US3397779A - Double reject gate mechanism - Google Patents

Description

Aug. 20, 1968 L. N. WILDER DOUBLE REJECT GATE MECHANISM Filed Dec. 13, 1966 INVENTOR.

LESLIE N WILDER BY 8M ATTORNEYS United States Patent 3,397,779 DOUBLE REJECT GATE MECHANISM Leslie N. Wilder, San Jose, Calif., assignor to Icore Industries, a corporation of California Filed Dec. 13, 1966, Ser. No. 601,505 7 Claims. (Cl. 209-74) This invention relates to a rejection gate mechanism, and more particularly relates to a gate mechanism having a plurality of gate elements.

In processing containers such as cans and boxes, it is customary to provide some inspection mechanism to determine whether the articles are onweight or offweight, whether they have a label properly positioned or some other property. In such mechanisms, after a determination has been made, it is necessary that the articles be segregated into a plurality of different paths, one representing the acce table containers and another path representing the rejected containers. In the past it has been proposed to provide a moving belt mechanism wherein a single swinging gate is provided over the belt, the gate serving the purpose of causing articles to follow one path when in a closed position and follow another path when in the open position. The disadvantage of such a single gate is that it must be of substantial width in order to effect the rejection action. More important, depending upon the separation desired, maximum possible deflection angle, line speed and container spacing, it may be impossible to achieve the required separation Without physical interference of the gate with either preceding or succeeding containers.

This is especially apparent if the gate must go through a uniform cycle for each reject container. Hence if one reject follows another, the gate must open to deflect the first, then return to its unoperated position before again rotating to deflect the second. It is also usually desired that the gate not strike the container, but reach its new position before the container contacts it, to avoid damage to the container, as the gate motion is usually rapid.

In addition, since the rotational moment of inertia increases as the square of the gate length, a short gate is to be desired.

In accordance with the present invention, a split gate mechanism is provided wherein the gate is divided into two segments, which may or may not be of equal length, so that a much smaller movement of each of the two sections is required than the movement required for a single gate. This permits a closer spacing of the articles on the moving belt and speeds up the segregation action.

In the drawings forming part of this application:

FIGURE 1 is a perspective view of a device embodying the present invention.

FIGURE 2 is a partial plan view of the segregating mechanism showing the gates in closed position with certain parts broken away for clarity of illustration.

FIGURE 3 is a view similar to FIGURE 2 showing the gates in the open position.

FIGURE 4 is a partial view of a modified form of gate.

Turning now to a description of the drawings by reference characters, there is shown a moving belt 5, moving to the right in the direction shown by the arrows, carrying a plurality of spaced articles, such as 7 and 9. Guide members such as 11 and 13 may be employed beside the belt to insure that the articles are properly lined up for the rejection mechanism. As the articles get to the double gate mechanism, generally designated 13 and hereafter described in detail, the articles will come into contact with the gate if the gate is closed, as is shown in FIGURES 1 and 2, and the articles will be diverted by the gate into the path 15. If the gate is open, as is shown in FIGURE 3, the articles will pass through the gate into the path 17.

3,397,779 Patented Aug. 20, 1968 which has previously been designated 13, is held over the path of travel by member 19 attached to the framework of the machine, not illustrated. Member 19 supports an upper plate 21 and a lower plate 23 both of which extend out over the path of the moving articles. Shafts 25 and 27 are mounted for rotation in the plates 21 and 23 and carry the rejection arms 29 and 31 respectively. The ends of the two arms are preferably notched as at 33 to provide for an overlapping relationship so that they will come together and form a smooth, continuous path on one side. These notches are not necessary but are useful in securing proper alignment of the two gates. When closed, the gates form an angle with the path of travel. Typically this angle will be about 45, although the exact optimum angle will depend to some extent on the nature of the containers, gate and belt. Further, other factors, such as friction, length available to achieve separation, allowable impact and the like will have an effect on the optimum angle. A bell crank 35 is attached to shaft 27 While a corresponding bell crank 37 is attached to shaft 25. The two bell cranks are connected together by means of arm 39 and are biased into an open position by means of spring 41. A turnbuckle 43 may be provided at the center of arm 39 for precise positioning of the two gates. A second bell crank 45 is attached to arm 27 and this leads through link 47 to piston rod 49 extending into a pneumatic cylinder 51. Pneumatic cylinder 51 is provided with air tubes 53 and 55 to actuate the piston, not illustrated, therein. Normally the gates are biased open to the positions shown as 29A and 31A, permitting articles to pass through the gates. However, when air is admitted to line 53 and/or released from line 55, the parts 29 and 31 will assume the positions shown in FIGURES 1 and 2, and it is obvious that when so positioned, an article striking the gate will be diverted to path .15.

