i estimate the rate in video to be 17 bags per minute. this looks almost perfect (only two places show slowdown - after dropping the bag). we have done same job using same robot that does 25-26 bags per minute. not quite the double speed but some 40% faster. the motion speed in this video seem to be purposely reduced since feed rate is not too high so no point in stressing the robot and burning energy if it can keep up.

someone with a name like sandwichtube you must be knowledgeable about automation.

There's safety faults for torsion overload, yeah it would hurt like hell when it hits you but it wouldn't continue.

there is most likely light curtains calibrated for the operation area of the robot so if anything trips it, it will stop

There are multiple light curtains on the fences that will issue a robot hold

it stops on both sides

There must be a reason for doing it this way. Trust me, the engineers know what they doing.

@@PacificoAyala321 "trust me I'm an engineer"

Not really that big of a difference, the acceleration phase is the most time consuming in this application. The traveltime difference should be only like 200ms higher. But the most important, the supply of cocaine and amphetamine does most likely not have infinite buffer so it makes sense to load both at the same time.

intentional slow down so the line can keep up with the robot.

Probably better than having an entire pallet of bags queued up on the conveyor

yes stupid, back breaking jobs. but here come the the jobs for skilled people.

@@ivicakvasina4957 what we fear is terminator type robots that can repair itself and think better than humans

yeh but far more unpredictible

The robot can do that 24/7. So you need 6 persons and pay them extra for working at night and on weekends.

@@cbaurtx the think probably costs 200k upwards, plus how much it costs to power the thing. So nah, I still don't see the economics of it.

@@briancherry1 6 people at say 40k/Yr would be 240k every year, plus overheads, so maybe at least 50-200% more on top of that. Maybe the robot lasts 10 years (probably more), so equivalent is then more than 2.4 million + overheads(or leave them out to compensate for robot overheads/maintenance). And the robot will be nearly perfectly consistent the whole time. If it uses 10 kW continuous (possible, but I personally expect less), then it costs 25000/Yr in electricity (assuming 30c/unit)

@@jackaw1197 what warehouse operator throwing bags gets 40k a year??

this is KUKA 5-axis palletizer with KRC4 controller. Robot arm is most likely KR180R3200PA (180kg payload, 3.2m reach, palletizer). similar arms for other payloads exist as well. older models are 4-axis and needed more space due exposed linking arms. this is a beautiful machine, low maintenance and very very nice.

why do you say that?

The path and cross over every item isn’t needed , by reducing the clearance hight , , given travel time as well one layer at at a time per side may also reduce loading times we are talking a second here or so but multiplied it can also on return the device goes back to x point before reaching for another at point y, that process can be reduced further lowing op time. It’s a very broad outline I strongly suggest simulating in the relevant tools first to see what I mean

for one robot 1 input and 1 output shoud be around 100K USD

​@@pramotexpI can do for less

Concur. To reduce wasted motion, the arm should be focused on palletizing one load at a time. Maybe switch lines in-between pallet swaps. There's probably something where there isn't enough storage or start-stop capability in either line to accommodate unloading one line at a time.

@@bosef1 So, if the stacker is keeping up with both lines, what does it matter? SUre, you could probably make it a little more efficient from a time and motion standpoint, but unless you could save enough time that it could stack from 3 lines instead of 2, or the current stacking process is slowing the entire process .. what does it matter?

for 1 infeed 1 outfeed robot can handele around 1200 bag per hour

@@pramotexp Thats definitely high volume. But the velocity of the movements does not look like the highest imaginable. Its a simple robot goddammit. It should be abnormaly fast. These bags and pellets are normed. Everything it does is predictable and controllable. Nessecary hardware is accessible (chips, sensors, joints, motors, conveyor belts..) or can be build with existing knowlege, same for the software I guess. If one lightning fast unit can do he work of 10 regular production facilities, we get more output wih less ressources. Thats good for everybody and everything I suppose. We can live without high speed machinery. But isn't life better with it? At he moment technological advancement eases chores that wouldnt exsist without it. Repetitive human labour in a shoe factory can be automazied gradually but wouldnt exsist if shoe makers would work in their craft room. Then, on the other hand, only mass prouction can lower he prices so much that most people can afford a basic version of almost everyhing and not seldom a lot of it. Every year you have multiple pairs of shoes at your behalf. In the middleages shoes where passed on from father to son (not exclusively of course). So higher material standart of living came at the expense of something that can be thinked of as the joy of work. (Is this true?) If machinery of zhe future can fulfill our materialstic needs and wants (read: food, shelter, transport, medicine..), thereby constantly freeing more people of performing manual labour - then we as human societies can devote more time and attention to social and artesian contexts of human interaction. Otherwise, giving away contol of the provision of our livlyhood by leaving it to a.i. is to big of a risk. (Is it?) Humanity must advance in thoughts first. What can be depends on our imagination. Ask how a better world looks like and how you can be part of it already. "Don't say something should be done. Do." -S. "Be the change you want to see in the world." -G.

@@marcelluswallace4076 if it is already as fast as the input/upstream capacity, then making it faster just means it will be waiting more, and put more load/wear on the components and increase the chance of something going wrong. It can probably go faster(and perhaps the speed is even modulated based on the backlog of bags), but there is no point

@@jackaw1197 exactly.

y tambien con mucho trabajo que hacia la gente pero bueno habra que evolucionar y estudiar para hacer otras cosas

Nailed 😂 for one side one guy, here it's about all day that's why

Sounds like bad programming. You should be able to bump up your cycle time.