2018
DOI: 10.1007/s00170-018-2492-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Label-/tag-free traceability of electronic PCB in SMD assembly based on individual inherent surface patterns

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Other time improvements may include parallelization of the software application and/or reducing the image to hash codes [22,55,56]. Comparing with other state-of-the-art works, Takahashi et al [12] measured a time of 0.827 s to perform 1 vs. 1 comparison, while Wigger et al [15] reported a time to perform 1 vs. 1 comparison (The authors state that: "in the present case of 115 PCB parts, the identification process for one part takes 1.11 s", so we are assuming that is the time needed to perform 115 comparisons (the identification process does not stop after finding a correct correspondence). In that case, the extraction time takes 680 ms and the time for 1 vs. 1 comparison is calculated as 1000 × 0.42/150 = 3.7 ms.) of 3.7 ms. From the performed analysis, it is clear that time is one of the limitations of the proposed approach and the trade-off between time and accuracy may also be considered.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Other time improvements may include parallelization of the software application and/or reducing the image to hash codes [22,55,56]. Comparing with other state-of-the-art works, Takahashi et al [12] measured a time of 0.827 s to perform 1 vs. 1 comparison, while Wigger et al [15] reported a time to perform 1 vs. 1 comparison (The authors state that: "in the present case of 115 PCB parts, the identification process for one part takes 1.11 s", so we are assuming that is the time needed to perform 115 comparisons (the identification process does not stop after finding a correct correspondence). In that case, the extraction time takes 680 ms and the time for 1 vs. 1 comparison is calculated as 1000 × 0.42/150 = 3.7 ms.) of 3.7 ms. From the performed analysis, it is clear that time is one of the limitations of the proposed approach and the trade-off between time and accuracy may also be considered.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wigger et al [15] proposed an individual object recognition system based on the surface patterns of Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs) for traceability purposes. The authors take advantage of the fiducial markers, commonly used to align the PCBs, to define the region of interest and capture the images.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dies ermöglicht, Objekte markierungsfrei über ihren gesamten Lebenszyklus zu identifizieren. Die Identifikation kann selbst bei Objekten mit (teilweise) beschädigten oder weiter bearbeiteten Oberflächen gewährleistet werden [24,25]. Bei stark veränderten (zum Beispiel korrodierten), glänzenden oder spiegelnden Oberflächen stößt die Fingerprint-Technologie jedoch an Grenzen [24].…”
Section: Lösungsansätze Für Konsistente Identifikationssystemeunclassified
“…The communication amongst different machines and systems relies on cellular networks to facilitate mobility. Wigger et al [157] investigated the possibility of tracing and identification of printed circuit boards (PCB) through fingerprint-of-things (FOT), in this case surface pattern photography. Fiducial markers would be soldered onto 115 PCBs by solder paste screen printing.…”
Section: Category 3: Control Track and Trace-related Activitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%