Enough reach, incomplete drawing (machining fixture exchange)

TheoChen1193 · 2026年7月15日 05:03 UTC

回复讨论

主帖中文翻译暂不可用,以下显示英文原文;回复保留原文。 查看英文原文

TH
TheoChen1193
We're considering Fairino FR5 for machining fixture exchange with a cylindrical aluminum blank in a production cell beside an enclosed mill, with 141 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 条回复

WI
WillBrooks0835

Got measured outlines for the opening and gripper? An offline layout might catch what the reach circle misses.

13分
TH
TheoChen1193

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

7分
WI
WillBrooks0835

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.

11分
TH
TheoChen1193

@WillBrooks0835 Our buyer says go bigger. Does that help, or just buy the same problem in a larger arm?

23分
WI
WillBrooks0835

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

11分
ME
MeiAllen0342

@WillBrooks0835 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.

7分
WI
WillBrooks0835

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.

20分
AD
AdaBrown0912

@WillBrooks0835 We had a different machine application where a good transfer layout put the pedestal across a service panel. Maintenance spotted the catch immediately.

14分
TH
TheoChen1193

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

25分
JA
JamieArcher0382

Would making the pedestal removable address service access, or would restoring its position introduce a further setup requirement to evaluate?

5分
WI
WillBrooks0835

A removable base adds relocation and installation checks to the work. Have the integrator weigh that against keeping normal service access clear in the layout.

13分
TH
TheoChen1193

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

24分
WI
WillBrooks0835

@TheoChen1193 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.

24分
AD
AdaBrown0912

@WillBrooks0835 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.

11分
TH
TheoChen1193

@AdaBrown0912 Measured access review first, then an arm decision. I've settled on that route; choosing the arm depends on a workable full-tool layout and qualified assessment.

7分
WI
WillBrooks0835

That puts the access question in the right place in the decision. A conditional selection fits the limits of the sketch.

19分

参与讨论

欢迎来到 Application Robot

所有人都可以阅读论坛。登录或注册后即可发起讨论、回复或上传照片。

忘记密码?

注册账号即表示你同意我们的 使用条款 和 社区准则。请阅读我们的 隐私政策 ,了解我们如何处理你的信息。