ROBOLOAD--

A ROBOT PAYLOAD MANAGEMENT TOOL

User's Manual for Version 2.3

Date: 09/10/03


Copyright, General Motors Corporation, 1980-2003. All unauthorized use of this piece of software is forbidden.

GM ROBOLOAD CONTACT: Todd Watson, Yanli Zhou, CRW Robotics, General Motors Corporation, M/c:
480-109-164, 30300 Mound Road, Warren MI 48090-9040. Fax: 586-947-1039; Email: [email protected]
Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Table of Contents
1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................6
1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................6
1.2 History ....................................................................................................................................................6
1.3 Units .......................................................................................................................................................7
1.4 Roboload Version 2.3 ............................................................................................................................7
2 Installation and testing....................................................................................................................................7
2.1 System requirements...............................................................................................................................7
2.2 Installation ..............................................................................................................................................8
2.3 Testing your installation of Roboload 2.3 ..............................................................................................9
3 A brief primer on Roboload related topics .....................................................................................................9
3.1 A Coordinate frame primer.....................................................................................................................9
3.2 Commonly used coordinate frames ......................................................................................................10
3.3 A mass and inertia primer.....................................................................................................................13
3.4 An inertia and "finite elements" primer ................................................................................................15
3.5 A units primer.......................................................................................................................................17
4 Using Roboload 2.3......................................................................................................................................17
4.1 Roboload toolbar special purpose buttons ............................................................................................18
4.2 Running Roboload v2.3........................................................................................................................22
4.3 Creating or re-using end of arm tooling and dress data files ................................................................30
4.4 Importing end of arm tooling data and dress from solid modeling programs (e.g., Unigraphics) ........32
4.5 Analyzing Roboload output..................................................................................................................33
4.6 Interpreting Roboload's output to better design the payloads/tooling...................................................36
5 Roboload and the tooling design, build and buyoff process .........................................................................41
5.1 Problems and solutions.........................................................................................................................41
6 Frequently asked questions and encountered problems................................................................................41
6.1 Commonly asked questions ..................................................................................................................41
6.2 Common sources of problems ..............................................................................................................43
7 Support .........................................................................................................................................................43
7.1 Roboload registration ...........................................................................................................................43
7.2 Roboload problem resolution process...................................................................................................43
7.3 Robot vendor support process ..............................................................................................................45
8 Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................46
The Roboload Hall of Fame .............................................................................................................................46
9 References ....................................................................................................................................................47
Appendix I: Roboload registration .....................................................................................................................48
Appendix II: Roboload training request form ....................................................................................................49
Appendix III: Roboload training evaluation form ..............................................................................................50
Appendix IV: Roboload problem reporting documentation ...............................................................................50
Appendix V: Example end of arm tooling drawing ...........................................................................................52
Appendix VI: Example end of arm tooling drawing -- broken up .....................................................................53
Appendix VII: Example end of arm tooling table ..............................................................................................54
Appendix VIII: Commonly used information ....................................................................................................54
Appendix IX: Sample output to test installation ................................................................................................56
Appendix X: Case Study 1 .................................................................................................................................57
Appendix XI: Case Study 2................................................................................................................................62
Appendix XII: Case study 3 ...............................................................................................................................64
Appendix XIII: Instructions for creating solid model input data........................................................................67
Appendix XIV: Roboload 2.3 wish list – Features that need to be added ............................................................72
Appendix XV: Roboload 2.3 bug list – Problems reported and yet to be fixed ...................................................73
Appendix XVI: Case studies using Fanuc robots .................................................................................................74
Case 1b .............................................................................................................................................................74
Case 2b .............................................................................................................................................................75
Case 3b .............................................................................................................................................................78
Appendix XVII: Case studies using kuka robots................................................................................................81

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 2 of 86 Page 2

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Case 1c ............................................................................................................................................................81
Case 2c .............................................................................................................................................................82
Case 3c .............................................................................................................................................................85

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 3 of 86 Page 3

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: A typical right-handed coordinate system showing the origin and the 3 mutually orthogonal basis
vectors ............................................................................................................................................................9
Figure 2: A point mass described in a coordinate system. Note that it has only mass..........................................10
Figure 3: A finite mass described in a coordinate system. Note that it has both mass and inertia properties.......10
Figure 4: The GM standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position. .................................................11
Figure 5: The ABB standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position. ...............................................11
Figure 6: The Fanuc standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position...............................................12
Figure 7: The Kuka standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position. ...............................................12
Figure 8: The center of mass or centroidal frame.................................................................................................13
Figure 9: GM standard dress/Axis 3 coordinate frame.........................................................................................13
Figure 10: An example of two objects that have the same mass and c.g., but different inertias. .........................14
Figure 11: Modeling the same object (on far left) differently can result in very different answers and potentially
change Roboload’s output!! Note that while Models 1 and 2 have the same mass as the Object their mass is
distributed differently and the resulting inertias are different in the three cases. .........................................14
Figure 12: Overview Flow Chart Showing How To Use RoboLoad....................................................................20
Figure 13: The Units Calculator built into Roboload v2.3 ...................................................................................21
Figure 14: Selecting/opening Roboload v2.3 ......................................................................................................21
Figure 15 Excel Pop-up Window when you start RoboLoad.xls .......................................................................22
Figure 16: Roboload warning: For GM use only! ................................................................................................23
Figure 17: Roboload v2.3 startup screen. .............................................................................................................23
Figure 18: Setting up your default data path. .......................................................................................................24
Figure 19: Reminding users to set up their default path .......................................................................................24
Figure 20: Filling in the Roboload.ini file. ...........................................................................................................24
Figure 21: Entering the new file name and the units to be used. ..........................................................................25
Figure 22: Warning accompanying the conversion of the data file from a pre-v2.3 version to v2.3....................26
Figure 23: Example data entry worksheet, showing the EOAT Data tab .............................................................27
Figure 24: Robot manufacturer selection dialog box............................................................................................28
Figure 25: Robot model selection dialog box.......................................................................................................28
Figure 26: Roboload output: The analysis report showing vehicle program, station, tooling and designer data .29
Figure 27: Choosing the input units for the solid model data...............................................................................32
Figure 28: The solid model data entry dialog box for the end of arm tooling. .....................................................33
Figure 29: Fanuc Collision Guard Parameters......................................................................................................35
Figure 30: The principal areas in the Roboload output analysis sheet..................................................................36
Figure 31: The robot payload analysis process from design time through validation of tooling hardware built..45

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 4 of 86 Page 4

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

ROBOTS IN ROBOLOAD VERSION 2.3.4

ABB M93 ABB M94A ABB M96

ABB M93 6000 2.4-120 ABB M94A 6400 2.4-120 ABB M96 6400 2.4-120
ABB M93 6000 2.4-150 ABB M94A 6400 2.4-150 ABB M96 6400 2.4-150
ABB M93 6000 2.8-100 ABB M94A 6400 2.8-120 ABB M96 6400 /B-150
ABB M93 6000 3.0-75 ABB M94A 6400 52.9-120 ABB M96 6400 2.4-175
ABB M93 6000 53.0-100 ABB M94A 6400 3.0-75 ABB M96 6400 2.4-200
ABB M94A 6400 2.25-75 ABB M96 6400 2.8-120
ABB M94A 6400 /B-150 ABB M96 6400 52.9-120
ABB M96 6400 3.0-75

FANUC R2000 FANUC S430 FANUC S900

R-2000i / 165F (2.6M) S-430i W (2.3m)(200kg) S-900 iW (2.48m)

R-2000i / 125L (3.0M) S-430i W (2.6m)(165kg) S-900 iL (3.03m)
R-2000i / 200F (2.5M) S-430i F (2.6m)(130kg) S-900 iH (2.48m)
R-2000i / 165R (3.1M) S-430i L (3.0m)(125kg) S-900 W (2.5m)
R-2000i / 200R (2.9M) S-430i L (3.0m)(80kg) S-900 H (2.5m)
R-2000i / 165CF (1.4M) S-430i R (3.1m)(165kg) S-900 L (3.0m)
S-430i CF (1.4m)
S-430i CI (1.7m)

FANUC S420 KUKA

S-420i W (2.4m)(175kg) KR125

S-420i W (2.4m)(155kg) KR125L100
S-420i W (2.85m) KR150
S-420i F (3.0m) KR150L150
S-420i F (2.85m) KR150L120
S-420i F (2.4m) KR200
S-420i S (2.25m) KR200L150
S-420i L (3.0m) KR350
S-420 A (2.4m) KR350L280
S-420 F (2.4m) KR350L240
S-420 W (2.4m) KR60P
S-420 WD (2.4m)

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 5 of 86 Page 5

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

ROBOLOAD-- A ROBOT PAYLOAD MANAGEMENT TOOL

User's Manual for Version 2.3

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview
Roboload is a software tool intended to ensure at design-time that the proposed robot end of arm
payload1 is within the capability of the proposed robot. The primary goal of Roboload is, therefore, to
flag -- early in the design process -- a large fraction of the overload situations that could plague GM's
new product launches. It is also intended to help automate the error prone, non-systematic, hand
calculations and to ensure that warranty voiding conditions are avoided. Roboload is not intended to
be a top of the line analysis tool. Therefore, if Roboload flags approximately 30% of the overload
during the design process, it has performed to specifications. To facilitate this, Roboload has been
designed to be a rather conservative analysis tool; the onus is on the user to carefully analyze the
flagged cases.

A secondary goal is to provide the fabric for a systematic robot payload management process to track
issues as the design morphs into actual hardware in the job shops and then in the plant. Roboload's
one page analysis sheet output provides the media for this tracking effort. Buyoffs are required during
design time as well as when the as-built equipment is being prepared for use on the floor.

