We're planning planning robotic welding of bracket assemblies with Fairino FR10 on a steel angle-bracket assembly in a welded-assemblies production workshop. The reach sketch includes every seam, but the torch is just a line. The actual torch body and fixture clamps make inside-corner access look doubtful.
This is offline only, with no live welding trials. What should I ask our integrator to include?
Start with complete torch and clamp geometry, paired with the welding engineer's required joint access. Are those available for the integrator's offline comparison?
@MeiAllen0342 I've the torch assembly drawing and clamp model. The layout pack doesn't state any required torch orientations. It really is just reach so far.
Have the welding engineer specify the required orientations, then include the actual torch assembly in the offline model. That creates a basis for assessing clearance.
@MeiAllen0342 Assessable at a pose, perhaps. You haven't mentioned getting into or out of it, or the cable envelope. Those can spoil a convincing screenshot
@RaviBennett0737 You're right; I described too narrow a check. Include approach, withdrawal, mounting hardware and the cable-routing envelope in the offline access review.
The integrator should coordinate the routing information with the equipment supplier and identify the assumptions used. Until defined, the cable path remains a limitation of the model.
On my separate welding layout, the tool model was complete but the extraction hardware wasn't there. We had a beautiful answer to an incomplete question.
@CalebBarnes0580 I've got a concrete request for the integrator: real tool geometry assessed against the welding requirements offline. That settles what I needed from this discussion; accepting the access concept still depends on the assessment.