessary that the estimation unit 83 uses a different calculation logic than the modified determination process of the determination unit 82. Besides this, various applications and modifications are possible with the implementation method and its variations.

[0122] Explanation of reference numerals in the attached figures

[0123] 1: Component mounting machine 2: Substrate conveying device 3: Component supply device 31: Component supply unit 4: Component transfer device 43: Mounting head 45: Component mounting unit 47: Component camera 5: Control device 52: Mounting operation data 6: Line management device 7: Substrate production line 73: Substrate appearance inspection machine 77: Feeder maintenance device 78: Nozzle maintenance device 8: Error cause identification device 81: Storage unit 82: Determination unit 83: Estimation unit 84: Notification unit LD: Log data EC, ECFECN: (Error) occurrence rate ER: Error participation rate E1: Predicted value E2: Predicted participation rate MAF MAN: Final implementation time MBF MBN: Implementation interval MCF MCN: Next scheduled time.

Claims

1. An error cause identification device, comprising: a storage section that stores operation good-or-not information and operation condition information, the operation good-or-not information indicating good-or-not of operation results of respective installation operations performed a plurality of times in a component mounting machine, the operation condition information indicating two or more of a plurality of constituent parts of the component mounting machine and mounting job data involved in respective installation operations of the plurality of installation operations; a determination section that, in a case where an occurrence rate or a number of occurrences of an error in the installation operation in at least one of the component mounting machine, the constituent parts, and the mounting job data exceeds a predetermined value, compares two or more of an error involvement rate of each of the constituent parts and an error involvement rate of the mounting job data calculated based on the operation good-or-not information and the operation condition information, to determine the constituent part or the mounting job data as a cause of the error; and a presumption section that presumes the constituent part or the mounting job data as the cause of the error using predetermined presumption logic different from the comparison of the error involvement rates.

2. The error cause identification device according to claim 1, wherein the determination section, in a case where the constituent part or the mounting job data of which the error involvement rate is high is determined as a first cause and an individual of the first cause is determined, determines an individual of the error as the cause in a case where the error involvement rate does not deviate in correspondence with an individual of a second cause in a case where the constituent part or the mounting job data of other kinds is determined as the second cause.

3. The error cause identification device according to claim 2, wherein the determination section, in a case where the individual of the first cause is determined, determines an individual of the error as the cause in a case where the error involvement rate deviates in correspondence with the individual of the second cause, in a case where the individual of the second cause is determined in a case where the error deviates, and in a case where the error involvement rate does not deviate in correspondence with the individual of the first cause.

4. The error cause identification device according to claim 2 or 3, wherein the determination section determines that the error involvement rate deviates in a case where the error involvement rate of one individual among a plurality of individuals included in the first cause or the second cause is equal to or higher than a predetermined involvement rate.

5. The error cause identification device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of constituent parts include a component supply unit that supplies a component in the installation operation and a component mounting unit that picks up the component from the component supply unit and mounts the component to a board, and the presumption section uses the presumption logic that compares last maintenance implementation times of the component supply unit and the component mounting unit that are likely to be causes of the error, to determine a unit of which the last maintenance implementation time is earlier as the cause of the error.

6. The error cause identification device according to claim 1, wherein ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ The plurality of components include an element supply unit that supplies elements in the mounting operation and an element mounting unit that picks up the elements from the element supply unit and mounts them on a board, The estimation unit uses estimation logic that compares the occurrence rate or the number of occurrences of the error of the element supply unit and the element mounting unit that are likely to be the cause of the error, and sets the unit of the higher occurrence rate or the larger number of occurrences as the cause of the error.

7. The error cause identification device according to claim 1, wherein The plurality of components include an element supply unit that supplies elements in the mounting operation and is periodically subjected to maintenance, and an element mounting unit that picks up the elements from the element supply unit and mounts them on a board and is periodically subjected to maintenance, The estimation unit uses estimation logic that compares the maintenance interval of the element supply unit and the element mounting unit that have the possibility of being the cause of the error, and sets the unit of the shorter maintenance interval as the cause of the error.

8. The error cause identification device according to claim 1, wherein The plurality of components include an element supply unit that supplies elements in the mounting operation and is periodically subjected to maintenance, and an element mounting unit that picks up the elements from the element supply unit and mounts them on a board and is periodically subjected to maintenance, The estimation unit uses estimation logic that compares the next scheduled time of the maintenance of the element supply unit and the element mounting unit that are likely to be the cause of the error, and sets the unit of the nearer next scheduled time as the cause of the error.

9. The error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 3 and 5 to 8, wherein The estimation unit acts only in the case where the determination unit cannot determine the cause of the error.

10. The error cause identification device according to any one of claims 1 to 3 and 5 to 8, wherein The error cause identification device includes a notification unit that notifies the cause of the error determined by the determination unit and the cause of the error estimated by the estimation unit.

11. The error cause identification device according to any one of claims 5 to 8, wherein The error cause identification device includes a notification unit that makes a notification to perform maintenance of the cause of the error determined by the determination unit and the cause of the error estimated by the estimation unit.

12. The error cause identification device according to claim 11, wherein The estimation unit uses estimation logic that, even if the maintenance is performed on one of the element supply unit and the element mounting unit corresponding to the cause of the error notified by the notification unit and used again, the occurrence rate or the number of occurrences of the error does not improve to the predetermined value or less, corrects that the other of the element supply unit and the element mounting unit is the cause of the error, The notification unit makes a notification to perform the maintenance of the corrected cause of the error.

13. The error cause identification apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 3, 5 to 8, wherein The determination section collectively calculates the occurrence rate or the number of occurrences of the error for each individual, every time the component mounting machine performs the mounting operation on a predetermined number of substrates or every time the operation time of the component mounting machine elapses a predetermined time, with two or more of the plurality of constituent components and the mounting job data as targets.

14. The error cause identification apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 3, 5 to 8, wherein The determination section individually calculates the occurrence rate or the number of occurrences of the error for each individual, every time a predetermined number of times related to the mounting operation elapses, with two or more of the plurality of constituent components and the mounting job data as targets.

15. The error cause identification apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein The plurality of constituent components include one or more of an component supply unit that supplies components in the mounting operation, a component mounting unit that picks up the components from the component supply unit and mounts them on a substrate, a mounting head that holds the component mounting unit and moves between the component supply unit and the substrate, and a component camera that photographs the components picked up to the component mounting unit.

Images