We're considering Fairino FR10 for machine fixture loading with a cylindrical aluminum blank in a compact machining workshop, with 97 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
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
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.
@CallumBrown0882 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.
@KaiBarnes0541 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.
@CallumBrown0882 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
@CalebBennett0754 Would making the pedestal removable address service access, or would restoring its position introduce a further setup requirement to evaluate?
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.
@CalebBennett0754 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.
@CallumBrown0882 Measured access review first, then an arm decision. I've settled on that route; choosing Fairino FR10 depends on a workable full-tool layout and qualified assessment