Mounting system, component recognition data update method, test device, and test program

Abstract

To ensure the validity of part recognition data such that pass or fail of parts shape can be correctly determined even when lots are changed at update of the part recognition data.SOLUTION: An implementation system causes a control unit of a surface mount machine to execute: a determination process that determines pass or fail of the part shape, using part recognition data; a storage process that stores, in a storage unit, images and determination results of the determination process in association with each other; an editing process that edits duplicate data of part recognition data on the basis of an image of a part that was determined to be failed in the determination process; a first test process that determines pass or fail of the part shape, using the edited duplicate data on an image of another part of the same type as a type of the failed part, and tests the edited duplicate data by comparing the determination results; and an update process that, in the case that the edited data passed the test in the first test process, updates the part recognition data, using the edited duplicate data.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 9

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The technology disclosed in this specification relates to a mounting system, a component recognition data updating method, a test device, and a test program. [Background technology]

[0002] Conventionally, in a mounting system that mounts components on a board, component recognition data is used to determine whether the component shape is good or bad. Among such mounting systems, there is known a system that corrects the component recognition data when the component shape is determined to be bad (see, for example, Patent Document 1). Specifically, in the recognition data correction method described in Patent Document 1, when image data obtained by imaging a component does not match the recognition data representing the shape of the electronic component, an image file including the image data and recognition data of the electronic component is sent to an analysis device, the cause of the mismatch is found based on the image file, and the recognition data is corrected based on the found cause. Patent Document 1 also describes that the quality of the corrected recognition data is confirmed by again determining whether it matches the image data based on the corrected recognition data corrected by the analysis device (claim 2 and paragraph 0052 of the same document). [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2003-224400 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] However, the recognition data correction method described in Patent Document 1 above does not fully consider the influence that differences in manufacturing lots (hereinafter simply referred to as lots) of electronic components have on determining whether the component shapes are good or bad. This specification discloses a technique for ensuring the validity of component recognition data so that, when updating the component recognition data, the quality of the component shape can be correctly determined even when the lot is changed. [Means for solving the problem]

[0005] a storage process for storing the image and the determination result of the determination process in the storage unit; an editing process for editing duplicate data of the component recognition data based on the image of the component determined to be defective in the determination process; a first test process for testing the edited duplicate data by determining the pass / fail of the component shape on the image of another component of the same type as the component determined to be defective using the edited duplicate data and comparing the determination result with the determination result of the determination process; and an update process for updating the component recognition data with the edited duplicate data if the test in the first test process is successful. [Effects of the Invention]

[0006] According to the above configuration, when updating the component recognition data, the validity of the component recognition data can be ensured so that the quality of the component shape can be correctly determined even when the lot is changed. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0007] [Figure 1] Block diagram of a mounting system according to the first embodiment [Figure 2] Block diagram showing the electrical configuration of the server [Figure 3] Schematic diagram showing the overall configuration of a surface mounter [Figure 4] Head unit side view [Figure 5] Block diagram showing the electrical configuration of the surface mounter [Figure 6A] Schematic diagram of a chip component viewed from below [Figure 6B] Schematic diagram of a QFP component viewed from below [Figure 7] Component mounting process flowchart [Figure 8] Flowchart of the first process executed by the surface mount machine (when editing by the surface mount machine) [Figure 9] Flowchart of the process executed on the server (when editing on a surface mounter) [Figure 10] Flowchart of the second process executed by the surface mount machine (when editing by the surface mount machine) [Figure 11] Flowchart of the first process executed by the surface mounter (when edited on the server) [Figure 12] Flowchart of the process executed on the server (when editing on the server) [Figure 13] Flowchart of the second process executed by the surface mounter (when edited on the server) [Figure 14] Block diagram of a mounting system according to a second embodiment [Figure 15] Flowchart of the process executed on the server (when editing on a surface mounter) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0008] (Outline of this embodiment) (1) A mounting system according to the present disclosure is a mounting system for mounting components on a board, comprising an imaging unit for capturing an image of the components, a memory unit, and a control unit. The control unit executes the following steps: a determination process for determining whether a component shape is good or bad using component recognition data on an image captured by the imaging unit; a storage process for correlating the image with the determination result of the determination process and storing the image in the memory unit; an editing process for editing duplicate data of the component recognition data based on the image of the component determined to be defective in the determination process; a first test process for testing the edited duplicate data by determining whether a component shape is good or bad on the image of another component of the same type as the component determined to be defective and comparing the determination result with the determination result of the determination process; and an update process for updating the component recognition data with the edited duplicate data if the test in the first test process is successful.

[0009] In mounting systems that mount components onto circuit boards, components are supplied from reels wound with component tape containing the components, or from component trays on which the components are arranged in rows and columns. For example, when the number of components remaining on a component tape becomes low and the reel is replaced with a new one, the components on the previous reel may be from a different lot. In mounting systems, when component lots are switched, the frequency of defective components being determined to be different from the previous lot can be higher. The following reasons explain this: -Part shapes may vary slightly depending on the batch. The light reflectance of the surface of components varies slightly depending on the lot, causing the components to appear differently in the images captured by the imaging unit.

[0010] As described above, the recognition data correction method described in Patent Document 1 checks the quality of the corrected recognition data by determining whether it matches the image data again based on the corrected recognition data. However, because the image data to be checked is only the image data of the part that is determined to be inconsistent, even if the quality of parts from the same lot as the part is correctly determined, the part shapes of parts from different lots may not necessarily be correctly determined.

[0011] According to the above mounting system, the duplicated data edited based on the image of the component determined to be defective is tested using images of other components of the same type as the component determined to be defective. These other components may include components from a different lot from the component determined to be defective. For this reason, the above mounting system tests the duplicated data using images of components from different lots. Duplicated data that passes this test can be guaranteed to be able to correctly determine whether the component is good or bad even when the lot is changed. Therefore, according to the mounting system described above, when updating component recognition data, the validity of the component recognition data can be ensured so that the quality of the component shape can be correctly determined even when the lot is changed.

[0012] (2) The control unit may determine whether the defect determination is due to a change in the lot of the part, and may execute the editing process if it determines that the defect determination is due to a change in the lot.

