Author Topic: literature recommendations  (Read 201 times)

Playfield

  • Forum User
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
literature recommendations
« on: July 28, 2018, 06:06:18 PM »
Hello everybody ,

I'm Chris from Germany and have been dreaming of an own milling robot for a couple of years, like most people here, I think so ;). The robot will work on wood in the future. I am currently working in mechanical engineering and have already gained some experience working with the KR C4.

Now the project is becoming more and more concrete, so I need more information. Can you give me some literature recommendations for sizing the equipment? For example, by what factor must the potential payload be greater than the used payload to handle forward speed dynamic load?

It looks like some people are building their cell with the parts that are currently available. In view of the costs, I would prefer to calculate to make sure that everything works. Or are these all empirical values?

Will I find such information in SpringerLink Rob|Arch when I am a member?

Best Regards

Christian

Johannes @ Robots in Architecture

  • Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Forum User
  • *****
  • Posts: 762
    • View Profile
    • Robots in Architecture
Re: literature recommendations
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2018, 07:47:38 AM »
Hello Christian,

Unfortunately I'm not aware of such literature regarding dimensioning etc. The problem is that every robot project is different, and companies are earning good money from their consulting/planning services.
So your best bet is finding someone with experience in the field you want to use your robot in. Also, payload is not everything, as you can get e.g. a  KR360 Fortec with 360kg payload and a KR300 Quantec with 300kg payload. And while there are just 60kg difference in payload, the Fortec is definitely the stiffer robot, as it weighs 3x as much as the Quantec.
In any case, milling is particularly tricky because of the varying loads...
The Springer Rob|Arch books provide you with a good overview of projects and deeper insight into the strategies, but they are not tutorials or instructional literature.

Best,
Johannes