Roboload's inputs are the geometric and mass information of the intended tooling and, if applicable,
part. This is converted internally to mass and inertia information that is then utilized by the program
to determine if the total load (mass and inertia) is within the robot's specifications. The result of the
analysis is either
Pass -- A "Pass" determination suggests that if the modeled data is correct, the system should
perform well on the floor; or
Further analysis required -- The "Further analysis required" determination suggests that the
payload's inertia properties are outside the robot's specifications, given modeling assumptions
and the absence of application specific information. In other words, further analysis is
required of the job/process shop (possibly with help from the robot manufacturer) to either
redesign the end of arm tooling to "pass" Roboload, or to more carefully address application
specific issues to determine if that robot can, in fact, safely execute the task.
An extreme output is the determination that the given payload cannot be handled by the
selected robot -- a determination that would ordinarily rate a "fail" rating. Given the
conservative nature of Roboload's analysis, we choose to flag this as a "further analysis
required" case.

As Roboload is a GM proprietary piece of software, non-GM use is strictly forbidden and illegal.

1.2 History
Originally created in Lotus 1-2-3 by Paul Tyckoski and then migrated and extended into Excel by Dr
Ningjian Huang and Dr. Prasad Akella, Roboload is now being maintained and updated by Todd


Copyright, General Motors Corporation, 1980-99. All unauthorized use of this piece of software is forbidden.
1
End of arm payload = end of arm tooling, dress, and any parts being manipulated.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 6 of 86 Page 6

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Watson and Dr. Yanli Zhou of GM's Controls, Robotics, and Welding Center. As indicated above,
v2.3 has been refined and updated to additionally perform as a design tool. In addition to providing
quantitative metrics in the "Specification Ratings" charts, Roboload is now being configured to also
be a part of a new payload management process to be followed during new product launches.

Futures releases of Roboload are currently in the works. A near term effort will be the release of a PC
based executable version of 2.3 written in VB. A longer term effort is to update the models and
analysis in v2.3 to handle kinetic and configuration data to better model the process planned for the
floor. Also planned for the long term is the migration of Roboload into robot simulation packages like
Deneb's Igrip and Technomatix's Robcad.

1.3 Units
The preferred units used in this document are in the SI notation (mass in kilograms, length in meters,
time in seconds). We extend this to describe force in Newtons, torque in Nm and inertia in kg m2. All
internal calculations are done in the SI MKS system. While the user is encouraged to use SI units to
be consistent with the rest of the world, Roboload permits the use of British units, if necessary. In
particular, the output data -- which by default is in SI units -- can be toggled to SI (mm) and British
units for the convenience of the user.

1.4 Roboload Version 2.3

Roboload v2.3, written in a Microsoft Excel environment, supports ABB, Fanuc, and KUKA robots
in use by GM.

The rest of this document details the installation, use and abuse of Roboload v2.3. Section 2 walks the
user through the installation and testing procedure while Section 3 is an important primer on some
basic fundamentals critical to using Roboload correctly. The user is strongly urged to carefully read
through Sections 3.1 and 3.2 and is encouraged to peruse of the rest of Section 3. Section 4 describes
the procedures key to the successful running and use of Roboload. As indicated earlier, the tooling
integration process is critical to insuring that the as built tools perform well on the floor. Section 5
gives an overview of this process so the designer using Roboload understands his/her role in the
process. Typical problem situations are addressed in the Section 6 on frequently encountered
Roboload problems while Section 7 details the procedures to be followed when the user desires help
with Roboload software or robot hardware/performance issues.

2 INSTALLATION AND TESTING

2.1 System requirements

In order for Roboload v2.3 to run successfully on your machine, you need to ensure that it meets the
following specifications. Please check-off the list below to be sure.
IBM compatible PC, running off of a 486 or faster processor
Windows 95, 98, NT, or 2000 operating system
Microsoft Excel 97 - 2000 with Solver Add-in for Version 2.3
(WinZip 6.x - 8.x to unzip the roboload-2.3.zip file)
Hard drive with 2Mb of free disk space

If you have problems, refer to Section 6 entitled “Frequently asked questions and encountered
problems.”

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 7 of 86 Page 7

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

2.2 Installation
Please follow the following steps if you have had Roboload version 2.3.1 and earlier on your
computer. If you don’t have older version of Roboload on your computer, skip step 1 and 2.

1. Delete any previous versions of Roboload.

2. From within Excel, delete “RoboTlbr,” a roboload added toolbar that provides the roboload
special buttons (Section 4.1). To do this, choose customize and then tab to toolbars. Select
RoboTlbr and delete it. If you don’t do this, you will get a run time error.
3. Unzip “roboload2.3.x.zip” to the folder where you would like roboload to reside. Make sure to
“Use folder names” option is on. After unzip the files, a “roboload” directory will then be created
under the directory you specified. (Get your local system administrator to help you in case of
problems). Save the original roboload zip file in case you need to reload the software in the
future.
4. You should have the following files in your roboload directory at this point (assuming, for the
purposes of this example, the directory you specified is C:\):

C:\
... existing directories
roboload\
data \
(several data files used in the case studies in Section 4.6)
Roboload.xls
Roboload.ini
... existing directories and files

5. It is recommended that the “data” directory be used for Roboload analyses. A directory structure
may be created within the “data” directory – or in another location if the user prefers.
6. Fire up Excel
7. Choose “New” under the File menu and then us “Save As” to save this empty file as temp.xls.
(This file does not have to have any useful information. We will use it to help set up your default
data directory presently.)
8. Close temp.xls; leave Excel running.
9. Now, from within Excel, launch roboload-2.3. and select Enable Macros within the first pop-up
window. When you do this, you will see the Roboload toolbars loading up.
10. Details (with figures) on the steps that you will be following now are presented in Section 4.2.
Please refer to that material if the admittedly terse instructions here don’t suffice.
11. Click on “Continue” in the warning and about Roboload banner.
12. Roboload should default to a blank screen at this point.
13. Using Excel’s File Open (Ctrl-O) function, open up temp.xls created in Step 11. With temp.xls as
the active window, click on the “Set default” Roboload toolbar button (the 4th from the left) to
select the default location of the data files created in the future by Roboload. The Roboload
Special function toolbar is just below Excel’s toolbars. If you choose to change this default in the
future, follow the exact same steps to create and then tag a file in your favorite data directory,
anywhere on your disk drives.
14. Close temp.xls.
15. Next, edit in Excel the Roboload.ini file that resides in the main Roboload directory. Within
“Open” window, switch file filter to “All files” to see and select the file.
16. You are now ready to proceed with testing your installation.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 8 of 86 Page 8

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

2.3 Testing your installation of Roboload 2.3

Please follow the following steps in order to test your installation of Roboload v2.3.
1. With Roboload v2.3 loaded within Excel, choose the “Open file” button from the Roboload
toolbar buttons. Click your way to c:\roboload\sample\metric(m)_sample.xls (assuming that you
saved Roboload in the c:\roboload directory). As the data file is write protected, it is OK to open
the file as a read-only one.
2. To run the analysis, select the robot (ABB, M96, 6400C /B-150). Compare the analysis to the
sample output in Appendix IX. Please note that every time you change a selection of robot, All
calculations will be redone and the analysis sheet will be updated.
3. If there is a problem or discrepancy, refer to the “Problems and solutions” section.

3 A BRIEF PRIMER ON ROBOLOAD RELATED TOPICS

3.1 A Coordinate frame primer

Coordinate frames are extensively used in robotics to describe the relative location of different parts
of the system. For example, we define the Tool Center Point (TCP) of the tool in the Tool Frame [T]
that is affixed to the Face Plate (FP) of the robot. Or, we define the location of a weld point in terms
of the World Frame [W] that is affixed at the base of the robot.

1. A coordinate frame (see Figure 1) is typically composed of two parts:

The origin of the frame (O); and
The three, mutually orthogonal, basis vectors (X, Y, and Z) forming a right-handed
coordinate system
Z

O X

Figure 1: A typical right-handed coordinate system showing the origin and the 3 mutually orthogonal basis
vectors

2. The three, mutually orthogonal (i.e., perpendicular), basis vectors follow the “right hand rule.”
This rule says that if the curled fingers of the right hand point in the direction of a 90° rotation
from the positive x-axis to the positive y-axis, then the thumb points in the direction of the
positive z-axis.

3. A vector is typically used to locate a point in the coordinate system. Thus, the position vector
O
pm = (xm, ym, zm)
is used to locate an object m, in the coordinate frame [O] in Figure 2 (bold face p refers to a
vector, leading superscript O refers to the frame [O], while trailing subscript m refers to the point
in space under consideration).

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 9 of 86 Page 9

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

O
pm Y

O X

Figure 2: A point mass described in a coordinate system. Note that it has only mass.

In general, the vector Opm points to the center of mass of the object m in coordinate frame O. Thus, in
the case of a finite sized object m, the vector Opm points to the center of mass of m (see Figure 3).

m, I

O
pm Y

O X

Figure 3: A finite mass described in a coordinate system. Note that it has both mass and inertia properties.

3.2 Commonly used coordinate frames

To simplify the use of Roboload, and to be consistent with earlier versions of the program, v2.3
continues to use a few standard frames in which to define the tooling. In particular, we use the “GM
standard face plate” and “GM standard dress” frames to standardize on the frames in which the end of
arm tooling (EOAT) and dress are defined, respectively. The primary motivation for doing this is that
the frames used by the three major GM vendors are different (here's one in need of commonization!).

The six important frames of interest to us are:

1. GM standard face plate frame
This coordinate system (see Figure 4) has its origin at the center of the face plate, on the tool
mounting surface. The X-axis points directly out of the face plate, away from the robot arm. The
Z-axis is picked to be pointing away from the ground when the tool is held up in an orientation
as if the robot were in a zero position. The Y-axis follows from the right hand rule and is parallel
to the ground and to the 5th axis of the robot.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 10 of 86 Page 10

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Robot
X
arm O

Robot face plate

Figure 4: The GM standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position.

Please note that all End of Arm Tool data is input in this coordinate frame. (By doing this, we
can use the same tool data on different robots.)

