We're considering Fairino FR5 for machining fixture exchange with a cylindrical aluminum blank in a production cell beside an enclosed mill, with 141 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.
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.
@WillBrooks0835 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.
Yes, I made that sound more certain than it's. Compare candidate geometry in the measured layout; a larger arm is only useful if the complete approach improves.
@WillBrooks0835 We had a different machine application where a good transfer layout put the pedestal across a service panel. Maintenance spotted the catch immediately.
A removable base adds relocation and installation checks to the work. Have the integrator weigh that against keeping normal service access clear in the layout.
@TheoChen1193 Yes. Include the required entry direction and withdrawal conditions, not just an end pose. A reachable point can still have no usable approach with the proposed tool.
@WillBrooks0835 For our machine, withdrawal with a held workpiece needed a different route from entry. The empty-tool model made the clearance look much better than it was.
@AdaBrown0912 Measured access review first, then an arm decision. I've settled on that route; choosing the arm depends on a workable full-tool layout and qualified assessment.