In the embodiment illustrated, the ates move in opposite directions; thus the gate segment on the side of the diversion path will push an article into the diversion path in the case of an article which has not been fully diverted at the time the gates open; this condition is often encountered with closely spaced articles. The opposite gate, moving away from the oncoming articles, will provide no interference with articles not to be diverted. However, under some conditions, it may be desirable to have both gates move in the same direction, in which case both gates would move in the same direction as the moving belt.

Although the two gates have been shown as being of equal size in FIGURES 1 through 3, this is not necessary and one gate might be longer than the other, as is shown in FIGURE 4. However, in general, the gates would be of substantially equal size. FIGURE 4 illustrates an embodiment of the invention wherein the gates are not only of unequal size but also curved to lessen the initial impact. Here the lower gate 51 is relatively long and has a concave curve in the direction of the incoming articles. The opposite gate 63 is relatively short and forms a continuation of the curve of gate 61. It will be seen that the sidewise acceleration of an article 65 is gentle in comparison with the abrupt sidewise motion imparted by a straight gate. Tailoring of the acceleration curve is possible by suitable design of the gate curves.

Further, although pneumatic means have been shown for actuating the gates, other means such as hydraulic or electric drives, e.g. solenoids, could be employed. Further, the exact linkage shown is not essential to the operation of the invention and those skilled in the art will recognize that many other linkages might be employed to open and close the gates simultaneously. For instance, the shafts could be geared together, or individual cylinders could be used to actuate each arm. Although the mechanism has been shown as suspended over the path of travel, it might be located under the belt.

Although only a single pair of gates has been illuse trated, it is obvious that in many practical machines more than one pair of gates might be employed. For instance, the first pair of gates might be utilized for rejecting articles which were not of the exact weight While a second set of gates migh the employed for further segregating the ofiweight articles into overweight and underweight articles.

It is believed apparent from the foregoing that I have provided an improved form of rejection mechanism wherein short gates are employed shortening the timespace requirements for rejecting defective articles. Fur ther, by providing short gates which sweep a relatively short path, closer container spacing may be employed and/or faster rejection secured.

I claim:

1. In a rejection mechanism wherein articles move over a first path and can be diverted by a gate mechanism into a second path or continue in the first path, the improve- 4 ment comprising a pair of mating gate elements located at substantially the center of said first path and forming an angle to the path of travel and hinged at opposite sides of the first path and means for moving said gate elements out of said first path to permit articles to pass therethrough.

2. The structure of claim 1 wherein the two gate 'elements are of substantially equal length.

3. The structure of claim 1 wherein pneumatic means is employed to actuate the gates.

4'. The structure of claim 1 wherein the two gate elements turn in opposite directions.

5. The structure of claim 1 wherein at least one of the gates is curved to predetermine the lateral acceleration curve.

6. The structure of claim 1 wherein the gate mechanism is mounted above the belt.

7. The structure of claim 1 wherein the angle is about References Cited UNITED STATES PATENTS ALLEN N. KNOWLES, Primary Examiner.

Claims (1)

1. IN A REJECTION MECHANISM WHEREIN ARTICLES MOVE OVER A FIRST PATH AND CAM BE DIVERTED BY A GATE MECHANISM INTO A SECOND PATH OR CONTINUE IN THE FIRST PATH, THE IMPROVEMENT COMPRISING A PAIR OF MATING GATE ELEMENTS LOCATED AT SUBSTANTIALLY THE CENTER OF SAID FIRST PATH AND FORMING AN ANGLE TO THE PATH OF TRAVEL AND HINGED AT OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE FIRST PATH AND MEANS FOR MOVING SAID GATE ELEMENTS OUT OF SAID FIRST PATH TO PERMIT ARTICLES TO PASS THERETHROUGH.

Images