[0013] According to the above mounting system, if the defective judgment is due to a change in component lot, the duplicate data is edited, thereby more reliably preventing differences in component lots from affecting the judgment of the pass / fail of the component shape.

[0014] (3) The mounting system may include a plurality of components having the same function, and each component may be mounted on the board using one of the components. The control unit may perform a second test process to test the edited duplicated data by judging the acceptability of a component shape using the edited duplicated data on the image of another component of the same type as the component determined to be defective, which is mounted using the same components as the components used to mount the component determined to be defective, and comparing the judgment result with the judgment result of the judgment process. If the test in the second test process is passed, the control unit may perform a setting process to set the edited duplicated data as the component recognition data for the component used to mount the component determined to be defective. A determination process may determine whether to update the component recognition data or set the component recognition data for the component used to mount the component determined to be defective based on the occurrence of a defective determination. If the determination process determines that the component recognition data should be updated, the control unit may perform the first test process and the update process. If the determination process determines that the component recognition data should be set, the control unit may perform the second test process and the setting process.

[0015] Typically, when mounting components onto a board, the component shape is judged to be pass or fail before the component is mounted on the board. If it is judged to be pass, it is mounted on the board, and if it is judged to be fail, it is discarded. Therefore, the above "mounting" also includes cases where a component is judged to be fail and discarded. The above "components used to mount the component judged to be fail" refers to the components used before the component is discarded.

[0016] For example, a problem with a particular component may result in the component shape of a component mounted using that component being determined to be defective. In such a case, defective judgments are concentrated on that component. For this reason, if defective judgments are concentrated on a particular component, it may be decided to set component recognition data for that particular component. In this way, it is possible to minimize the range affected by updating the component recognition data. On the other hand, if defective judgments are not concentrated on a particular component, it may be possible that this is due to the effect of a change in lot, so it may be decided to update the component recognition data. In this way, it is possible to reduce the effect of the lot regardless of which component is used.

[0017] (4) The component may be at least one of a mounting head that holds and releases the component, the imaging unit, and a feeder that supplies components to the mounting head.

[0018] In the case of an imaging unit, deterioration of the light source over time can cause the part shape to be inaccurately recognized, resulting in a defective product being judged as defective. As a result, defective product judgments can be concentrated on imaging units with deteriorated light sources over time. In the case of mounting heads, the way the illumination (light emitted from the light source) hits the imaging unit can vary depending on the position of the mounting head. Even if there is no effect on the pass / fail judgment of components when the imaging unit has not deteriorated over time, if the imaging unit deteriorates over time, the way the illumination hits can change significantly, and defective judgments can be concentrated on mounting heads that are less well-lit. Reels and component trays are set in the feeders. In the case of feeders, for example, if the component tape wound around a reel set in one feeder contains a component lot that is different from the component tape wound around a reel set in another feeder, defective products may be concentrated in a particular feeder. According to the above mounting system, the range affected by updating the component recognition data can be limited to one mounting head, one imaging unit, or one feeder.

[0019] (5) The control unit may determine that the test has passed if the judgment result of the first test process, which is obtained by judging whether the part shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data, completely matches the judgment result of the judgment process, or if the first-pass rate is equal to or greater than a threshold value.

[0020] The above-mentioned "first-run rate" can also be rephrased as the coincidence rate of the judgment results. According to the above mounting system, if the judgment result of whether the part shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data exactly matches the judgment result of the judgment process, or if the first-pass rate is equal to or greater than a threshold, it is judged that the test has passed, thereby ensuring the validity of the updated part recognition data.

[0021] (6) The control unit may determine that the test has passed if the judgment result of the second test process, which is obtained by judging whether the part shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data, completely matches the judgment result of the judgment process, or if the first-pass rate is equal to or greater than a threshold value.

[0022] According to the above mounting system, if the judgment result of whether the part shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data exactly matches the judgment result of the judgment process, or if the first-pass rate is equal to or greater than a threshold, it is judged that the test has passed, thereby ensuring the validity of the set part recognition data.

[0023] (7) When the frequency of defective determinations after updating the component recognition data is equal to or greater than a threshold, the control unit may execute a selection receiving process to receive a selection from among re-editing the duplicate data of the component recognition data, selecting which component recognition data to use from the component recognition data before the update and the component recognition data after the update, and using the component recognition data after the update only for a specific period.

[0024] According to the above mounting system, the operator can re-edit the duplicated data of the component recognition data by selecting "Re-edit duplicated data." The operator can select which component recognition data to use, the pre-update component recognition data or the updated component recognition data, by selecting "Select which component recognition data to use, the pre-update component recognition data or the updated component recognition data." The operator can use the updated component recognition data only for a specific period by selecting "Use the updated component recognition data only for a specific period."

[0025] (8) When the frequency of defective judgments after setting the part recognition data for the component is equal to or greater than a threshold, the control unit may execute a selection receiving process to receive a selection from among re-editing duplicate data of the part recognition data, selecting which part recognition data to use from the part recognition data or the part recognition data for the component, or using the part recognition data for the component only for a specific period.

[0026] According to the above mounting system, the operator can re-edit the duplicated data of the component recognition data by selecting "Re-edit duplicated data." The operator can select which component recognition data to use, the component recognition data or the component recognition data for the component, by selecting "Select which component recognition data to use, the component recognition data or the component recognition data for the component." The operator can use the set component recognition data only for a specific period by selecting "Use component recognition data for a specific period only."

[0027] [Details of the embodiments of the present disclosure] The present disclosure will be described below with reference to exemplary embodiments. The present disclosure is not limited to these examples, but is defined by the scope of the claims, and is intended to include all modifications within the meaning and scope of the claims. The embodiments of the present disclosure can be realized in various forms, such as an apparatus, a system, a method, a computer program for realizing the functions of these apparatuses, systems, or methods, and a recording medium on which the computer program is recorded.

[0028] <Embodiment 1> A first embodiment will be described with reference to Figures 1 to 13. In the following description, the left-right direction shown in Figure 3 will be referred to as the X-axis direction, the front-rear direction will be referred to as the Y-axis direction, and the up-down direction shown in Figure 4 will be referred to as the Z-axis direction. In addition, in the following description, the right side shown in Figure 3 will be referred to as the upstream side, and the left side will be referred to as the downstream side. In the following description, the reference numerals in the drawings may be omitted for the same components, with some exceptions.