2. ABB standard face plate frame

This coordinate system (see Figure 5) has its origin at the center of the face plate, on the tool
mounting surface. The Z-axis points directly out of the face plate, away from the robot arm. The
X-axis is picked to be pointing vertically into the ground when the tool is held up in an
orientation as if the robot were in a zero position. The Y-axis follows from the right hand rule
and is parallel to the ground (and to the 5th axis of the robot). Note that the ABB robot's 6th axis
is the Z-axis while the 5th axis is the Y-axis.

Y
Robot face plate

Robot
arm
Z
O

X
Figure 5: The ABB standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position.

3. Fanuc standard face plate frame

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 11 of 86 Page 11

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

This coordinate system (see Figure 6) also has its origin at the face plate, on the tool mounting surface.
The Z-axis points directly out of the face plate, away from the robot arm. The X-axis is picked to be
pointing vertically up, away from the ground, when the tool is held up in an orientation as if the robot
were in a zero position. The Y-axis follows from the right hand rule and is parallel to the ground. Note
that the Fanuc robot's 6th axis (the "alpha axis") is the Z-axis while the 5th axis (the "beta axis") is parallel
to the Y-axis.

Robot
Z
arm O

Robot face plate

Y
Figure 6: The Fanuc standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position.

4. Kuka standard face plate frame

This coordinate system (see Figure 7) is identical to the ABB coordinate system just described.

Y
Robot face plate

Robot
arm
Z
O

Figure 7: The Kuka standard face plate frame with the robot in its zero position.

5. The GM standard tool mass center frame (or, the "centroidal" frame)

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 12 of 86 Page 12

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

This coordinate system (see Figure 8) has its origin at the center of mass of the tool (and part, if
applicable) and an orientation parallel to that of the GM standard face plate frame.

Robot
arm Y

Robot face plate

X
O
Tool/part
Center of mass

Figure 8: The center of mass or centroidal frame.

6. GM standard dress/Axis 3 coordinate frame

This coordinate system (see
Figure 9) has its origin along the 3rd axis and an orientation parallel to that of the GM standard face
plate frame when the robot is in its zero position. Specifically, the x’-axis is parallel to the 4th axis
and the z’-axis is directed upward. Note that all dress data has to be input in this coordinate frame. It
is highly likely that the configuration for your robot will result in an offset axis 3 location. In such
cases, measure the dress c.g. location with respect to the appropriate coordinate plane (e.g., to get the
x’ location, measure how far the c.g. is from the Z'-Y’ plane).
Z' Y'

X'
A3
Axis

Figure 9: GM standard dress/Axis 3 coordinate frame.

3.3 A mass and inertia primer

Point Mass [MKS units: mass: kg;]
A point mass (shown in red in Figure 2 in the online version of this document) has a mass (m) at a
center of gravity location of (xm, ym, zm). As it is a "point" mass, it is infinitesimal and therefore has,
by definition, no self-inertia2.

Finite Mass (and inertia) [MKS units: mass: kg; inertia: kg m2]
A finite mass (shown in Figure 3) has a mass (m) at a center of gravity location of (xm, ym, zm) as
well as a self-inertia (I) due to its finite dimensions. Actually, it has 6 inertia parameters that fully
define it (Ixx, Iyy, Izz, Ixy, Ixz, Iyz)3. Physically, Ixx is larger when the mass distribution is further away
from the X-axis.

2
The self-inertia of an object is its inertia about a frame through its center of mass. A point mass has no self-
inertia, by definition.
3
Technically, one refers to a 3x3 inertia matrix, I; as the matrix is symmetric, 6 elements define the matrix
completely.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 13 of 86 Page 13

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

It is important to recognize that inertia cannot be ignored when analyzing robot loading. We have
observed that designers often query us "My payload is within the robot's ability. Why is Roboload
"failing?" A careful check of the analysis often reveals that the inertia of the payload is high (or that
the c.g. is very far from the face plate). Thus, the effort to manipulate two payloads with the same
mass and center of gravity, but different moments of inertia, can be quite different! (See Figure
10).

To test this out, try rotating the two bar bells (which have with the same mass but different separation
distances) shown in Figure 10 about the vertical axis. Does it take the same effort to do so? Which
one is harder to rotate? The one that is harder to rotate is the one with the larger inertia!

Figure 10: An example of two objects that have the same mass and c.g., but different inertias.

Further, the manner in which the tool is modeled is also important. Figure 11 shows an object modeled
in two different ways. The first model treats the object as composed of two different cuboids on either
side. The second model wraps a cuboid around the whole object and assumes that the mass is equally
distributed. (In essence, this is equivalent to replacing the two lead weights by a solid block of
aluminum.) Thus, both models have the same mass; since the geometry is different, this mass is
distributed differently. Where are the c.g.’s in both cases? Are the moments of inertia the same? If
not, which one is larger? Which is the superior model?

Object Model #1 Model #2

Figure 11: Modeling the same object (on far left) differently can result in very different answers and potentially
change Roboload’s output!! Note that while Models 1 and 2 have the same mass as the Object their mass is
distributed differently and the resulting inertias are different in the three cases.

Answers: In the case of the objects in Figure 10, the one on the right has a greater inertia since the
masses are further from the vertical axis about which we rotated it. Similarly, in Figure 11, Model #2’s
inertia is smaller since the mass distribution has been altered by our assumption and effectively been
brought closer to the axis of rotation. We encourage Roboload users to use Model #1 instead of
Model #2.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 14 of 86 Page 14

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Parallel axis theorem

Quite often, we are interested in the effective inertia of an object about a frame other than its
centroidal frame4. For example, we need to know what the effective inertia about axis 6 is – because
the drive-shaft of the joint motor is physically there. In this case, we use the parallel axis theorem to
reflect the inertia about one frame (A) at a second frame (B):
A
Iαα = BIαα + m(y2 + z2)
Note that the mass, unlike the inertia, is unaffected5 by the choice of frame.
To distinguish between self-inertia and inertia about non-centroidal frames, we use the following
notation in this document:
A
Jαα = OIαα + m(y2 + z2) = OIαα + m(d2)
where Jαα refers to the inertia about axis α in frame A, OIαα refers to the self-inertia about axis α in
A

the centroidal frame of the object, m is the object's mass, while the axis offset is given by d.

Products of inertia
The moments of inertia discussed above are defined with respect to one axis. In contrast, when the
inertia is defined with respect to a set of perpendicular axes, we calculate the products of inertia: OIxy,
O
Iyz, and OIzx; OIyx, OIzy, and OIxz are obtained by symmetry (OIyx = OIxy, OIzy = OIyz, and OIxz = OIzx). As
the definition in Section 3.4 shows, the product of inertia can be positive, zero, or negative because it
depends on the distances to the elemental mass in consideration.

Principal moments of inertia (from Roboload’s perspective)

Moments of inertia are traditionally depicted in a matrix form:
O O O
Ixx Ixy Ixz
O O O O
I= Iyx Iyy Iyz
O O O
Izx Izy Izz.

For the purposes of Roboload6, we define principal moments of inertia to be OIxx, OIyy and OIzz while
the products of inertia are OIxy, OIyz and OIzx, where the frame O is parallel to the face plate frame.
These are the six numbers to be input when using the solid model input method in Section 4.4. Note
that the diagonal terms (the “principal” moments of inertia in the context of Roboload) are positive
while the off-diagonal (i.e., the products of inertia) can be positive or negative.

3.4 An inertia and "finite elements" primer

Given how important inertia is to the payload analysis problem, the question that arises is "How do
we calculate the inertia of a randomly sized and shaped payload?" There are two solutions to the
question:
1. Use a solid modeling program like Unigraphics (and, possibly, Deneb or Robcad) to build a solid
model of your payload. Thus, the program knows of the different constituent parts and their
material properties as also about geometric features like hollow members, pockets, and curved
members. These programs can, then, output the appropriate mass, cg, and inertia estimates. It is

4
An analogous example is from Statics 101. A force vector (pure force, no moment) when reflected at another
point in space (i.e., at an other frame), behaves like a force and a moment, with the moment = r x f.
5
Continuing with the force moment analog, recognize that the force, unlike the moment, is unaffected by the
choice of frame as long as the two frame are oriented similarly.
6
This is not strictly true from a mechanics perspective. In reality, the moments of inertia depend on the
orientation of the coordinate frame (i.e., the axes) chosen. Thus, as the frame is rotated, the moments of inertia
vary. In a special orientation, the products of inertia are zero while the principal inertias are at their maximum
and minimum. In this orientation, the axes are aligned along the principal axes and the moments of inertia are
known as the principal moments of inertia.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 15 of 86 Page 15

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

critical to ensure that the inertia and cg are defined in a frame required by Roboload, based on the
robot model being considered.
2. The data sheets in Roboload use a built-in inertia calculator to determine, albeit approximately,
the inertias. The Roboload inertia calculator requires the designer to break the tooling and part
into its constituent parts; and to estimate each of these constituent parts as cuboids, with uniform
mass distribution. Each cuboid must be dimensioned and oriented parallel to the GM coordinate
system (per items 1 and 6 of Section 3.2).

Given this, the inertia of the cuboid about any axis, α, is:
( )
I αα = ∫ y 2 + z 2 dm
where y and z are the distances along the orthogonal axes to the elemental mass, dm. The sum of
the squares of y and z represents the perpendicular distance from the object to the axis. Thus,
Iαα = m(y2 + z2)/12
for the case of a cuboid with uniform mass distribution and where m is the total mass of the
cuboid in consideration. Similarly, the inertia of a point mass about any axis, α, is:
Iαα = m r2
where r is the perpendicular distance from the point to the α axis.

Similarly, the product of inertia of a cuboid about a pair of axes, x and y, is:
I xy = ∫ ( xy )dm
where x and y are the distances along the orthogonal axes to the elemental mass, dm.

Issues centered around the creation and use of this constituent cuboidal method are addressed in
Section 4.3 as also in the Section 6. An example of the cuboid method of determining a system
inertia is included in the example in the Appendices V through VII.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 16 of 86 Page 16

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

3.5 A units primer

Common quantities and conversion factors among them are presented in Table 1. Version 2.3 and
later uses metric units (MKS) for all internal calculations while permitting input and output data to be
in metric or British units. To facilitate some common conversions, we have also provided a units
translator within Roboload that can help translate among the different units. This units calculator can
be accessed from the Roboload tool bar in Excel (See Figure 13 and Figure 26).

Quantity Metric Metric (kg- British (FPS) British (in-lb) Fanuc

(MKS) mm)
Length metres millimeters feet inches cm
1 1000 3.281 39.4 100
Mass kilograms kilograms pounds (mass) pounds (mass) kg
1 1 2.21 2.21 1
Time seconds seconds seconds seconds Seconds
1 1 1 1 1

Weight newtons newtons pounds pounds kgf

(kg m s^-2) (weight) (weight)
1 1 0.225 0.225 0.102
Moment Nm Nmm ft lb in lb
1 1000 0.737 8.865
Inertia kg m^2 kg mm^2 lb ft^2 lb in^2 kgf cm s^2
1 1000000 23.73 3416.94 10.197
Velocity m/s mm/s fps ips
1 1000 3.281 39.4
Acceleration m s^-2 mm s^-2 ft s^-2 in s^-2
1 1000 3.281 39.4

Table 1: Unit conversion table

4 USING ROBOLOAD 2.3

Roboload works on the basic principle that no robot joint motor, joint brake, or gear system should be
overloaded. Further, it is conservative in that it assumes no specific knowledge of the motions that the
robot does or does not make (i.e., application specific information is not used in the analysis). Thus, if
an end effector "passes" Roboload, one can be quite sure that it will execute any task that it is being
programmed for. On the flip side, a "further analysis required" outcome indicates that further analysis
is required to more accurately determine if, based on application specific information, the robot can
be successfully used. Sections 4.6, 5 and 7 indicate mechanisms to get help from GM engineers
and/or the robot manufacturers to analyze these situations.

Robot design and performance considerations commonly lead to the situation that the drive train
components of the wrist axes (the last 3 axes – 4, 5 and 6) are the ones most likely to be overloaded.
More often than not, it is the payload inertia characteristics that cause this overloading situation. In a
few cases, the 3rd axis can be overloaded due to the large moment arm from the payload center of

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 17 of 86 Page 17

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

gravity to the 3rd axis and/or that due to the dress7. Robot manufactures specify a recommended
loading condition for dress loads, but when the recommended limit is exceeded, the wrist load
capabilities must be de-rated. This will reduce the load capabilities of the robot and perhaps produce
a “further analysis required” result even when the EOAT load is within the original robot
specifications. Thus, Roboload uses manufacturer provided models to examine the torque loading on
the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th axes of the robot to determine potential overload situations. The models used
expand upon equations and specifications that are often provided in the robot manuals accompanying
the robot.

A new feature of Roboload v2.3 is the wealth of feedback being provided to the designer. This
information, designed to answer “What if?” questions, is presented in the Roboload Analysis
Summary Report (see “Specification Ratings” at the bottom right corner of Figure 30). Of particular
interest are the torque and inertia ratings with the torque ratings indicating how close the payload is to
the limits of the robot axis’ static capability while the inertia ratings reflect the proximity to the
dynamic performance limits8.

Roboload is a general program that can be used for body shop, material handling as well as any other
applications. The user needs to understand how Roboload functions and adapt it for his/her special
needs. The user is encouraged to contact the Roboload support team per details in Section 7 if unusual
modeling steps are being taken.

This rest of this section provides details on running Roboload, on creating data files for input to
Roboload, as well as on interpreting the results of the analysis for improved design effectiveness.
Section 4.2 steps the user through the mechanics of using Roboload. The details of the process of
passing mass and geometric data to Roboload in one of two ways (see Sections 3.4 and 4.3) are
presented in Sections 4.3 and 4.4. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 present relevant robot manufacturer specific
information and explain how the user should interpret Roboload's output. In particular, the "what-if"
information provided is particularly useful to the tooling designer in the case of a "further analysis
required" outcome.

4.1 Roboload toolbar special purpose buttons

Before exploring Roboload’s capabilities, it is useful for the user to familiarize him/herself with a few
special purpose buttons created to simplify the user interface. These buttons, presented in the order in
which they appear (left to right) in the Roboload tool bar in the Excel tool bar window of the screen
(see Figure 17), include:
♦ “New Roboload file” – permits the user to create a new Roboload file. Note that this file cannot
be used with pre-v2.3.
♦ “Open file” – permits the user to open existing Roboload files.

7
When a dress load is used between the 3rd and 4th axes, this too will provide an additional load on the 3rd axis.
8
An analogy will help explain this concept. Consider a Corvette and a Cavalier at a stop light. The Corvette can
clearly either pull a greater mass or accelerate faster if loaded similarly. This primarily due to the higher
powered engine that it has been outfitted with. The Corvette’s ability to move a mass from a stationary position
is reflected by the stall torque of its engine and transmission. If the Corvette is systematically loaded with lead
blocks, it will ultimately be unable to move – hence the term stall torque. The Corvette and the Cavalier have
different stall torques. Now, let us assume that the Corvette is in motion. Its ability to accelerate depends on the
mass it is moving and the extra power left in the engine.
In the robot context, its motor and drive train correspond to the car’s engine and transmission. The torque
specification ratings discussed in Section 4.5 reflect its stall property while the inertia ratings reflect its ability
to accelerate.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 18 of 86 Page 18

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

♦ “Convert old file” – permits the user to convert pre-v2.3 tooling files into a new Roboload file.
Note that the original files is saved with a “.old” extension in the same directory.
♦ “Set default path” – permits the user to set a default path to point to the most likely location of
their data files. This allows the user to get to his/her files with minimal mouse clicks.
♦ “Add line” – increases the number of parts. This will add another row and increment the number
of parts appropriately in the worksheet. Do not add a row using the Excel functions to do so – for
Roboload does not recognize these changes and your calculations will be wrong! [Note:
Roboload defaults to 5 user defined parts and 6 typical parts when a new file is created.]
♦ “Reset line” – resets the row in which the cursor is currently to a row of zeroes and reformats the
internal equations for that one row. Note that Roboload does not have a delete row feature and
that the Excel delete row feature should not be used. Simply resetting the offensive row is the
easiest strategy.
♦ “Input UG data” – permits the user to enter UG or solid model data. The data is entered in the
next available row; if no rows are available, it will create a new row. The data format will be
covered later in Section 4.4.
♦ “Update worksheet” – permits the user to update the worksheet that he/she has just edited so that
the updated data is used in the analysis. In the case that a robot has not already been chose, the
user has to follow through on prompts to choose a robot for the analysis. The update button also
queries the user if he/she wishes to save the edited version of the file
♦ “Change Robot” – permits the user to select a robot. The selection is based the manufacturer
(and, if necessary, by model year).
♦ “Change units” – permits the user to change the units in which the output is displayed from the
default MKS units used internally by Roboload.
♦ “Print analysis” – prints only the analysis report and Collision Guard Parameters for Fanuc
robots (i.e., summary) part of the Roboload analysis page. See Section 4.2 for more details.
♦ “Units calculator” – transforms values in one unit system to those in an other. Particularly useful
to the designer working with data in multiple unit systems or trying to do sanity checks on the
data available to him/her. (See Figure 13).
♦ “Save Delmia Data” – export payload data to a text file with name <robotname>.roboload
under c:\roboload\delmia directory.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 19 of 86 Page 19

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Open RoboLoad 2_x.xls

Cuboid Solid Model

Method Input (UG) Data
End of Arm

Existing
Data

End of Arm Tool Data Stored on “EOAT Data” worksheet

No New Solid Model

Data Input (UG) Data
Dress Data

Cuboid
Method

Dress Data Stored on “Dress Data” worksheet

Select
Robot

Review “Analysis” Worksheet

Print and Exit

Figure 12: Overview Flow Chart Showing How To Use RoboLoad

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 20 of 86 Page 20

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Figure 13: The Units Calculator built into Roboload v2.3

Figure 14: Selecting/opening Roboload v2.3

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 21 of 86 Page 21

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

4.2 Running Roboload v2.3

The first step to running Roboload is its successful installation, as detailed in Section 2.

The Roboload study itself is divided into three main tasks including:
1. determining and inputting the end of arm tooling (EOAT) load;
2. determining and inputting the dress load; and
3. choosing the appropriate robot to run the appropriate analysis.

Figure 12 presents an overview of the flow in the program. Roboload analysis workbooks organize
each of the three tasks into tabbed worksheets titled “EOAT Data”, “Dress Data”, and “Analysis.”
Advantageous to v2.3, is the ability to toggle between each of the three worksheets and then update
and view the changes.

Introduction
To run Roboload 2.3:
Launch Excel;
Then open “Roboload.xls” as shown in Figure 14. Note that a shortcut can be placed on the
desktop to automate this process.
An Excel pop-up window will appear (see Figure 15). Click on “Enable Macros.”

Figure 15 Excel Pop-up Window when you start RoboLoad.xls

Next, a warning will appear which advises the user to use Roboload only for GM projects (see
Figure 16). It also includes information on how to obtain support for Roboload. Click on
“Continue.”

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 22 of 86 Page 22

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Figure 16: Roboload warning: For GM use only!

Following the warning, Roboload defaults to a blank screen (see Figure 17) – ready for use.

Figure 17: Roboload v2.3 startup screen.

Note the new toolbar (with its special purpose buttons) that was introduced into the Excel toolbar
by Roboload as it loaded up (details in Section 4.1).

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 23 of 86 Page 23

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

The first step that the user should take is to set up the default directory in which Roboload looks
for its files. To do this, follow the instructions in Section 2.3. If this wasn’t done already,
Roboload will advise the user that he/she needs to do so (see Figure 19).

Figure 18: Setting up your default data path.

