I am reviewing the locating nest for our UR5e bracket-loading plan. Two accepted samples sit flat; a third rocks between the rear pad and a side contact. The proposed fix is more clamp force. I would like to understand which surfaces are meant to locate the bracket before we make it conform by force.
Ask the fixture designer to label each contact's purpose against the part datums. Location, support and clamping are different jobs. The seating check needs to detect a properly located part, not merely a clamp reaching its end position
The designer says the side contact is a support, but its face also prevents the rocking sample from reaching the rear pad. I have asked for the contact scheme on the drawing.
Does the sample meet the drawing at those surfaces? Accepted is helpful context, but the inspection may not have checked every surface touching this nest
We had that with a rough edge nobody intended to locate from. Looked innocent until you put it against a nice straight stop. Which bit touches first on yours?
The side contact meets a relieved edge first. Quality says that edge is not a locating datum and is allowed more variation than the nest seems to tolerate.
Then why keep that contact there at all? I'm asking about the design, not suggesting someone remove it and try the robot. It sounds like a support that's volunteering for another job.
Let the designer answer that against the intended loads. Also ask how the revised nest will confirm seating before clamping; the controls description currently risks hiding the same problem
They cannot see it from the loading side. The designer is revising the side support and proposing a separate seating check; the contact drawing is now N3. We have not accepted that revision yet.
Please come back after they try the awkward sample in N3. I'd like to know whether they keep that support, and how obvious a bad seat is to the operator.