[0029] (1) Mounting system A mounting system 1 according to the first embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 1. The mounting system 1 is a system for producing mounting boards on which components are mounted. The mounting system 1 includes a mounting line L and a server 10 (an example of a test device and a computer). The mounting line L is equipped with one surface mounter 11. The surface mounter 11 is a device that mounts components onto a board. In addition to the surface mounter 11, the mounting line L is also equipped with other devices that perform work on the boards (loaders, screen printers, print inspection machines, dispensers, post-mounting appearance inspection machines, reflow machines, post-curing appearance inspection machines, unloaders, etc.), but these other devices are omitted from FIG. 1. Each device is connected to the server 10 via a communication network so that it can communicate with them. The mounting line L may be equipped with multiple surface mounters 11.

[0030] (1-1) Server The server 10 is a computer that executes various processes related to the mounting line L. As will be described in detail later, the various processes include a process for storing images of components captured by the surface mounter 11, a process for editing duplicated data of component recognition data (to be described later), a process for testing the edited duplicated data, and a process for instructing the surface mounter 11 to update the component recognition data.

[0031] The electrical configuration of the server 10 will be described with reference to Fig. 2. The server 10 is a so-called personal computer, and includes a control unit 12, a memory unit 13, a communication unit 14, a display unit 15, and an operation unit 16. The control unit 12 has a CPU 12A and a RAM 12B. The memory unit 13 stores various types of data. The various types of data include master data for component recognition data used to determine whether the component shapes are good or bad, and test programs that cause the server 10 to execute the various processes described above. The memory unit also stores images of components captured by the surface mounter 11. The display unit 15 is a display device such as a liquid crystal display. The operation unit 16 is a mouse, keyboard, touch panel, etc.

[0032] (1-2) Surface mount machine The overall configuration of the surface mounter 11 will be described with reference to Fig. 3. The surface mounter 11 includes a base 20, a transport conveyor 21, four component supply devices 22, a head unit 24, a head moving section 25, two component imaging cameras 30 (examples of components and imaging sections), a board imaging camera 31, a control section 50 (see Fig. 5), and an operation section 51 (see Fig. 5).

[0033] The base 20 has a rectangular shape in a plan view and a flat upper surface. An area A indicated by a two-dot dashed line in Fig. 3 is a work position where the board P is fixed when components E are mounted on the board P. The transfer conveyor 21 includes a pair of conveyor belts (front conveyor belt 21A and rear conveyor belt 21B) that move in a circular manner in the X-axis direction, a conveyor drive motor 62 (see FIG. 5) that drives the conveyor belts, and the like.

[0034] The four component supply devices 22 are arranged in four locations, two at each end in the X-axis direction on the front and rear sides of the transport conveyor 21. Here, we will explain an example of a component supply device 22 that supplies components E stored in a component tape wound around a reel. A plurality of tape feeders 23 (an example of a constituent element and a feeder) are attached to the component supply device 22 and aligned horizontally in the X-axis direction. Each tape feeder 23 includes a reel (not shown) around which a component tape (not shown) storing a plurality of components E is wound, and an electric feeding device (not shown) that unwinds the component tape from the reel. The component supply devices 22 supply components E one by one from a component supply position located at the end of the transport conveyor 21. The component supply devices 22 may also supply components E placed on a component tray.

[0035] The head unit 24 is equipped with a plurality of mounting heads 28 (an example of a component) that pick up and release components E. The head unit 24 will be described later. Head moving section 25 moves head unit 24 in the X-axis direction and Y-axis direction within a predetermined movable range. Head moving section 25 includes beam 26 that supports head unit 24 so that it can move back and forth in the X-axis direction, a pair of Y-axis guide rails 27 that support beam 26 so that it can move back and forth in the Y-axis direction, an X-axis servo motor 58 that moves head unit 24 back and forth in the X-axis direction, and a Y-axis servo motor 59 that moves beam 26 back and forth in the Y-axis direction.

[0036] The two component imaging cameras 30 are each provided between two component supply devices 22 lined up in the X-axis direction. The component imaging cameras 30 are cameras for capturing images of components E picked up by the mounting head 28 from below to recognize the shape, angle, etc. of the components E. The component imaging cameras 30 are equipped with a light source, an image sensor (line sensor or area sensor) consisting of multiple light receiving elements, and an optical system for forming an image on the image sensor of light emitted from the light source and reflected by the components E. The board imaging camera 31 is provided in the head unit 24. The board imaging camera 31 is a camera for detecting the position and angle of the board P by capturing an image of the fiducial mark attached to the board P from above.

[0037] The head unit 24 will be described with reference to Fig. 4. The head unit 24 is a so-called in-line type, with multiple mounting heads 28 (an example of multiple components) lined up in the X-axis direction. The head unit 24 is provided with a Z-axis servo motor 60 (see Fig. 5) that raises and lowers these mounting heads 28 individually, and an R-axis servo motor 61 (see Fig. 5) that rotates these mounting heads 28 all together around their axes.

[0038] Each mounting head 28 picks up and releases a component E, and has a nozzle shaft 28A and a suction nozzle 28B that is detachably attached to the lower end of the nozzle shaft 28A. Negative and positive pressures are supplied to the suction nozzle 28B from an air supply device (not shown) via the nozzle shaft 28A. The suction nozzle 28B picks up a component E when negative pressure is supplied, and releases the component E when positive pressure is supplied. Here, head numbers starting from 1 are assigned as head identification numbers, starting from the mounting head 28 on the left. Although an inline type head unit 24 has been described as an example here, the head unit 24 may also be a so-called rotary head in which a plurality of mounting heads 28 are arranged on the circumference.

[0039] The electrical configuration of the surface mounter 11 will be described with reference to Fig. 5. The surface mounter 11 includes a control unit 50 and an operation unit 51. The control unit 50 includes an arithmetic processing unit 52, a motor control unit 53, a storage unit 54, an image processing unit 55, an external input / output unit 56, a feeder communication unit 57, and the like.

