PCM Sanity / Safety Check

[[ad...]]

Hi Guys,

I'm new to PCM coding and I have been tasked with an issue of creating a safety check point.

The handle you can see on the picture if faced upwards, part is not clamped. (Pin furthest out)
If faced downwards part is clamped.(Pin closest to part)

My thought is to use the pin in the center and touch the pin at the furthest point, this would then stop the program/programmable stop with Text to face handle down, but I need an "IF" it does not touch the furthest point(Handle Up) the program is safe to continue.

Does anyone have any example of script to send or some helpful advice.

Simplicity would be for operators to securely lock in the fixture 😕

Probe.jpg

[[Ro...]]

Ok i got a couple programs where the part 'shape' stays the same, but the part gets 'longer' as the part numbers go up.
I have a check point near the start of the program with a very big search distance before & after the nominal i set, and based on the results the actual part number is identified and put in the report, and the text file for WINSPC is sent to the correct location, all without any operator input.

This same if statement can be used for you, just take a quick measurement of the end if the pin in the clamped and unclamped position, average the distance out and anything higher than the average is unclamped and anything less than the average is clamped.
put this into the Post script of your check point feature, if the number is good then it wont stop, if the number is bad then a message will appear and the program will pause waiting for operator to hit ok

Note, put your average number in place of the 20.99's in both statements.

if abs(getActual("Dim A Point").x ) >20.99 then
message("Youse about to lose yo Job")
endif
if abs(getActual("Dim A Point").x ) <20.99 then
endif

[[Er...]]

Whats the reason for the 2:nd if statement? 😉

[[Ro...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Mind control, its a 5G data trigger.


So yeah Adam, you could delete the 2nd if statement.

[[ad...]]

Thanks Guys! had to invert the (</>) and worked perfect!

Kudos

[[Ro...]]

Glad i could help.

Thinking about it some more, you should probably put endInspection() the next line after the comment, the reason being is that if the part was not clamped and the base alignment has already been done, clamping the part will def move the part, so you'll end up wasting a lot of time running a part that has no chance at checking good.