Next Article in Journal
Development of Hand–Eye Coordination Analysis System Using Mixed-Reality Technology
Previous Article in Journal
Impact of Graphite on Aluminum Alloy 6061: Insights into Mechanical and Tribological Behavior Through Hot Press Forging
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

Digital Imaging Inspection System for Aluminum Case Grinding Quality Control of Solid-State Drive †

Department of Automation Engineering and Smart Machinery, Intelligent Manufacturing Research Center, National Formosa University, Yunlin 632301, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 2024 IEEE 6th Eurasia Conference on IoT, Communication and Engineering, Yunlin, Taiwan, 15–17 November 2024.
Eng. Proc. 2025, 92(1), 96; https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025092096
Published: 11 June 2025
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of 2024 IEEE 6th Eurasia Conference on IoT, Communication and Engineering)

Abstract

The enterprise or data center does not use the M2 SATA because of the cooling problem. Therefore, SSDs employ metal cases similar to the traditional 2.5” or 3.5” hard disk. The metal case is made of aluminum, which must be ground after the metal plate forming process. Conventionally, quality control is conducted to check the ground quality of aluminum cases manually. This method is not accurate as the data are difficult to digitize. To improve the quality control, speed, and efficiency. We established a digital imaging-based inspection system for the aluminum case grinding quality control. The inspection system consists of a digital industrial camera, a closed-circuit TV lens, a light-emitting diode (LED) light source, and a personal computer. If the loading and unloading time is ignored, the test time is less than five seconds for one case. When the tested case is uploaded to the inspection system, the camera captures and sends images to the computer. The image was processed to evaluate the quality and record the tested results. Then, the tested case is classified by a robot or an operator.

1. Introduction

Automatic optical inspection (AOI) is a common automatic inspection method. The line scanning technology has the fastest inspection speed, but its system construction cost is relatively high [1,2,3]. In addition to the high price of the linear image sensor, the price of its matching lens is high due to its larger aperture. For high-speed measurement, a dedicated image capture card and workstation computer are required, which significantly increases the system construction cost. Therefore, most general inspections are based on area-scanning image sensors. There are many applications for AOI used in the electronics industry [4], textile industry [5], and production status monitoring [6].
Lim et al. [7] used convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to classify components on printed circuit boards (PCBs). Yang et al. [8] used a charge-coupled device (CCD) camera with a resolution of 2592 × 1944 and a field of view of 15 × 11.25 mm with light sources in six directions to detect surface scratches and flow of O-rings. Defects such as surface scratches, flow marks, and non-fills are detected, and elastomer O-rings with high surface reflection coefficients are identified.
Zhang et al. [9] applied the adaptive threshold gray transformation to image enhancement of defect images on the steel surface and processed subsequent Gabor filter and image segmentation. Li et al. [10] proposed an automatic defect pattern recognition system to search for hidden scratch/line defects in wafers. The proposed method achieved a higher recognition rate than 89% for scratch/line types and 94% for all common wafer defect types.
Șipoș et al. [11] proposed an automated optical inspection system for the detection of PCB mounting defects. The reference image was processed using hue-saturation-value (HSV) color space and image thresholding. Tahir et al. [12] developed a technique using machine vision and unsupervised machine learning for real-time defect detection and localization to support paper production industries in improving and monitoring product quality. The proposed system efficiently detects and localizes unwanted foreign objects in an image for a wide range of object sizes.
Sirvent et al. [13] determined an optimal subset of descriptors for obtaining the best possible classification of defects in semiconductor wafers using scanning electron microscope (SEM) images. A support vector machine (SVM) classifier was trained with all subset combinations of features, and the classification results were utilized to employ an Elasticsearch (ES) for providing the optimal subset of features. Li et al. [14] proposed a machine learning-based method for accurate wafer defect map classification. The proposed method is referred to as TestDNA-E, as it applies ensemble learning based on improved TestDNA features. The proposed method achieves a high hit rate for each defect type and overall accuracy. The TestDNA of a tested wafer consists of the TestDNA sequence (for electric information) and the wafer defect pattern (for spatial information).

