Currently we are working on the project where UR10e stands on the pedestal, like column. We want to restrict the robot from this column not to collapse it when working. Safety planes don’t work for us in this case, any suggestion?
Sorry could you describe what you’re trying to prevent the robot from doing in a little more detail? Pictures always help the community help you.
Unfortunately I can’t send exact picture yet, but more or less situation is like this on the picture:
So I want to restrict area of LIFTKIT. Chances of touching liftkit is quite small, but anyways I want to prevent it.
That pedestal looks like it’s going to be very unstable. Not sure what your application is but I wouldn’t trust it to repeat very well. Even at the base of the robot. Let alone when you get out to the TCP.
If that’s the Ewellix column, they’re actually not bad for rigidity if it’s mounted properly. We’ve had a few controllers fail in the field though. Currently testing out the OnRobot one as well as another custom manufacturer one.
Thanks for the answer.
Do you have to restrict the column area to the robot?
Any suggestions about restriction area?
Dont have access to my pendant right now, but would be possible to restrict the 2nd axis limits +/- which would limit how far below the base you could reach?
Thanks for the answer. I think restricting axis will work properly. Thanks a lot.
Unfortunately I can’t find that command in teaching pendant. Anyways, my question is following: Can I make a pillar as no-GO area? I’m trying to do it with Points and Lines, but impossible. With Plane restriction it restricts other areas as well, which doesn’t work for me.
Herewith, is it possible to restrict that zone (coordinates) with URScript?
I saw a post that referenced “moving out of a box” that kind of did this, only the opposite.
If the tcp was in a defined area (like inside a CNC machine in my case) I have to physically / manually move it out of the the machine before I start it so it won’t hit the machine when it swings around to the pallet.
Don’t know how, but it uses a set of safety planes to help calculate the move to get clear of the machine. I would think you could do something similar to have the opposite effect that you’re looking for.
Not 100% sure another URcommunity member know a better way as I have the same question. Maybe try something like the link below:
Right now I don’t think there is a way using safety planes. If you had a cylindrical safety area around the base infinitely downward YES but this currently isn’t possible.
Best bet would be to monitor the TCP position + get travel distance of the lift and use this to prevent robot from trying to sweep through that area or collapse lift with arm under it.
Hope that helps and best of luck!
“Right now I don’t think there is a way using safety planes. If you had a cylindrical safety area around the base infinitely downward YES but this currently isn’t possible.” ------ This would be the best if it was available.
“Best bet would be to monitor the TCP position + get travel distance of the lift and use this to prevent robot from trying to sweep through that area or collapse lift with arm under it.” ------ In this case we just monitor the distance right with command: point_dist(p_from, p_to)? We can’t set the travel distance.
I think if i can’t find one restriction command, I will have to add one additional waypoint which isn’t close to the pilar, and avoid collapse this way.
Thanks for help
Thanks for the answer. I’ll check the article.
Anyways, safety plane doesn’t work for me, as set of safety plane restricts the hole space, not only the one we need.