Ur10 Programming
Regenia Junke
The multinational company Continental is a good example of the transition taking place in the industry; as a leading company in the automotive sector, Continental is by far the most robotized Spanish manufacturer in the business and the first to pioneer the move towards industry 4.0. In 2016, the company decided to acquire several UR10 cobots to automate the manufacture and handling of PCB boards, bringing down changeover times by 50%, from 40 to 20 minutes when compared to performing the task manually.
Continental is a constantly growing company which, during its 25 years of history in the automotive industry, has always focused on innovation and as a result, has won numerous major projects in the face of competition from other top level players.
Cyril Hogard, plant manager at Continental Automotive Spain, emphasizes that one of the main challenges of the industry is to improve productivity given that the company operates within a very competitive sector. When he first heard about collaborative robots 2 years ago he was quickly convinced that the cobots would be a cornerstone for the growth of Continental Automotive within Industry 4.0, based among other things on fast and easy integration, minimal maintenance and improved productivity.
The company Continental Automotive Spain chose Universal Robots to perform the tasks of handling and validating PCB boards and components during their manufacturing process, a monotonous and repetitive task which at the same time requires precision and delicacy.
The first project was initiated with special enthusiasm as the use of collaborative robots meant working with a groundbreaking technology with processes based on a more modern robotic philosophy, in accordance with the new Industry 4.0, heralding the emergence of the Smart Factory where automation and the Industrial Internet of Things (IIOT) are key.
The UR robot application was accomplished by the engineer Vctor Cantn, who accepted the challenge despite having no experience in robotics up until then. However, within a few weeks he understood the basics of the UR cobots and was able to start the programming. Having a UR available at a very early stage of the project allowed him to carry out tests and calculations of the cycle and movements in a laboratory in order to streamline and accelerate the implementation.
The company managed to keep control over the decisions made by the robot thanks to very simple programming; all the electronics and robot controllers are combined within a central point, allowing them to make programming changes without the help of outside experts.
The cobot arrival meant a change in the role of operators who no longer have to perform menial tasks such as moving components from one station to the next. They can now concentrate on skilled tasks that contribute to improving production.
Automating the work of moving parts and components around the plant has allowed Continental to reduce operating costs by bringing down changeover times by 50%, from 40 to 20 minutes when compared to performing the task manually.
The team at Continental is very satisfied with the security measures associated with collaborative robots. For example, the operator can enter the cell at any time and the robot stops instantly due to additional sensors that stop when the operator get close to the robot.
So i am working on a new project where i need a robot to load and unload and machine that makes plastic watering cans. For me the first choice is a Kuka robot. In this case Probably the KR10 R1420. But i was also offered a Universal robots UR10.
The thing is i am a bit hesitant to use the UR10, moslty because i am unfamiliar with it in the sense that is know what it is and what its capabilities are, but never had any hands on experience. To compare i have been working with Kuka bots for over 7 years.
My first question is about programming. What i can find on the internet and what the seller tells me is: it is super simple, you learn it within a hour. What i hear is that there is a user friendly interface you use to program, but with limited depth. I see it the same light as the Inline forms from kuka. Yes it is easy to use, but for complicated programming with base shifts and product measurement i prefer to write my own code. Does the UR software allow for more complex programming or are you stuck with basic functions? or are there enough functions that i dont need to worry about that.
My second question concerns safety. One of the biggest advantages for the UR robot is that i dont have to fence everything off. well that is what the seller tells me anyway. I know it is not that simple (and sometimes differs between countries to make it easier). I think in my case i don't need fencing. i can probably keep speeds low and it is not like i am mounting a knive to it. But the last step is that watering can is placed on a table in front of an employee who preforms the more complex task that i can not automate (yet). That employee needs to feel safe working next to it, and that is a hard thing to quantify. To give an example with the kuka bots in normally work with (KR150) i am really happy that there is a fence between me and it. Even during programming at low speeds i am really mindfull of where it is and where it is going because i know that it wont stop if it hits me. Now this an extreme example because of the size of robot. But i have seen small robots move with high speeds, and i don't want to get near those. Basically what i am asking if people here have had crashes/accidents and how safe you feel working next to it. I know this is a bit of a vaque question, but i a really interested in this.
1.) The UR robot has a very SIMPLE display that even nonprogrammers can understand within the first hour of dealing with it. As opposed to KUKA who has a somewhat unique feel to the software, where you have to kinda know where everything is. UR can get a little confusing as opposed to KUKA when it comes to opening subroutines and viewing them, in my perspective, due to all programs being on one screen while running the main routine.
2.) Kuka is a little more "OPEN" in the sense of the type of instructions that you can use or just type in unlike UR who has a specific set of instructions that they try to push on you. KUKA has a full keyboard and WorkVisual is better for complex programming
3.) Safety hands down UR takes the cake especially since people will be working around it. The safety features on the UR 10 are absolutely phenomenal especially with the protection against harm to an individual.
Thanks for the Information, It is always a bit difficult when i a seller or sales representative seams over optimistic about a product. What is definitely the case with the sales rep i got for UR. In the end it is probably comes down to if i want to build a cobot application or a traditional robot cell.
Regarding UR, their simulation software (Polyscope) is free, and can be downloaded from their website. It works the same way KUKA OfficeLite these days. You will download a virtual machine, and You will have a virtual teach pendant running inside this virtual machine. You can take a look in the programming interface and even write some code.
I think an important detail to keep in mind is robot speed and cell cycle time. Cobots are normally slow (and looks safer to work by its side). On the other hand, a KR10 is pretty fast, so You can achieve better cycle times.
I have had a conversation with my sales rep from kuka, most of the conversation was about delivery time for a new robot. what at the moment seems to be a bit of problem. But i also asked what he thought about the situation. I could hear he tried to be polite, but i could tell he was not a fan of the Universal robots. He made a remark about the durability of the cobot vs there KR10. I know that mechanically the kuka robots are designed and build to last. We have 3 robots here that are almost 20 years old and mechanically they are still in great condition. (but i have to admit that in the controller we have had plenty of issues) and if you compare that to the UR10 wich is of course a bit lighter in build (because it can be, and probably because it needs to be from a safety perspective). So i can probably see that they probably wont last as long as a kuka bot. But in there defensive i can't find any stories of UR bots being of bad quality or last only a short time.
To make it easier for me is that my boss has already approved the higher budget for the UR10 so it basically comes down to what i think is best for this application. both will work but the UR10 will give me the flexibility to not have fencing and thus have a much lower required floor space.
From what I've seen and heard: URs definitely lack the durability of a KUKA (or Fanuc, or ABB) in the same payload range. That said, if the task you're trying to program isn't arduous, and isn't pushing the robot hard for cycle time, it might well hold up indefinitely. URs also lack the raw strength of a same-payload non-Cobot, from what I've seen -- if your watering can tends to "stick" in the mold, a UR might not have the muscle to pull it free, where a KR10 might.
The UR has a definite advantage in the "operator interaction" area. For a KUKA, you would have to add the SafeOperation package, define a safety zone for the operator, add an area scanner or lightscreen, , maybe a Safety PLC as well, and set the robot up to do a Safety Rated "position hold" whenever it and the operator were in the same area. Plus, when the robot is moving in/out of that area, the operator would have to stay outside the shared zone until the robot reached the "hold" position.
KUKAs are definitely more programmable, but for a simple pick&place, the UR might well be fine. One thing to keep in mind: the URs definitely lean on their UR-Caps, pre-made packages for grippers, vision cameras, etc, that pre-package hardware and software together. If you can find a UR-Cap that fits your application, getting that with the robot might make your integration and programming that much simpler.
93ddb68554