Feed aggregator

Line scan cameras occupy a distinctive niche in machine vision: rather than freezing a full frame, they assemble an image one line at a time as the subject moves past the sensor. This scanning method makes them indispensable for inspecting continuous materials, fast conveyor flows, and wide surfaces where resolution and throughput must work in tandem.

In this post, we will offer a glimpse into how line-scan imaging turns motion into precision, sharing a few practical clues along the way.

Line scan camera imaging principles

An industrial line scan camera is a specialized imaging device that uses a single line of pixels instead of a two-dimensional sensor. Unlike conventional cameras, which capture an entire frame at once, a line scan camera records one line at a time in rapid succession. To build a two-dimensional image, the object must move relative to the camera—either conveyed past the sensor or kept stationary while the camera itself moves.

Operating at very high speeds (10–400 kHz), these cameras can scan moving objects without motion blur. Because of their extremely short exposure times, they require bright, uniform line illumination to ensure accurate imaging.

As with conventional 2D imaging, a line scan camera requires both a lens and dedicated line illumination to ensure accurate image capture. Several sensor configurations are available: a single sensor line is typically sufficient for producing monochrome images, while dual-line or quad-line sensors can capture the same image multiple times to increase brightness. This approach reduces the intensity of illumination required, making image acquisition more efficient.

So, in a nutshell, a line scan camera consists of a single row of pixels—or multiple rows in certain configurations—that captures one line of an image at a time. As the object moves past the camera or the camera scans across the object, the system constructs a complete image line by line.

This arrangement is particularly effective in conveyor-based or web inspection systems, where materials move continuously in a linear path. For precision inspection and high-speed applications, line scan cameras are indispensable in modern industrial imaging, delivering continuous, high-resolution images of fast-moving objects or large surfaces with remarkable accuracy.

Figure 1 Pencil sketch demonstrates a line scan camera capturing a flat object line by line to assemble a complete, high-resolution image during continuous motion. Source: Author

As a worthy aside, maintaining image proportions in line scan systems requires precise synchronization between the camera and the movement of the subject. This is typically managed by a rotary encoder, a mechanical sensor connected to the conveyor system that sends electrical pulses to the camera.

These pulses act as external triggers, ensuring that the camera captures each new line only when the object has travelled a specific, pre-defined distance. Without this hardware-level coordination, any fluctuations in the conveyor’s motor speed would cause the resulting image to appear vertically stretched or compressed.

Suitable applications for line scan cameras

Line scan cameras excel in scenarios where continuous movement and fine detail must be monitored with precision. In web inspection, they track paper, textiles, and films for defects across wide surfaces. In electronics manufacturing, they ensure accuracy in PCB production by detecting misalignments or flaws at high speed.

They are equally valuable in glass and surface evaluation, where even subtle scratches or irregularities must be identified. In food and beverage packaging, they verify labeling and seal integrity on fast conveyor lines.

Recycling and sorting operations also benefit, as line scan systems can distinguish materials in real time for efficient separation. Across these varied domains, technology delivers speed, reliability, and resolution that conventional imaging methods cannot match.

Line scan vs. area scan cameras

Choosing the right camera technology is a critical step in designing a machine vision system, and the decision often comes down to whether a line scan or an area scan camera is better suited to the task.

Line scan cameras capture images one line at a time, making them ideal for continuous inspection of fast-moving objects or large surfaces, such as materials on conveyor belts or webs of paper, textiles, and films. Their strength lies in producing seamless, high-resolution images without motion blur, even at very high speeds.

Area scan cameras, on the other hand, use a two-dimensional sensor to capture an entire frame in a single exposure. This makes them well suited for applications where objects are stationary or where the field of view is limited, such as component placement verification, barcode reading, or general object recognition.

In essence, line scan technology excels in continuous, high-speed imaging of extended surfaces, while area scan technology is more versatile for static or discrete object inspection. The choice depends on the nature of the material flow, the required resolution, and the inspection environment.

Figure 2 Line scan and area scan cameras drive machine vision efficiency by capturing high-fidelity visual data for real-time processing. Source: Author (composite); individual images belong to their respective producers

Power and I/O interfaces

Line scan cameras depend on robust power and data interfaces to ensure seamless integration with machine vision systems. Camera Link delivers deterministic, low-latency transmission for high-speed inspection tasks, while CoaXPress (CXP) combines ultra-fast data throughput with power delivery over coaxial cable.

GigE Vision, built on standard LAN/Ethernet infrastructure, is widely adopted because it supports cable runs up to 100 m, scales easily across factory networks, and leverages cost-effective switches and routers. HD-SDI enables real-time, uncompressed video transmission over coaxial lines, often used in broadcast or specialized imaging environments.

For simpler or lower-bandwidth setups, USB 3.0/3.1 provides plug-and-play connectivity with broad compatibility. The choice of interface depends on throughput, cable length, synchronization, and system architecture, with LAN-based GigE Vision standing out as a versatile option for PCB inspection and other industrial imaging applications.

Architecture of linear image sensors in line scan systems

Linear image sensors form the foundation of line scan cameras, capturing one row of pixels at a time to assemble seamless two-dimensional images of moving objects. Charge-coupled device (CCD) sensors shift accumulated charge through a common output register, preserving signal integrity and delivering high dynamic range—a valuable trait for detecting subtle defects on fast conveyor lines.

In contrast, CMOS sensors have become the dominant choice in modern industrial imaging. By converting charge to voltage directly at each pixel, CMOS sensors achieve faster readout speeds, lower power consumption, and greater integration flexibility, making them well suited for today’s extreme production line velocities. Note at this point that while CCDs remain a niche choice for specific scientific spectroscopy, CMOS has become the industry standard due to its superior speed, integration, and cost-efficiency.

For color imaging, line scan cameras often employ a trilinear architecture, consisting of three parallel rows of pixels filtered for red, green, and blue. As the target moves beneath the sensor, each row captures its respective color channel in sequence, and the system reconstructs a full-color line. Advanced designs may also use prism-based multi-sensor configurations to enhance color fidelity.

Figure 3 The S13774 CMOS linear image sensor enables high-speed industrial imaging for machine vision and inspection. Source: Hamamatsu

Because the final image is generated line by line, precise synchronization between the sensor’s line rate and the object’s motion is essential. Any mismatch can introduce spatial distortion, while perfect timing ensures distortion-free, high-resolution composite images. This architecture makes linear sensors indispensable for high-speed inspection tasks such as web monitoring, bare PCB analysis, print verification, and sorting, where continuous imaging of moving materials is required.

