Our open machine door is missing from the layout (Fairino FR10)

SamArcher0420 · 7 Jun 2026, 00:42 UTC

Reply to discussion
SA
SamArcher0420
We're considering Fairino FR10 for machining fixture exchange with a rectangular polymer blank in a production cell beside an enclosed mill, with 175 planned. The sketch reaches the fixture. Trouble is, we left out the gripper body and open door. I'd like to check access properly before choosing an arm.

14 replies

LU
LucaArcher0352
Replying to SamArcher0420

@SamArcher0420 Can you compare measured door geometry with the proposed gripper envelope? An offline layout including both may expose access issues that the reach sketch doesn't represent.

23 points
SA
SamArcher0420
Replying to LucaArcher0352

@LucaArcher0352 After comparing the outlines, I found that the proposed approach overlaps the door handle even though the workpiece itself clears. That explains the misleadingly comfortable result in my initial sketch.

12 points
LU
LucaArcher0352
Replying to SamArcher0420

Use that measured layout to review the complete approach and retreat offline. Include the tool, cables and service access, then ask the integrator to assess a revised mounting arrangement.

25 points
SA
SamArcher0420
Replying to LucaArcher0352

Our buyer says go bigger. Does that help, or just buy the same problem in a larger arm?

14 points
LU
LucaArcher0352
Replying to SamArcher0420

Going larger should open up mounting options. It might be the most straightforward option to explore.

6 points
JU
JuliaBarnes0587
Replying to LucaArcher0352

@LucaArcher0352 A different arm geometry may introduce its own clearance problems. Increasing reach doesn't establish that the proposed tool can pass the existing handle obstruction.

25 points
LU
LucaArcher0352
Replying to JuliaBarnes0587

You're right; more mounting freedom isn't guaranteed. Check each candidate in the measured layout and only favour a larger arm if its full approach works better.

14 points
LU
LuisAllen0347
Replying to LucaArcher0352

@LucaArcher0352 On our separate machine job, the first pedestal position blocked a maintenance panel. The transfer looked excellent until the maintenance person asked how they'd open it.

16 points
SA
SamArcher0420
Replying to LuisAllen0347

Your example prompted me to compare our proposed pedestal with the service panel opening. That revealed another overlap to correct in the layout.

5 points
EL
ElenaAllen0340
Replying to SamArcher0420

@SamArcher0420 Would making the pedestal removable address service access, or would restoring its position introduce a further setup requirement to evaluate?

7 points
LU
LucaArcher0352
Replying to ElenaAllen0340

@ElenaAllen0340 Restoring location and checking the installation would become part of that proposal. Ask the integrator to compare it with a layout that preserves routine service access.

23 points
SA
SamArcher0420
Replying to LucaArcher0352

The fixture requires a straight approach segment. Should we establish that constraint in the model before exploring alternative positions for the robot base?

0 points
LU
LucaArcher0352
Replying to SamArcher0420

Yes, model the entry direction and retreat requirements as constraints. Reaching the final point doesn't establish that the full tool can approach it usefully.

14 points
LU
LuisAllen0347
Replying to LucaArcher0352

Our unloading retreat differed from loading because the held workpiece changed the envelope. Modelling the empty gripper alone gave us a very flattering answer.

9 points

Add to the discussion

Welcome to Application Robot

Everyone can read the forum. Sign in or create an account to start a discussion, reply, or upload photos.

Forgot your password?

By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.