2. System Structure

The inspection system includes a digital industrial camera, a closed-circuit TV lens, a light-emitting diode (LED) light source, and a personal computer. The camera and light source are mounted in a specified position by the aluminum fixture. The samples are picked up by a 6-axis robot arm and a vacuum suction cup. The robot arm moves the sample to the specified position and orientation. The sample must be orthogonal to the optical axis of the camera. The CCTV lens is mounted on the camera. The camera is connected to the personal computer by USB 3. When a sample reaches the specified position, the arm controller outputs the trigger signal to the computer. The computer captures one image and conducts an image processing process. After the image is processed, the inspection system outputs inspection results. The computer sends the results to the robot controller. The robot moves the approved and rejected samples to different locations. Figure 1 shows the presented inspection system without the personal computer and robot controller.

3. Experimental Results

Figure 2 shows the original image captured by the industrial camera of the presented inspection system. Figure 3 shows the appearance of the inspection system software. It shows the result after the imaging process and defect identification. Figure 4 shows five sample images. Polish defects appear on the side of the solid-state drive (SSD) case and on the inside of the SSD case. Figure 5 shows the final version of the inspection system software. In addition to displaying the recognition results, arm links are set up by transmission control protocol/internet protocol (TCP/IP).

4. Conclusions

We established an inspection system for SSD aluminum case inspection. It was used by the company in their production lines. The system saves time and costs for inspection. It enables the digitalized inspection result, and the test time is less than five seconds for capturing images, image processing, and recognition.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.-J.C. and C.-F.T.; methodology, C.-J.C.; software, C.-F.T.; validation, C.-J.C. and C.-F.T.; formal analysis, C.-J.C.; investigation, C.-J.C.; resources, C.-J.C.; data curation, C.-F.T.; writing—original draft preparation, C.-J.C.; writing—review and editing, C.-J.C.; visualization, C.-F.T.; supervision, C.-J.C.; project administration, C.-J.C.; funding acquisition, C.-J.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported partly by the National Science and Technology Council, TAIWAN, under Grants NSTC 113-2622-E-150-002 and NSTC 113-2637-E-150-005.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study did not require ethical approval.

Informed Consent Statement

The study did not involve humans.