[0040] The arithmetic processing unit 52 includes a CPU, a RAM, etc., and controls each unit of the surface mounter 11 by executing a control program stored in the storage unit 54 . The motor control unit 53 controls the rotation of each motor such as the X-axis servo motor 58 and the Y-axis servo motor 59 under the control of the calculation processing unit 52 . The storage unit 54 stores various programs and data executed by the arithmetic processing unit 52. The various data includes component recognition data received from the server 10.

[0041] The image processing unit 55 is configured to take in image signals output from the component imaging camera 30 and the board imaging camera 31 . The external input / output unit 56 is a so-called interface, and is configured to receive detection signals output from various sensors 63 provided in the main body of the surface mounter 11. The external input / output unit 56 is also configured to control the operation of various actuators 64 (such as an air supply device) based on control signals output from the arithmetic processing unit 52.

[0042] The feeder communication unit 57 is connected to the tape feeder 23 and controls the tape feeder 23 in an integrated manner. The operation unit 51 is equipped with a display device such as a liquid crystal display, and input devices such as a touch panel, keyboard, mouse, etc. The operator can operate the operation unit 51 to perform various settings and edit the duplicate data of the component recognition data, which will be described later.

[0043] (2) Part recognition data The component recognition data is data used by the surface mounter 11 to determine whether the component shape is good or bad. The component recognition data is prepared for each type of component E. The component recognition data includes component shape data that represents the component shape, and imaging condition data that represents the imaging conditions when the component E is imaged by the component imaging camera 30.

[0044] The content of the component shape data varies depending on the type of component E. For example, as shown in FIG. 6A, a chip component 70 such as a resistor is generally rectangular when viewed from below, with electrodes formed on both longitudinal sides. Therefore, the component shape data for chip component 70 includes the vertical width A, horizontal width B, and horizontal width C of each electrode when viewed from below. For example, as shown in FIG. 6B, a QFP (Quad Flat Package) component 71 has multiple leads extending from the four sides of the component body. Therefore, the component shape data for QFP component 71 includes the vertical width A, horizontal width B, the number of leads on each side, lead length C, lead width D, and spacing E between adjacent leads when viewed from below. In addition, the component shape data also includes dimensional tolerances.

[0045] The imaging condition data includes the brightness of the light source when imaging the component E. The imaging condition data may also include exposure time. The content of the imaging condition data can be determined appropriately according to the imaging conditions that can be set in the component imaging camera 30. As described above, the master data of the component recognition data is stored in the storage unit 13 of the server 10. Each surface mounter 11 receives the master data from the server 10 and stores the received master data in the storage unit 54 as component recognition data.

[0046] (3) Component mounting process The component mounting process executed by the control unit 50 of the surface mounter 11 will be described with reference to FIG. In S101, the control unit 50 causes the mounting head 28 to pick up the component E supplied by the tape feeder 23. In the following description, the component E picked up by the mounting head 28 will be referred to as the target component E.

[0047] In S102, the control unit 50 causes the component imaging camera 30 to capture an image of the target component E. In S103, the control unit 50 judges whether the part shape is good or bad using the part recognition data of the type of target part E on the image captured by the part imaging camera 30 (an example of a judgment process). In S104, the control unit 50 transmits type information indicating the type of the target part E, the image captured in S102, and the determination result in S103 (an example of the determination result of the determination process) to the server 10. The server 10 associates the received type information, image, and determination result and stores them in the memory unit 13 (an example of the storage process). In the following description, the images stored in the memory unit 13 of the server 10 are referred to as past images.

[0048] In S105, the control unit 50 proceeds to S106 if it has determined that the test piece is good in S103, and proceeds to S107 if it has determined that the test piece is bad. In S106, the control unit 50 mounts the target component E on the board P. In S107, the control unit 50 discards the target part E.

[0049] In S108, the control unit 50 determines whether or not to update the component recognition data for the type of target component E. Specifically, the control unit 50 determines whether or not the following update conditions are met. The following update conditions are conditions for determining whether or not the defective determination is due to a change in lot. Update condition: A defective judgment occurs a predetermined number of times (for example, 5 times) or more before the number of times that component E supplied by the replaced reel has been mounted reaches a predetermined number of times (for example, 20 times).

[0050] When a reel is replaced, the lot of component E may be changed between the reel before replacement and the reel after replacement. If the defective judgment is due to the lot change, the frequency of defective judgments increases after the reel is replaced. Therefore, by determining whether the above-mentioned update condition is met, it can be determined whether the defective judgment is due to the lot change. The update condition is not limited to the above-mentioned condition as long as it is a condition that can determine whether the defective judgment is due to the lot change.

[0051] If the defective judgment is due to a change in lot, the frequency of subsequent defective judgments will increase if the same component recognition data is continued to be used. Therefore, if the defective judgment is due to a change in lot, the control unit 50 determines to update the component recognition data in order to reduce the frequency of defective judgments. If the update condition is met (i.e., if the defective judgment is due to a change in lot), the control unit 50 determines to update the component recognition data and proceeds to S109, but if the update condition is not met, the control unit 50 returns to S101 and repeats the process. In S109, the control unit 50 executes the process of updating the component recognition data. After executing the process of updating the component recognition data, the control unit 50 returns to S101 and repeats the process.

[0052] (4) Updating part recognition data The component recognition data update process executed in S109 will now be described. In the component recognition data update process, the operator edits the duplicated data of the component recognition data. The operator can select whether to edit the duplicated data on the surface mounter 11 or on the server 10. For ease of understanding, the following description will be given separately for the case where the data is edited on the surface mounter 11 and the case where the data is edited on the server 10.

[0053] (4-1) When editing with a surface mounter The process of updating component recognition data when edited by the surface mounter 11 consists of a first process executed by the surface mounter 11, a process executed by the server 10, and a second process executed by the surface mounter 11. Each process will be explained below.

[0054] (4-1-1) First process executed by the surface mounter The first process executed by the surface mounter 11 will be described with reference to FIG. In S201, the control unit 50 of the surface mounter 11 (hereinafter simply referred to as the surface mounter 11) creates duplicate data of the component recognition data. Then, the surface mounter 11 displays the image of the target component E captured in S102 on the operation unit 51, and accepts editing of the duplicate data from the operator. While looking at the displayed image, the operator edits the duplicate data so that the judgment result becomes a good judgment (an example of editing processing). In S202, the surface mounter 11 transmits the edited copy data to the server 10.

[0055] (4-1-2) Processing performed on the server The processing executed by the server 10 will be described with reference to Fig. 9. This processing is started when the server 10 receives the above-described duplicated data from the surface mounter 11. The processing by the server 10 to receive the duplicated data from the surface mounter 11 is an example of an edit receiving processing. In S301, the control unit 12 of the server 10 (hereinafter simply referred to as the server 10) extracts past images of the part E of the type (i.e., the type of the target part E) indicated by the type information received in S104 from the storage unit 13. The past images to be extracted may be all past images of the type, or a predetermined number of the most recent past images (an example of a first test process).

[0056] In S302, the server 10 judges whether the part shape is good or bad on the past image extracted in S301 using the duplicated data received in S202 (an example of a first test process). In S303, the server 10 compares the determination result in S103 (i.e., the determination result stored in the storage unit 13 in S104) with the determination result in S302 for the part E of the type indicated by the type information, thereby testing the edited duplicated data (an example of a first test process). Specifically, by comparing them, the server 10 determines whether the following pass conditions are met: Pass condition: First-run rate is above the threshold The first-run rate is expressed by the following formula 1. The first-run rate can also be said to be the agreement rate of the judgment results. First-pass rate=number of parts E for which the judgment result in S103 matches the judgment result in S302 / (number of parts E for which the judgment result matched+number of parts E for which the judgment result did not match) Equation 1

[0057] For example, it is assumed that past images of five parts E are stored for the type indicated by the type information, and that the following determinations are made for these five parts E in S103 and S302, respectively. Judgment result in S103: Good, poor, good, poor, good S302 result: Good, bad, good, good, bad In this case, the judgment results in S103 and S302 for the first three parts E match, but the judgment results for the last two parts E do not match. Therefore, the first-pass rate is 3 / 5. In this case, if the threshold value were 4 / 5, for example, it would be determined that the pass condition is not met.

[0058] In contrast to this, for example, it is assumed that the following determinations are made for the five parts E in S103 and S302, respectively. Judgment result in S103: Good, poor, good, poor, good S302 result: Good, poor, good, good, good In this case, the judgment results in S103 and S302 match for the first three parts E and the last part E, but the judgment result does not match for the fourth part E. Therefore, the first-pass rate is 4 / 5. In this case, if the threshold value is 4 / 5, it is determined that the pass condition is met. If the passing condition is met, the server 10 proceeds to S305, and if not, ends the process. In S305, the server 10 instructs the surface mounter 11 to update the component recognition data stored in the surface mounter 11 with the duplicated data edited by the surface mounter 11.

[0059] (4-1-3) Second process executed by the surface mounter The second process executed by the surface mounter 11 will be described with reference to Fig. 10. This process is started when the surface mounter 11 is instructed by the server 10 to update the component recognition data. In S401, the surface mounter 11 updates the component recognition data stored in the storage unit 54 with the edited duplicate data (an example of an update process).

[0060] (4-2) When editing on the server The component recognition data update process when edited by the server 10 also consists of a first process executed by the surface mounter 11, a process executed by the server 10, and a second process executed by the surface mounter 11. Each process will be explained below. In the following explanation, the same processes as when edited by the surface mounter 11 are assigned the same reference numerals, and explanations thereof will be omitted.

[0061] (4-2-1) First process executed by the surface mounter The first process executed by the surface mounter 11 will be described with reference to FIG. In S501, the surface mounter 11 instructs the server 10 to edit the duplicated data of the component recognition data.

[0062] (4-2-1) Processing performed on the server The process executed by the server 10 will be described with reference to FIG. In S601, the server 10 creates duplicate data of the master data. Then, the server 10 displays the image of the target part E received in S104 on the display unit 15, and accepts edits of the duplicate data from the operator (an example of edit processing and edit receiving processing).

[0063] In S602, if the passing condition is met, the server 10 proceeds to S603, and if not, the server 10 proceeds to S604. In S603, the server 10 transmits the copy data edited in S601 to the surface mounter 11. In S604, the server 10 accepts a selection from the operator as to whether or not to cancel the update of the parts recognition data. If cancel is selected, the server 10 terminates the process, and if not, the server 10 returns to S601 and accepts editing of the duplicated data.

[0064] (4-2-3) Second process executed by the surface mounter 13, the second process executed by the surface mounter 11 will be described. This process starts when the surface mounter 11 receives the duplicated data from the server 10. In S701, the surface mounter 11 updates the component recognition data stored in the storage unit 54 with the duplicated data received from the server 10.

[0065] (5) If the frequency of defective judgments does not decrease At a predetermined timing after updating the component recognition data (for example, when a predetermined number of components E have been mounted after updating the component recognition data), the surface mounter 11 determines whether the frequency of defective determinations of the components mounted after updating the component recognition data is equal to or greater than a threshold value. The threshold value can be determined as appropriate. For example, the threshold value may be the frequency of defective determinations before updating the component recognition data.

[0066] If the frequency of defective determination is equal to or greater than the threshold value, the surface mounter 11 accepts the following selection from the operator (an example of a selection acceptance process). (a) Re-edit the duplicated data of the parts recognition data. (b) Select either the pre-update component recognition data or the updated component recognition data. (c) The updated part recognition data is used only for a specific period.

[0067] If the above-mentioned (a) is selected, the surface mounter 11 re-executes the processing from S201 (or S601) onwards. If (b) is selected, the surface mounter 11 accepts a selection from the operator as to which component recognition data to use, either the component recognition data before the update or the component recognition data after the update. If the component recognition data before the update is selected, the surface mounter 11 reverts the current component recognition data (i.e., the component recognition data after the update) to the component recognition data before the update. If (c) is selected, the surface mounter 11 uses the component recognition data after the update only for a specific period, and reverts to the component recognition data before the update after the specific period has elapsed. The specific period can be set arbitrarily. For example, the specific period may be until the next reel replacement.

