Surface mount.

[wa1vwl]

Last year I toured the Vicor plant in Andover, Massachusetts. Vicor
makes DC power modules. What I saw was almost complete assembly
untouched by human hands and electrical testing by machines. Surface
mount components were mounted and dispensed on giant reels. Soldering
was completely automated. At the end of the line, a robotic arm picked
up an individual assembly and inserted it in an empty test bay.
Increasingly manufacturers are relying on these and similar methods
because factory cost and overhead is low and this in turn translates to
low selling price. Unlike humans, machines keep going around the clock,
never complain and never take a breaks, and most important of all never
ask for a raise. Once set properly, it spits out thousands of identical
pieces. The high speed logic we commonly see today would not be possible
without surface mount's small footprint and no lead lengths. I regularly
work on assemblies that are double sided surface mount and have up to 22
layers. And while it's not impossible to work/repair one of those, it
does take some special equipment to do a good job. For example, a good
stereo zoom microscope and a good soldering iron and tip (and a steady
hand). You also neeed tweezers and other assorted small tools. As far as
troubleshooting is concerned, that's usually done by a technician using
computerized equipment and a test fixture. It either works or it
doesn't. If it doesn't, unless there's a costly component or components
on the board, it gets scrapped. No sense paying someone double what it
cost to manufacture. What I'm driving at is this. As manufacturers use
surface mount technology, this creates less of a demand for leaded
components. This in turn means they will become less available and more
costly. What it means to us as hobbyists is that it gradually becomes
prohibitively expensive to roll our own. Conversely, it also becomes
prohibitively expensive for a company to sell a kit using such
components. I believe this is one of the things that killed Heathkit in
its later years. You could buy something that was functionally
equivalent, already assembled, for the same money or less. Notice I said
later years. I'm not talking about Heathkit's heyday when the HW-100
could be had for $240 and worked better than a $420 Swan 350.
Personally, I think there's still a market for some kits. For example,
I'd like to see a linear amplifier kit similar to either the SB-200 or
220 or both. The technology hasn't changed and is still very much
viable. Antenna tuners is another area that could be explored. But it
has to be for less money than a fully assembled product. Economics is
the bottom line. As far as receivers, transmitters, and transceivers it
would be virtually impossible to be economically competetive. Can you
imagine an Icom IC-706 in kit form? Too small? Well, OK, how about a
large box with the same functionality? It still wouldn't be cost
effective.

73/Gerry/W1ID

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
To subscribe: listserv at listserv.tempe.gov
and in body: subscribe HEATH yourfirstname yourlastname
To unsubscribe:  listserv at listserv.tempe.gov
and in body: signoff HEATH
Archives for HEATH: http://www.tempe.gov/archives
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --