Enough reach, incomplete drawing (machining fixture exchange)

TheoChen1193 · 15 Jul 2026, 05:03 UTC

Reply to discussion
TH
TheoChen1193
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.

16 replies

WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to TheoChen1193

Got measured outlines for the opening and gripper? An offline layout might catch what the reach circle misses.

13 points
TH
TheoChen1193
Replying to WillBrooks0835

Checked them. The approach clips the handle; the workpiece clears. No wonder my first sketch looked so reassuring.

7 points
WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to TheoChen1193

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.

11 points
TH
TheoChen1193
Replying to WillBrooks0835

@WillBrooks0835 Our buyer says go bigger. Does that help, or just buy the same problem in a larger arm?

23 points
WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to TheoChen1193

A larger arm should give you more mounting freedom, so that could be the easiest route to investigate.

11 points
ME
MeiAllen0342
Replying to WillBrooks0835

@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.

7 points
WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to MeiAllen0342

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.

20 points
AD
AdaBrown0912
Replying to WillBrooks0835

@WillBrooks0835 We had a different machine application where a good transfer layout put the pedestal across a service panel. Maintenance spotted the catch immediately.

14 points
TH
TheoChen1193
Replying to AdaBrown0912

Checked ours. The suggested pedestal overlaps a panel opening too. More red pen for the drawing.

25 points
JA
JamieArcher0382
Replying to TheoChen1193

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

5 points
WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to JamieArcher0382

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.

13 points
TH
TheoChen1193
Replying to WillBrooks0835

Our fixture needs straight entry. Put that constraint in before moving the base around?

24 points
WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to TheoChen1193

@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.

24 points
AD
AdaBrown0912
Replying to WillBrooks0835

@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.

11 points
TH
TheoChen1193
Replying to AdaBrown0912

@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.

7 points
WI
WillBrooks0835
Replying to TheoChen1193

That puts the access question in the right place in the decision. A conditional selection fits the limits of the sketch.

19 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.