Evolution and role of contact image sensors

In modern industrial imaging, contact image sensor (CIS) has advanced from a basic document-scanning component into a high-performance alternative to traditional line scan cameras. Unlike reduction-type CCDs that rely on lenses to project a wide field of view onto a small chip, an industrial CIS functions as a 1:1 imaging system spanning the full width of the production line.

This compact design integrates a dense sensor array, gradient-index fiber lenses, and high-intensity LED lighting into a single housing. Because the sensor matches the width of the material being inspected, CIS modules eliminate edge distortion and uneven illumination often seen in conventional optics.

Over time, CIS technology has become the primary choice for web inspection—monitoring continuous materials such lithium-ion battery electrodes, solar wafers, and high-speed print rolls. Mounted just millimeters from the target, CIS units save valuable machine space while delivering uniform, high-resolution data across wide surfaces without the need for complex stitching software. Although they lack the depth of field offered by CCD-and-lens systems, their ability to provide distortion-free imaging over massive widths has made them the dominant standard for flat-surface industrial automation.

Repurposing surplus sensors for discovery

Whether you’re a seasoned tinkerer or just beginning to explore the world of line scan cameras, this session invites you to see electronic waste through a new lens. Hidden inside discarded flatbed scanners is a frontier of high-speed discovery: a high-resolution CCD, a precision-engineered slice of silicon that once mapped physical reality into the digital realm with sub-millimeter accuracy.

For makers, these surplus sensors aren’t leftovers—they’re the eyes of new projects. Repurposed linear arrays can power DIY Raman spectrometers to identify chemical substances, serve as “finish line” cameras for high-speed photography, even build experimental line scan cameras, or form the core of custom laser-based 3D scanners. It’s a chance to work directly with the physics of light, transforming a few dollars’ worth of surplus electronics into professional-grade instruments that reveal one thin, brilliant line at a time.

From my lab diary, I experimented some time ago with the CJMCU TSL1401CL module, along with discrete linear sensors such as the ILX555K, TCD1304AP, and KLI-8023. Those sessions helped me grasp the subtleties of line scan imaging—from timing control and signal conditioning to noise suppression and optical alignment.

Figure 4 The TCD1304AP CCD Linear Image Sensor upholds its legacy as a POS scanner workhorse by utilizing a precision electronic shutter to stabilize signal output against the unpredictability of ambient lighting. Source: Toshiba

Each component revealed its own quirks, turning datasheet specifications into hands-on lessons. That tinkering not only deepened my understanding of sensor behavior but also gave me the confidence to repurpose surplus parts into meaningful experiments, bridging theory with practical discovery.

This marks the end of the post. The journey through line scan cameras may also reveal a gateway to learning, invention, and the thrill of seeing light itself transformed into knowledge one line at a time.

T. K. Hareendran is a self-taught electronics enthusiast with a strong passion for innovative circuit design and hands-on technology. He develops both experimental and practical electronic projects, documenting and sharing his work to support fellow tinkerers and learners. Beyond the workbench, he dedicates time to technical writing and hardware evaluations to contribute meaningfully to the maker community.

Related Content

• The State of Machine Vision
• Camera design for machine vision
• Laser Sensor System Scans Railway Tracks
• Linescan Cameras Expand Image Resolution
• Line-scan cameras adjust to low and variable speeds

The post Line scan cameras: Fundamentals in focus appeared first on EDN.

Infineon Technologies AG of Munich, Germany says that the Munich District Court (Landgericht München I) has ruled in its favor in two further patent infringement cases – specifically one based on a patent and one based on a utility model – concerning gallium nitride (GaN) technology between Infineon and Innoscience...

Providing power via contact-closure circuits historically required a new third wire, but perhaps no longer.

Say the words “solid-state relay” (SSR) and most engineers also naturally think of two unspoken adjectives: “optical” and “isolation” (although the galvanic isolation can also be implemented using magnetic, capacitive, RF, or other techniques).

But that doesn’t have to be the case, as an SSR can also be non-isolated as well as non-optical. An example is a small IC introduced by Littelfuse, Inc. in late 2025: the CPC1601M, a 60 V, 2 A normally open (1-Form-A) solid-state latching relay targeting critical integration and power challenges in thermostat, HVAC, and building automation wiring (Figure 1).

Figure 1 The block diagram of the Littelfuse CPC1601M solid-state latching relay shows its basic input and output connections as well as internal function blocks. (Image source: Littlefuse)

What’s the problem here that needs solving? It’s largely a legacy issue and one that sounds simple enough – but it’s not.

Consider the classic two-wire thermostat still in use in millions of homes. It’s simple, reliable, and easy to troubleshoot. These thermostats provide a “dry” contact closure to call for heat when the sensed temperature drops below their setpoint. The heating system provides 24 VAC to this contact-closure loop via an AC-line transformer; when the circuit is closed, the 24 V energizes the coil of an electromechanical relay that turns on the 120 V/240V heating system.

Note: Dry contacts have a power source going through them that is independent of the power in the circuit they are controlling (often done by a relay). In a “wet” circuit, the controlling switch  or element is directly handling the full load current and voltage. A standard wall light switch is a wet circuit, as that switch handles the 120 VAC that goes to the light bulb. The terms “wet” and “dry” are holdovers from the pre-electronics days of electricity when wet electrochemical cells were used as higher-voltage batteries.

But there’s the problem with this elegantly simple two-wire dry scheme: when the homeowner wants to upgrade from the unpowered contact-closure unit to a better thermostat with digital readout or a smart Wi-Fi-enabled thermostat, that thermostat needs a power source. However, there is no power source in the open loop that thermostat controls: when the loop is open, there is no current flow.

In many such “upgrade” situations, the unpleasant solution is to run a new third wire for needed power, designated as the “common” or “C” wire. (Note that this “common” in unrelated to what electronic circuit designers called circuit common, as the HVAC industry has its own terms and designations.

Of course, running that third wire can be difficult, especially in a house with multiple floors and rooms. It often involves cutting openings in the walls to snake the wire around obstacles such as framing, fire stops, wiring conduits, and plumbing.

Littelfuse maintains that CPC1601M is the first PCB-mounted solid-state relay of its kind that combines load-powered operation with a latching architecture in a 3 × 3 mm DFN IC package. It can harvest operating power directly from the load or draw less than 1 μA from the system supply, thus enabling zero-power operation while dramatically extending battery life or eliminating the need for batteries altogether.

Solving missing-power challenge, CPC1601M relay can obtain operating power from the open-circuit load or system power supply. When power is supplied by the load, the relay opens periodically to obtain power via the open-circuit load voltage. In most applications this very short interruption is transparent to the load (Figure 2).

