01 / 03Line reality
Start with the event that creates an inspection frame.
Line rate, encoder or trigger, lighting, exposure, camera format, and buffering define the acquisition problem before inference begins.
Industrial Vision Design-In
Build inspection around the real line conditions.
Map camera capture, triggers, edge inference, machine I/O, frame-integrity validation, and production constraints for an AOI or machine-vision system.
Explore the system path
System operating context
Designed for
- AOI vendors
- Machine builders
- Industrial vision integrators
Configuration before claims
Inspection performance depends on the complete acquisition path.
Line rate, exposure, trigger timing, image transfer, preprocessing, inference, and the machine response must be evaluated as one configured system.
- 01
A camera specification is not a cycle time
The usable inspection rate includes exposure, transfer, buffering, preprocessing, inference, decision logic, and actuator timing.
- 02
Frame integrity must be measured
Dropped-frame and deterministic-timing requirements need a defined source, duration, load, thermal state, and acceptance rule.
- 03
Machine integration defines the boundary
Triggers, encoder inputs, PLC or controller I/O, fail-safe behavior, logging, and operator workflow belong in the design review.
Architecture review
Trace every step from trigger to machine action.
The design-in review documents the acquisition and decision path before platform or performance claims are finalized.
Industrial Vision Design-In
Active stage 01
Trigger
Line event, encoder, exposure, lighting, and timing source
Evidence before performance claims.
Performance is configuration-specific. The review defines the target, test configuration, and evidence needed before latency, frame integrity, stream density, power, or thermal results are treated as claims.
Follow the operating path
See where source reality becomes a production decision.
01 / 03
02 / 03Acquisition path
Trace every frame from trigger to inspection logic.
Capture, transfer, preprocessing, region handling, model runtime, and exception logic need a common configured test path.
Follow an inspection from trigger to machine action.
Line conditions define the usable acquisition path. Watch cameras, material motion, inspection, and the machine handoff operate as one physical sequence.
03 / 03Machine handoff
Define what happens after the inspection decision.
PLC or controller I/O, fail-safe behavior, evidence, operator workflow, enclosure, service, and qualification belong in the same review.
Choose an acquisition model the machine can validate.
The patterns separate timing and ownership decisions. Any cycle-time or frame-integrity result remains configuration-specific.
01
Free-running vision
- Fits when
- The application continuously observes a process and selects frames in software.
- Review first
- Frame rate, exposure, buffering, selection logic, compute load, and exception behavior.
- Evidence to collect
- Representative sustained acquisition and decision-path validation.
02
Triggered acquisition
- Fits when
- An encoder, sensor, or machine event defines when the image must be captured.
- Review first
- Trigger source, lighting, exposure, timestamp, capture path, and acceptance window.
- Evidence to collect
- Trigger-to-result measurement with a fixed source, workload, duration, and thermal state.
03
Coordinated machine cell
- Fits when
- Multiple cameras or stations share timing, inspection, and machine actions.
- Review first
- Clock model, station ownership, controller I/O, evidence, recovery, and operator workflow.
- Evidence to collect
- Cell-level validation across normal, fault, restart, and service conditions.
Architecture review
Turn what you know into a testable system brief.
Bring to the review
Start with the constraints you already know.
- Line rate, trigger, exposure, and lighting sequence
- Camera interface, format, and image dimensions
- Inspection model and preprocessing requirements
- Pass/fail action and machine I/O
- Frame-integrity and latency acceptance criteria
- Enclosure, thermal, service, and qualification plan
Review output
Leave with a clearer evaluation path.
- Trigger-to-action architecture map
- Candidate capture and edge compute path
- Configuration-specific benchmark plan
- Evaluation and production design-in next step
Related YUAN capabilities
Continue with product and software evidence.
Evaluation questions
Separate current decisions from the items that still require testing.
Can YUAN claim deterministic latency before testing?
No. The source, trigger, workload, software, platform, thermal state, duration, and measurement points must be fixed before the result is meaningful.
What should an AOI team bring to the review?
Bring the trigger sequence, camera and image format, line rate, model or processing graph, machine I/O, acceptance criteria, and environmental constraints.
Does the design-in review replace machine qualification?
No. It organizes the architecture and evaluation plan. The machine builder remains responsible for its complete system validation and applicable safety or compliance requirements.
Prepare the technical brief
Ask the YUAN hardware expert which inputs and constraints belong in your review.
Other design-in paths
Review another system pattern.
YUAN USA design-in
Bring us the architecture before the component list is fixed.
Share the video sources, software workload, physical constraints, project stage, and production intent. The YUAN USA team will route the review to the relevant product and integration specialists.