We're planning planning robotic welding of bracket assemblies with Fairino FR5 on a steel gusseted bracket in a robotic welding cell planning area. 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?
Fairino FR5: Which geometry is missing from this welding-cell proposal?
FionaAli0238 · 2026年6月7日 11:04 UTC
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
8 条回复
回复 FionaAli0238
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?
11分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.
16分回复 FionaAli0238
@FionaAli0238 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.
6分@HenryArcher0351 The proposed additions still need approach, withdrawal and cable-envelope coverage. A convincing clearance image at one pose doesn't establish those aspects of access.
2分@WillCarter1009 You're right; I described too narrow a check. Include approach, withdrawal, mounting hardware and the cable-routing envelope in the offline access review.
23分@HenryArcher0351 Who supplies the cable envelope? The torch drawing shows connectors but doesn't define the routed shape.
-2分回复 FionaAli0238
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.
18分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.
23分