Figure 2 In basic load-powered mode, relay K1 is controlled by turning the CPC1601M relay on and off. (Image source: Littlefuse)

Its use is not limited to thermostats; it is also a viable solution to upgrading other contact-closure designs such as fire-control panels, security systems, and building automation subsystems.

What about the lack of galvanic isolation? That’s easy: it’s not needed here. The electromechanical relay that activates the heating system provides the needed isolation between the thermostat control loop and the 120/240 VAC heating system power (relays easily provide thousands of volts of isolation).

If you do need galvanic isolation – a requirement in dual-transformer HVAC systems where the transformer returns are separate and isolated from each other – it can be implemented with the addition of a few capacitors providing capacitive coupling of a PWM signal (Figure 3).

Figure 3 In the galvanically isolated configuration, the system microcontroller generates several multiple cycles of a PWM signal that is capacitively coupled by isolation capacitor C1. This PWM signal is filtered by R2 and C2 thus creating a DC signal that is used to trigger the SET input of the CPC1601M. (Image source: Littlefuse)

Additionally, the CPC1601M provides a power output pin that can supply external circuits with a maximum of 10 mW of power. The CPC1601M can sense whether it is powered by the load or by the system power supply automatically by monitoring the HVCC input pin. The load-powered mode of operation applies to an AC source, such as a 24 VAC transformer secondary voltage.

If all this seems confusing – and even simple circuits can be, depending on context – Littelfuse offers the LEB-0024 Evaluation Board with full documentation (Figure 4). The kit includes input and load-circuit terminal blocks along with switches for mode selection and manual relay operation.

Figure 4 The LEB-0024 Evaluation Board makes it easy to “play around” with the CPC1601M to better understand its functions in each application. (Image source: Littlefuse)

Have you ever had to deal with an upgrade issue where a conceptually simple requirement such as “just add another wire” had a ripple effect with respect to design-in, installation, bill of materials, or retrofit issues? How did you resolve these challenges?

References

• Worth HVAC Training, “What are ‘Dry Contacts“
• Control by Web, “Understanding Dry Contacts and How to Monitor Them”
• Electrical4U, “Dry Contacts: What is It?”
• High Performance HVAC, “How to Wire a Thermostat | HVAC Control”
• High Performance HVAC, “Running New Thermostat Wire | HVAC Heating and Cooling”
• High Performance HVAC, “Programmable Thermostat Wiring Diagrams | HVAC Control”

—Bill Schweber is a degreed senior EE who has written three textbooks, hundreds of technical articles, opinion columns, and product features. Prior to becoming an author and editor, he spent his entire hands-on career on the analog side by working on power supplies, sensors and signal conditioning, and wired and wireless communication links. His work experience includes many years at Analog Devices in applications and marketing, and he also developed significant mechanical-engineering insight while designing control electronics for large materials-testing systems.

Related Content

• Relays Are Great, But There’s No Need to Let Them Waste Power
• Electromechanical relays: an old-fashioned component solves modern problems
• The pulse of power: Mastering the PWM relay

The post A non-isolated SSR solves a not-so-simple “simple” power problem appeared first on EDN.

📰 Газета "Київський політехнік" № 23-24 за 2026 (.pdf) Інформація КП пт, 06/19/2026 - 15:00

DigiKey, the global distribution leader in electronic components and automation products, announces its sponsorship of the AIoT Design Challenge 2026, an initiative towards fostering innovation at the intersection of Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things (AIoT).

The DigiKey AIoT Design Challenge 2026 aims to provide participants with a rewarding innovation journey. Registered participants will receive exclusive access to essential resources, including development board details, specifications, idea submission samples, project article guidelines, and curated learning videos, ensuring they are fully equipped to bring their ideas to life.

Participants will have a chance to win cash prizes and development boards if their ideas are selected, including featured supplier boards from Analog Devices, Arduino, and M5Stack. Cash prizes will include ₹1,00,000 for first place, ₹30,000 for second place, ₹20,000 for third place, and 15 projects will be selected as “most popular” projects and awarded ₹5,000 each. In addition, participants who submit a qualified project abstract will be awarded a Certificate of Participation, recognizing their effort and initiative in the competition.

“DigiKey is excited to sponsor the AIoT Design Challenge 2026 and support the next generation of innovators exploring the possibilities of AI and IoT,” said Ben Brookes, director of regional marketing for DigiKey. “We are eager for participants to develop impactful, real-world solutions that push the boundaries of connected technology and inspire innovation across industries.”

Beyond monetary rewards, the competition offers unparalleled industry exposure. Winning projects will receive editorial coverage on ElectronicsForU.com, including a dedicated author page, and promotion across EFY’s extensive digital platforms, reaching an audience of over 5 million industry professionals.

The industry experts evaluate all submissions. Projects will be judged based on creativity and innovation, effective use of bill of materials sourced from DigiKey, quality of documentation, real-world applicability, and the strength of video demonstrations. This ensures a fair and thorough assessment while encouraging participants to develop well-rounded, impactful solutions.

The post DigiKey Launches AIoT Design Challenge 2026 appeared first on ELE Times.

Devices Deliver Over 1 kΩ Impedance to Filter Noise Above 10 MHz, Soft Saturation for Stable Inductance, +180 °C Continuous Operation, and Enhanced Resistance to
Shock and Vibration

Vishay Intertechnology, Inc., introduces the first four devices in its new IHDV line of high voltage power inductors for next-generation automotive, energy, and industrial systems. Engineered for designs requiring 1.5 kV isolation voltages, and available in compact 0808 (20 mm x 14 mm x 14 mm) and 1008 (25 mm x 20 mm x 23 mm) case sizes. The Automotive Grade IHDV-0808AC-3A and IHDV-1008BB-3A and commercial IHDV-0808AC-30 and IHDV-1008BB-30 combine continuous high temperature operation to 180 °C with soft saturation performance.

To extend the voltage capability beyond the 350 V typical of existing inductors, the Vishay Dale devices release an incorporated PET plastic coilform insulator that supports 1.5 kV isolation voltage. Enabled by a powdered iron alloy core, their soft saturation behavior allows inductance to remain stable under load for effective ripple current regulation, while withstanding transient in-rush currents up to five times their heat rating current.

For high frequency filtering, the IHDV devices deliver significantly higher impedance than similarly sized iron composite inductors. The 0808 models provide impedance of 1 kΩ at a peak frequency of 80 MHz, while the 1008 models deliver 2.8 kΩ at 25 MHz, three times the impedance of similar inductors at four times the frequency. Typical applications for the devices include on-board chargers, battery-charging circuits, power factor correction (PFC), and high-voltage DC battery filtering.

