Last Call BBS – How to Reduce the Time/Cost for Wine O’Clock

This short guide will give you few tips on how to reduce the time for Wine O’Clock and reduce the cost.

Guide to Reduce the Time and Cost

If you fiddle with it enough you could probably take out one of the counters to get it lower maybe. Use the bottom 2 counters as a memory since the order is only 1 pulse, then it sets the opposite counter so that it uses the 0/on feature of the counter to enable the correct output.

Set the counter you don’t want and the other defaults to 0 when the order comes in, which you use.

Upd. You don’t have to deactivate the lower two counters. The sorter will not sense anymore after it received a THRU signal, you can save one mixer for that.

You can also use the counter for sorter to inactivate the other counters, saving more multiplexer and get 61k.

Consider that 8 is the absolute minimum just to dispense the tray (1), stack a product (1), and move it (6) spaces to the output. So 8 is a perfect solution that never leaves the tray waiting, the product must be right behind it and ready to stack immediately. But since our product does have to wait in order to fill, we must save stacking for last so the tray doesn’t wait with it.

In order to do that, we need to dispense the glass at t=1, fill twice at t=2 and t=3, and move it off the sorter at t=4. You actually have one cycle of wiggle room if you put the sorter all the way down at y=5, but I’ll tell you don’t need to, you can do a step every cycle and have your sorter at y=4 to keep it from getting ahead of the tray.

So the next step is to figure out how to do these actions every cycle, with no latency.

If you need another hint: One of my solutions uses only one counter, the other uses none at all. Think about what else you can use to do actions at a specific time without a counter.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.