Figure 19: Reminding users to set up their default path

The user should then edit his/her personal information in the file Roboload.ini (shown in
Error! Reference source not found.) that is located in the Roboload directory. (Open it
from within Excel. Switch to “All files” in order to see, and then select, the file.) This
information is automatically entered into your analysis summary sheets. It ought to be
customized by each user. As future follow-up activities later in the program will require this
information, it is important to fill it accurately.

Figure 20: Filling in the Roboload.ini file.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 24 of 86 Page 24

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

The user now has three choices that can be executed by using the “New Roboload file,” the
“Open file” or “Convert old file” options.
Clicking on the “New Roboload file” permits you to create a new Roboload file. The first step in
this process is to choose a file name and the units in which the data will be entered (see Figure 21).
The user does not need to add any extension as the “.xls” is automatically appended. Once the
input units have been chosen, they cannot be changed. While UG or equivalent solid model data
can be entered in units different than those in use in the file (Roboload automatically converts the
units to be consistent), this is discouraged as it is a very likely cause of data entry errors. Note
that the final analysis can be displayed in English or Metric units using the “Change units” special
button (see Section 4.1).

Figure 21: Entering the new file name and the units to be used.

The initialization process for generating a new analysis workbook may take some time – the user is
requested to be patient during this process! Once this is done, the user can follow steps described in
Section 4.2 to continue with the data entry and analysis process. The data can be entered either via the
cuboid method or from solid model data as indicated in those sections.

Clicking on the “Open file” button permits you to open a previously created Roboload v2.3 file
only. (Note: This does not work for data files created in earlier versions of Roboload.) The user
can use the standard Windows 95 procedure to work his/her way from the default directory to the
desired directory and pick the necessary data file. If the file is being opened for analysis purposes
only, it is appropriate to choose the “Read only” option; else, open it in an editable mode and
make the necessary changes prior to running code. This also reduces the possibility of introducing
extraneous errors.
Roboload v2.3 is backward compatible – conversion to the Roboload v2.3 format is possible by
using the “Convert old file” button. Thus, users with data created and saved in earlier versions of
Roboload can seamlessly continue their work. However, files saved in v2.3 cannot be used by
earlier versions of Roboload.

Before clicking on the “Convert old file” button, be sure to open the desired data file within
Excel. (You will know the fact that you have opened an old file from the fact that several
columns will be colored and the fact that the data sheet will have only one tab at the bottom left
of the spreadsheet (as opposed to the three tabs in the new format). Then click on the conversion
button. It is quite likely that this will result in a window entitled “Gotcha!” popping up. If this is
the case, cancel out of it and rename the worksheet (by double clicking on the name tab at the
bottom left corner) “EOAT Data” – note the capitalization as it is very important. Re-clicking on
the conversion button should result in a warning show in Figure 22 and the old file being saved
with a “.old” extension in the same directory.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 25 of 86 Page 25

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

The new version of the file is then created in the same directory – this might take a short while,
particularly if the original file had many parts in it.

If one, erroneously, tries to convert a v2.3 file, the routine aborts in a short while. However, before
aborting, it has moved your .xls data file to its .old version. Thus, to recover, the user has to exit
Roboload, and manually rename the .old version as the .xls version.

Figure 22: Warning accompanying the conversion of the data file from a pre-v2.2 version to v2.3.

End of Arm Tool Data Entry

New data can be entered into Roboload via one of three methods:
1. as traditional cuboid data; or
2. solid model data from UG (or equivalent CAD software); or
3. as a combination of the above two methods.

Details on the use of these methods are presented in Sections 4.3 and 4.4.

The data entry worksheet identifying the critical components, is shown in Figure 23. Noteworthy are:
Data entry worksheet (“EOAT Data”): The type of data being entered can be determined from
the tab at the bottom of the Roboload worksheet. In Figure 23, the “EOAT Data” worksheet is in
view.
Coordinate system: For EOAT data, the user must keep in mind the coordinate system
defined in Section 3.2.1.
Input cuboid data: The user has write access to the data cells in columns B-I. These cells
include the (x, y, z) dimensions of each cuboid, the vector to its c.g. (dx, dy, dz) and the density
of the material (column H) or the mass of that cuboid/part (column I). The mass is calculated if
the density is given, but if the mass is entered manually, the internal mass-calculating equation is
overwritten. In order to restore the equation, click on the “Reset Line” button mentioned above.
As an aside, the user also has access to column A in order to change the name of the part and
make tracking parts consistently easier. Note that some typical EOAT parts are already included
in the last six data rows including “kick 1,” “kick 2,” “transf.,” “cylinder,” “misc1,” and “misc2.”
Input solid model data: Using the “Input UG Data” button, the user can use the output of a solid
modeler to most accurately calculate the inertial properties of the payload and tooling. Details on
this are presented in Section 4.4.

Once the EOA Tool data has been entered, either click on the “Update worksheet” button in Figure
23, or use the worksheet tabs to switch to either the “Dress Data” or “Analysis” worksheet, whichever
one is applicable to the analysis at hand. Note that every time the “Update worksheet” button is used,
Roboload will remind, and give, the user the option save to the analysis file.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 26 of 86 Page 26

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Figure 23: Example data entry worksheet, showing the EOAT Data tab

Dress Data Entry

Dress data is entered in the same manner as EOAT data (described in Section 4.2), except that the
coordinate system is now in reference to the 3rd axis (see figure 9). The user must follow the
coordinate system defined in Section 3.2.6. Again, data can be entered in as a combination of solid
model data and/or cuboids.These steps are very similar to those listed in Sections 4.3 and 4.4.

Selecting the robot manufacturer and model

If a robot has not already been chosen,clicking on the “Change robot” button permits the user to
select the robot. The user will be prompted as shown in Figure 24 and Figure 25. The robot selection
prompt has two steps:

1. Choose the manufacturer;

2. Choose the robot model;

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 27 of 86 Page 27

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Figure 24: Robot manufacturer selection dialog box

Figure 25: Robot model selection dialog box

Generating the Analysis Report

Once the End of Arm Tool data and Dress data (if applicable) have been entered and the robot has
been selected the robot analysis may be performed. If the “Analysis” worksheet was accessed via the
worksheet tab, click on the “Update worksheet” toolbar button to update the analysis worksheet with
current EOAT and Dress data. The “Update worksheet” toolbar button may also be used to ensure
that the analysis data is the most recent.

Additionally, the user should enter the appropriate data describing the particular application. This
data (shown in Figure 26) identifies the vehicle program being worked on, the station being studied
and the particular robot in that station. While the Robot Model and the EOA Tool file are
automatically entered (the user, therefore, does not have access to these cells), the designer has to
enter an identifier for the tooling file. A commonly used identifier is the weld gun model number
provided by the weld gun designer in the gun drawings. Finally, the designer has to identify
him/herself with the company they work for and a telephone number that can be used in case of any
questions later in the process (as shown in Figure 30).

At this point, the analysis should be reviewed and appropriate action taken. See Sections 4.5 and 4.6
for suggestions. To change tooling information, use the tab at the bottom of the worksheets to toggle
to the appropriate data sheet. If any information has been altered, click on the “Update worksheet”

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 28 of 86 Page 28

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

toolbar button. To view the analysis with a different robot, simply click the “Change robot” toolbar
button while in the “Analysis” worksheet.

Figure 26: Roboload output: The analysis report showing vehicle program, station, tooling and designer data

Printing the Analysis Report

Once the Analysis is complete, it may be printed using the “Print analysis” command in the Roboload
toolbar. The printout generated by this command is consistent with GM’s tracking process and is set
up to print on one 8.5 x 11 page. Note that this special print command works only for the Analysis
worksheet.

In the highly unlikely case that the user wishes to print out other parts of the analysis page, he/she can
do so by using the standard print menu within Excel.

Save Delmia Data

To export payload data for Delmia simulation, use “Save Delmia Data” command in the Roboload
toolbar. This command will create (or replace) a text file named <robotname>.roboload under
c:\roboload\delmia directory. Here <robotname> is the text typed in cell D6 (for Robot #) of the
roboload analysis worksheet.

Quitting Roboload
To exit Roboload, the user can either close the Roboload workbook within Excel, or quit from Excel
completely. In either case, the user should respond with a “No” when asked if the changes to
Roboload 2.3 should be saved.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 29 of 86 Page 29

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

4.3 Creating or re-using end of arm tooling and dress data files
This Section details the procedure to be followed to break up the end of arm tooling into an adequate
number of constituent parts. This part data is then passed onto the “Analysis” worksheet.

Primary tooling categories

The end of arm tooling is divided into two parts. A simple way to identify which component goes
into which category is to identify which member is supporting the component.
1. Wrist or End of arm tooling (EOAT)
This includes all the components that are supported by the wrist of the robot (or, almost
equivalently, by the face plate of the robot). Examples include a wrist mounted weld gun or a
material handling tool and material handled (ie. sheet metal body panel)
2. Dress/Arm loading
This includes all components that are supported by the robot link connecting joints 3 and 4.
Examples include dense packs, bus bars, dress booms, and dress cabling. These arm loads
tend to restrict the torque available in joint 3. Thus excessive arm loads tend to result in a
payload derating (i.e., reduction from the specification) at the wrist.
Note that hip mounted equipment that loads joints 1 and 2 are ignored in this version of
Roboload.

Appropriate reference frames for geometric data

1. Wrist or End of arm tooling (EOAT) See Section 3.2.1.
All input data should use the GM standard face plate frame defined earlier in Section 3.2.1
and depicted in Figure 4. Note that the program handles all the necessary transformations to be
consistent with the robot manufacturers specifications and models.
2. Dress/Arm loading. See Section 3.2.6.
All input data should use a frame with origin at the 3rd axis of the robot and parallel to the GM
standard face plate when the robot is in the zero position. (See Section 3.2.6 and
Figure 9). The program handles all the necessary transformations to be consistent with the robot
manufacturer's specifications and models.

