A computer analysis of orientation devices for vibratory bowl feeders

Ouyang, Cheng; Maul, Gary P.

doi:10.1080/00207549308956744

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Just before they emerge from the outlet of the vibratory bowl, the parts are manipulated into the final desired orientation by means of one or more orienting devices mounted along the perimeter of the bowl. Over the years, more efficient part feeders (Yeong and de Vries, 1994) and part-orienting tracks (Lo and Dick, 1990) have been designed, sometimes by matching the geometrical and topological properties of parts to the features of candidate orientation devices to improve the efficiency of part feeding (Ou-yang and Maul, 1993). The design of the orienting devices and their sequence of mounting on the vibratory bowl depend on some fore-knowledge of Proposes a computationally-simple method, based on the centroid solid angle, for computing the probability distributions of the natural resting aspects of small parts, the fore-knowledge of which can improve the design of vibratory feeders and orienting devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determining the probabilities of natural resting aspects of parts from their geometries

Lee

Ngoi

Lim

et al. 1997

Assembly Automation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proposes a computationally‐simple method, based on the centroid solid angle, for computing the probability distributions of the natural resting aspects of small parts, the fore‐knowledge of which can improve the design of vibratory feeders and orienting devices. The centroid solid angle (CSA) hypothesis postulates that the probability of a part coming to rest on a particular aspect is directly proportional to the solid angle subtended by the aspect with respect to the centroid (the centroid solid angle) and inversely proportional to the height of the centroid from the aspect in question. When benchmarked against Boothroyd’s energy barrier method, its results did not deviate from those of the energy barrier method by more than 0.04. Examines studies of a cylindrical prismatic part and a symmetrical T‐shaped prism. The drop tests used to obtain the authors’ empirical data were validated by experiments conducted on vibratory bowl feeders, subjected to different vibration frequencies. The tracks of one of the bowls was coated with urethane to simulate a soft surface. In the case of both frequencies, the empirical results are in generally good agreement with the predictions of the CSA hypothesis; the largest deviation was 0.07. As for the urethane track, the largest deviation was 0.08, thereby corroborating the results of the drop test method.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%