[0068] (6) Effects of the embodiment According to the mounting system 1, duplicate data edited based on an image of a component E determined to be defective is tested using images of other components E of the same type as the component E determined to be defective. The other components E include components E from a different lot from the component E determined to be defective. For this reason, the mounting system 1 also tests the duplicate data using images of components E from different lots. Duplicate data that passes this test is guaranteed to a certain extent to be able to correctly determine whether the component is good or bad even if the lot is changed. Therefore, according to the mounting system 1, when updating the component recognition data, the validity of the component recognition data can be ensured so that the pass / fail of the component shape can be correctly determined even if the lot is changed.

[0069] According to the mounting system 1, if the defective judgment is due to a change in the lot of the component E, the duplicate data is edited, so that it is possible to more reliably prevent the difference in the lot of the component E from affecting the judgment of whether the component shape is good or bad.

[0070] According to the mounting system 1, if the first-run rate is equal to or greater than a threshold value, it is determined that the test has passed, thereby ensuring the validity of the updated component recognition data.

[0071] According to the mounting system 1, the operator can re-edit the duplicated data of the component recognition data by selecting the above-mentioned (a). The operator can select which component recognition data to use, the pre-update component recognition data or the updated component recognition data, by selecting (b). The operator can use the updated component recognition data for only a specific period by selecting (c).

[0072] <Embodiment 2> A mounting system 201 according to the second embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 14. The mounting system 201 according to the second embodiment also includes a mounting line L and a server 10. The mounting line L according to the second embodiment includes a plurality of surface mounters 11.

[0073] As shown in Fig. 4 described above, the head unit 24 is provided with a plurality of mounting heads 28. Each mounting head 28 is a component having the same function, and each component E is picked up by one of the mounting heads 28. As shown in Fig. 3, component imaging cameras 30 are provided in two locations, one on the front side and one on the rear side. Each component imaging camera 30 is a component having the same function, and each component E is imaged by one of the component imaging cameras 30. As shown in Fig. 3, a plurality of tape feeders 23 are attached to the component supply device 22. Each tape feeder 23 is a component having the same function, and each component E is supplied by one of the tape feeders 23.

[0074] For convenience, in the following description, the component recognition data that is received as master data from the server 10 and stored in the storage unit 54 of the surface mounter 11 will be referred to as common component recognition data. The common component recognition data is component recognition data that is used in common by all components. The server 10 according to the second embodiment determines whether to update the common component recognition data with edited duplicate data or set the edited duplicate data as component recognition data for the component used to mount the component E that has been determined to be defective, based on the occurrence status of the defective determination.

[0075] Specifically, server 10 basically determines to update the common component recognition data, but if defective judgments are concentrated in a specific component, it determines to set the edited duplicated data as the component recognition data for that specific component. If the edited duplicated data is set as the component recognition data for a specific component, the pass / fail of the component shape of component E that is subsequently mounted using that specific component is determined using the component recognition data for that specific component. The pass / fail of the component shape of component E that is mounted using other components is determined using the common component recognition data.

[0076] (1) Component mounting process 7 described above, the component mounting process according to the second embodiment will be described. In the component mounting process according to the second embodiment, in S104, the surface mounter 11 transmits to the server 10, in addition to the type information, the image, and the determination result, mounter identification information for uniquely identifying the surface mounter 11 that mounted the target component E, camera identification information for uniquely identifying the component imaging camera 30 that imaged the target component E, head identification information (i.e., the head number) for uniquely identifying the mounting head 28 that picked up the target component E, and feeder identification information for uniquely identifying the tape feeder 23 that supplied the target component E. The server 10 stores the received type information, image, determination result, and each of the above-mentioned identification information in the storage unit 13 in association with each other.

[0077] (2) Updating part recognition data A description will be given of the process of updating component recognition data according to the second embodiment, taking as an example a case where the surface mounter 11 edits the duplicated data.

[0078] (2-1) Processing executed on the server The processing executed by the server 10 according to the second embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 15. In the following description, steps that are substantially the same as those in the first embodiment will be denoted by the same reference numerals, and the description thereof will be omitted. In S801, the server 10 determines whether to update the common component recognition data or set component recognition data for a specific component (an example of a determination process). Specifically, the server 10 determines to update the component recognition data if the update condition described in the first embodiment, "a predetermined number of times (e.g., five times) or more of defective judgments have occurred before the number of times that components E supplied by the replaced reel have been mounted reaches a predetermined number of times (e.g., 20 times)," is met. In this case, if four out of the five defective judgments are concentrated on a specific component of the surface mounter 11 indicated by the mounter identification information received in S104, the server 10 determines that the defective judgments are concentrated on the specific component.

[0079] For example, if four out of five occurrences occur in the mounting head 28 with head number 2 of the surface mounter 11 described above, the server 10 will determine that the defective judgments are concentrated in the mounting head 28 with head number 2. The criteria for determining whether the defective judgments are concentrated in a specific component are not limited to the example described above, and can be determined as appropriate. If the defective judgments are not concentrated in a specific component, the server 10 determines to update the common component recognition data and proceeds to S802, and if they are concentrated, it determines to set component recognition data for the specific component and proceeds to S803.

[0080] In S802, the server 10 extracts the past images of the component E mounted by the surface mounter 11 described above from the past images of the component E of the type indicated by the type information (an example of a first test process). In S803, the server 10 extracts only past images of components E of the type indicated by the type information that were mounted using the specific components of the surface mounter 11 described above (an example of a second test process). For example, if the defective judgments were concentrated in the mounting head 28 with head number 2 of the surface mounter 11 described above, the server 10 extracts only past images of components E that were picked up using the mounting head 28 with head number 2 of the surface mounter 11 described above from past images of components E of the type indicated by the type information.

[0081] In S804, when updating the common component recognition data, the server 10 judges whether the component shape is good or bad using the duplicated data received in S202 on the past image extracted in S802 (an example of a first test process). When setting component recognition data for a specific component, the server 10 judges whether the component shape is good or bad using the duplicated data received in S202 on the past image extracted in S803 (an example of a second test process).

[0082] In S805, the server 10 compares the determination result in S103 with the determination result in S804 to test the edited duplicated data (an example of a first test process and a second test process). In S806, if the server 10 is to update the common component recognition data, it instructs the above-mentioned surface mounter 11 to update the common component recognition data. If the server 10 is to set component recognition data for a specific component, the server 10 notifies the above-mentioned surface mounter 11 of the identification information of the component, and instructs it to set component recognition data for the component identified by the identification information.

