Projects for programming languages

    Hey guys,

    So I’ve been messing around with robots as part of my job as a laser applications engineer; I’m currently in school for computer engineering, I know Python and C, but I want to start diving more into KRL, Rapid, and Karel.

    Would anybody have any suggestions for projects where I’d actually be able to put these to the test.

    Also, is programming this way more efficient or better than using a teach pendant? It seems like all the best robot guys I met had a really good grasp on these languages as well.

    We don't use Karel at all, only TPP. We realize we may be losing some functionality, but the advantage is that when there is a problem on the shop floor we can go out and fix it straight from the pendant. We have cells made by outside vendors that use Karel. The difference in time to troubleshoot and correct problems can be quite substantial.

    Quote from AlanL

    We don't use Karel at all, only TPP. We realize we may be losing some functionality, but the advantage is that when there is a problem on the shop floor we can go out and fix it straight from the pendant. We have cells made by outside vendors that use Karel. The difference in time to troubleshoot and correct problems can be quite substantial.

    when you say they program the cell in Karel, they made the whole cell with OLP?

    Quote from AlejandroOrtiz

    .. Also, is programming this way more efficient or better than using a teach pendant?..

    Which way?

    On Abb and Kuka robots you use the corresponding language (rapid/krl) on TP and offline, there is no difference in used language. Only Fanucs have this difference where you have to use offline tool to compile Karel, but you also can use TP language online and offline.

    For learning one of those languages you should use either a real robot or an offline programming software like Kuka office lite, robotstudio, or roboguide. Everyone of these are expensive, but for the last two you can get a 30 day test version.

    Quote from AlejandroOrtiz

    when you say they program the cell in Karel, they made the whole cell with OLP?

    Probably not -- KAREL is being deprecated by Fanuc as a motion controlling language. These days it's mostly reserved for operations TP doesn't support, like socket communications, or custom modules that the developer wants to keep proprietary. OLPs are probably generated in TP, although I have heard of setups where the OLP is too large for the robot's internal memory, and instead a KAREL program is used to "stream" the positions to the robot via I/O or TCP/IP.

    hermann has the right of it -- the biggest issue with learning any of the robot languages is the lack of execution environments, unless you either have a robot of the correct brand, or a brand-specific simulator. You can write most of these languages offline in a text editor, but testing and debugging would require a robot (virtual or real). And there are no free options. RoboGuide, RobotStudio, and OfficeLite have, IIRC, 30-day trial periods, but after that, you're stuck.

    Quote from hermann

    Which way?

    On Abb and Kuka robots you use the corresponding language (rapid/krl) on TP and offline, there is no difference in used language. Only Fanucs have this difference where you have to use offline tool to compile Karel, but you also can use TP language online and offline.

    For learning one of those languages you should use either a real robot or an offline programming software like Kuka office lite, robotstudio, or roboguide. Everyone of these are expensive, but for the last two you can get a 30 day test version.

    That makes way more sense, I was not aware of this; we have a staubli in our apps lab, obviously that’s all programmed off of VAL3. I thought outside of staubli, the other major companies were like Fanuc in that they had Karel as well as TP; I didn’t know the language was the same on both the pendant and in a text-editor for Kuka, ABB etc.

    Quote from SkyeFire

    Probably not -- KAREL is being deprecated by Fanuc as a motion controlling language. These days it's mostly reserved for operations TP doesn't support, like socket communications, or custom modules that the developer wants to keep proprietary. OLPs are probably generated in TP, although I have heard of setups where the OLP is too large for the robot's internal memory, and instead a KAREL program is used to "stream" the positions to the robot via I/O or TCP/IP.

    hermann has the right of it -- the biggest issue with learning any of the robot languages is the lack of execution environments, unless you either have a robot of the correct brand, or a brand-specific simulator. You can write most of these languages offline in a text editor, but testing and debugging would require a robot (virtual or real). And there are no free options. RoboGuide, RobotStudio, and OfficeLite have, IIRC, 30-day trial periods, but after that, you're stuck.

    This all makes a lot more sense now, I thought outside of Fanuc all robots had a TP language and structured text language so to speak; I didn’t know they only used one language for all formats of programming.

    I guess when I asked if it was better to program in a text editor I meant more how does that workout with motion and everything? If you’re programming in a text-editor, doesn’t it make it difficult to gauge distances and such?

    So, Kawasaki robots also use two languages, AS and Block Step, but they can be mixed in the same program.

    ABB and KUKA have a single language for all tasks.

    Fanucs are unique in that any KAREL program written offline cannot be imported into the robot without being compiled offline in RoboGuide first. TP programs require either RG compilation or the robot to have the (paid) ASCII Import Option. Every other brand that I'm aware of can import ASCII program files by default.

    Almost any program written in a text editor will need to be fine-tuned for physical motion "online". However, it's entirely possible to write programs offline with "placeholders" for the motions, which get filled in after the programs have been imported to the robot.

    URs actually provide a free "simulation" environment where you could import offline programs and see them execute, but it'll just be a stick figure of the robot moving around.

    When I program with a text editor, I will insert motion instructions with blank positions as a placeholder for any general purpose positions to teach later. For any positions that are relative to a fixture I will actually fill out all the position data relative to a user frame for that fixture. In that case I just leave the user frame blank until I teach it on the real robot.

    With that method I have very little touch-up to do on the shop floor. Usually just a couple user frames and a few points.

Advertising from our partners