Yes. That model was the one I had issues with in my original post.
Playing with insulated flange options in roboguide, you get a null user tool move of 23mm when changing from non insulated to insulated.
Yes. That model was the one I had issues with in my original post.
Playing with insulated flange options in roboguide, you get a null user tool move of 23mm when changing from non insulated to insulated.
I see what you are saying Nation. Assuming the only way for this to have happened would have been that an insulated flange option was selected at the beginning of the development, during the controlled start.
Lets say all the TCPs were taught with that option enabled at the beginning. Then lets say the robot was re-setup through controlled start -> maintenance -> manual screen to the normal flange. Hypothetically its a possibility, that someone might have done it inadvertently or maybe they were testing something. The only other robot person that had access to this cell told me he didn't do anything like that.
My question is then, is there a variable that can be changed to select the different flange options. I am thinking something along the lines of $PARAM_GROUP[group].$MOUNT_ANGLE that is also part of the initial robot setup. I have never seen one, but would assume one exists.
Again I am just speculating, but maybe they were looking through a variable list looking for something and accidentally changed that specific parameter value that relates to the flange option.
I would love to dump the old TCP backup into the robot and change it to the insulated flange option, and see if all the moves go back to the way they were before. If time permits, I would be really curious to see the results.
Thanks again
Not to my knowledge. From what I have seen, the robot modifies the distance of it's wrist center to faceplate, defined by $MRR_GRP[1].$DH_D[6]. Without the flange, it is -175, with it, it is -198.
That variable is write protected.
Hey Jay, I measured the distance from faceplate to the ATI pin that was taught and it's 129mm.
Nation, I think you cracked the case. That is exactly what I was looking for, some actual variable that I could compare against the old back up program from July.
On the left side of the image is the old backup from july which seems to have the flange setup as per your description. On the right side, is the current setup of the robot with normal flange selected. This at least gives me actual numbers to confirm that there was a change in the robot at some point and that is what i was looking for.
Thank you all for your help, much appreciated!