Posts by Jaycephus

Manual says that you set an argument to a program name that will be your interrupt program.
It also implies that you must stop execution, and that is what I have found to be true by experimenting with it.
My PLC must issue a Stop (or one happens and is detected), and then the 'interrupt' can be used.

But the manual implies that at the moment of using the interrupt program, the main program motion will also resume and must be stopped. That is not my experience. There is no explicit need to stop the current 'motion,' since execution was stopped already before you can even use the interrupt, and there is no need to worry about that motion if you don't need to resume it, because running the interrupt program does not also automatically resume the main program (unless the interrupt program is programmed to do so, using a path save/restore and StartMove).

I do have the example code that lets me return back to what was happening before, such as a move in progress, if I need to, BUT I was wondering if the difference between the manual's text and actual use was just due to an outdated manual, or what.

Thanks,

Thanks for the answer!
Currently working on the implementation.

Thanks for the replies.

Being from Fanuc World, I am guessing that the "run chain ok" is "all safety devices on all circuits are closed, enabled, etc?" I did multiple searches in IRC5 manuals and found no definition of "run chain," but that is what I infer from how the phrase is used.

I currently have a PLC connected to my IRC5 controller via EtherNet/IP, and so I can configure any one of these system I/O to my EIP bits?

In my case, I can have Main be mostly a looping case statement waiting for a command number and run bit from the PLC (with echo back of command number to the PLC to acknowledge before running). So if the robot is commanded to run the Main program from the beginning, nothing happens until the robot is also commanded to run a specific process (a program called from the case-statement, initiated by the separate PLC process once it knows the robot is running and ready).

But the one 'gotcha' I see from your description and my experience is the "robot is not faulted." In Fanuc, I don't have a "must acknowledge" fault from an EStop or Gate Open event. Yes, it stops the robot. But then the PLC can reset and restart over EtherNet/IP without having to reset or manually acknowledge anything on the pendant. So, in a basic scenario of running the system, performing a process, the robot returns to waiting for a new process command, the operator opens the cell gate, stopping the robot via the safety inputs, resets up the work-piece, exits the cell, returning the run chain (?) to 'ok,' and then he can hit a button on the HMI to reset the robot, and another one or more buttons to run robot Main, and initiate a process on the new work-piece.

In my experience with ABB, opening the gate creates a fault that requires the operator to also have to perform an acknowledge on the Flex pendant prior to being able to run. Any way around that, or do I have to live with that. Or am I wrong on one or more of these points? Also, I have multitasking, so if an always-running task helps in this application, let me know.

Thanks,

I am new to ABB, though very familiar with Fanuc.
I need to implement safety with a basic closed cell.
I have a closed cell with a robot in it. The only operator interoperability is manually teaching points using the teach pendant.
So there is a door with a safety switch. If it is opened, the robot is stopped. If it is closed the robot may be re-enabled and run.
Just the basic cell safety. The only e-stops are the controller and flex-pendant, right outside the cell door. Robot is only dangerous equipment in the cell.
Which circuits would I use, and is there a software configuration change that needs to be made?

(Additionally, but not required this time, I may also want to add a switch on the door in the fully-open position. If this fully-open switch is not made, the robot is not enabled for manual-teaching or jogging operations. Some companies have wanted the door locked in this fully open position. Never-mind lock-out-tag-out on keeping the door from being closed. lol Any recommendation for that?)

Thanks,

For RW 6.08 on an IRC5, I made this GUIDE on the ABB forums. Might be useful for people hooking up a generic connection with something that doesn't use EIP configuration files, which is my normal case.

GUIDE: ABB Internal EtherNet/IP Adapter configuration with Beckhoff EL6652 Scanner

My experience is mainly with 1) Fanuc, and 2) ABB, though with a fair amount of Adept, Staubli, and Epson in the more distant past.

I'll say that you should be aware that Kuka is now Chinese owned, so if you are looking at a Fanuc alternative for a specific reason, then company ownership might play into it.

Between Fanuc and ABB, each has their advantages. I'm still learning some of the basics on ABB, but their current offering is very nice and has many things built in that are expensive add-ons in Fanuc.

Fanuc's DCS is still King, though. BUT ABB just released "Collision Avoidance" which adds to their own DCS-like capabilities. It is, however, more like an advanced Fanuc Space Check or Interference Check, and may be missing features that those Fanuc options currently have.