Data Availability Statement

We cannot provide detail data because business secret. They belong my partner company.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Denkena, B.; Ahlers, H.; Berg, F.; Wolf, T.; Tönshoff, H. Fast Inspection of Larger Sized Curved Surfaces by Stripe Projection. CIRP Ann. 2002, 51, 499–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Liao, C.-W.; Yu, J.-H.; Tarng, Y.-S. On-line full scan inspection of particle size and shape using digital image processing. Particuology 2010, 8, 286–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lin, C.-S.; Huang, J.T.; Wei, T.-C.; Yeh, M.-S.; Chen, D.-C. High speed and high accuracy inspection of in-tray laser IC marking using line scan CCD with a new calibration model. Opt. Laser Technol. 2011, 43, 218–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Moginati, M.; Ercal, F.; Dagil, C.H.; Tsunekawa, S. Automatic PCB Inspection Algorithms: A Survey. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 1996, 63, 287–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ngan, H.Y.T.; Pang, G.K.H.; Yung, N.H.C. Automated fabric defect detection—A review. Image Vis. Comput. 2011, 29, 442–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Dutta, S.; Pal, S.; Mukhopadhyay, S.; Sen, R. Application of digital image processing in tool condition monitoring: A review. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol. 2013, 6, 212–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lim, D.-U.; Kim, Y.-G.; Park, T.-H. SMD Classification for Automated Optical Inspection Machine Using Convolution Neural Network. In Proceedings of the 2019 Third IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing (IRC), Naples, Italy, 28 March 2019; pp. 395–398. [Google Scholar]
  8. Yang, F.-S.; Ho, C.-C. Automated Optical Inspection System for O-ring based on Photometric Stereo and Machine Vision. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Symposium on Computer, Consumer and Control (IS3C), Taichung City, Taiwan, 8 April 2021; pp. 296–299. [Google Scholar]
  9. Zhang, M.; Sun, W.; Wang, J. Steel Surface Defect Detection Based on Adaptive Threshold Gray Transformation. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Power, Intelligent Computing and Systems (ICPIC), Shenyang, China, 29–31 July 2021; pp. 280–283. [Google Scholar]
  10. Li, K.S.-M.; Liao, P.Y.-Y.P.; Cheng, K.C.-C.; Chen, L.L.-Y.; Wang, S.-J.; Huang, A.Y.-A. Hidden Wafer Scratch Defects Projection for Diagnosis and Quality Enhancement. IEEE Trans. Semicond. Manuf. 2020, 34, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sipos, E.; Ones, A.; Ivanciu, L.-N. PCB Quality Check: Optical Inspection Using Color Mask and Thresholding. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics (AQTR), Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 19–21 May 2022; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  12. Tahir, M.N.; Khalid, Z.; Aslam, A. Online, Real-time and Robust Detection and Localization of Foreign Objects on Paper Surface using Machine Vision and Clustering. In Proceedings of the 2022 28th International Conference on Mechatronics and Machine Vision in Practice (M2VIP), Nanjing, China, 16–18 November 2022; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sirvent, J.L.G.; Rosa, F.L.D.L.; Sanchez-Reolid, R.; Fernandez-Caballero, A.; Morales, R. Optimal Feature Selection for Defect Classification in Semiconductor Wafers. IEEE Trans. Semicond. Manuf. 2022, 35, 324–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Li, K.S.-M.; Chen, L.L.-Y.; Cheng, K.C.-C.; Liao, P.Y.-Y.; Wang, S.-J.; Huang, A.Y.-A.; Chou, L.; Tsai, N.C.-Y.; Lee, C.-S. TestDNA-E: Wafer Defect Signature for Pattern Recognition by Ensemble Learning. IEEE Trans. Semicond. Manuf. 2022, 35, 372–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. System structure.
Figure 1. System structure.
Engproc 92 00096 g001
Figure 2. Original image.
Figure 2. Original image.
Engproc 92 00096 g002
Figure 3. Appearance of the first version inspection system software: (a) approved sample and (b) rejected sample.
Figure 3. Appearance of the first version inspection system software: (a) approved sample and (b) rejected sample.
Engproc 92 00096 g003
Figure 4. Processed images of defective samples: (a) defects on the right side; (b) defects on the left and bottom corner; (c) defects on the inside and right side; (d) defects on the inside and top side; (e) defects on the bottom side.
Figure 4. Processed images of defective samples: (a) defects on the right side; (b) defects on the left and bottom corner; (c) defects on the inside and right side; (d) defects on the inside and top side; (e) defects on the bottom side.
Engproc 92 00096 g004
Figure 5. Inspection system software.(Green OK: No defect, Red NG: defects).
Figure 5. Inspection system software.(Green OK: No defect, Red NG: defects).
Engproc 92 00096 g005
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, C.-J.; Tsai, C.-F. Digital Imaging Inspection System for Aluminum Case Grinding Quality Control of Solid-State Drive. Eng. Proc. 2025, 92, 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025092096

AMA Style

Chen C-J, Tsai C-F. Digital Imaging Inspection System for Aluminum Case Grinding Quality Control of Solid-State Drive. Engineering Proceedings. 2025; 92(1):96. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025092096

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Chun-Jen, and Cheng-Feng Tsai. 2025. "Digital Imaging Inspection System for Aluminum Case Grinding Quality Control of Solid-State Drive" Engineering Proceedings 92, no. 1: 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025092096

APA Style

Chen, C.-J., & Tsai, C.-F. (2025). Digital Imaging Inspection System for Aluminum Case Grinding Quality Control of Solid-State Drive. Engineering Proceedings, 92(1), 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025092096

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop