Quad vrs. Mydata

We are currently in the process of purchasing a new low volume SMT line. Based on our research, Quad and Mydata seems to best fit our applications. Has anyone used both equipment and experience the pro and cons of each machine? Thanks in advance for any information you can provide. - Jim

reply »

Jim and all,

That exact question has been asked before in this Forum and, in my view, well addressed. If you have not seen those discussions, try typing both quad and mydata into the search form on the left of the page to find them.

We encourage all of you to search the archives first before posting a question. There may already be a complete or partial answer to your question.

Thanks,

Cunli

reply »

I have had experience with both companies. If you are doing contract work and get you parts and boards in a box, the Mydata does a fine job of teaching a board on the machine. Quad's strengths are in their software and the ability to automatically program a board from CAD data or using a digitizer. Quad's networking capability is far superior if your company runs a Windows based LAN. Quad's individual feeders are much more flexible then the bulk magazine concept unless you have lots of bulk magazines and do not have to change magazine configurations often. If you do not have enough feeder space to run your board in one pass, the Mydata magazine concept is superior.

Quad offers the complete software solution. You probably should look at Unicam if you select Mydata. If you like a batch process, the Mydata will work well for you. If you want to put conveyors between the pick & place and oven, the Quad is a much better approach.

The growth path with Mydata is probably more batch machines. Quad seems to offer higher speed equipment to go with their flexible machines and has a real edge in advanced packaging. Mydata tends to mix and match printers and ovens where Quad offers a complete package. I think Quad may have sold thier screen printer company recently to MPM. If you want to select your own printer and oven, Mydata is better setup with established relationships with third party vendors. The support from both companies seems strong.

reply »

| We are currently in the process of purchasing a new low volume SMT line. Based on our research, Quad and Mydata seems to best fit our applications. Has anyone used both equipment and experience the pro and cons of each machine? Thanks in advance for any information you can provide. - Jim | I've had a Quad IVc at Interstate and have purchased a Mydata here at Murrietta Circuits. I've had frustration with that particular Quad in the past with several issues hence why I bought the Mydata. Although individual feeders are more flexible, their location are not - with the Mydata I've not had to be carefull with feeder locations between top and bottom sides. I like the Mydata software better and the new 2.0 software links to the net quite neatly. I can go into Mydata's other terminal(s) and program while the machine is producing boards. Mydata will package Unicam with thier machine (I did) and I can get boards programmed in as little as an hour with it.

The real issue is are you running batch or conveyor. If you're buying a conveyorized printer then Quad may be in the running. If you're running a batch printer and you're serious about low volume (10-50 boards) then Mydata makes since. I can't tell you how many times I've been frustrated by getting little strips of parts or parts in a bag and not being able to put them on the Quad without rereeling them - problem solved with the Mydata. Run out of feeder space on the Quad - problem solved on the Mydata. Run out of feeders on the Quad - problem solved on the Mydata (don't need to spend another $850 for one feeder, just use a tray). I can also build a group of boards (ie: 3 in one product) simultaneously on the Mydata or both sides at the same time or 10 at a time without panelizing them. I can also build without fiducials being on the board. I my opinion, if you're looking for low volume flexibility get a Mydata.

Hope this helps, Scott

reply »

Scott - Good to see things are going well for you. With regard to your comments, Quad has introduced a complete line of Semi-conductor/APT machines (Q Series) that support both SMT and Semi-conductor applications. The machines were introduced in 1994 and address all of the issues you mentioned. As you know, the IVc was the most flexible machine on the market in the early 1990's. The first to bring Cyber Optics into the SMT arena.

The IVc with recent enhancements continues to sell well in the very low volume market with positive displacement adhesive, 115 8mm feeder capacity, 12 mil pitch capability and test/component verification. Did you know that the IVc supports wafer presentation for die attach? Mydata shares this market with Quad and I think that both the IVc and TP series machines serve the market well.

Times have changed and Quad again leads the industry by adapting many semi-conductor based technologies into general purpose SMT equipment. The new machines address the issues outlined in your commentary:

1. It is important to have a conveyor between the P&P and oven. 2. Quad has offered a strip feeder plate for 4 years now. 3. The QSV machine has 50% more feeder space than IVc. 4. Mydata 12mm feeders cost about $8500 for 8. That is over $1000 per feeder. Mixed magazines (required for flexibility) can be very expensive. Quad 8mm and 12mm feeders are all less than $750. 5. No Quad machine requires fiducials to build a board.

