De-stacking conveyor system for can lids. Inspection equipment not installed yet.Product is removed from sleeves and later returned to their sleeves. www.caseautomation.com
Je ne comprends pas le rôle de cette machine. Les couvercles sont empilés dans 2 cylindres. Ils sont dépilés, pour aller sur un convoyeur qui va les ré-empiler. Il y avait qu'a les prendre tous déjà empilés !?
@@raphaelmahumane1648 yes the inside is a rounded profile for good surface contact with the discs so they stay parallel to the radius of the wheel, or close enough to it.
@@andrewyates5548 Thank you. This is an interesting piece of technology, especially the magnet component!!!! If we were to remove the magnet component, do you think there can be something else to serve the same purpose excluding magnet?
Imagine you had inspection/quality control problems, so instead of addressing the problems at their source, you invested the money to buy packages of unreliable material, transport that to a different location, and then the time and expense to build a complex machine to unwrap, de-stack, convey, inspect, restack, and repackage. Is this an incredibly stupid engineer or an engineer who has a terrible boss?
Yes, if a consistent defect showed up they would find the cause and correct it. This machine is intended to make it easy and fast to inspect every single part that comes off the production line, not just the the ones in the batches that are flagged due to defects, ALL of them.
@@andrewyates5548 I get that every part needs to be inspected and up to spec, but it’s still wildly inefficient to do it this way. Do the inspection where they are made and you avoid any need for this whole mess. A complicated, expensive, extra machine that you have to pay someone to operate and for that matter it takes up space and requires maintenance and training. It’s just so simple and obvious to correct the underlying problem that is effectively ballooning into the existence of this machine. To put it another way, if your supplier can’t deliver reliable product in spec, you try to get the supplier to fix it, or you switch to a different supplier who can produce adequate quality, or you make the part in house. There’s no scenario where you let your production line include jank scab machines that paper over a manufacturing defect higher in the chain. Not with all the wasted money of packaging and shipping.
@@twestgard2 You've obviously never seen sheet metal punch machines. They make about 500-1000 parts/min for small parts like that. You think you can effectively inspect parts that fast be my guest but normal humans can't. They split the production into multiples of these unstackers so that they are moving slowly enough to actually look at them.
@@andrewyates5548 I take your point with that, but the inspection is being done somewhere, sometime, by someone, so that’s the same. There’s still an extra stacking/de stacking step in here that could be eliminated by having an adequate inspection system the first time the parts are in a conveyor belt system.
@@twestgard2 They come out of the machine in stacks, not on a conveyor belt. I totally understand your intention to make things more efficient, I'm the same way, but because of the way the punch machines works it just wouldn't make sense to remove them with a belt.