As much as I've personally complained to coworkers about Fanuc documentation, I find ABBs to be worse, with part of that being just getting your hands on the latest, applicable documentation (Fanuc is MUCH better in this area), and part of it being figuring out which similarly named manual is applicable to your need (Fanuc is much better these days, again). Also, I find the lack of helpful screenshots, diagrams, or drawings in ABB to be very significant. Simply 'describing' something without showing an image is pretty poor for "world-class" documentation. I also found their electrical diagrams very lacking. Their actual schematics are complete, but they should show examples of hooking a controller up in various safety configurations, not just saying "these are our safety terminals here." Okay. There's a ton of them. How might I use them in different situations?

Programming in ABB is much better than in Fanuc, even when you go all out in Fanuc and pay for the PC Interface and a license of RoboGUIDE. Fanuc's RoboGUIDE/Handling PRO software does give you offline simulated cell capability, yes, but it barely brings your physical robot programming experience up to the level of ABB's free RobotStudio option. I think for full offline simulation capability, both are roughly equal and priced the same, I think. But one thing to consider is that ABB gives you one year of full simulation capability with the purchase of a controller. You'll pay full price for a year of RoboGUIDE, plus need an $option on the Fanuc controller for that experience on a Fanuc robot. Personally, I just get a Fanuc with the $500 Ascii upload option and use a text editor with FTP uploading. Adequate and cheaper.

I'd personally consider ABB a very good option to Fanuc (in ALL 5 of your categories), whether it is as future replacement, or to keep Fanuc 'honest.'

The case-statement-style software method (using EtherNet/IP in/out of the robot) was how I do it with Fanuc, too.
(After a command number is echoed back, then a start bit activates that 'command' or program.)
What about getting the robot running from a PLC-connection? With Fanuc, I can have the PLC reset and start via EtherNet/IP bits.

After EStops are enabled, can the EtherNet/IP connection between my PLC and IRC5 controller clear, reset and get the main program running? (Or is the 'command processor' set up to run automatically in a multitasking system?)

Thanks,

Can you know the state of EtherNet/IP?

I found that this test code works, but don't try to use IOBusStart!
I think there is a reset method for EIP.f

Q: is there a simpler or more-straightforward way? (thanks)

VAR num nBusState := 0;
VAR busstate bstate;
VAR string bname := "EtherNetIP";
 
 nBusState := 0;
!Don't uncomment this line:
!IOBusStart bname; <------ FYI, BLOWS UP HERE IF THIS LINE IS PRESENT ----------<<<<<
!Test Physical...
 IOBusState bname, bstate \Phys;
 
 TEST bstate
 CASE IOBUS_PHYS_STATE_RUNNING:
 ! Possible to access the signals on the bus
 nBusState := 1;
 
 DEFAULT:
 ! Actions for not up and running bus
 nBusState := 0;
 ENDTEST
 
 !Test Logical...
 IOBusState bname, bstate \Logic;
 
 TEST bstate
 CASE IOBUS_LOG_STATE_STARTED:
 ! The bus is started
 nBusState := nBusState + 1;
 DEFAULT:
 ! Actions for stopped IBS bus
 nBusState := 0;
 ENDTEST
 
 IF nBusState = 2 THEN
 SetGO ROB2PLC_Var1, 1;
 ENDIF

There may be a written procedure out there for this already, so I'm asking...

I have the task of describing how to fix a BZAL alarm and follow-on issues after an end-user has incurred this alarm.

What I'm seeking is a good English procedure to take them back to an operable robot. Otherwise, I'll need to filter through the Fanuc procedures involved and translate them into something easier to follow.

This is an R30-iB Mate, LR Mate 200 iD, Handling Tool v8.30
I did save a Quick Master reference position prior to shipping the system as well.

Thanks for any helpful feedback.

Does anyone know if Delmia breaks out robotic engineering functions as a separate offering, and how much it would be. The feature-set looks great, but that's like ~20% of the whole offering and it would be nice if you can get it for 20% of the full Delmia price.

Is Tecnomatix any good? I wasted an hour just looking for basic information and got nowhere on the Siemens website. I literally still don't know what the hell it is. Robcad = RobotExpert?? IDK!

Of the generalized Robot OLP, do any of them do well for cycle-time estimation, based on a particular robot and given payload?

