MOULDING MACHINE and WORKSPACE DEFINITION

It depends on your priorities. In some press-linking systems I built, in order to maximize cycle rate, the robots "fired" the press while they were still inside, on their way out. The Trigger commands were optimized to close the press as early as possible, with the robot just barely "escaping" the collision. However, if the robot was halted by any even after the Trigger command, a nasty collision could result -- the end effectors were built to be nearly disposable, deliberately, for this situation.

However, that project prioritized maximizing speed over nearly anything else.

If your highest priority is guaranteed "zone" signals, protected against stupid operator mistakes, then yes, the WorkSpace signals may be the best choice. They're not infallible, however -- the Cartesian WorkSpace signals are vulnerable to the active $TOOL values, for example. The most robust WorkSpace signals are the Axis WorkSpace (zero ambiguity), but it's hard to set those up for a rectangular workspace. So, it's a tradeoff between your requirements and what the WorkSpace configuration can actually achieve.

Optionally KUKA Safe Operation could add another level of redundancy to the process' depending on the priorities of the application. make a big difference if the robot wrist is inside harms way.

what is the exact KSS version? some use more than one point so flange is always included....

And on newest versions you can select different combinations, don't know the exact options at the moment.

or just don't use Cartesian workspace... if you stick with Axis specific workspaces, there is no tool involved regardless how old the KSS version

Hi, I'll jump into this thread with my question as well. I've been working on one project with euromap 67 and I came across that "mold area free" signal and from my understanding it is kind of safety signal?? But why it is wired through standard signals? In manual for euromap 67 it is described as two separate signals mold area free channel 1 and channel 2. Do ye know the purpose of that and how it should be implemented (I mean proper way)?

EuroMap 67 interface has a mix of safety and standard signals. Any time standard IO is used instead of safety IO, safety level is educed to a mere handshake.

Whether or not that is justified depends on construction and if permitted by standards. For example issuing "mold area free" signal in wrong time means that robot arm could get crushed by the mold. If rest of the safeguards are in place this does not put humans in harms way and therefore may be tolerable - for example if you don't mind expensive hardware replacements or repairs in case of a crash... or if that is factored into production costs because programmer may tweak workspaces to get fastest cycle time.

here is an example of interface as implemented on some KUKAs.

one could use SafeOperation of course and make this safer

You can use axworkspaces, they are independent of the tool. It's more difficult to find good configuration, but if the mechanical setup allows it, its a good solution.