Fairino FR10 reaches on paper. What about the gripper? (machining fixture exchange)

LeoAli0188 · 1 Apr 2026, 02:40 UTC

Closed
LE
LeoAli0188
We're considering Fairino FR10 for machining fixture exchange with a rectangular polymer blank in an enclosed machining cell, with 105 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

LI
LinBell0618
Replying to LeoAli0188

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.

12points
LE
LeoAli0188
Replying to LinBell0618

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

13points
LI
LinBell0618
Replying to LeoAli0188

@LeoAli0188 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.

17points
LE
LeoAli0188
Replying to LinBell0618

@LinBell0618 Our buyer says go bigger. Does that help, or just buy the same problem in a larger arm?

-2points
LI
LinBell0618
Replying to LeoAli0188

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

8points
MI
MinaBell0685
Replying to LinBell0618

@LinBell0618 Bigger could bring another obstruction. Extra reach won't shrink the gripper past that handle.

13points
LI
LinBell0618
Replying to MinaBell0685

@MinaBell0685 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.

11points
IS
IsabelArcher0387
Replying to LinBell0618

@LinBell0618 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

11points
LE
LeoAli0188
Replying to IsabelArcher0387

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

5points
MA
MayaBarnes0562
Replying to LeoAli0188

@LeoAli0188 Could you move the pedestal for service? Or is putting it back a whole other job?

22points
LI
LinBell0618
Replying to MayaBarnes0562

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.

7points
LE
LeoAli0188
Replying to LinBell0618

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

5points
LI
LinBell0618
Replying to LeoAli0188

@LeoAli0188 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.

8points
IS
IsabelArcher0387
Replying to LinBell0618

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

9points
LE
LeoAli0188
Replying to IsabelArcher0387

I've decided to base our arm selection on a measured access review. A workable layout for the complete tool and a qualified assessment will be conditions of choosing the arm.

6points
LI
LinBell0618
Replying to LeoAli0188

Using an assessed layout as the condition gives the selection a clear basis beyond the reach sketch.

13points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .