On 12/02/2015 01:40, RussellMc wrote: > On 12 February 2015 at 13:37, Jesse Lackey > wrote: > >> ... I've wanted a machine like this for 10 years, >> ... >> >> My idea of a tape feeder matched what someone posted when the list was > in trouble so my comments may have not got to list. I'll check. > > Essentially, you can run components in original tape pockets as he does, > with a takeup spool and something to strip the seal off. The machine can > either advance the tape at every pick or, probably quite acceptably, let > the pickup work along the row and indicate the need for a new feed of tap= e > when it gets to a certain point. The takeup systems can be very simple an= d > low cost. > > If desired you could have the pickup select a number of a limited range o= f > high volume of component and load them into a "ready action" area that is > close to the PCB so that place times are reduced. (You could bulk pick to= a > trasnfer tray, move tray and empty, or pick an empty tray, take it to the > filling area, fill it and return it. Just frequency coding component > positions would help reduce times. > > Idle musings - if you had two picking heads with one loading a "conveyor" > at a suitable time in advance of need and the other picking from the > conveyor picking times could also be much reduced. Unnecessary complexity > in something this simple. > >> If the pick area can hold 70+ tapes / small trays of loose parts and a >> 8x10" pcb, I'm sold. >> ... >> > Machine size is sensibly unlimited (for some value sof sensibly) as > extrusion is cheap, and accuracy is vision based so rigidity and > dimensional accuracy are desirable but not the killers they are in some > bottom end systems. > > So, 700 tapes, no problem [ :-) ] . > Oh. 70. Also no problem :-) > > > R This machime costs around US$3,000.00 and is fast. A friend of mine owns one and it is impressively fast. Video: It uses the same simplified feeder mechanism of the machine I cited in my previous post. The problem is that it doesn't have vision, so it is not very accurate, but its design is very simple and easy to replicate. Another problem is that it has too few feeders and they come in a fixed arrangement of 8/12/16mm and cannot be reconfigured. The Liteplacer is much more complicated mechanically but has vision, and more important, it is open source. I see a cross of the TM240A (construction and feeders) with a Liteplacer (software) as a very good machine that could be used in a small industry. Isaac --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .