In combination with
sturdy aluminium stay variants, these offer a
robust, maintenance-free solution for a variety of different applications. The high strength of the material allows for more compact steel cable carriers that can be used for significantly larger unsupported lengths in the same space, with loads of several hundred kilograms per meter. Steel cable carriers can also withstand
extreme temperatures: Galvanized variants can resist up to 400˚C for short periods, stainless steel cable carriers even up to 1,000˚C.
The system, a cropping machine for cutting reeled lead frames up to 40mm wide into
components up to 250mm in length, consists of a MELSEC iQ-F machine controller with multi- axis synchronised motion. One axis controls the stamped strip feeding, while another delivers a force of 6000N to the cropping tool. Designed for accurate and reliable positioning, the new design has helped minimise changeover
times and provided a significant boost to throughput with the ability to cut up to 700 pieces per hour. Richard Allen, OEM business development manager at Mitsubishi Electric, commented: “We always
strive to help OEMs build the very best machines that they can, and DAS stands as a prime example of a machine builder that consistently goes above and beyond to unlock new efficiencies for its customers. This new systemhas helped raise productivity and quality control standards considerably, and we’re delighted to hear the impact it is already having on the customer’s operations.” Mick Stallwood, director at DAS, said: “The initial implementation of the new solution has been a huge success, having allowed the end-customer to make considerable improvements to throughput. On top of this, through the use of electrical actuators, the design takes full advantage of modern technology to deliver a less energy- intensive systemto help reduce the overall process. “We’ve been working with Mitsubishi Electric for
over 30 years now, and the quality of its products is always excellent. As such, it felt natural to collaborate on this project.”
14
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
