If the robot hadn't moved, and you knew the coordinates of the position it was left in, You could enter those numbers in under single axis mastering.
Failing that, if you knew the coordinates of a known position, you could move to that position, and again, enter those coordinates in single axis mastering.
Of course, you will need to establish a pulse code signal, so write down where it thinks it is, and move each axis enough to establish a pulse code. then do the above.
Hi guys,
We are running IRvision with lit tracking conveyors, and I am seeing all sorts of inconsistency with the contrast score. On the same part of the belt, I can see anything from 65% to 145%.
The tracking conveyor uses LED backlighting.
I cleaned the belts, but still get the same numbers, and made sure to measure on the same part of the belt each time.
What can cause the reading to be that variable? Camera too far away? LED Flicker?
Thanks!
Update:
Sorry to bring back old thread, but the information is still valid. Just want to pass on what I have been doing and the results I have been getting.
I have been doing single axis master 2 ways.
1. I have an end of arm tool that I attached 3 dial indicators. I also center-punched 3 spots on a large section of steel on a nearby wall.
I set my indicators to all read zero when the robot is in position (mastering to a known point). When I need to check zero, I can move it to this position and check the position of each axis and compare it to my master numbers. (Useful for confirming master or when master is lost and the robot is in an unknown position). If the numbers are different, I just punch in my master numbers on the axis that are off and I'm good to go. I have this master saved as a position.
This position is a stretch for the robot...it couldn't be much farther away. My MAIN concern is Axis 1-3 and 5. This distance from the robot exaggerates any errors in position.
2. When replacing harnesses, I will put the robot in the most ergonomic position I can (usually straight out horizontally), and record the position of each axis. After replacing the harness, and clearing all alarms (rotating each axis etc), I will punch in the numbers I just recorded (I just take a pic of the screen with my phone), and single axis master it right where it sits.
Once that is complete, I move it to my mastering position described above to check the accuracy of the mastering.
Results:
Method 2 will get me to within .005" on each gauge.
Touching up with method 1, I find that if I move the robot to the same position a number of times (and at different speeds), it will vary by .002-.003" So my initial master was really only off by .002" when the accuracy of the robot is factored in.
I wrote a small program that moves the robot to the main master position, and 4 other positions that I marked out in my robot cell, then I also have it stop basically at zero for each axis to show positions in relation to alignment marks (yes, very redundant) in total I check it at about 7 different positions to be sure. Both of these methods have worked exactly the same after mastering the robot over 20 times from all sorts of positions, never caring if 2 and 3 were at zero or anything else.
This proved invaluable when someone accidentally moved 1 robot to all zeros, and then did a zero axis master.....on the wrong robot! (it was not anywhere near all zeros). I just eyeball it to what looks like zeros. Run my mastering program, and touch up the first position, enter my saved numbers, and single axis master. NO touch-ups were needed.
This all might not be anything new to some of you, but for others this might help.
OK....1 last confirmation.
Racermike123, in another thread you posted "The only rule for mastering a Fanuc is that axis 2 must be at zero to master axis 3 at zero."
If I do single axis mastering as mentioned above, does this not apply? My plate would not have axis 2 and 3 @ 0 degrees. I will know the positions of 2 and 3, but they just won't be zero.
Thanx again!!! (and again, and again. I want to change how we do things here but the guy "in charge" (who isn't involved with the mastering after a wiring harness job) is quite stubborn, and I HAVE to have this right before I bring it to management. He thinks quick master is the best way to go....we always have problems when we do that)
Thank you!
Last detail: Can I master all 6 at once? Or do I have to cycle power for each axis? Thanx!
Thank you. Can all 6 axis be done at the same time?
Also, can one axis be RE-mastered in single axis master if you didn't quite get it right (i.e.I have a #2 in the [ST] column, but I think it needs to be adjusted anyway)?
Thanx 1,000,000 
I guys,
Yes, I tried the search, but I ended up with pages of information that wasn't usefull.
Situation:
We have cells with 3 M-20ia robots.
We need to change wiring harnesses on all of these every 1.5-2 years.
1 of the robots can not be moved to all zero degree positions.
We CURRENTLY use quick master, and the quick master reference point is set to all zeros save for one robot that is at all zeros, but 1 axis set to 45 degrees.
Quite normally, they end up a little bit off (brakes slipping while changing harnesses?), we we are left trying to zero degree master the 2 robots that can reach zero (these are very important to get accurate setting on) and just seeing how it runs.
Touching up the programs is a monumental task as we have over 100 recipes for running different parts, each would need touching up...and usually do.
I would like to make a end of arm tool that has 3 points that I can touch to a plate and master it in that position... this position would not be anywhere near zero for most if not all axis (imagine the plate is on a table in front of the robots, 2 of the 3 would share the same plate (mastered separately of course).
To me this sounds like mastering to a fixture, but how do I tell it that the positions I am setting it to are not zero degrees without using quick master?
Thanx!