The IHDV-0808AC-3A and IHDV-0808AC-30 offer a compact, surface-mount footprint roughly one-third the volume of the 1008 model, while the advantage of the larger IHDV-1008BB-3A and IHDV-1008BB-30 is the through-hole terminations that deliver maximum mechanical strength in rugged environments. RoHS-compliant, halogen-free, and Vishay Green, all four devices incorporate additional support pins to increase resistance to shock and vibration. In addition, the automotive IHDV-0808AC-3A and IHDV-1008BB-3A are AEC-Q200.

Device Specification Table:

Part number	IHDV-0808AC-3A	IHDV-0808AC-30	IHDV-1008BB-3A	IHDV-1008BB-30
Dimensions (mm)	20 x 14 x 14		25 x 20 x 23
Inductance (µH)	1.9		10
DCR typ. (mΩ)	1.3		2.7
DCR max. (mΩ)	1.5		2.9
Heat rating current typ. (A)(1)	30.0		30.0
Saturation current typ. (A)(2)	110		68
SRF typ. (MHz)	83		22
AEC-Q200	Yes	No	Yes	No

(1) DC current (A) that will cause an approximate ΔT of 40 °C

(2) DC current (A) that will cause L0 to drop approximately 30 %

 

The post Vishay Intertechnology Releases 1.5 kV Automotive and Commercial IHDV Inductors appeared first on ELE Times.

The rise in price of silver and sustainability requirements are accelerating across semiconductor assembly. MacDermid Alpha Electronics Solutions introduces ATROX CD 560-1, a zero-per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) alternate silver filler die attach paste designed for metal leadframe packages and high-speed automated dispensing in modern manufacturing environments.

As silver prices continue to fluctuate sharply, semiconductor manufacturers face growing pressure on assembly budgets and long-term planning. ATROX CD 560-1 addresses this challenge through an engineered alternate silver filler approach that supports more stable cost management while delivering reliable performance and production efficiency.

The formula to support high-speed, high-volume manufacturing, offering 2.5 watts per meter-kelvin (W/mK) bulk thermal conductivity and robust die attach performance across key metal leadframe surfaces, including pre-plated frames (PPF), commonly nickel-palladium-gold (NiPdAu), and copper leadframes. Consistent dispensing performance supports repeatable flow and dispense patterns, along with clean deposits across long production runs with minimal maintenance.

ATROX CD 560-1 is manufactured with no added and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), helping customers respond to evolving environmental expectations and regulatory scrutiny while maintaining device performance. The zero PFAS chemistry aligns with broader sustainability goals without slowing production or adding process complexity.

“This approach sets a new benchmark in conductive die attach by combining manufacturing speed with reliability,” said Avin Dhoble, Product Manager, MacDermid Alpha Electronics Solutions. “It’s tuned dispensing and cure profile supports high-throughput processing, enabling faster production without a quality trade-off.”

The paste is compatible with time-pressure pump systems used on most die bonders, allowing consistent dispensing over long production runs. Low outgassing helps maintain cleaner oven environments and supports strong package reliability in downstream processes. Flexible cure options include snap cure for fast production lines and box-oven cure for conventional manufacturing flows, both delivering consistent results.

By enabling faster operation, lower contamination risk, and improved cost stability, ATROX CD 560-1 expands the ATROX portfolio to address sustainability, throughput, and price stability across semiconductor assembly. The product reflects MacDermid Alpha’s continuous commitment towards environment, health, and safety (EHS) while maintaining the reliability and build quality required for advanced semiconductor devices.

The post MacDermid Alpha Debuts Zero-PFAS Silver Filler Paste for Cost-Stable, High-Speed Semiconductor Assembly appeared first on ELE Times.

The global electronics manufacturing landscape is witnessing a massive structural realignment. According to recent trade data, India’s electronics exports surged by 11.62%, crossing the $5 billion milestone.
While the headline growth indicates strong momentum for India’s “Make in India” initiative, a deeper look at the data reveals a dramatic geopolitical and supply chain pivot: a sharp drop in trade with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) countered by an aggressive diversification into the United States (US) market.

The UAE Drawdown and Macro-Geopolitical Disruptions

Historically, the UAE has served as a primary re-export hub and secondary market for Indian-manufactured hardware. However, intensifying geopolitical tensions in the Middle East have severely strained traditional shipping lanes and trade corridors.
The impact on tech logistics is stark:

• The April Downturn: Electronics exports to the UAE nosedived, accounting for a mere 6.41% of India’s total electronics export basket in April.
• The Macro Shift: This represents a massive decline from the 2025-26 fiscal year, where the UAE captured 11.03% of India’s total tech exports, consuming over $5 billion worth of electronic goods.

Category-Specific Hit to Components & Hardware

The contraction wasn’t localized to just consumer units; it disrupted multiple hardware tiers where the UAE previously held dominant buyer positions:

• Smartphones: The UAE was formerly the second-largest buyer of Indian-assembled smartphones, representing a $4 billion+ segment.
• Enterprise & Infrastructure: The region plummeted from its status as a top destination for computer hardware and the third-largest destination for core electronic components.
• Regional Contraction: Parallelly, tech shipments to Israel dropped by 40% in April—notably impacting consumer electronics, printed circuit boards (PCBs), and telecommunication transmission equipment.

The US Tech Corridor: Absorbing the Supply Chain Deficit

This strategic shift completely offset regional losses 65% Exponential Surge: Electronics exports specifically to the US surged by 65%.

Net Positive Growth: This massive redirection of hardware volume pushed India’s total electronics export growth up by 24.4% in the tracked period, completely neutralizing the Middle Eastern bottleneck.

Silicon and Circuit Boards: What This Means for Global Hardware Sourcing

For enterprise hardware buyers, infrastructure architects, and supply chain officers, this pivot underscores two major trends:

• India’s Maturing EMS (Electronics Manufacturing Services) Ecosystem: The capacity to rapidly redirect billions of dollars in highly sensitive components—such as PCBs, transmission gear, and enterprise computer hardware—from one global superpower destination to another proves that India’s manufacturing logistics are becoming highly agile.
• De-risking is No Longer Theoretical: The 65% spike in US consumption shows that American enterprise tech pipelines are actively integrating Indian-fabricated hardware to establish multi-layered, resilient supply chains independent of traditional East Asian single-source hubs.

As India moves further up the value chain from basic smartphone assembly to complex multi-layered PCBs and enterprise computing systems, expect the US-India hardware corridor to solidify as a foundational pillar of global technology infrastructure.

The post India’s Hardware Shipments Surge 11.6% Amid Middle East Supply Chain Shifts appeared first on ELE Times.

Going the MVNO route involves potential risks for cellular companies and their customers alike…but also lots of possible upsides.

In conjunction with my recent deeper re-engagement with EDN from an employment standpoint, I not only reconfigured an existing computer in a LAN-isolating fashion but also set up a separate work mobile phone line. For hardware, I pulled out of storage the Google Pixel 7 that I’d mothballed at the conclusion of my prior “day job”. And since I was now on my own from a cellular provider-and-plan selection standpoint, I decided to finally give Google Fi Wireless a try.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend?

Originally known as Project Fi, then Google Fi (with “Wireless” more recently stuck on the end), this particular provider is, like US Mobile and others both in the US and around the world, a Mobile Virtual Network Operator (MVNO). Wikipedia’s entry starts by describing a MVNO as:

A wireless communications services provider that does not own the wireless network infrastructure over which it provides services to its customers. An MVNO enters into a business agreement with a mobile network operator (MNO) to obtain bulk access to network services at wholesale rates, then sets retail prices independently. An MVNO may use its own customer service, billing support systems, marketing, and sales personnel, or it could employ the services of a mobile virtual network enabler (MVNE).

That high-level description doesn’t dive into the minutia of various MVNO implementation variants, nor do I plan to do so here. Broadly speaking, I’ll stick with the high-level observation that it’s an intriguing business model that sometimes leads to startup company “flameouts”. Other times, it results in acquisitions by prior partners, with the MVNO either fully subsumed by the purchaser or maintaining a separate marketing identity and subsequently referred to as a “flanker brand” or as a “captive” versus prior “independent” MVNO. And some companies, such as Google Fi Wireless, remain independent MVNOs long-term.

MVNOs, perhaps obviously, don’t need to shoulder the substantial incremental costs of building out and maintaining a nationwide cellular network. Nor do they need to spend the money necessary to both secure and retain spectrum licenses. And, because they’re generally smaller, their promotional budgets are also leaner than their Mobile Network Operator (MNO) partners. But they also can’t be freeloaders, leading to the obvious next question…what’s in it for the MNO? Incremental revenue (taking the form of bulk, per-customer and/or per-packet regular payments) from MVNO partners, generated by the incremental use of any available excess network resources that would otherwise lie fallow, i.e., go to waste.

Therein lies the potential risk with MVNOs: if the MNO’s own customers consume the entirety of network capacity, there’ll be none left over for the MVNO’s own customers. Averting this outcome requires both upfront and ongoing negotiations between the MVNO and MNO, with “throttling” (dynamic bandwidth adjustments in reaction to capacity utilization changes) an interim step prior to, and hopefully also preventing, MVNO service shutoffs at heavy-use times.

An encouraging first date…

Google initially launched its MVNO service in 2015 alongside the Nexus 6 smartphone, in partnership with both Sprint and T-Mobile; the latter subsequently acquired the former in 2020. Google Fi Wireless currently comes in four plan tier options, all delivering 5G data rates:

• Flexible (“Pay for the data you use”)
  • $35 per month for 2 lines + data ($18 per line + $10/GB), for example, or $20 per month for 1 line + data
  • Data for $10/GB
  • High-speed hotspot tethering
  • International data in 200+ destinations
  • Connectivity for tablets and laptops
  • Full connectivity for select smartwatches
• Unlimited Essentials (“Our most affordable plan”)
  • $60 per month for 2 lines ($30 per line), for example, or $35 per month for 1 line
  • 30 GB of high-speed data
  • Full connectivity for select smartwatches
• Unlimited Standard (“Hotspot tethering for your devices”)
  • $80 per month for 2 lines (or $40 per line), for example, or $50 per month for 1 line
  • 50 GB of high-speed data
  • 25 GB of high-speed hotspot tethering
  • International data in Canada and Mexico
  • Full connectivity for select smartwatches
• Unlimited Premium (“Maximum perks & global connectivity”)
  • $110 per month for 2 lines (or $55 per line), for example, or $65 per month for 1 line
  • 100 GB of high-speed data
  • 50 GB of high-speed hotspot tethering
  • International data in 200+ destinations
  • Connectivity for tablets and laptops
  • Full connectivity for select smartwatches
  • 6 months of YouTube Premium
  • 100 GB of storage with Google One

The above pricing is standard; transient and varying-details pricing promotions that dip below the “MSRPs” are common. I’d even suggest that promotions are the rule versus the exception, not only with Google Fi Wireless but other MVNOs more broadly, further extending to all mobile operators more generally. For my new work line (in which, judging from the phone calls, voicemails and text messages I’ve subsequently received, I inherited a phone number formerly used by a Verizon customer named Robert with really bad credit), I went with the Unlimited Standard plan, since it included hotspot support as well as data support for my Pixel Watch. And at the time I signed up, since I was bringing my own phone, Google was offering half-off the published monthly rate for the first year. $25 per month for one line of service: not too shabby.

…led to a deeper relationship

After a few weeks of trying out the Google Fi Wireless, positively assessing both the company’s customer service and coverage robustness (particularly important in my Rocky Mountains foothills rural locale), I belatedly switched my personal line from AT&T over to Google Fi Wireless, too. I’d been on AT&T since mid-2010 (I’d switched to it from T-Mobile, ironically; nothing like going full circle!) the data portion of the monthly fee was “true” unlimited (i.e., non-throttled) and originally $30. By the time I canceled nearly sixteen years later, it had risen to $45/month but added visual voicemail and had also migrated from 3G (UMTS HSPA) to (4G LTE). More generally, here’s a breakdown of what I was paying per month:

I’d (too long) clung to it primarily due to its true-unlimited data nature; AT&T no longer offered this specific plan option, but I was “grandfathered” in as long as I didn’t cancel. As just noted, AT&T had upgraded it from 3G to 4G at no incremental charge (at the time; the $15/month adder was tacked on later as multiple $5/month increments). But the company declined to further upgrade it to 5G (not just gratis but at all); the “5GE” icon on my phone was marketing fluff, instead reflecting 4G LTE Advanced service. And since my plan didn’t support hotspot capabilities and the data allotment was therefore restricted to use solely by the phone itself, I was woefully undershooting its “unlimited” usage potential each month, anyway.

Instead, this time I went with Google Fi Wireless’s “Unlimited Premium” plan. Twice as much high-speed data included in the base price per month, twice as much of that also shareable with other devices via integrated hotspot support. Now’s as good a time as any to describe what Google Fi Wireless means by “unlimited”, i.e., what happens after you hit a plan’s per-month included-data threshold (save for the “Flexible” plan, where you pay $10/GB from the get-go):

• The data actually keeps flowing at no extra charge, albeit at a substantially “throttled” rate: 256 Kbps downstream.
• If you want more high-speed data within that month, you can incrementally purchase it at the $10/GB rate shown in the earlier bullet lists.

