Functional Safety (FSU) Questions

    Hi guys,

    Just looking into the FSU side and drawing up various questions as I go along.

    My first question is relating to the spheres/bubbles that surround the physical arm links:

    - Can these selectively and individually be enabled/disabled by parameter change, if so would you happen to know the relative parameter values.

    - Can these be adjusted in relation to either increasing the size or reducing the size of them.

    I really would like to disable S axis sphere as this is causing issues and is totally not really required as a monitored area and also a way to reduce the size of the sphere around T axis.

    If anyone has any insight, information regarding this, it would be gratefully received.

    Hi kwakisaki;

    for "surrounding bubbles" you're meaning this black spheres around the robot:

    If yes, I'm sorry I really don't know. I'm not sure but I guess that they will change according to the robot model.

    For the T-axis you must consider the setup of the tool envelope. It could help you to mask the T-sphere.

    Motouser

    Many thanks for replying.

    :offtopic:

    Yes, I talk about them usually as bubbles as they look like a bubble you used to blow using small plastic ring dipped into water detergent as a child.

    In UK, back in my earlier days we also used to do 'Bubble Writing' where letters were made out of several bubbles just like you make for tool interference models.

    :backtotopic:

    2 issues I have come across with my new learning to Yaskawa:

    1. S Axis bubble

    - S axis stock bubble extends below physical base of model.

    - If I place robot flat on a prohibited surface, then I cannot move robot due to S axis bubble interfering.

    2. T axis bubble on small robot.

    - If I use 'very small tool' inside bubble, this bubble interferes on surrounding zones.

    - Zones are very close, as T axis bubble is larger than tool, it causes issues.

    Quote from Motouser

    It could help you to mask the T-sphere.

    Is this possible, as this is exactly what I was asking about (maybe not using correct words).

    I would like to do this for S and T sphere/bubble, is this possible?

    Quote from kwakisaki

    Motouser

    Many thanks for replying.

    :offtopic:

    Yes, I talk about them usually as bubbles as they look like a bubble you used to blow using small plastic ring dipped into water detergent as a child.

    In UK, back in my earlier days we also used to do 'Bubble Writing' where letters were made out of several bubbles just like you make for tool interference models.

    :uglyhammer2:

    I admit that the CS configurator graphics is better that the motion axis range.


    I have never have a tool so small that falls entirely inside the bubble, I didn't think that was so big.

    For the spheres dimensions I must confess my ignorance, maybe someone in the forum could know some parameter that could help.


    And yes the FSU is a very pain in the a.... You must pass to flash memory reset and to restriction of operation.

    Just as example I use endless rotation on external axis and it's incompatible with FSU, even if I want to exclude the ext. axis. Remember that my experience is limited to DX200 controller, as I said before maybe someone in the forum that works with the newer controller(YRC) could help you or know newer functions.

    Yes, I am feeling that FSU is not as flexible as the Kawasaki equivalent.

    However, it is what it is and can be made to work, albeit in a more restrictive way.

    I am carrying out some simple tests at the moment and I am very surprised at the results.

    What I am seeing is a variety of indeterminable stoppages and how you recover from them and it all seems to be dependent on just how far you have breached the monitored area.

    I'll post them a little later when I have some baseline information to provide.

    Many thanks Motouser for your responses so far.

    Quote from kwakisaki

    Does anyone know if the tool interference can be set to trigger an event if any of the tool interference bubbles interfere with the robot link bubbles in order to prevent EOAT and ROBOT collisions.

    Anyone have any response to this one?

    I have not found anything conclusive in the manuals stating yes or no, but through testing and trawling through manuals, I believe the answer is no.

    I am in the middle of testing the accuracy of the FSU features in terms of robot/EOAT>machine collisions using MotoSim (not on a live robot yet) using a simple 100mm TCP from the centre of the flange which is just outside of T axis bubble.

    So I am looking specifically at a Range Area, Tool Interference and TCP in the attached video:

    - T axis bubble is always clear of the range area.

    - I can freely use the position panel to jog the TCP.

    - I can trigger a range limit alarm when I am inside the 'Outside' monitored range limit cube.

    - I can Jog it clear by a minimal distance, reset the alarm and now alarm free.

    - When using the teach pendant instead, I cannot get anywhere near that range area again.

    - This tolerance appears to be around 20mm.

    a) Is this a possible bug within motoSim.

    b) Can I expect to see this tolerance being applied using the teach pendant on a live robot.

    c) Is there any parameter/function that relates to this tolerance and can it be changed, turned off.

    d) Is this tolerance an internally generated predictive value based on speed/stopping distances etc.

    e) Is this something obvious I am missing.

    Any pointers, opinions, facts, documentation references you could provide would be appreciated.

    Just for clarity, I've also tried the range area set as inside to check I cannot move outside this area.

    The results appear to be the same, as above except this time the tolerance prevents me from going outside of this area by a very similar tolerance value of approx 20mm.

    I am pretty sure there is a sync issue between using position panel jogging and the virtual pendant but at this point, using the position panel to check for interference is spot on but when using virtual pendant, this tolerance is being applied.

    If this is the case with a live robot, then is somewhat disappointing if I cannot null it out...... :bawling:

Advertising from our partners