re: indexerLPT

Hi Jon,

Yes, I can see that the process control is involved! And I don't think
Sherline's rotary table or linear controller will hold the 30+ part
programs! While a controller program COULD run the part programs, it
would be difficult to tie in vision inspection. Do you have to
palletize parts, or move them? Sounds a little like the pick and place
robotics I worked on for testing LSI IC's. It even had a little
elevator and handler that would pack the LSI's in carriers into a long
box! I could watch that machine for hours...

You might "simulate" the process, and give them a demo on a small mill?

Alan KM6VV
P.S. I've thought I'd like to play with the LPT indexer code some time.


Jon Anderson wrote:

>
> Alan,
>
> Really, a small PLC would probably be the way to go. At the time I was
> looking at something that would completely automate the setup.
> I looked at Indexer for this because of what I percieved at the time, as
> ease of programming for more of a process automation than real
> machining. I wanted something that would load a file based upon part
> number, there are over 30 part numbers made from two molded parts,
> involving one or two countersunk and drilled holes that vary in location
> along a single axis. Machine would have used an indexing table and
> performed one single operation at each index.
> Would probably hook up with a PLC programmer instead of spin my wheels
> trying to learn ladder logic. My vision for the system, and no pun
> intended, is automated vision inspection of every part, with rejects
> being automatically discarded. Considering the nature of the parts and
> the current process, I think this would pay off big. But, it's a big
> step to convince someone to commit to paying $20k+ (that's sans vision
> inspection) for a machine when one really has no reputation. Factory
> automation is not an easy field for a one-man outfit to break into!
>
> Jon