Usually, you need the specific Robot manufacturing Simulation software to get accurate cycle-time estimates, BUT we work with multiple robot manufacturers, so our cost would be tens of thousands of dollars each year to keep up licenses on multiple industrial robot sim packages. (Fanuc, ABB, Kuka, etc)

Thanks,

A: Close and reopen Screenmaker, and it will ask which version of the SDK that you have in your system that you want to use.

When using 32-bit RobotStudio and I open the ScreenMaker project, I get this log message:

"The preferred FlexPendant SDK version for this project is 5.14.188 instead of 6.05... "

I had to download the Legacy SDK to go that far back, and then I selected the only 5.14 version in the list, but it is slightly older than 5.14.188.

How do I change or delete which SDK it wants to use when I open my Screenmaker project?

Thanks

If you are making an .LS from the nesting software, you will either want to have the ASCII UPLOAD option on the robot, or have an offline way to translate, which is possible for free with a workaround that uses RoboGuide from Fanuc. You would have to download and install that.

For a more automatic method via FTP loading to the robot, the R507 ASCII UPLOAD option is required (typically $500)
Looks like maybe a newer version of the same thing is "R796 ASCII Program Loader," but I don't know what the difference is between the two.

I don't know what the Siemens stuff is, but are you getting a .TP file out? Or a .LS file? ASCII UPLOAD option is what I use to load an .LS. A .TP file can be loaded directly without any option. The ASCII UPLOAD option is typically $500 per robot. Looks like maybe a newer version of the same thing is "R796 ASCII Program Loader," but I don't know what the difference is between the two. I presume it is the newest way to automatically translate a .LS file to .TP at upload time.

(Be aware that if a program is selected for editing, or it is being run or is in paused mode, an upload of a program with the same name will fail.)

For those wondering:

IO->PMC->DATA->Int IO Asg (Internal IO Assignment)->Clr All

This clears internal IO assignments related to the PMC, and prevents the PMC from overwriting what you're trying to do with a PLC-related IO assignment.

It might clear assignments you didn't want cleared. For me, it cleared the assignments I was trying to use on UOP IO, so having a back you can restore if it does something you don't want is a good thing. Noting all your IO assignments is a good thing, anyway. Mine were simple and easy to remember and restore.

For some reason the PMC was ordered as an option on a robot, but never setup or used.

R-30ib HT 8.30P

When trying to set up user inputs to be set by PLC, the PMC or something appears to be overriding the inputs. There is no PMC program and the PMC is stopped, but with the internal mapping in the PMC, I can only change the PMC bits from the internally mapped bits. If I delete this internal mapping it looks like my User inputs go away, even though I have them configured for EtherNet/IP from the PLC. If I keep the mapping EIP cannot set the User Inputs.

What's the correct way to disable PMC control of UIO, for this controller version?

Is there a way to write to these internal bits from TP code?

Thanks,
Jay

Quote from hermann

Even on unlicensed Robotstudio You can load, edit, debug and save robot programs.
It is only a bit strange to use, and I also had to try some hours until I found the way to do it. But found it once it's that easy, You can't understand the problems You had before.

1. create a VC from backup of the real controller
2. create a station with the VC built in 1.
3. load backup in that station

You can see the "naked" robot in Robotstudio, You can do everything as at the real robot. The only thing that is not possible is, to use the simulation things like building accessories, attach grippers, create paths from CAD-files and so on.

Is step 1 procedure in the help files? Nothing tricky? I've gotten a backup of the controller.

The ability to just see the files within RAPID, rather than falling back to a text editor, was what I was wanting to do, which looking at the backup folder lets you do. I just didn't know to right-click on the Backup folder to tell it where to look

I'm very new to ABB and Robot Studio, and I often have to work without a Robot Studio license. When I have the physical robot and am connected, I don't have a problem with an unlicensed copy of Robot Studio, viewing and editing RAPID and downloading it. However, if I'm sent a robot backup, I don't see how to just view (or edit) the RAPID files. It wants to find the virtual controller for this particular robot, and in my case, the robot has added options used in the code (extended axis type stuff and more).

Is it possible to get the VC set up in an unlicensed Robot Studio, so that I can look at code and send changes to the factory site? I can spend the time to figure this out, but I would like to know it's possible before I go further. I will be onsite with the robot soon, so a direct-connect procedure will also be viable in a few days.

Thanks!