The big Factory I/O Wishlist (Discussion)

This is the discussion board for the wishes that you have for Factory I/O. You can discuss your Ideas with others here before posting them in the wishlist.

In regards to this comment in the wishlist

I think a more viable solution would be that those elements should match the conveyors in size. For example 2m, 4m and 6m. Currently they are grid square longer than the 2m conveyor (for the fence), the handrail matches perfectly and the platforms are 0.5m, 1m and 1.5m. Also, the step from the M-size to L-size platform is a little too big, I think a 1x2 would fit better.

Hi

For the tanks would be cool if I could pump from tank to tank via pipes.

More elements about the tank:
flow meter
Pipes
Agitator

Sounds like a solid idea. Someone else suggested that they should do something like Process I/O that is solely based on tanks, pipes and pumps and whatnot. Because the tank currently doesn’t interact with any other station, it’s just kind of the odd one in the group.

HI, i think it would be great, if we had the possibility to add several controllers (not just one) !

Hmm…yeah, I think this would be a plus. I don’t know how de MHJ-Adapter will handle this tho (for Siemens).

I don’t know about the MHJ-Adapter, but on simulation with PLCsim Advanced (which offers the possiblity to simulate multiple CPUs) it would give a great result ! because … if we think about it, for most learners, there is no material (PLCs and others), the only way would be to simulate and Factory IO is made for simulation, right !?

1 Like

Interesting… :thinking:

Hey all,

I’m brand new to FactoryIO and I’d love to see the following added:

  1. A “generic” machine emitter.

A “hanging arrow” isn’t very realistic, so why not have a generic machine that “emits” parts. Currently I have an emitter and small conveyor inside a palletizer to represent a generic machine.

  1. Smaller raw parts

The “Raw” material parts are big, which is great for the pick and place machines but in real manufacturing many parts are much smaller, and it would be great to get parts 1/4 the size of the Raw Material

  1. Large WIP / Parts Bin

Not every machine is attached to the next machine, and in many facilities the machine outputs parts into a part bin. I tried using the stack-able box, but it’s just too small - we need one about twice as large in all directions.

  1. I know this is asked for a lot, be it would be great to be able to import 3d models

Maybe they would be used just for scenery, or could be used as emitters and removers, but it would be awesome either way.

Shawn

I’d like to know FactoryIO’s road map for new / upgraded parts.
After a year+ I don’t see any clear answer what to expect in the future concerning (custom) parts.

My contribution to the Wishlist:

  • set fixed speed on “Digital” on/off conveyors.
  • Ability to set direction on all conveyors (Digital).
  • Ability to set max speed on all conveyors.
  • Ability to set (de)acceleration on all conveyors.
  • Dynamic conveyor width/length/height on all types
  • Ability to change weight on “conveyor” items to remove/add friction
  • Ability to add Can/Round/Smaller objects to be used on small (guides) belt conveyors
  • More (dynamic) guides. It’s only fixed to the grid.
  • force placing parts outside the GRID.
  • ability to move camera UP/DOWN (with that disable the CTRL shortcuts)

In the future ability to help our self to create our own parts.

Great list @hbrandsma

Here’s another one to add to my list:

5 - Molding machine which outputs to a conveyor, and takes raw materials from a tank or bin.

Animation is very simple:

  1. Molding Machine closes
  2. A small about of material is removed from a separate but attached tank/bin (assuming it’s not empty - it would need refilling at some point. The color of the material in tank would determine the color of part molded by the machine.)
  3. Machine opens and parts fall out (you’d want to put a conveyor under it)

Just like the robotically loaded “machines,” we wouldn’t have to code the operation of the Molding Machine, just start and stop it, as well as read back if it has enough raw material to run.

But if more depth was wanted, we could be forced to turn on the heaters for a set period of time before we could start making good parts. Heaters could even require PID control, and different colors could require different temps to make a good part.

Shawn

1 Like

I think your initial suggestion of it being an automated machine would be cool. But a machine of this type already exists (the CNC robot station). What would be the benefit of this new machine?

@janbumer1 Correct me if I’m wrong, but the CNC machine requires the Robot Arm to remove finished parts?

