I'd add the serie of checkings in the loop (20*10ms is optimal) when the nozzle is still down to raise it at once when proper level is reached. And confirm when nozzle is up to catch the message to throw if error. Then all these dwell times are needed for nothing. I've it done this way since long time and it works great.
1. I guess it's after nozzle raise...
I'd add the serie of checkings in the loop (20*10ms is optimal) when the nozzle is still down to raise it at once when proper level is reached. And confirm when nozzle is up to catch the message to throw if error. Then all these dwell times are needed for nothing. I've it done this way since long time and it works great.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/db6be08c-c667-4344-9bdc-db02a55785e6%40googlegroups.com.
Question 2: The isPartOff check seems to be a source of issues for people.
Update:I have started it in debug mode to see the steps.It does the pick, check vacuum, makes discard, go to align, check vacuum and throws message that "no part before place".Somewhere is eaten pick repetition and message that "no part after pick".
So it looks I didn't make any mistake in config.
But in the form like now this is totaly not acceptable IMHO, and programming value above 0 should be locked in the code until it is not solved.With restriction: maybe I still do something wrong testing this.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/5a9a52ab-5867-43b5-88d8-dff990c158a8%40googlegroups.com.
Well, that did not go well. Instead of consensus on changes needed the thread was derailed into support.I am trying very hard to fix the bugs in OpenPnP 2.0, but discussions like this make it very difficult.If this topic is of interest to you, and it is important to you that you see these bugs fixed, please answer the questions in the original post and let's decide what needs to be done, if anything. Pick / feed retry is next on my list, but it will be a different thread.Thanks,Jason
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:47 AM Marek T. <marek.tw...@gmail.com> wrote:
Absolutely agree with you about new features and elementary bugs.
It's like buying great new car with one small manfulction - lack one tire only but multimedia are awsome 😁.
I think I'll stay with my custom of 1.0 yet. Or try fix here something if covidv will rule longer. Good for me, now I have machine.xml converted to 2.0 for future...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
Currently, we make the following checks:1. isPartOn: After pick.
Question 1: Should any of those be removed, or changed?
Question 2: The isPartOff check seems to be a source of issues for people.
Currently we place the part, which turns off the vacuum, then we turn it back on to check if the part is off. I seem to remember that folks don't like this behavior. How should it change?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/c1079b82-859d-407a-85cd-d5465819ed36%40googlegroups.com.
Or all vacuum values set to 0
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/4d20bc79-a8e6-44aa-980a-5087d972396b%40googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/CA%2BQw0jw%3DHPVRR1ZhJW2uZLHt9nQ8z9-sjQwVsK%2BKFq51kfufbw%40mail.gmail.com.
4. Jason's Discord comment about moving this to Part makes sense to me. Some parts are just going to be more problematic than others and the ability to say "with this part, I don't care about post pick vacuum, just continue regardless" I think could get you out of a hole if you are in a jam tying to get a run completed.
4. Jason's Discord comment about moving this to Part makes sense to me. Some parts are just going to be more problematic than others and the ability to say "with this part, I don't care about post pick vacuum, just continue regardless" I think could get you out of a hole if you are in a jam tying to get a run completed.I don't think so. Nozzle tip is the correct place in general, maybe with an option to override by package for exotic exceptions, but certainly not by part. And it only makes sense by package, if the package has a single nozzle tip compatibility.
IMHO, better make a 0402xy package and assign it to the
part. If you have a second reel of company xy, its
quickly assigned too and from then on you can centrally tune it.
This way you have both benefits: you can change all parts through
their common package (very powerful) and you can change individual
parts.
Otherwise, imagine if you wanted to change the settings for all
R0402 packages, but you have dozens or hundreds (like I have)!
_Mark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/3efc8834-5e99-4c5d-a565-2840a1876e87%40googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/ead4f135-e97c-6802-aa92-e0bd54cde940%40makr.zone.
I use two loops 20x10ms.
In place to find the partOff level is reached and then raise immediately or if loop counter is finished. And I don't read sensor anymore to generate the message but turn on the valve and step is finished. isPartOff in pick step is first action. Maybe it's faulty because part could be not placed but step is positively done. Nobody's perfect... Maybe it should be added new and last step of entire pick/place sequence containing only this reading and finishing planned placement?