Generating wrist or end of arm tooling data

1. Start with a drawing of the end of arm tooling (e.g., a weld gun with supporting brackets, kickless
cables, transformers, cylinders, and bus bars). An example is shown in Appendix V. Divide the
tooling into constituent cuboids. The key idea is to break down the tooling into regular,
geometric, parts (i.e., those that naturally look like cuboids) and that the cubiods should be
aligned with the GM standard coordinate frame. The alignment is particularly important when the
gun is designed so its essentially at an angle to the GM standard coordinate frame.
2. An example is shown in Appendix VI. Each cuboidal element has x, y and z dimensions and
dimensions to its center (dX, dY, dZ) in the GM standard faceplate frame (see Section 3.2). In
creating these cuboids, care needs to be taken to align them to the principal axes of the GM
standard faceplate frame. Minor angular misalignments are to be ignored.
3. Further, in creating these cuboids, select the parts so that regular geometric shapes can be as
accurately fitted as possible. This is required to keep modeling error in check. Thus, using one
large cuboid to encompass the entire tool is convenient, but inaccurate. On the other hand, using
hundreds of cuboids is more accurate, but very inconvenient and time consuming. The designer

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 30 of 86 Page 30

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

needs to exercise judgement in picking the optimal balance. A general rule of thumb is to have 20
to 30 cuboids for a typical gun.
4. Finally, try to envelope cylinders in cuboids. Note that modeling hollow cylinders as solid
cuboids can be erroneous! Exercise engineering judgement. Keep in mind that the object
modeled is 3D, therefore, enclosing hollow sections should be avoided and the dX, dY, dZ
dimensions should reflect three dimensional positions.
5. For each cuboid created, identify its center of mass (at the center of the cuboid).
6. Be sure to clearly label the drawing so the cuboid method is documented for future reference.
7. Using the multiple projections in the drawings, measure the perpendicular distances from the
center of mass to the YZ, ZX and XY planes of the GM standard faceplate frame. Record these
distances as dX, dY, and dZ.
8. Create a hand written summary table listing element attributes including the size (x, y, z), the
distance from the origin (dX, dY, dZ), and the density of the material or the mass of the cuboid
(see example in Appendix VII). If the density is not known, you can enter the mass in directly.
Refer to Appendix VIII for data on commonly used equipment and materials.
9. The drawing and the summary table need to be appended to the Roboload analysis documents for
potential use in the future.

Generating dress/arm loading data

The steps to be followed are almost identical to those just listed for the wrist or end of arm tooling
data files. The primary difference is in the coordinate frame to be used for measuring the different
offsets for the c.g. location and for the dimensions of the parts.

Important notes
Be sure to include the mass of water enclosed in the kickless cables and weld gun! In the
same sense, include the mass of hydraulic fluids where significant.
Be aware of quick connects and offset plates that move the center of gravity. Be sure to
dimension from the face plate of the robot which does not necessarily coincide with the end
plate of the EOAT.
Watch for hollows and voids. Avoid modeling them, but use good judgment to conservatively
model the entire system.
Be sure to model the material handled for material handling applications as well as the
tooling.
Model cuboids for actuators and moving parts in the worst case condition. Reconfigurable
end of arm tools may have configuration that is the worst case for center of gravity location
and inertial characteristics.
When done with dividing the EOA tooling and payload and assigning density or mass to each
part, confirm that the total mass and c.g. are in the ball park provided by the gun designer. If
you find a significant discrepancy, go back and use “weighted densities9” instead.

9
Weighted densities are obtained by redistributing the true mass of the object “uniformly” over the geometric
shape used for modeling purposes. For example, if you had a cylindrical object made of copper being modeled
as a copper cuboid, one would clearly have a mismatch in mass properties. To overcome this, treat the cuboid as
being made of some fictitious material like supermanium and ascribe to supermanium a density = (mass of
cylindrical object/volume of cuboid).

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 31 of 86 Page 31

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Entering wrist or end of arm tooling and dress data

Once the cuboids have been determined, enter each one as a part in the appropriate data sheet, either
“EOAT Data” or “Dress Data.” Add lines as necessary by clicking on the “Add Line” toolbar button.
Toggle between the worksheets using the tabs at the bottom of the worksheet. When the data is
completely entered, or the user would like to view the current analysis, click on the “Update” toolbar
button.

4.4 Importing end of arm tooling data and dress from solid modeling programs (e.g.,
Unigraphics10)

This Section details the procedure to be followed to import solid model data on the end of arm
tooling. Typically, the end of arm tooling data will not cover dress parameters that load both the wrist
and the arm -- the designer has to handle this on his/her own. This data is then passed onto Roboload
for analysis.

Figure 27: Choosing the input units for the solid model data

1. To enter solid model data, click on the “Input UG Data” toolbar button (Figure 23) while in the
appropriate data worksheet.
2. Roboload will prompt the user to confirm that solid model data is available.
3. Next, the user will be prompted to select the input units as shown in Figure 27.
4. Now, the user has to fill in the End of Arm Tool Data or the dress/arm data dialog box (depending
on which tab the user was in when the UG data input process was triggered). This dialog box
(example shown in Figure 28) requires that all input data be consistent with the units chosen in
step 3 above.
The file requires that the part’s (or system of parts’) mass, the principal centroidal moments of
inertia (Ixx, Iyy, Izz) and the c.g. locations are necessary data while the products of inertia (Ixy, Iyz,
Izz) are optional. Despite being optional, the user is encouraged to input them to improve the
accuracy of the analysis. Please note the frames in which the data needs to be input: the moments
of inertia are in the centroidal frame while the c.g. is in the GM standard faceplate frame.
5. Another option available from the prompt in Figure 28, is the “View Coordinate Frame” button.
This will remind the user of the coordinate system, helping them to verify that they are entering
data correctly. Note that if data is entered in error the per-part information can be reset as
described in Section 4.1.

10
Please note that at the time of writing this manual, we did not have any confirmation that Deneb’s Igrip and
Technomatix’s Robcad programs were outputting correct inertia values. Till such time this confirmation is
received from tests that we are conducting, we cannot support the use of inputs based on these programs. If you
choose to go ahead try it, we urge you to validate the outputs from these programs before plunging ahead.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 32 of 86 Page 32

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

6. Once the necessary and required information in Figure 28 has been filled in, click on the “Done”
button to proceed.
7. Roboload will query the user whether the updated data file needs to be re-analyzed.
8. If the entire tooling system was described by the solid model data just entered, click “OK” to
proceed to the “Analysis” worksheet. Otherwise, click “Cancel” to remain in the data worksheet
and continue entering tool data as per-part solid model information and/or cuboids.
9. The user might be asked if he/she wishes to save the data file during the process. This is appropriate only if
the file was originally opened in a write mode (as opposed to a read-only mode).

Figure 28: The solid model data entry dialog box for the end of arm tooling.

4.5 Analyzing Roboload output

The Roboload output page (see Figure 30) has 5 principal parts:
1. Names and Description. In this area, the designer is required to provide background
information regarding the vehicle program, station number and specific robot and end of arm
tooling being analyzed. Further, the designer has to identify him/herself so that any future
questions can be directed appropriately.
2. Analysis Results. The two choices, as indicated in Section 1, are "Pass" and "Further analysis
required (FAR)." A pass case indicates that the payload is within the capability of the robot in
consideration. A FAR outcome indicates that the designer has to (a) improve the design of the
tooling; (b) use a different, more capable, robot; (c) identify the fact that it’s a special case
and get corresponding buyoffs; or (d) recognize that the payload is outside the robot's
capability.
3. Buyoff Names and Signatures. In order to improve the process of which Roboload is a part
and to get all payload related information in one place (details in Section 5), the Roboload
summary sheet is used for two buyoff processes:

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 33 of 86 Page 33

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Design time buyoff. This is the buyoff procedure required during the design phase, many
months before any hardware is built. This procedure requires the buy-in and signatures of
authorized representatives of the design shop, GM Mechanical tooling, GM CRW and the
Robot manufacturer.
As built buyoff. This is the buyoff procedure required when the hardware arrives for
validation and plant integration immediately prior to the product launch. The primary
activity here is to compare the as-built equipment’s inertia properties with those
estimated at design time. Significant deviation will require that Roboload be run again
with the as-built values. This procedure requires the buy-in and signatures of theGM
division/plant engineer and the Robot manufacturer.
4 Tool and dress data. This data, in the appropriate GM standard coordinate systems, is
summarized in one place to facilitate the payload management process.
5 Graphical summary. This data, in the robot manufacturer’s coordinate system, summarizes
the results of the Roboload analysis. There are two primary parts to the summary:
Load diagram. This not-to-scale visual tool is primarily intended to show where the c.g.
of the tooling lies with respect to the robot’s performance surface limit. The surface limit
basically indicates where the performance limits are for a given mass and inertia
combination. The limit surface is reduced to a curve for the purposes of presentation. The
calculations in the Specification ratings use X,Y, Z data (as opposed to L, Z data shown
in the load diagram). It is this reduction that causes this to be a visual tool.
Note that in the case of Fanuc robots, the load curve is sometimes ill-formed. This is due
to the fact that a different set of equations are used to generate the load curves. This
happens primarily when the mass or inertia values are very high or when the c.g. is too
far out. An ill-formed load curve is typically a symptom of load problems!
Specification ratings. These quantitative ratings are the basis of the “Pass/Further
analysis required” decision. For consistency in interpretation and presentation, all the bar
charts are shown as percentage figures, with the different parameters being calculated as
follows:
• Mass % = (design mass/derated EOAT mass x 100). Note that the EOA tooling is
derated if the inertia characteristics of the dress exceed those normally anticipated by
the robot manufacturer.
• Cx, Cy, Cz % = (appropriate c.g. offset/corresponding limit surface value x 100).
Thus, for Cx this will be (Xcg/Xlimit {y, z constant} x 100). The denominator in the above
ratio is obtained by identifying what the coordinates for the limit surface are by
holding y and z constant and varying x. In some situations, the c.g. might fall at a
point such that the denominator cannot be found (there will be no intersection with
the limit surface). In such cases, we arbitrarily assign a value of 500% to the
corresponding ratio. The user needs to recognize this situation when trying to re-
design the tooling. Details of this process are presented in Section 4.6.
• Ti % {for i = 3 to 6} = (Static torque required at joint i/Rated static torque available
at joint i x 100). The objective here is to identify the fraction of the drive train’s
capabilities that are being used to support the payload against gravitational forces.
• Ii % {for i = 3 to 6} = (Inertia due to payload at joint i/Rated inertia permissible at
joint i x 100). The objective here is to reflect the fraction of the drive train’s
capabilities that are being used to support the dynamic loading due to the payload’s
kinetics (arising from velocity and acceleration profiles). This ratio uses inertia about
an axis as a reflected measure by assuming maximum acceleration conditions.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 34 of 86 Page 34