The point is, most machines dump products into a bin or conveyor - like an Injection Molding Machine, or a Stamp Press Machine, etc, and don’t have a robotic arm to load or unload.

That’s why I think it would be great to have a generic machine with a “Source” in it - it’s just not realistic to have a floating arrow in the sky as a part source.

The CNC machine will take the raw material types (green, blue and metal) and transform them into top and bottom parts. It will then output them onto a chute where you could let them fall unto an conveyor. So, 1 material in, 1 product out. The in part could be done with a forced conveyor and a correctly timed emitter.

I do agree tho that the Emitter and Remover could be designed differently. Something other than a big arrow would fit the simulation better imo.

“I do agree tho that the Emitter and Remover could be designed differently. Something other than a big arrow would fit the simulation better imo.”

That’s what I’m getting at.

While the CNC machine can be used to simulate many processes (including automated sandblasting equipment and single part stamping machines) most manufacturing processes are better simulated with raw material storage (silo, vat, or reel) feeding a “part making” machine (like an injection molding machine or continuous stamping machine.)

In my opinion, a new source like this would be better because it would represent more typical machines.

To keep it generic, you could just put the source arrow and a conveyor inside something that looks like an industrial machine, but there really isn’t anything in the library that looks like a “generic” industrial machine.

To step it up a notch, you could integrate it so every part that comes out decrements a small amount of “raw material” from a silo / vat /reel, which then would need to be refilled occasionally (like the tank used for the PID scenario)

I’d recommend the parts that come out should be 1/4 the size of the current lid and base parts, and also come with a new “parts bin” at least four times bigger than the current grey bin.

Without these additions, I’ve having a hard time integrating FactoryIO into my existing eight courses, which I’d really love to do as I know my students would really dig it, and that would lead to more sales for FactoryIO :slight_smile:

Shawn

1 Like

Hi everyone!
Thank you for sharing your suggestions with us. We’ve been following this discussion and found some great ideas we would like to explore in a future version.
Please keep sending us feedback so we can improve your experience with Factory I/O. We appreciate it!

2 Likes

Hey @beatriz.santos and everyone at Factory I/O

Thank you guys for taking the time and reading through this topic (thanks agaim to @brunovgr for making it sticky) and takimg up the ideas.
Keep up the great work and I’m looking forward to future updates for this great program!

Jan

1 Like

Hello everybody,

I am making a Youtube Channel to teach how to program PLCs, the software
Factory I/O is great, easy and functionaly, but some things isn’t how to
real world automation works.

so here i come to write some suggestions

  1. all cylinders need to have 2 actions with 2 sensors “work” and “home”
    we need to have the completely control of machine on line production, so
    it is necessarly to have the actual position of cylinders.

  2. to have more realism the machine of warehouse need to be by coordinates
    with return of position in X and Y.
    imagine that you have motor with encoder plugged at inverter, at real life
    you need to command the inverter to reach some position,
    so i think it would be nice to be more realistic this part of warehouse.

  3. the robot would be programmable, like real robot, only to register the
    coordinates and wait some inputs to get more realistic from a factory automated
    we could pick the products and simulate some process where the real robots did.

  4. some safety devices would be cool to have, we are starting the industry 4.0
    and security is a thing essentialy to have at automated line. nothing too big.
    light grids, safety sensor at door and things like this.

5)the CNC machine can be separate of robot, imagine tha robot programmer did
the software of robot and you need to program the robotic Cell, so we have the
signals that we need to send to robot like

bit0 = Pick the Raw Product at load
bit1 = drop the raw product at cnc
bit2 = pick the raw product at cnc
bit3 = drop the raw product at unload

it will be more realistic with the real automated cell

the CNC we could control the door position opened and closed and start the
process

there is some Robotic cells where the robot shows the product to a Sensor camera
to inspect it, it would be nice to have at simulator

  1. control speed would be nice to have at some conveyors because we have skids
    that need start fast and slow down when reach close to the stop sensor.

well, it is all that I can remember.

(english isn’t my native language, so my apologise for english mistakes)

Excelent work that REALGAMES did!

Did we already ask for the ability to import scenes into other scenes and keep the names? I don’t mind having to remap the IO but it would be nice to create custom scenes that can be imported to create a factory without having to rename all the points again. Currently, I can only cut and paste.