简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文;未对原文作自动翻译。

Can't finish the FR5 interface while ready has two meanings

IsabelBarnes0561 · 2025年8月13日 23:01 UTC

已关闭
IS
IsabelBarnes0561
Two suppliers, one ready signal. Ours means request received in the machine notes and loading space available in the robot notes. Can't finish the spacer-loading interface like this. Who gets to choose?

20 条回复

BR
BrunoBrooks0800

Neither meaning should win by accident. Give them different names and ask both suppliers to write the event behind each one. I'd take the word ready out of that discussion until they stop nodding at different things.

7
IS
IsabelBarnes0561

I tried received and loading available. Machine supplier says received happens immediately, loading available can follow later. That is already clearer than their timing diagram.

6
BR
BrunoBrooks0800

Good, now ask the integrator which event its sequence needs at each step. Don't simply rename the existing wire and leave the old assumption in the program.

11
JU
JuliaBrown0935

Include the operator display in that agreement. Received should be visible while it waits. Otherwise the person at the screen sees nothing happen and tries another request. Seen that turn a clear sequence into a confusing shift report

12
SO
SofiaBaker0456

Is loading available only ordinary sequence status, with the actual safety permissions handled separately?

19
IS
IsabelBarnes0561

Yes, Sofia. Safety functions are separate. The ordinary interface tells the sequence where the machine job has got to. Screen currently says ready for both meanings too.

5
SO
SofiaBaker0456

Then put that distinction in the names, including on the screen.

18
NI
NinaBrown0936

Our diagram was lovely until someone asked what happened when a request was cancelled. Who owns that on yours? Don't leave it to whoever gets bored of waiting first.

7
BR
BrunoBrooks0800

Nina's cancellation question is worth a separate example in the walkthrough. Which side knows whether any loading has started by the time cancellation is requested?

15
IS
IsabelBarnes0561

Not agreed. Machine supplier calls cancel a new command. Integrator calls it clearing request. I think we've found the next argument.

4
BR
BrunoBrooks0800

I'd describe what the caller wants to happen instead of choosing either implementation first. Withdrawing an unaccepted request and dealing with a job already under way can need different handling.

12
JU
JuliaBrown0935

Name the person who deals with an uncertain job too. The screen can show waiting all it likes, but someone needs authority to investigate when neither side can say whether the spacer moved

12
IS
IsabelBarnes0561

Controls lead is taking ownership. We've split not yet accepted from accepted and waiting. Cancel after acceptance stays unresolved while both suppliers agree the handling.

12
SO
SofiaBaker0456

Can the operator read the request details while that uncertainty remains?

20
NI
NinaBrown0936

Please don't give them a clear button that also sends another request. Ours did, briefly. Quite a lot hidden behind one small word.

13
BR
BrunoBrooks0800

Sofia and Nina are pointing at different controls: looking at the job and changing its state. Have the screen draft show both, with the state-changing actions agreed by controls.

22
IS
IsabelBarnes0561

Screen draft now lets them view the job without changing it. Nina, no combined clear-and-request button. Bruno, thanks for separating the events first. That got both suppliers talking.

4
BR
BrunoBrooks0800

Did they agree what happens after a connection loss as well? You could have the new names right and still disagree about an old request when the link comes back.

4
IS
IsabelBarnes0561

Connection-loss cases added to the review, no agreement yet. Normal sequence wording is signed by both suppliers. I'm keeping recovery marked unfinished.

13
NI
NinaBrown0936

Keep that unfinished bit on the cover sheet. People love forwarding only the page with two signatures.

4

讨论已关闭

此讨论已连续六个月没有活动,现已关闭新回复。 最后活动: .