[0083] (2-2) Second process executed by the surface mounter 10 described above, the second process executed by the surface mounter 11 according to the second embodiment will be described. In the second process executed by the surface mounter 11 according to the second embodiment, in S401, when the surface mounter 11 is instructed by the server 10 to update the common component recognition data, the surface mounter 11 updates the common component recognition data stored in the surface mounter 11 with duplicated data edited by the surface mounter 11 (an example of an update process). On the other hand, when the surface mounter 11 is instructed by the server 10 to set component recognition data for a specific component, the surface mounter 11 sets the edited duplicated data as component recognition data for the component specified by the server 10 (an example of a setting process).

[0084] Here, the case where the duplicated data is edited by the surface mounter 11 has been described as an example, but the case where the duplicated data is edited by the server 10 is also similar.

[0085] (3) If the frequency of defective judgments does not decrease As in the first embodiment, the surface mounter 11 according to the second embodiment determines, at a predetermined timing after updating or setting the component recognition data, whether the frequency of defective determinations of components mounted after updating or setting the component recognition data is equal to or greater than a threshold, and if the frequency of defective determinations is equal to or greater than the threshold, receives the following selections from the operator (an example of a selection receiving process): The options available when updating common component recognition data are the same as in the first embodiment, so here we will explain the options available when setting component recognition data for the components. (a) Re-edit the duplicated data of the common part recognition data. (b) Select which part recognition data to use from the common part recognition data and the part recognition data for the constituent elements. (c) Part recognition data for components is used only for a specific period.

[0086] The operation of the surface mounter 11 when each option is selected is substantially the same as in the first embodiment, so a description thereof will be omitted.

[0087] (4) Effects of the embodiment According to mounting system 201, when defective judgments are concentrated on a specific component, component recognition data for that specific component is set, thereby narrowing the range affected by updating the component recognition data as much as possible. On the other hand, when defective judgments are not concentrated on a specific component, common component recognition data is updated, thereby reducing the influence of the lot regardless of which component is used.

[0088] According to the mounting system 201, the range affected by updating the component recognition data can be limited to one mounting head 28, one component imaging camera 30, or one tape feeder 23.

[0089] According to the mounting system 201, if the first-run rate is equal to or greater than a threshold value, it is determined that the test has passed, thereby ensuring the validity of the set component recognition data.

[0090] According to the mounting system 201, the operator can re-edit the duplicated data of the component recognition data by selecting the above-mentioned (a). The operator can select which component recognition data to use, the common component recognition data or the component recognition data for the component, by selecting (b). The operator can use the component recognition data for the component only for a specific period by selecting (c).

[0091] <Other embodiments> The technology disclosed in this specification is not limited to the embodiments described above and in the drawings, and for example, the following embodiments are also included in the technical scope disclosed in this specification.

[0092] (1) In the above embodiment, the passing condition is described as "the first-run rate is equal to or greater than a threshold value," but the passing condition is not limited to this. For example, the passing condition may be "the judgment result in S103 and the judgment result in S302 completely match," or "the number of parts judged as good in S302 is greater than the number of parts judged as good in S103."

[0093] (2) In the second embodiment, a case where it is determined in step S801 whether to update the common parts recognition data or set parts recognition data for a specific component is described as an example. However, for example, the occurrence status of defective judgments for each component may be displayed, and the operator may select each time whether to update the common parts recognition data or set parts recognition data for a specific component. Alternatively, the common parts recognition data may not be updated, and parts recognition data for a specific component may always be set.

[0094] (3) In the above embodiment, multiple mounting heads 28, multiple component imaging cameras 30, and multiple tape feeders 23 are used as examples of multiple components having the same function, but the multiple components having the same function are not limited to these and may be other components.

[0095] (4) In the above embodiment, an example has been described in which editing of the replicated data is accepted when the aforementioned update condition is met. In other words, an example has been described in which editing of the replicated data is accepted when a defective judgment is due to a change in lot. However, the condition for editing the replicated data is not limited to this and can be determined as appropriate. For example, regardless of whether a lot has been changed, it may be determined that the replicated data should be edited if a certain number of defective judgments have occurred in the most recent predetermined number of mountings. Alternatively, a configuration may be adopted in which the operator can edit the replicated data at any time.

[0096] (5) In the above embodiment, the surface mounter 11 determines whether the component shape is good or bad. However, the determination of whether the component shape is good or bad may be made by a device other than the surface mounter 11. For example, the determination of whether the component shape is good or bad may also be made by a post-mounting appearance inspection device disposed downstream of the surface mounter 11. The determination result may be notified to the surface mounter 11.

[0097] (6) In the above embodiment, the component imaging camera 30 was used as an example of the imaging unit that images the component, but the imaging unit may be an imaging camera that captures an image of the component E that is sucked onto the mounting head 28 from the horizontal direction. Alternatively, the imaging unit may be a board imaging camera 31.

[0098] (7) In the above-described second embodiment, in steps S802 and S803, the server 10 extracts, from among past images of components E of the type indicated by the type information, past images of components E mounted by the surface mounter 11 indicated by the mounter identification information. In contrast, the server 10 may extract all past images of components E of the type indicated by the type information, regardless of which surface mounter 11 was used to mount them.

[0099] (8) In the above embodiment, the master data stored in the server 10 is not updated. In contrast, for example, if it becomes clear that the common component recognition data stored in the surface mounter 11 is being updated and the pass / fail determination is now more accurate than before the update, the master data may be updated with the common component recognition data.

[0100] (9) In the above embodiment, an example was described in which the operator edited the duplicated data while viewing an image of the component E that was determined to be defective. However, the surface mounter 11 or the server 10 may automatically edit the duplicated data based on the image of the component E that was determined to be defective so that the determination result becomes a pass judgment.