Data details

Speaking of data, the “Unlimited Premium” plan also includes up to four data-only SIMs at no extra charge, usable in cellular-cognizant devices such as my Surface Pro X and Surface Pro 7+/8 laptops, as well as my various iPad tablets (one’s in my 11” iPad Pro now, in fact) along with any dedicated cellular hotspot devices. Their data usage, in addition to that of my smartphone (both natively and via hotspot) and watch cumulatively goes against the plan’s per-month usage limit.

And speaking of dedicated cellular hotspot devices, the high-end NETGEAR Nighthawk M6 MR6110 I talked about back in mid-March:

is carrier-locked to AT&T. And although the mid-range Franklin A50 also covered there:

initially seemed to be third-party-unlockable, Unlocklocks wasn’t able to get me an unlock code after all (although to its credit, the company quickly refunded me in full after I submitted an order with the device IMEI). The low-end (LTE-only) Franklin T9, on the other hand:

is natively a T-Mobile-centric device. And since Google Fi Wireless runs on T-Mobile’s network, I was able to get up and running straightaway after ordering, receiving and activating a data SIM. For 5G purposes, I sprung for two more used hotspot devices (this time T-Mobile supportive), in both cases bought off eBay and manufactured by Inseego: the high-end MiFi X Pro 5G M3000:

and mainstream M2000 5G MiFi:

Pinching pennies

How much did this all cost? That’s perhaps the best part of all. For one thing, I’m getting $10/month off the normal $65 monthly service rate for the first two years. And I’m also getting a free Pixel 10 (the one below is “Indigo”, mine’s “Obsidian”):

a smartphone I’d initially covered during last August’s intro and I’ll write more about next week. Normally $799 for my 128 GByte variant, Google did an upfront-acquisition discount to $499. That’s a notable markdown as-is, although given that the Pixel 11 family is seemingly enroute, I’ve already seen discounts (although not to this degree) elsewhere already, too. The remaining to-free discount amount takes the form of monthly credits against the service cost, again spread out over 24 months. My Pixel 7 phones are scheduled to fall off the supported device list next October (a two-year extension to the original expiration, mind you), so I’d already been looking for a replacement anyway. I already have a Pixel 9a, which I’d traded in my earlier Pixel 6a to acquire, queued up as the eventual replacement for the “work” Pixel 7; I’ll keep both of them as spares.

There’s also one other monthly expense reduction that I’m considering as well. Conceptually, at least, the data service delivered by the Google Fi Wireless “Unlimited Premium” plan’s data-only SIMs is functionally redundant with the AT&T 5G data service that I still have active. Granted, I’m getting a $20/month discount from AT&T off the normal $55 plan rate. And the fact that just a few months ago, I spent a few hundred dollars on AT&T-only hotspots and accessories (extra batteries, cases, etc.) is also giving me pause. But the AT&T 5G plan, although remarkably fast especially on the external antennae-supportive high-end hotspot device, only provides 5 GBytes per month at the nominal fee rate. And a bit more than a dollar per day, $420/year said another way, is money that I could redirect elsewhere or “bank” for the future.

Not a shill

In closing, in case you were wondering, Google doesn’t have any idea that I’ve written this piece. I’m just a happy (so far, at least) customer who also finds the overall MVNO business model interesting. Analogies to the MVNO-and-MNO relationship that come to mind include:

• The semiconductor foundry model, although in this case, TSMC and its foundry-only kin aren’t simultaneously also acting as merchant chip suppliers, and
• Deep learning model developers who license them for use by other software-and-services providers, although in this case, open-source model alternatives also exist

Ironically, in looking back at the June 2010 post that had kicked off my move to AT&T as I wrapped up this writeup, I realized that I’d started it out as follows:

Ever experience one of those situations where, afterward, you wonder why it took you so long to tackle the undertaking? That’s what I’m feeling right about now.

With respect to my current situation, I couldn’t have said it any better myself. Wait…I did. Let me know your thoughts in the comments!

—Brian Dipert is the associate editor, as well as a contributing editor, at EDN.

Related Content

• De-commingling LAN equipment: It’s all in what you call it
• From T-Mobile To AT&T: It Couldn’t Have Been More Easy
• Verizon’s (and others’) 5G: underwhelming is putting it mildly
• Cellular hotspots: Multi-option evaluation thoughts
• If you made it through the schtick, Google’s latest products were pretty fantastic

The post Try Google Fi (Wireless)? The perks-for-the-price are why appeared first on EDN.

Футбольний турнір до 20-річчя Держспецзв'язку України Інформація КП чт, 06/18/2026 - 13:00

India’s leading UAV manufacturing startup, BonV Aero, is set to establish a 30-acre drone manufacturing campus in Khordha, Odisha. Envisioned as a first-of-its-kind concept in India, the facility will combine the latest UAV manufacturing with a curated visitor experience, offering firsthand engagement with the UAV ecosystem.

“The first time I saw a drone take flight, it left a lasting impression on me and shaped the path I chose,” said Satyabrata Satapathy, co-founder & CEO, BonV Aero. “Through BonV’s Drone Park, I hope to spark that same sense of awe and possibility in every visitor, especially young, aspiring minds who will go on to shape and secure India’s UAV future.”

That ecosystem is envisioned to take shape across the ₹300 crore facility. The campus will reimagine conventional manufacturing by bringing together advanced assembly lines and a Centre of Excellence alongside training rooms and certification halls open to pilots and technicians. At its core, the BonV Experience Centre will be designed to inspire and engage, offering something for everyone from knowledge seekers to thrill seekers. Thoughtfully designed visitor spaces, the campus will blur the lines between industry and experience, creating a destination that feels as much like a hub of innovation as it does a manufacturing facility.

Most UAV and defence manufacturing facilities in India keep visitors out. BonV Aero Drone Park does the opposite, opening its gates in a structured and guided manner to those seeking to understand how drones are designed, built, and flown all within a single integrated site, added Satapathy.

Moreover, the deep tech firm expects the facility to create over 1,000 jobs across manufacturing, research, and pilot training over the next two years, and sees the campus as a step toward making Odisha a hub for the wider drone economy, not just a production base. The launch comes as Indian states compete for investment in drone manufacturing, backed by federal production-linked incentives and a push for domestic UAV components. Odisha’s ambitious Aerospace and Defence Manufacturing Policy and the B-MAAN scheme for the aviation sector were cited as reasons for the company’s decision to set up in the state.

The post India to Get its First Public Drone Park in Odisha appeared first on ELE Times.

