There are many different versions of KRC4. What exactly do you mean by missing safety card. ESC, SIB, ...? At best provide article numbers. Or do you mean KRC4 is complete but you miss a profisafe or other bus card.still everything depends what type of KRC4 with what options in detail you have. What technology packages and software versions is also important. So please be a lot more specific on details.
Fubini
The configuration data shows the robot has Ethernet/IP and CIP-Safety. The only way to operate it is to connect it to a Safety PLC that can act as a CIP-Safe controller.
The alternative would be to convert the robot to using X11 hardwire safety, but that would require hardware and software changes to the KRC.
The configuration data shows the robot has Ethernet/IP and CIP-Safety. The only way to operate it is to connect it to a Safety PLC that can act as a CIP-Safe controller.
The alternative would be to convert the robot to using X11 hardwire safety, but that would require hardware and software changes to the KRC.
Thank you, what is the easyest, cheapest option for a compatible safety plc?
check with your AB distributor... because safety PLC is a system. to make it work you need CPU, safety I/O, programming software....
you can try to buy hardware cheaper online (eBay or whatever) but do not forget that software costs too.
as far as i recall this is only supported with AB safety PLCs (at least officially). after some difficulties, one or two forum members managed to make CIP Safety work with omron too.
there are many PLC brands out there. all major brands have their own proprietary Ethernet based network, usually with safety option.
AB with Ethernet/IP (and CIP Safety)
Siemens with PRofinet (and PRofiSafe)
Beckhoff with EtherCat (and FSoE)
etc,
the above three are the ones that KUKA supports. and support is only with native brand PLC.
you can have other PLC brands (like Omron etc.) that may not be involved in development of Ethernet/IP but they do support it... along with CIP Safety. but there is no notable support to make it work with KUKA. no program or setup examples, no EDS, so you are on your own. so while this is possible to make work with other brands it is always an uphill battle. so...
Search this forum (or internet) for CIP safety and see how many hits you get.
Then search this forum (or internet) again for Mitsubishi PLC supporting CIP safety and see how many hits you get.
do the math...
but reading back, you did mention KRC4 compact.
KRC4 compact is different... as i recall it always comes with X11 interface - even if one orders it with Ethernet/IP. so you should be able to simply use that X11 as a safety interface. then no safety PLC is required.
This is the data plate:
you can look at your controller... or supplied drawings....
every KRC4 compact that i have ever seen had X11...
even when it was ordered with network based safety interface (CIP Safety or ProfiSafe or FSoE ).
So as long as you do not select network based safety, that option is not going be active, X11 will be the safety interface. And you can still use Ethernet/IP (just not CIP Safety - if you setup CIP Safety as safety interface then X11 will become inactive)
and whichever option you choose, consult manufacturer(s).
if you want to go CIP safety route with Mitsubishi, go ahead but i would make sure to call both KUKA and Mitsubishi for confirmation and ask for specific settings example or application note. one can probably make it work without support but it will be time consuming and this is something only advanced users should be attempting..
Thank you for your detailed answer.
I got this picture in the meantime.
Can I run the robot without safety?
no... the only way to run robot is to have a working safety interface. for sake of troubleshooting it is possible to temporarily bypass it using StartUp Mode but obviously there are limitations....
that robot must still have CCUsr (standard, midsise and extended cabinets of KRC4 use CCU and SIB board, but CCUsr integrates the functionality of SIB-STD...). so SIB or CCUsr is where everything for parallel safety is. so most likely the X11 interface is just not installed to reduce system cost.
this is how it normally looks like, basically it is a DSUB50 with three cables that plug into X402, X403 and X406.
this is how CCU and CCUsr look like, note that CCUsr is meant for small robots (hence "sr" sufix) but this CCU is actually larger... and safety relays normally seen on SIB board are already on CCUsr