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

• Additional assumptions: In developing the roboload model with the robot

manufacturers, several assumptions had to made. One such assumption is that joints 1
and 2 are over engineered and therefore rarely at their performance limits. Or put
another way, one of the other 4 joints is more likely to hit a limit before joints 1 or 2
hit theirs.
• Note:
1. For the payload to be rated a “pass,” all 10 parameters in the Specification
Ratings need to be at or below 100%.
2. We have arbitrarily capped all charts at 500%. This was done to ensure that plots
weren’t distorted by special situations. Case study 2, in Section 4.6, explores an
example of this situation and how it should be dealt with.
6 Payload Data This data is provided on the bottom of Roboload analysis sheet in the format as
shown in Figure 29. The parameters given by Roboload are for the
EOAT and are given in the units that the specific robot controller requires for entry. These
parameters are printed with analysis sheet.

Figure 29: Fanuc Collision Guard Parameters

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 35 of 86 Page 35

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Figure 30: The principal areas in the Roboload output analysis sheet.

4.6 Interpreting Roboload's output to better design the payloads/tooling

4.6.1 Case study 1: Bringing the c.g. into an acceptable range

The goal of this case study is to demonstrate the process to bring the c.g. into the acceptable range.
Please refer to the data presented in Appendix X to follow along with the analysis.

The case examines the use of an ABB 6400 2.4-120 robot to manipulate a 100kg tool with c.g. at (0.3,
0.2, 0.15)m and inertia of (0.042, 0.104, 0.104)kgm2. From a quick glance, the c.g. falls outside the
load diagram. Looking at the Specification rating bar charts, we note that Cx is 196%11, Cy is 131%
11
The curious user might be interested in knowing how, for example, the 196%, 131% and 141% came to be.
The easiest one to demonstrate graphically is the Cz 141% value. Scaling off of the load diagram, we see that
the z component (in ABB coordinates) is 0.3. We see that a line dropped parallel to the Z axis from the c.g.
point intersects the limit curve at about 0.21. Dividing 0.3 by 0.21 results in 141%. Trying the same experiment
with the x or y components results in very different (and erroneous) results. This is because we have taken a
surface and projected it onto the plane to generate a 2 dimensional plot instead of the true 3 dimensional one. In
fact, this is the motivation for going away from the graphical, but non-quantitative, load limit curves used in
earlier versions of Roboload.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 36 of 86 Page 36

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

and CZ is 141%. (Ignore for the moment the fact that some of the torques are over a 100%.)
Roboload’s analysis says “Further analysis required.” Remember the Specifications Ratings are in
the manufacturers coordinate frame.

The designer faced with this situation has at least four choices (depending on the freedom he has in
moving tooling parts around): to bring the x , y, z components of the c.g. individually within
specifications or some combination of the three within specifications. “By how much?” is the
question – a question that was not answerable in previous versions of Roboload.

To answer this, we start with the x component. We divide 0.3m (the x component of the c.g.) by 1.41
(the factor from the specification rating chart for Cz; converted from the percentage format to a ratio)
to get our target x component of 0.213m. To test this, we re-run the above analysis using c.g.
coordinates of (0.213, 0.2, 0.15)m while leaving all other values untouched. The outcome is shown on
the next page in Appendix X. The c.g., not surprisingly, falls right on the load limit curve. Further, the
Cz bar chart in the Specifications ratings is at 100%, indicating that the x component (GM input) is
within specification. Of greater interest is the fact that both the Cx and Cy bar charts also have
dropped to 100% along with the Cz chart! (Note that in this case the torque values also dropped to the
100% mark. This is not the general case.) Thus, by pulling in the x component, the operating point
was shifted right onto the limit curve. The designer now knows that if he/she can re-arrange the parts
in the payload so the x component is at or lower than 0.213m, his/her design will work and result in a
pass certification from Roboload.

Let us examine the case of pulling in the y component instead. The target is calculated to be 0.153m
(= 0.2/1.31). Plugging in 0.153m for the y component of the c.g. and re-running the analysis, we see
from the analysis in Appendix X that the design will pass Roboload.

We can now compute the z component target to be 0.077m (= 0.15/1.96). Plugging in this target value
and re-running Roboload, we determine that this design will result in a pass.

Finally, there are the cases where the designer might want to (or can only!) pull in the c.g. in some
combination of the three directions by some limited amounts. The question then is “Will there be a
feasible solution?” This question is hard to answer in a simple fashion because the “load limit curve”
is really a “load limit surface” whose shape is hard to predict, especially for the Fanuc robots. The
only guaranteed (albeit, very conservative) answer is for the designer to reduce the c.g. to (0.213,
0.153, 0.077)m. From a practical and pragmatic perspective, the best strategy for the designer to
follow is to plug in the limit (or easily achievable) values into Roboload and see if they pass.

Calculations:
.3m .2m .15m
cg x' : cg zABB
'
: = .21276m , cg 'y : cg 'yABB : = .15267m , cg z' : cg xABB
'
: = .07653m
1.41 1.31 1.96

4.6.2 Case study 2: Bringing the c.g. into an acceptable range under special circumstances
The goal of this case study is similar to that of Case study 1 – to demonstrate the process to bring the
c.g. into the acceptable range – with the significant difference that one of the c.g. component bars is at
500%. Please refer to the data presented in Appendix XI to follow along with the analysis.

The case examines the use of an ABB 6400 2.4-175 robot to manipulate a 100kg tool with c.g. at
(0.01, 0.3, 0.3)m and inertia of (40, 10, 10)kgm2. From a quick glance, the c.g. falls outside the load
diagram. Looking at the Specification rating bar charts, we note that Cx is 189%, Cy is 189% and CZ

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 37 of 86 Page 37

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

is 500%. (Continue to ignore the fact that some of the inertias and torques are over a 100%.)
Roboload’s analysis concludes that “Further analysis is required.”

As in Case study 1, the designer faced with this situation has at least four choices (depending on the
freedom he has in moving tooling parts around): to bring the x , y, z components of the c.g.
individually within specifications or some combination of the three within specifications. He also
needs to determine by how much to pull in the different c.g. components.

To answer this, we first need to understand why we have a 500% rating on Cz. As was indicated in
Section 4.6, Cz is calculated by dividing the z component of the c.g. by the z value of the intersection
point of a line drawn parallel to the Z axis and through the c.g. with the limit curve. In this case, there
is no intersection point. In this case, we (albeit, arbitrarily) decided to assign a value of 500% to Cz.
In contrast, Cx and Cy can be calculated because an intersection point can be found in the x and y
directions. Note that a similar situation can arise for Cx and Cy if there was no intersection point.

The designer faced with this situation will quickly see that there is no benefit to be had from varying
the z component of the c.g. Thus, by reducing either the y or z (GM input) components to 0.159m
(0.3/1.89), the design can be brough into the c.g. specifications (note that we continue to have a
problem with I6, the inertia about the 6th axis).

Calculations:
cg y .3m cg .3m
cg 'y : cg 'yABB : = = .15873m , cg z' : cg xABB
'
: z = = .15873m
1.89 1.89 1.89 1.89

 cg y   .3m .3m 
untested! (cg '
y )
, cg z' = 
 1.892
,
cg z
1.89 2
=
  1.336 1.336 
, = (.224,.224)
 2 2 

4.6.3 Case study 3: Bringing inertia into an acceptable range

This case study addresses the question of bringing in inertia and torque specifications within bounds.
Please refer to the data presented in Appendix XII to follow along with the discussion.
We examine the use of an ABB 6400 2.4-175 robot to manipulate a 100kg tool with its c.g. at (0.009,
0.15, 0.29)m and inertia of (40,10,10)kgm2. A quick glance indicates that the only problem facing the
tool designer is I6, the inertia on the 6th axis, which is over specifications by a factor of 1.88. Noting
that the 6th axis corresponds to the inertia about the X-axis (in GM coordinates), we need to re-design
the tool to be about 21.27 kgm2 (= 40/1.88). Running this scenario through Roboload, we see that,
while the inertial load on the axis has dropped significantly, it is still above 100%. Why is this so?
The answer lies in the recognition that the inertia load is a combination of the self inertia about the
tool’s centroidal axis and the term due to the parallel axis shift (see Section 3.3). Thus, to solve this
problem by getting the rating factor down from 1.18, the designer needs to, in addition, pull the c.g.
closer to the face plate.
Calculations:
Observation 1: Eventhough c.g. is within the load curve, Roboload result is “Further Analysis
Required”. Why? Answer: I6 is too high.

Observation 2: I6 is at 188% and needs to be scaled back.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 38 of 86 Page 38

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

I6
Step 1: I 6' = = 21.27kg • m 2 (does not bring within limits, need to use Parallel Axis Theorum)
1.88
(
Step 2: I 6 = I xx = o I xx + m y 2 + z 2 )
I =I
' '
= +
(
I xx m y 2 + z 2
o
)  y2

= 21.27 + m +
z2 

6 xx
1.88 1.88  1 . 88 1 . 88 
y2 y .15 z2 z .29
y' = = = = .109 , z ' = = = = .211
1.88 1.371 1.371 1.88 1.371 1.371
Solution: Reduce Ixx, cgy, and cgz.
Observation 3: We were lucky that the problem was with I6 because it could directly relate to Ixx.
In general, working with I5 is harder, and I4 is even harder.
Best solution is to do ‘back of envelope’ calculations as above and the ‘iterate’.