Всеукраїнський хакатон із комп'ютерного зору та робототехніки для школярів kpi чт, 06/18/2026 - 12:18

Every PCB designer has experienced it. A design progresses through schematic capture and layout only to reveal problems during verification, simulation, design review, or manufacturing preparation. A differential pair violates a critical constraint. A return path is compromised. A fabrication limitation was overlooked. A proven solution from a previous design was recreated rather than reused.

The result is familiar: additional iterations, schedule delays, increased costs, and engineering resources consumed by preventable rework.

For decades, many organizations have accepted this cycle as a normal part of PCB development. As design complexity continues to increase, however, this approach is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain. High-speed interfaces, power integrity requirements, signal integrity challenges, miniaturization, manufacturability demands, and compressed development schedules are all converging simultaneously. The traditional response—adding more reviews, more manual checks, and more engineering effort—does not scale.

In today’s design environment, productivity can no longer be measured by the amount of effort expended. It must be measured by how effectively engineering knowledge is captured, applied, reused, and enforced throughout the design process. This is where automation and abstraction are fundamentally changing how successful engineering organizations approach PCB design.

Rethinking productivity in PCB design

Historically, productivity improvements were often achieved by increasing engineering resources or extending design schedules. While those approaches may provide temporary relief, they do little to address the root causes of inefficiency. The reality is that many PCB development processes remain heavily dependent on manual intervention.

As design complexity increases, these manual approaches create significant risk. Constraints are often defined inconsistently. Verification occurs after implementation. Design knowledge resides primarily with individual engineers. Reuse is informal and dependent upon who remembers what was done on a previous project. The challenge is not a lack of engineering talent. The challenge is that manual processes struggle to keep pace with the increasing demands placed on modern electronic systems.

True productivity improvements come not from performing more work, but from eliminating unnecessary work altogether. More importantly, they come from preventing problems before they occur.

Automation: Enforcing design intent in real time

Automation represents a shift from manual execution to intelligent process control. Automation-assisted PCB design environments provide the ability to define electrical, physical, manufacturing, and reliability requirements as constraints that are continuously enforced throughout implementation.

Rather than relying on engineers to manually identify violations after routing is complete, constraint-driven design environments can evaluate compliance in real time. This enables:

• Continuous enforcement of electrical and physical design rules
• Real-time verification during placement and routing
• Guided routing aligned with signal and power integrity requirements
• Automated validation of manufacturing constraints
• Automated generation of manufacturing deliverables

The significance of this shift extends beyond simple efficiency gains. When design rules are evaluated continuously throughout implementation, engineers spend less time identifying problems and more time solving higher-value design challenges. Design intent becomes embedded within the process itself rather than residing solely in engineering documentation or individual expertise.

The result is improved design quality, reduced rework, greater predictability, and shorter development cycles. Simply put, designs become correct by construction rather than corrected after construction.

Engineering knowledge should not leave with the engineer

One of the most significant challenges facing engineering organizations today is the management of institutional knowledge. Many companies still depend heavily on the experience of senior engineers to ensure successful implementation of complex designs. While expertise remains invaluable, this approach creates an inherent scalability problem.

When critical knowledge exists primarily in the minds of individual contributors, organizations become vulnerable to personnel changes, inconsistent execution, and repeated mistakes. The departure of a key engineer should not result in the loss of years of accumulated design intelligence. Automation provides a mechanism for capturing and institutionalizing engineering knowledge.

Constraints, routing strategies, manufacturing requirements, design guidelines, and verification methodologies can be embedded directly within the design environment. Rather than relying on tribal knowledge, organizations can create repeatable engineering processes that consistently produce successful outcomes. The objective is not to replace engineering expertise. The objective is to amplify it and make it scalable across teams, programs, and future generations of designers.

Abstraction: Simplifying complexity through reuse

As systems become more sophisticated, managing every design detail at the individual net level becomes increasingly inefficient. This is where abstraction becomes a powerful productivity enabler. Abstraction allows engineers to work at higher levels of design intent by encapsulating proven solutions into reusable building blocks.

Examples include:

• Reusable hierarchical design blocks
• Standardized constraint templates
• Proven interface implementations
• Reference architectures
• Verified subsystem designs
• Reusable placement and routing methodologies

Design reuse is often misunderstood as simply copying circuitry from a previous project. Effective reuse goes much further. It involves capturing validated circuitry, proven constraints, routing topologies, placement strategies, manufacturing knowledge, and verification data so that future projects can build upon prior success rather than recreating it from scratch.

The difference is significant. Instead of repeatedly solving the same problems, engineering teams can focus their efforts on innovation and differentiation. This transforms design knowledge from a project-specific asset into an organizational asset.

From design automation to intent-driven design

Individually, automation and abstraction provide substantial benefits. Together they enable a more profound transformation: intent-driven design.

In an intent-driven workflow, engineers focus on defining system objectives, performance requirements, and design constraints. The design environment then continuously enforces those requirements throughout implementation. This reduces reliance on manual interpretation while improving consistency across teams and projects.

Intent-driven methodologies help ensure that:

• Design requirements remain aligned throughout implementation
• Constraints are applied consistently
• Reuse strategies are standardized
• Verification becomes continuous rather than sequential
• Manufacturing considerations are addressed earlier in the process

The result is a more predictable design flow that reduces ambiguity and improves overall engineering effectiveness.

Overcoming the adoption barrier

Despite the benefits, many organizations hesitate to adopt advanced automation and abstraction methodologies. The most common concern is the upfront investment required to define constraints, establish reusable design frameworks, and standardize engineering processes. From the perspective of an individual project, these activities can appear to add time. From the perspective of the organization, however, they represent investments in long-term scalability.

Every reusable design block created today can eliminate future engineering effort. Every validated constraint template can prevent future design errors. Every automated verification process can reduce future iterations. Over time, these benefits multiply.

Organizations that continue relying primarily on manual processes often find themselves trapped in a cycle where increasing complexity demands increasing effort. Organizations that invest in automation and abstraction create systems that scale with complexity, rather than being overwhelmed by it.

Connecting design intent across the product lifecycle

The value of automation and abstraction extends beyond PCB layout. Today’s products are increasingly developed within digital engineering ecosystems where requirements, simulation, design, manufacturing, and test activities must remain connected.

Traditional workflows often rely on disconnected tools and fragmented data sources. This creates opportunities for miscommunication, inconsistent implementation, and costly delays. On the other hand, a connected digital thread helps maintain continuity of design intent throughout the product lifecycle by linking:

• System requirements
• Architecture development
• PCB design and layout
• Simulation and verification
• Manufacturing preparation
• Test and validation

This continuity improves traceability, reduces information loss, and supports a model-based engineering approach where decisions are informed by connected data rather than isolated activities. As organizations continue advancing toward digital engineering and digital twin methodologies, the ability to maintain and leverage design intelligence throughout the lifecycle will become increasingly important.

