User Frames vs. Position Commands

  • Hello All:


    We have a Fanuc 30iB Mate Plus Controller with a 6-axis 200iD.


    Unit has been zero mastered after battery failure. Frame data was then restored from backup. Programs ran okay but needed tweaking. User frame was re-taught using 3 point method. In the process of tweaking the user frame multiple times, the R data (J6) in the position commands P[X] in the TP programs have shifted. We cannot duplicate the issue by performing direct entry user frame re-teaching.


    Does re-teaching the user frame translate data in the position commands? Or have we inadvertently caused this translation? We can't seem to duplicate the translation to get a handle on how to fix it without re-teaching the R data. As always, thanks in advance for any help.


    Mike423

  • Place your Ad here!
  • Quote

    In the process of tweaking the user frame multiple times, the R data (J6) in the position commands P[X] in the TP programs have shifted.


    Shifted by how much?


    Quote

    Does re-teaching the user frame translate data in the position commands?


    Your positions are relative to your user frame, but re-teaching or modifying the user frame does not modify the position data itself. (I would be very surprised to see this... going to check actually... EDIT: verified that touching up a user frame does not affect position values. Hey, I've seen weirder things happen!)


    If your new frame's rotation does not match your old frame's rotation, your positions will appear off in X, Y and R.


    If it's just R that seems off, perhaps J6 was not mastered correctly (or it was incorrect to begin with). If this is the case, then the J6 rotation on ALL of your positions will be different.


    It would probably be better to adjust your tool frame's rotation than modify all your positions.

  • Hello Jay:


    The J6 position is off by around -180 degrees.


    We did a preliminary frame re-teach and R behaved. But after trying to get X/Y/Z closer (with subsequent re-trains and manual entry attempts), somehow R is now lower by 180 as mentioned above.


    We can't duplicate it. We tried to re-train with R at a different position and it did not shift R in our position commands.


    We will adjust our R positions if needed, but I would just like to know how we messed up for future reference.

  • Hello Jay:


    I noticed you confirmed that touching up a user frame doesn't affect position commands.


    Our new R data is outside of the hard limits of the axis, so we will either need to redo zero master or manually re-teach the R data. Any better method?


    mike423

  • Mike,


    If you can get the robot configuration/variables back to where the problem started and have the mastering counts, pre-battery failure, I'd encourage you to perform a quick master. That way you don't change any frames or positions and should be able to recover accuracy completely.

  • Hello Sevastopol1:


    I have an AOTA backup from when the robot was shipped for production. Since then, the robot has lost mastering due to battery failure in the robot base. Do you believe that I can restore the AOTA and then perform a quick master?


    mike

  • Once we had similar issue. After re-teaching the user frame, all our positions shifted. I investigated for a few hours than found out that the tool frame was initialized, and re-configured and there was a p=(-180) missing. So it was not the user frame after all...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new account
Sign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign in Now

Advertising from our partners