External Mastering Confirmation

  • Hi All,


    KRC4 KSS 8.6.5


    I'm experiencing some confusion with regard to the external mastering confirmation and I want to get the specifics nailed down because I am getting conflicting inputs from various resources (people and documentation).

    So the questions that I have are as follows:


    1. Is it a requirement to have the standard reference switch for mastering confirmation?

    The reason I am questioning this is because of the Description paragraph in section 7.7 of the safeoperation manual and from my reading of that is that the external mastering is handled explicitly with the higher level controller and/or external mastering confirmation system and that external mastering is confirmed by checking the reference position saved in the higher level controller and then if okay sending a safe input to the robot to confirm that mastering is fine.


    So for example:


    1: Internal mastering required

    2: Robot moves to reference position (specific position in space, not touching reference switch)

    3: External controller checks the robots position and compares to that of the reference, stored within the higher level controller itself

    4: If robot position is within tolerance then fires safe mastering confirmation (EJB) signal to the robot controller

    5: Robot can continue operation


    Am I correct in what has been stepped out or is it a requirement to still have the robot move to a reference switch?

    Edited once, last by BOTTECH ().

  • Place your Ad here!
  • For "SafeOpperation" it is a requirement that we validate the mastering of the robot.

    The Master referencing test doesn't change the mastering of the robot it validates the current position of the robot servo motor to the stored value in the robots safety configuration.


    The actual switch used can vary depending on the actual configuration of your system and if you are only using the robots internal safety with the extended SIB board or if you have a Safety PLC using CIP Safety or ProfiSafe. With just the SIB board it is simplest to use the KUKA master referencing switch and connect it to the robot. if you have a safety PLC you can use any in put to the safety PLC to indicate that the robot is in the specific position. this signal is then configured in the robots safety configuration to come from the safety signal for the safety plc.


    the robot must have the axes mastered first.

    the robots position is stored both in a move command. in the MasRefMain... might actually be a sub program from that...follow the setup, the KUKA Master Referencing switch can be used or optionally something else from your safety PLC.

    If you are using a safety PLC and the Master referencing switch is connected to the PLC the Safety PLC sends the signal to the robot that the switch identifying the Master referencing position has been made.

    The robot validates the robots current servo positions to the positions stored in the robots safety configuration.

    If the Master Referencing test passes the robot safety is not violated


    there are some more options with multiple external axes and configurations that don't allow all the axes to be check at the same time but basics are the same....


    As always check this with your own safety risk assessment to your local requirements. :smiling_face:

  • Quote

    1. Is it a requirement to have the standard reference switch for mastering confirmation?

    if using SafeOperation then YES.


    Quote

    external mastering is handled explicitly with the higher level controller

    only if:

    a. using fieldbus safety interface (FSoE, CipSafety or ProfiSafe), and

    b. mastering reference switch is wired to SafetyPLC instead of X42


    but you do have a choice of connecting switch to X42 on the controller and then PLC is not part of this.


    if using SafeOperation with parallel safety interface (X11+X13), you MUST connect sensor to X42



    Quote

    is it a requirement to still have the robot move to a reference switch?

    Yes, that IS one of the requirements when using SafeOperation. You could cheat and send fake pulse from your safetyPLC to simulate switch presence but - this is not how KUKA SafeOperation is designed, tested and certified. If something goes wrong and someone gets hurt, you would be liable. This is why safety configuration report and checksum are printed and saved when commissioning or doing system safety evaluation, so that in case of an incident, specially if humans are involved, some sucker will pay for not doing his/her job correctly.

    1) read pinned topic: READ FIRST...

    2) if you have an issue with robot, post question in the correct forum section... do NOT contact me directly

    3) read 1 and 2

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