[0101] (10) In the above embodiment, an example was described in which past images are stored in the server 10 and the replicated data is tested by the server 10. However, the surface mounter 11 may have the functions of the server 10. That is, past images may be stored in the surface mounter 11, and the surface mounter 11 may test the replicated data. [Explanation of symbols]

[0102] 1: Implementation system 10: Server (example of test equipment) 11: Surface mounter 12: Control section 13: Storage section 23: Tape feeder (an example of a component and feeder) 28: Mounting head (example of component) 30: Component imaging camera (an example of a component and imaging unit) 50: Control section 54: Storage section 201: Implementation System P: Board E: Parts

Claims

1. A mounting system for mounting components on a substrate, an imaging unit that images the component; A memory unit; A control unit; Equipped with The control unit a determination process for determining whether a component shape is acceptable or not using component recognition data on the image captured by the imaging unit; a storage process of storing the image and the determination result of the determination process in the storage unit in association with each other; an editing process of editing duplicate data of the component recognition data based on the image of the component determined to be defective in the determination process; a first test process for testing the edited duplicate data by determining whether a part shape is good or bad on the image of another part of the same type as the part determined to be defective, using the duplicate data edited based on the image of the part determined to be defective, and comparing the determination result with the determination result of the determination process; an update process for updating the component recognition data with the edited duplicated data when the component recognition data passes the test in the first test process; Implementing system.

2. The mounting system according to claim 1, The control unit determines whether the defect determination is due to a change in lot of the component, and executes the editing process if it determines that the defect determination is due to a change in lot.

3. The mounting system according to claim 1 or 2, The mounting system includes a plurality of components having the same function, and mounts each of the components on the board using one of the components; the component recognition data is common component recognition data used in common by all the components, The control unit a second test process for testing the edited duplicate data by judging the acceptability of a component shape on the image of another component mounted using the same components as those used to mount the component judged to be defective, among other components of the same type as the component judged to be defective, and comparing the judgment result with the judgment result of the judgment process; a setting process for setting the edited duplicated data as the component recognition data for the component used in mounting the component determined to be defective when the test in the second test process is passed; a determination process that determines whether to update the common component recognition data with the duplicated data edited based on the image of the component determined to be defective, or to set the duplicated data edited based on the image of the component determined to be defective as the component recognition data for the constituent element used to mount the component determined to be defective, based on the occurrence status of the defective determination; Run an assembly system that executes the first test process and the update process if it is determined in the judgment process that the common component recognition data should be updated with the duplicated data edited based on the image of the component that has been determined to be defective, and executes the second test process and the setting process if it is determined that the duplicated data edited based on the image of the component that has been determined to be defective should be set as the component recognition data for the component.

4. The mounting system according to claim 3, The components of the mounting system are at least one of a mounting head that holds and releases the components, the imaging unit, and a feeder that supplies components to the mounting head.

5. The mounting system according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The control unit determines that the test has passed if, in the first test process, the judgment result obtained by judging whether the component shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data completely matches the judgment result of the judgment process, or if the agreement rate between the judgment result obtained by judging whether the component shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data and the judgment result of the judgment process is equal to or greater than a threshold.

6. The mounting system according to claim 3 or claim 4, The control unit determines that the test has passed if, in the second test process, the judgment result of determining whether the component shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data completely matches the judgment result of the judgment process, or if the agreement rate between the judgment result of determining whether the component shape is good or bad using the edited duplicated data and the judgment result of the judgment process is equal to or greater than a threshold.

7. A mounting system according to claim 1 or claim 2, When the frequency of defective judgments after updating the component recognition data is equal to or greater than a threshold, the control unit executes a selection receiving process to accept one of the following selections: re-editing duplicate data of the component recognition data; selecting which component recognition data to use from the component recognition data before the update or the component recognition data after the update; and using the component recognition data after the update only for a specific period.

8. The mounting system according to claim 3 or claim 4, and wherein, when the frequency of defective judgments after setting the component recognition data for the component is equal to or greater than a threshold, the control unit executes a selection receiving process to receive a selection of one of the following: re-editing duplicate data of the common component recognition data; selecting which of the common component recognition data or the component recognition data for the component is to be used; or using the component recognition data for the component only for a specific period.

9. 1. A method for updating component recognition data used to determine the acceptability of component shapes in a mounting system that mounts components on a board, comprising: an imaging step of imaging the component by an imaging unit; a determining step of determining whether a component shape is acceptable or not using the component recognition data on the image captured by the imaging unit; a storage step of storing the image and the determination result in the determination step in a storage unit in association with each other; an editing step of editing duplicate data of the component recognition data based on the image of the component determined to be defective in the determination step; a first testing step of judging whether a part shape is good or bad on the image of another part of the same type as the part judged to be defective using the duplicated data edited based on the image of the part judged to be defective, and comparing the judgment result with the judgment result of the judgment step, thereby testing the edited duplicated data; an updating step of updating the component recognition data with the edited duplicated data if the component recognition data passes the test in the first testing step; How to update part recognition data, including:

10. A test device that is communicably connected to a surface mounter that mounts components on a board, A memory unit; A control unit; Equipped with The control unit a storage process of receiving, from the surface mounter, an image of the component and a determination result obtained by determining whether the component shape is good or bad on the image using component recognition data, and storing the received image and the determination result in the storage unit in association with each other; an editing and receiving process for editing duplicate data of the component recognition data based on the image of the component that has been determined to be defective in a pass / fail determination using the component recognition data, or for receiving duplicate data edited by the surface mounter; a first test process for testing the edited duplicated data by determining whether a part shape is good or bad on the image of another part of the same type as the part determined to be defective, using the duplicated data edited based on the image of the part determined to be defective, and comparing the determination result with the determination result stored in the storage unit; Execute the test equipment.

11. A test program executed on a computer communicably connected to a surface mounter that mounts components on a board, a storage process of receiving, from the surface mounter, an image of the component and a determination result obtained by determining whether the component shape is good or bad on the image using component recognition data, and storing the received image and the determination result in a storage unit in association with each other; an editing and receiving process for editing duplicate data of the component recognition data based on the image of the component that has been determined to be defective in a pass / fail determination using the component recognition data, or for receiving duplicate data edited by the surface mounter; a first test process for testing the edited duplicated data by determining whether a part shape is good or bad on the image of another part of the same type as the part determined to be defective, using the duplicated data edited based on the image of the part determined to be defective, and comparing the determination result with the determination result stored in the storage unit; A test program that causes the computer to execute the above.

Images