In pick, the second loop is reading for isPartOn level to raise immediately, or raise if counter is finished. And now I read isPartOn to generate alarm. Without any dwell time. So alarm will occur only if loop was ended (never reached isPartOn level because feeder was empty), if we lost part on z transit the vacuum will not have time to grow. So in Align or Place, another isPartOn will tell the true.
I'm not sure if you shouldn't wait until Jason re-write the jobProcessor.
Hi all
I made a PR:
What do you think?
More info including a detailed explanation of all the fields
here:
https://github.com/openpnp/openpnp/pull/991
_Mark
Wow!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/2f98ca94-5551-4730-8b0f-f3ad447f82cb%40googlegroups.com.
Establish level and Probing time. Can you give little more details how it works?
The "Establish level" life vacuum level monitoring and waiting is only used in the pick and the place, when the nozzle tip is down on the part.
The "Probing time" is a fixed time, where the valve is quickly
opened and then closed again. This time we don't want to reach a
specific level, but we want to measure the change in pressure at
the end of the probing time (either in Absolute terms or as a
Difference).
This should tell you if a part in on or off.
This works well for my second-smallest nozzle tip/0603 and up.
But on my 0402 nozzle tip the difference between Part On and Part
Off is very small. I'm still tuning. Maybe I'll have to conclude
it doesn't work.
The problem is I can't adjust the air flow. The suction that is
good for large ICs and clunky inductors with large cup nozzle
tips, will almost completely stall on the finest nozzle tip. It
then doesn't matter much whether a tiny 0402 part is on or off.
I should add that for 0402 the finest nozzle tip is still quite
large actually, the hole is almost larger than the part surface.
And the part is sometimes picked slightly off-center, so some
amount of leakage is normal, the part is still picked firmly.
So I get false negatives if i set the thresholds too firmly.
So far in all my tests bottom vision has always complained and
caught all missing or tomb-stoned picks.
I was hoping to do 0402 without vision, but maybe that's asking
too much. For reliable 0402 vacuum tests, I guess one needs a programmable
air flow restriction. Note that programmable air
flow restriction and programmable pressure are not the
same, I want high pressure, but only if there are no leaks.
This is for liquids, but I guess it's similar for air:
https://techblog.ctgclean.com/2012/03/reducing-flow-vs-reducing-pressure-which-is-it/
Also funny:
https://www.tlv.com/global/US/calculator/air-flow-rate-through-orifice.html
_Mark
Firstly @_Mark, thank you for your effort, this wasn't a 10 min. hack :-) I wish I had good enough Java skills to be able to contribute more to this.
Thanks, Duncan!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/b55fe55e-9990-40d3-9979-8a5f46fc2e0f%40googlegroups.com.
No, not knowingly. I have reviewed my own work countless times,
so very unlikely.
And I don't think its fixed, I got stuck all the time while
testing yesterday. But I haven't actually analyzed all the details
of the problem, it's just that I had to stop the Job and restart
it to be able to continue.
_Mark
Thanks, John
"vac lines to the sensor", so you mean the electrical signal, or
do you mean the vacuum tube?
The electrical signal should be no problem, have you've got a proper amplifier on it?
https://makr.zone/vacuum-sensor/192/
If it's the vacuum tubes, yeah its best to have the valve and the
sensor on the head. Otherwise you get a lot of air volume in tubes
that the system must move in or out with each valve switch.
_Mark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/a9426639-3284-4172-82ce-9455dd0c2fed%40googlegroups.com.
Hey Duncan, Marek
could you please move this discussion over to the right thread "Feed and pick retry in OpenPnP 2.0"?
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/openpnp/kbnMKnDArIk/discussion
This one should discuss the "Part on/off vacuum checks". I know
one plugs into the other, but its still not the same thing ;-)
Thanks,
Mark
You're right, sorry.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/8fce95b7-2a28-40a9-8a9b-986ed3a7e660%40googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/45ebc96b-1ff7-4884-bc1e-46cee3aac6da%40googlegroups.com.