Simple screw counter

(mitxela.com)

114 points | by jk_tech 2 days ago

11 comments

  • schobi 6 minutes ago
    A beautiful balance of effort and benefit.

    I don't know any better, but the screw counting mechanism seems awkward. Imagine the set has 10 components..

    I'm surprised there is no standard solution to this - like a tape and reel solution? A counting and dispensing gun that works for different sizes? But how much more would anyone pay for M3 bolts on a tape?

    Helmke had a tube feeding his dispensers in one of the videos, with bolts lengthwise. That tube idea could be used for a manual dispenser - imagine a drink dispenser, but giving 3 bolts. Maybe easier to store away, but just as awkward to load.

  • bschwindHN 2 hours ago
    > You can probably guess my opinions on it though, the software is very good but the cloud-based vendor lock-in is grating, and the free tier is hobbled beyond the point of usefulness. On the plus side, being browser-based, it works perfectly on Linux.

    > The 1.1 release of FreeCAD should be soon. I really want FreeCAD to succeed, but blimey they have a big hill to climb. My fingers are crossed.

    Since these parts mostly seem to be laser cut acrylic (so mostly 2D), it seems like solvespace would do a good job at cranking out the designs. I haven't used it for a larger project like this though, maybe it was already considered.

    • Doxin 1 hour ago
      For what it's worth I've been using FreeCad 1.1RC2 lately, and for me it's the first FreeCad version worth bothering with. It's now a tool I actively reach for over OpenSCAD and Blender for various projects. Previously I couldn't make the simplest part with it.

      I can't wait for the release proper, but I can heartily recommend everyone try the release candidates as well. I've got a feeling this is the tipping point for FreeCad like 2.5 was for blender.

      • bschwindHN 57 minutes ago
        I'll give it a shot, I remember absolutely hating FreeCAD's UI last time I tried it.
        • Doxin 26 minutes ago
          I mean I'll be honest, it's still a car crash of a program, but at least it's now a usable car crash. I've found the following workflow to be pretty good, using the part design workbench:

          - create a part - create a body - create a sketch - pad/pocket/revolve/etc - repeat with additional sketches to taste

          I've also been using the proxy object thing, I forget the name, the button is a green blob, to "import" geometry from a master sketch into more specific sketches.

    • spragl 32 minutes ago
      Solvespace can also be used for 3D.

      It is sad that FreeCAD gets all the attention. If Solvespace had some of it, and the development time following from it, it could get improvements and some of the cool stuff in their pipeline. That would IMO make it a much better CAD program than FreeCAD could ever become.

  • irjustin 2 hours ago
    At scale, use weight and supply 1 or 2 extra.

    This is how pretty much every IKEA, LEGO, etc works with very small, cheap parts.

    End users benefit because it's easy to drop/lose/break one.

    • kristianp 2 hours ago
      So that explains why the smallest parts often have spares in ikea and lego builds. Is this done because of the error in weighing the smallest parts, so they have a margin for error by allowing for an extra 1 or 2?
      • irjustin 1 hour ago
        > Is this done because of the error in weighing the smallest parts, so they have a margin for error by allowing for an extra 1 or 2?

        This is a secondary benefit, the primary benefit is if the end user loses/breaks one. That part very well could be show stopper (Ikea 110630 anyone?). Now the end user is stuck - has to call, you have to ship, do you charge? do you give for free? they have to wait. they're annoyed, you're annoyed.

        No one is happy.

        The supply chain headaches for giving exact number of tiny parts is terribly expensive, relatively speaking. So you give spares because in the long run it's way cheaper.

        • conductr 1 hour ago
          Just tacking on to mention the smallest parts are most likely to be lost, they’re the ones that - if dropped - seem to bounce and roll under a refrigerator or into the ether. They don’t give extras on the larger parts because they’re not likely to be lost. Frequently enough all it takes is a violent/careless bag opening to send the small pieces flying.
    • medi8r 1 hour ago
      Or a vibrating seperator which can give perfect counts if needed.
  • LiamPowell 2 hours ago
    > the (OnShape) free tier is hobbled beyond the point of usefulness.

    The free tier is identical to the standard tier except you can not create private documents and it has a no commercial use clause. This has been the case for many years, so I'm not sure where "hobbled beyond the point of usefulness" is coming from.

  • kennywinker 3 hours ago
    I love this so much. Such simple machines, for human-scale problems. I often get pulled down rabbit holes of machines and automation - this is a nice reminder that you can solve a lot of problems without reaching for an arduino or a servo.
  • earleybird 3 hours ago
  • blorenz 3 hours ago
    Awesome solve!!! Lasers and 3d printing is my side hobby business and is what keeps my sanity intact. I love seeing the practical creations that are realized by them! One of my core tenets is being self-sufficient and achieving efficiencies. This post is exactly that. Well done.
  • sudo_cowsay 2 hours ago
    a small scale problem = assisting device

    a medium scale problem = a better assisting device

    a large scale problem = hire people

  • nehal3m 2 hours ago
    Push button, nut.
  • abstractspoon 2 days ago
    Insane!
  • chrsstrm 4 hours ago

      >> I have wasted a significant chunk of my life counting out small numbers of parts into bags and posting them to people.    
    
    So, small parts like this are always counted by weight, and I'm wondering why you would spend so much time on a counting solution when "buy a scale" is right there.
    • jstanley 4 hours ago
      He's counting out like 6 at a time. He needs a fast way to pick small quantities precisely, not a fast way to check large quantities. Once they're picked they're easily verified by eye.
    • bravoetch 2 hours ago
      Yes it's by weight when you need exactly 20k tiny screws in a box. But when you need six that won't save you any time.
    • kamaal 4 hours ago
      Until counting machines got ubiquitous, banks in India would count notes/bills by weight as well.

      It wasn't very precise but you could move a lot of money in ball park with this method. Atleast internally across branches.

      • ghshephard 4 hours ago
        Up to roughly 100 bills it's pretty much bang on - even with a cheap $10 scale (American Weigh Scales Digital Pocket Scale has a bunch of different options). Each bill weights roughly 1 gram. So - accurate to within 1% - and presumably the banks have better scales.
        • eru 3 hours ago
          I suspect at scale (moving either a lot of batches or large batches), you also need to take variance into account more. Some bills might be dirty or have stuff stuck to them, some bills might be damaged and have bits missing? And other things that occur in practice that I can't think of from the comfort of my armchair in 30s.