Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Home shop Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM)

Hi TK;

Below you should find some comments based on my perspective.

tkosan wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I am in the process of developing requirements for a modular, home
>shop based Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) system and I was
>wondering if anyone on this list would would be interested in
>providing some feedback on this idea? The whole system will be
>integrated using a wired/wireless Ethernet network and I plan to make
>all of the software open source so if this project eventually produces
>deliverables then it can be downloaded from the internet for free and
>used or modified as needed.
>

Open source is good, but I would not even bother with wireless ethernet
in an area where machine tools are running. The concern with ethernet
is especialy an issue if those tools are to be home built.

My thought is that the best way to go about this is to get some of the
projects that are alread mature such as EMC and the PLC project to
consult on a common software interface. If the vast majority of the
effort required to move messages between platforms could be reduced to a
library you might have a possibility of wide scale adoption. As O see
it you would immediately have to concerns with communications, that
would be sychonization messagges between tools and the transfer or
invocation of differrent programs on a platform.

At this time I have no idea how much of this is actually implement
anywhere. There does seem to be some depth to the NIST software
base. So maybe an expert here could pipe up.

>
>As much of the software as possible will be written in the Java
>programming language (including the realtime embedded systems code) so
>it will be able to run without modification on a very wide range of
>computer platforms including Windows, Linux, Macintosh and Embedded
>systems.
>

I don't buy it, Java is not the way you want to go here. First off
none of the platforms you mentioned above have every been at the same
level of implementation when it comes to Java. Second there really is
not rational reason to support Windows with GPL'ed software when we have
a GPL'ed operating system. Third I truely believe that you would be
much farther ahead to implement in C++.

Lets face it Java is a system that binds your to certain programming
concepts and performance pitfalls. You do not want the possibilites
limited in your project due to the select language. Even the latest
gcc Java compiler leaves a lot to be desired.

>
>
>Here is a simple diagram that gives an idea of what the system's
>topology will look like:
>
>http://tkosan.javadevices.org/misc/embeddedjava/home_shop_cim.jpg
>
>
>With this kind of system, parts can be designed in the house or the
>shop and part files can be downloaded to the machines as needed
>through the network. Beyond this, the network enables a
>building-block manufacturing capability that allows work cells to be
>easily put together which consist of a number of different machines.
>
>For example, a cell can be put together which consists of a material's
>handling robot and a CNC table and the network will allow these two to
>work together.
>

Often it is easier to implement a bit of electrical handshaking between
machines as opposed to complicate I/O networking. This is especially
the case if the machines have dramatically differrent controllers.
Use you networking capability for bulk transfers such as robot programs
or cnc code. As manufacture have learned building blocks are nice but
the infrastructure to tie them together is a killer.

>
>Cameras can also be easily added to the network and the status of a
>production run can be monitored from anywhere on a person's property
>using a wireless PDA, a PC in the house or even from a person's TV in
>the near future.
>
>As another example, an audible alarm can also be attached to the
>network in the house and the system could then notify the people in
>the house when a machine needs reloading or when there is a problem.
>
>Even though widespread CIM has been a dream of the manufacturing
>industry for years, the commodity technologies needed to implement
>this idea relatively inexpensively have just become available within
>the past couple of years.
>
>Anyway, if anyone has some ideas about what they would like to see in
>a system like this I would very much like to hear them.
>

I've never really believed that the issues restricting adoption have
been the lack of commodity technologies for the controllers. The issue
always seems to revolve around all the hard machinery required to
implement the automation and the supporting software edevelopment. The
cost of a lathe an its CNC controller is nothing comapred to trying to
integrate it into a prodcution line. The software developement effort
can not be underestimated, this is why I believe that attempting to
enrole as much existing software as possible is a good idea.

>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ted Kosan
>
>
>
>Addresses:
>FAQ: http://www.ktmarketing.com/faq.html
>FILES: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO/files/
>Post Messages: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com
>
>Subscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>Unsubscribe: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>List owner: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO-owner@yahoogroups.com, wanliker@..., timg@...
>Moderator: pentam@... indigo_red@... [Moderators]
>URL to this group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO
>
>OFF Topic POSTS: General Machining
>If you wish to post on unlimited OT subjects goto: aol://5863:126/rec.crafts.metalworking or go thru Google.com to reach it if you have trouble.
>http://www.metalworking.com/news_servers.html
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jobshophomeshop I consider this to be a sister site to the CCED group, as many of the same members are there, for OT subjects, that are not allowed on the CCED list.
>
>NOTICE: ALL POSTINGS TO THIS GROUP BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN BY POSTING THEM. DON'T POST IF YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT THIS.....NO EXCEPTIONS........
>bill
>List Mom
>List Owner
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
>