More to come at Nepcon West... See you there!

reply »

I have just finished this excise which compared Mydata and Quad machine. As the result I purchased Quad QSV-1 model SMT assembler.

In my opinion select which one that will depend on your applications. Also depend on what machines you compare with.

The consideration should include:  speed ( use 50% what they claimed cph)  capability ( smallest and biggest part and PCB board, component type, BGA..)  machine appearance ( some of them just not look right, this also depend on who is your customer )  programming flexibility ( Quad machine can program by using MS Excel )  network capability ( I need it to back up all of the machine file )  operation system ( dos, unix or window )  inline capability ( future )  PCB design ( do you design your own board ? If yes, then you can control CAD data format )  used market ( feeders can be more expensive than machine itself, you can pay $500 for a Quad 8mm feeder in the used market )  resale value ...

reply »

| Scott - Good to see things are going well for you. With regard to your comments, Quad has introduced a complete line of Semi-conductor/APT machines (Q Series) that support both SMT and Semi-conductor applications. The machines were introduced in 1994 and address all of the issues you mentioned. As you know, the IVc was the most flexible machine on the market in the early 1990's. The first to bring Cyber Optics into the SMT arena. | | The IVc with recent enhancements continues to sell well in the very low volume market with positive displacement adhesive, 115 8mm feeder capacity, 12 mil pitch capability and test/component verification. Did you know that the IVc supports wafer presentation for die attach? Mydata shares this market with Quad and I think that both the IVc and TP series machines serve the market well. | | Times have changed and Quad again leads the industry by adapting many semi-conductor based technologies into general purpose SMT equipment. The new machines address the issues outlined in your commentary: | | 1. It is important to have a conveyor between the P&P and oven. | 2. Quad has offered a strip feeder plate for 4 years now. | 3. The QSV machine has 50% more feeder space than IVc. | 4. Mydata 12mm feeders cost about $8500 for 8. That is over $1000 per feeder. Mixed magazines (required for flexibility) can be very expensive. Quad 8mm and 12mm feeders are all less than $750. | 5. No Quad machine requires fiducials to build a board. | | More to come at Nepcon West... See you there! | | I have a strange feeling the above response may have been from a Quad employee. My company purchased a Quad QSP2 a little over a year ago and has not been too pleased. We've had repeated problems with consistency of placement. Our computer feezes up and has to be reset at least twice a day. Twice just today one of the gantries decided to do its own thing while homing and slammed itself into the other gantry (we've spent well over $1000 replacing badly bent bellows from such incidents.) The software is full of glitches and bugs and seems to have a knack of corrupting its own files. Quad service and support cost a fortune and generally aren't terribly helpful. What we usually hear is "it shouldn't do that." The best placement rate we've ever achieved is about 4000 cph on a terribly easy board layout (I see that Quad no longer displays a CPH counter on the newer versions of their software.) I would also echo what the response below suggests. Check the forum achives, it should be an eye opener, just search for Quad. My company may soon be expanding and upgrading its SMT line and you can bet that we won't be visiting Quad Systems. Our QSP2 will probably be put into duty as a bottom side only placement machine. I have had no experience with Mydata. Good luck and anyone how has had positive experiences with a particular make and model of chipshooter, please feel free to contact me.

Galen

reply »

Scott - Please give me a call at 732-728-0951 and we can set up an event number and update you to version 5.25. It sounds like you may have an older version of the software.

Jim Mitchell, Quad Systems

reply »

Maybe you have not considered all your options at this point. My name is Robert Horowitz, I am the Sales Manager at Contact Systems and have had a lot of experience in comparing the Mydata machine and the Quad machine. Contact systems is the ONLY 100% USA made manufacturer of this caliber equipment you are looking at. I can give you many customers that have replaced their Quad Machines and Mydata Machines with the Contact 100% VISION CENTERING pick and place machine.Please feel free to call me to discuss your application or look us up at our website www.contactsystems.com

Regards,

Robert Horowitz (203) 743-3837

reply »