IN Brief:
- Technosert has installed an ASYS DIVISIO 5100 Gen 5 automated PCB depaneling system.
- The machine offers ±10µm positioning, adaptive control, cut inspection, and automated tool management.
- OPC UA, IPC-HERMES, and IPC-CFX interfaces connect depaneling with wider production and traceability systems.
ASYS Group has installed a DIVISIO 5100 Gen 5 PCB depaneling system at Austrian electronics manufacturing services provider technosert, replacing more operator-dependent separation work with an automated and monitored process.
Although an operator continues to load and unload assemblies in the standalone configuration, routing, sawing, handling, inspection, tool control, and process monitoring are performed automatically. Technosert will use the platform across production that includes medical, aerospace, and ATEX electronics.
Linear motors provide positioning accuracy of up to ±10µm, while dual-spindle and dual-gripper operation supports cycle times below approximately 2–2.5 seconds, depending on the assembly and separation method. Force-controlled gripping and a soft-stop function are intended to limit mechanical loading as boards are handled and released.
Automatic tool changes are combined with camera-based measurement and complete cut inspection. Adaptive process control can detect deviations and alter the operation, connecting programmed cutting geometry with tool behaviour and the condition of the separated circuit.
Integrated tool management provides autonomy for as many as 20.5 production shifts before planned intervention. During routing, progressive tool wear can alter edge quality, cutting force, dust generation, dimensional accuracy, and the mechanical stress transferred into nearby components and solder joints.
Communication through OPC UA, IPC-HERMES, and IPC-CFX allows programme information, operating status, traceability data, and process events to move between the depaneling station, neighbouring equipment, and wider production systems. Separation data can consequently become part of the manufacturing record rather than remaining inside an isolated machine.
Similar control principles are appearing in camera-guided manual assembly and traceability systems, where controlled instructions and verification reduce undocumented variation. Depaneling applies the approach to a mechanical process near the end of PCB production, where damage can be introduced after placement, soldering, and inspection have already been completed.
Excessive bending, vibration, or localised loading during separation can crack ceramic capacitors, weaken solder joints, damage vias, disturb connectors, or introduce latent faults that remain invisible during immediate testing. Components positioned close to routed edges are particularly exposed, while thin boards and larger panels may flex differently as individual circuits are removed.
Panel design therefore remains closely connected to process performance. Breakaway tabs, routed channels, component keep-out regions, rails, fiducials, tooling holes, copper balance, board thickness, and the orientation of mechanically sensitive components influence whether separation can be completed without excessive strain.
Increasing volumes of new board designs are adding pressure to high-mix manufacturers. Recent growth in the number of PCB part numbers entering UK supply channels reflects active redesign and product development, each of which can require new tooling, programmes, inspection criteria, and traceability records.
Automatic measurement and cut inspection give the separation stage a stronger role within quality control. Rather than recording only that the machine completed a cycle, manufacturers can retain information about cut position, deviations, tool use, and inspection results, associating those records with a panel or product serial number.
That history can support investigations when edge damage, cracked components, or mechanical failures emerge during later test or field operation. Correlating defects with tool condition, machine programme, panel design, and process history offers a more disciplined route to root cause than inspecting an already separated board without contextual data.
Open interfaces will only improve production when the resulting information is filtered into useful limits, alarms, and maintenance actions. Excessive data collection can conceal the variables that predict failure, whereas defined process windows and traceable exceptions give engineering and quality teams a manageable record.
The modular DIVISIO platform can be expanded or retrofitted as technosert’s product mix and automation requirements change. PCB separation is increasingly becoming a controlled manufacturing process in its own right, particularly where assemblies are regulated, mechanically sensitive, costly, or expected to operate for long periods without failure.
