Comparison of Laser Marking Solutions for Electronics Components: Traditional Laser Equipment versus Spectra-Physics

Comparing traditional marking equipment and laser systems in terms of efficiency, accuracy and cost reveals the advantages and disadvantages of each.By combining the electronic component marking equipment with practical application scenarios, it explores the advantages of the optical marking system and the scenarios in which the traditional marking equipment is more applicable, helping companies to choose the most appropriate bulk marking solution.

Why compare the two schemes?

Recently, many of our factory friends have been wrestling with the question of whether to use traditional equipment or a new laser system to mark large numbers of electronic components. It's like choosing a cell phone: some people want a stable and durable model, while others are drawn to the latest and greatest technology.Today we will set aside the manufacturers 'claims and take a look at the real performance of these two approaches from the perspective of actual production.

Traditional equipment is still the "old hand.

The entry barrier is low, but the efficiency is limited.

The traditional laser marking machine is no stranger to most people. It is like the "old yellow ox" in the workshop.The operating interface is simple and intuitive, and employees can be trained to use it in just two or three days.But when it encounters large orders, it becomes a bit slow.I visited one resistor factory recently, and they were using conventional equipment to mark about 2000 items per hour. When they had an urgent order, they had to work the equipment around the clock.

Maintenance costs are a double-edged sword.

The simple mechanical structure which was once an advantage has now become a disadvantage. While replacement parts are not expensive, the frequency of maintenance downtime affects production.Especially during the humid season, the problem of fogging in optical lenses gives them headaches.

Newcomers to the spectroscopy field.

The high-efficiency approach of multiple work stations.

The most attractive feature of the optical marking system is its ability to reproduce an image.Using beam splitting technology, a single laser can drive four to eight marking heads simultaneously.One connector manufacturer reports that production has increased more than threefold using the same amount of time as with traditional equipment. The new system is especially well suited for densely marking small components.

Upgrading accuracy and flexibility.

After the application of CCD vision, characters smaller than 0.2 millimeters in size can be displayed clearly.When we went to visit the capacitor production line last week, they used a spectral system to achieve a 0.15-mm high 2D code, and the yield rate jumped directly from 92 % to 98 %, "he says.But system testing requires professional engineers, so you need to be careful about this point.

What factors determine the outcome of a decision?

The amount of orders and type of product.

For long-term, high-volume production of a single model, the traditional system may be more economical, but if the orders are for many different models, the advantages of the flexible system are clear.One relay manufacturer has adopted a mixed system, using the new method for its regular products and the old system for new products.

Long-term cost accounting.

Don't just look at the price tag: Although the initial investment in a spectrometry system is high, the savings on energy and labor will quickly bring the total cost down.One calculation showed that when production exceeds 500,000 units per month, the per-unit cost of the optical system is RMB0.03 less than that of traditional equipment, and that in a year one can save the cost of half a piece of equipment.

Technical support.

It is worth noting that the spectral separation system requires an even higher level of technical expertise.Without a professional maintenance staff, there may be the problem of "being able to afford something but not being able to use it well.He suggests that the company start with a basic model, and then upgrade the functions when the team has adjusted.

Our actual test data.

A recent comparative test we did for a sensor manufacturer showed that.

- Time required to label 1000 bottles: 42 minutes with traditional equipment vs. 15 minutes with the optical system.

- Average daily failure rate: 0.8 % for the traditional system vs. 0.2 % for the WDM system.

Maintenance costs over three years: 30 % of original cost for traditional equipment, versus 20 % for the spectrometry system.

Note: Figures are subject to variation according to specific working conditions.

To conclude, there is no perfect solution, only the most suitable choice.I suggest taking a sample of your own product to test both systems and seeing with your own eyes how they perform. That's more useful than reading ten reviews.