Capture, reuse, and apply design intelligence

The future of PCB design will not be defined by how many hours engineers spend pushing traces or performing repetitive verification tasks. It will be defined by how effectively organizations capture, reuse, and apply engineering intelligence throughout the design process.

Automation and abstraction are not about replacing engineering expertise. They are about amplifying it. When constraints are defined once and enforced consistently, when proven design knowledge can be reused across programs, and when design intent remains connected throughout the product lifecycle, engineering teams gain something far more valuable than incremental productivity improvements: they establish predictability.

The organizations that embrace this shift will be better positioned to manage increasing design complexity, accelerate development cycles, and deliver higher-quality products with greater confidence. In an industry where complexity continues to grow faster than available engineering resources, success will increasingly belong to those who can transform engineering knowledge into scalable engineering intelligence.

Stephen V. Chavez is a principal printed circuit engineer with over three decades of experience. He is acknowledged globally as an industry Subject Matter Expert (SME) in PCB design. He is also an author, blogger, podcast host and is currently a principal technical product marketing manager with Siemens EDA.

Related Content

• It’s Time for AI in PCB Design
• Write your own PCB design rule checker
• How to Achieve Excellence in High-Current PCB Design
• Design guidelines for effective automated PCB assembly
• EDA AI Agents: Intelligent Automation in Semiconductor and PCB Design

The post How automation and abstraction are transforming PCB design appeared first on EDN.

AXT Inc of Fremont, CA, USA — which makes gallium arsenide (GaAs), indium phosphide (InP) and germanium (Ge) substrates and raw materials at plants in China — says that its subsidiary Beijing Tongmei Xtal Technology Co Ltd has entered into a long-term supply agreement to reserve production capacity and raw-material allocation for, and grant supply priority to, Nanjing Casela Technologies Corporation Ltd...

Про підсумки конкурсу "Екоінноватор" Інформація КП чт, 06/18/2026 - 11:04

Elethron Ltd of London, UK and ATMOS Space Cargo GmbH of Lichtenau, Baden-Württemberg, Germany have concluded a joint engineering campaign to map and bridge the critical interfaces and operational architecture required to integrate Elethron’s microgravity materials processing lab into ATMOS’ PHOENIX free-flying reusable orbital transfer and return vehicle (OTRV), an uncrewed transportation system for controlled cargo transport, operations and return from low Earth orbit (LEO)...

Keysight Technologies, Inc. joins the Siemens Digital Industries Software Technology Partner Program. The collaboration gives customers access to Keysight Eggplant Test, an AI-driven test automation solution, to validate their digital engineering and product lifecycle management (PLM) environments.

Manufacturers face growing pressure to shorten development cycles while managing increasingly complex software-driven products. As engineering teams rely on digital tools like PLM platforms, testing those workflows, integrations, and system performance has become a significant operational challenge, with manual processes too slow and inconsistent to address at scale.

Siemens Digital Industries Software develops solutions for engineering, manufacturing, and product lifecycle management. Through the partnership, customers using the Teamcenter software can deploy Keysight Eggplant Test, an AI-driven test design and generation solution, to validate their enterprise applications and engineering workflows before they reach production.

Gareth Smith, Software Quality Engineering General Manager at Keysight, said: “As PLM environments grow in complexity, organizations need a reliable, AI-driven way to validate software before it reaches production. By joining the Siemens Digital Industries Software Solution Partner Program, engineers can use Keysight Eggplant Test to reduce the risk of undetected issues when upgrades or integrations are released, maintaining system performance and reliability at every stage of the product lifecycle.”

Resources

• White Paper: The Business Case for PLM Test Automation
• Survey: Complexity Overload and Bottleneck Struggles: The Hidden Costs of Manual PLM Testing
• Data Sheet: Testing the Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) Process with Keysight Eggplant Test

The post Keysight and Siemens Collaborate on AI-Driven Test Automation appeared first on ELE Times.

Aehr Test Systems of Fremont, CA, USA — which provides solutions for testing, burning-in and stabilizing semiconductor devices in wafer-level, singulated die, and packaged-part form — has received a follow-on production order for a fully automated FOX-XP wafer-level burn-in (WLBI) system, for delivery within the next six months. The system is configured to test nine wafers in parallel, and includes a fully integrated WaferPak Auto Aligner, and a full set of FOX WaferPak Contactors...

I have some nimo tubes, so i'm just showcasing them here. submitted by /u/EmptyWater7775 [link] [comments]

About a month ago I posted my credit-card sized computer project here and was honestly overwhelmed by the response - and thanks for all the encouraging feedback, that really helped a lot! One thing that came up repeatedly was people asking how it was actually built, so here I have some more details on the actual process. It's actually a bit of a hassle to take photos while working with dangerous chemicals, but it was worth it for sure! Honestly, my first thought after seeng this first picture was like "dang, this is nowhere as clean as I thought..." to the naked eye, everything looks precise and flawless, until you take photos with macro lens mounted on a mirrorless camera. But honestly, this kind of is satisfying too: Not only you can see all the impurities, but also every single overflow of solder paste, which doesn't even look like paste anymore as you can see the microscopic solder balls swimming in flux. Some areas needed some manual rework with additional solder paste, and the bridge over there was a result of my single layer limitation for now. And yes, I see it's almost shorting with another net but it luckily turned out fine. And regarding the actual etching process, that was described in my GitHub repo, but it was basically the normal method of etching PCBs with the difference of using copper foil with kapton tape as substrate. Curing the photoresist layer, developing it with a 5% sodium carbonate solution, etching it with ferric chloride, and lastly stripping the remaining photoresist with a 2% sodium hydroxide solution. Optionally solder mask if needed, but I skipped that step with this one. It's somewhat workable to get fast iterations but has the drawbacks of being extremely fragile. On some photos you can see how uneven the PCB is even though I taped it stretched onto a flat, rigid surface. Note that the pictures of each step is made on different runs, so you might spot some differences as result of trying different techniques. I already ordered a proper PCB from a fab, once that arrives, the Muxcard will be actually durable enough to be used as a daily driver. And for those who asked: Yes, I do plan to launch this soon. And if you're interested, you can find more details on the GitHub page :) But this post is more about these cool pictures I wanted to share here first, I'll add them into the repo as well as reddit doesn't seem to support including pictures in the text body. If there's anything you're curious about, feel free to ask - I'll try my best to answer every comment! :) submitted by /u/krauseler [link] [comments]