4.6.4 Fanuc case studies

The three cases studied so far have used ABB robots. As each manufacturer’s robot is designed
differently, the underlying performance will be different and the analyses will have to be tailored
accordingly.
Towards this end, we will use the same data files with sample Fanuc robots to explore their
characteristics. Results are presented in Appendix XVI.
Case1b: Case1b examines the use of a Fanuc S-420iW (2.4m) robot. As the Roboload analysis
outcome is a Pass, there is not much that can be done. However, note that the load curve is quite
different than that of the ABB – this curve is, in fact, generated on the fly by the program and
therefore has some segments that aren’t straight lines. Note, further, the fact that the T3 and I3 terms
are non-zero. These terms are of particular relevance if you have heavy dress loads.
Case2b: Case2b examines the use of the same S-420iW (2.4m) robot. The first observation that we
make here is that the load curve has degenerated into a straight line along the Z axis. Not too
surprisingly, we also note that many of the bars in the Specification Ratings are high. The large
payload being analyzed causes the load curve to compress to a line along the Z axis. (In fact, if the
load is even larger, it is quite possible that you can force a run-time error in Excel. If this happens, the
message is quite clear: “Your load is too heavy!”) As the c.g. of the load falls outside the “curve,” the
CMx, CMy and CMz bars are infinitely large and have to be capped off at 500%.
The trick, in this case, clearly is to bring the inertias (I6 and I4) into range – doing this will result in
the more familiar loading curve and to more useful bar charts. One can start by addressing I6 or I4; or
by reducing them in combination. For the purposes of this study, we’ll start by attacking I6. A first
step would be to reduce the Ixx value by a factor of 3.61 (to 11.08kgm2). One, immediately, sees the
load curve opening up. Not surprisingly, I6 is still at 181%. Following the logic of Case 3 above, we
need to reign in the mr2 term too (y = 0.157m and z = 0.157m in this case). Doing this results in a
Pass condition.
Calculations:
Example path Note: (There are multiple solutions to this problem)
Ixx 40
1. Ixx ' = = = 11.08kg • m 2
3.61 3.61
2. Bring cg in (as in Case 3)

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 39 of 86 Page 39

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Ixx m( y 2 + z 2 )
Ixx ' = + (parallel axis theorum)
3.61 3.61
Ixx ' = 11.08kg • m 2
.3 .3
y' = = .157 m, z ' = = .157m
1.9 1.9
Solution: Ixx ' = 11.08kg • m 2 , y ' = z ' = .157 m
Case3b: Case3b examines the use of a S-420iW (2.4m/175kg) robot. The initial analysis results in the
compressed load curve along the Z axis and similar problems with the I6 and I4 values. This time, we
will follow the I4 reduction path. Unlike I6, which clearly depends on the self inertia of the load
about the 6th axis (the X axis in GM coordinates) and its mr2 component from its centroidal axis to the
robot’s 6th axis, I4 has a more complex dependency on many of the terms in the inertia matrix. Given
this, the simplest rule of thumb is to reduce all modeled inertias by a factor of 1.21 and to reduce all
three c.g. offsets as in Case2b. Doing this results in I4 dropping to about 100% and I6 dropping to
270%. The reader should address I6 along the lines of Case2b as an exercise.
Calculations:
1. Follow the harder I4 path.
2. Scale c.g. by a factor of 1.21 and re-run roboload analysis.
.009 .15 .29
cg x' = = .008m, cg y ' = = .136m, cg z ' = = .263m
1.21 1.21 1.21
Note: Ixx ' = 33kg • m 2 , Iyy ' = 8.25kg • m 2 , Izz ' = 8.25kg • m 2
3. Note that I6 is off by a factor of 2.7. Now follow the steps as in Case 2b.

4.6.5 KUKA case studies

Case 1c: Case1c examines the use of a KUKA KR150 robot. As the Roboload analysis outcome is a
Pass, there is not much that can be done. However, note that the load curve is quite different than that
of the ABB – this curve is, in fact, generated on the fly by the program like the Fanuc model and
therefore has some segments that aren’t straight lines. Note, further, the fact that the T2, T3, I2, I3
terms are non-zero. These terms are of particular relevance if you have heavy dress loads.
Case 2c: Case2c examines the use of the same KR150 robot. As the c.g. of the load falls outside the
“curve,” the CMx and CMy bars are infinitely large and have to be capped off at 500%.
The first step is to reduce the CMx and CMz ratings in the Specifications Rating chart. This is done
by using the I6 reduction method. Use the parallel axis theorum. The EOAT still does not pass
roboload. Another method must be used also. Reducing Z (GM coordinates) by a factor of 1.68
brings the analysis into an acceptable level. Other methods can be used to bring the EOAT into the
acceptable range.

Calculations:
1. Use the I6 reduction method. (parallel axis theorum)
Ixx m( y 2 + z 2 ) .3 .3
Ixx ' = + , Ixx ' = 27.397 kg • m 2 , y ' = = .2483m, z ' = = .2483m
1.46 1.46 1.208 1.208
3. Reduce CMz (KUKA)

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 40 of 86 Page 40

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

.2483
z' = = .1478m
1.68
Case 3c: Case study 3c examines the use of a KUKA KR150 robot. This case can be modified to
bring the specifications within an acceptable range by using the same method as case 1 with the ABB
robot. The specifications for Cmx and Cmy are out of range. The specification rating can be reduced
by bringing Cmx into the acceptable range. This is accomplished by dividing the Z coordinate (GM)
of the eoat by the percentage in the specification rating for Cmx (KUKA coordinate frame). The
result is a passing analysis. The same results can be accomplished by using the same method with the
other coordinates in some combination.

Calculations:
.29m
cg x' : cg zKUKA
'
: = .152m
1.91

5 ROBOLOAD AND THE TOOLING DESIGN, BUILD AND BUYOFF PROCESS

5.1 Problems and solutions

In order for Roboload to be effective, several program gates need to reference Roboload. The buy-off
process needs to ensure that the robot and its tooling are compatible, and to keep confirming that the
model that was originally used for the analysis is still appropriate! The program gates will be
specified in future version of the relevant GM Robot Specifications (RS-x) as well as in the
corresponding mechanical design specifications (PED-x).
In the short term, the procedure that will be followed is detailed in Figure 30. Note that the process
extends from design time buy-offs in design shops through as built buy-offs on the job shop floor.
The GM mechanical and robotics engineers will work with the designers and launch personnel.
[Roboload developers, as indicated in Section 7, are to be contacted only in case of suspected
Roboload software problems – and that too, only by the project CRW Robotics engineer.]

6 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS AND ENCOUNTERED PROBLEMS

6.1 Commonly asked questions

Q1. How many parts should I break up the tooling/payload into?

There is no single answer to this question. There are two extreme solutions:
“One big blob” – Treat the tooling/payload as one large mass and define the corresponding
cuboid with its mass and inertia properties.
“Infinite number of small parts” – Break the tooling/payload up into a large number of parts
and define the corresponding cuboid with its mass and inertia properties.
The answer generally lies in between the two – a good rule of thumb is to use 20-30 parts for a
reasonably complex piece of payload/ tooling. We recommend that you start with fewer blocks
(by breaking the hardware in to rough (i.e., conservative) blocks). If this conservative design
passes, you are quite sure that the “accurate” model will also pass. You can stop at this point. If a
FAR results, then you need to improve the accuracy of your model by using smaller blocks.

Q2. What if a small part has an odd shape or is not aligned with the primary coordinate axes?

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 41 of 86 Page 41

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

You can ignore the angle, especially if it is small. However, we recommend that you start with a
conservative model by choosing a cuboid that encompasses the whole part. If a pass results, this
will suffice. If this conservative model results in a FAR outcome, you will need to break up the
part into smaller components and choose them such that modeling errors due to the angle are not
critical.

Q3. What if a larger part has an odd shape or is not aligned with the primary coordinate axes?
We recommend that you start with a conservative model by choosing a set of cuboids that
encompasses the whole part. If a pass results, this will suffice. If this conservative model results
in a FAR outcome, you will need to break up the part into smaller components and choose them
such that modeling errors due to the odd shape or angle are not critical.

Q4. Can I just work off of the mass and c.g. data that the tooling designer provides in the data sheet
or drawing corresponding to the tooling or do I need to have geometric data also?
Mass and c.g. data is incomplete data. It doesn’t tell you anything about the mass distribution – a
critical part of the process of calculating the payload/tooling inertia. Any analysis that ignores
inertia is flawed and wrong.

Q5. My design has hollow parts or parts with holes in them. How do I get appropriate density and/or
mass properties?
Use the weighted density approach explained in Section 4.3.

Q6. I can’t get Roboload to run!

Go back and systematically work your way through Section 2 to ensure that the distribution copy
of Roboload is running on your machine. Ensure that your machine meets all the specifications
stated and that you’ve meticulously followed the installation and test instructions.
If, after doing this you still have problems, please follow the problem resolution process
presented in Section 7.2.

Q7. How do I know what version of Roboload I am currently running?

The primary version number is boldly displayed upon launch. As of October 2002, the most
current version is 2.3.3. The secondary revision number is visible at the top of your analysis
page (e.g., 2.3).

Q8. When I am trying to analyze the load on a Fanuc robot, the load diagram at the bottom left
corner of the analysis page is some times strange and can even generate a run-time error. What
gives?
In the case of the Fanuc robots, we generate the load diagram – on the fly – based on the loading
conditions. This load diagram depends on the constraints placed on the different components of
the drive train (bearings, brakes, transmission, and motors to name a few). So, if your payload is
very heavy, has a c.g. far from the face plate, or has high inertia values, the load diagram can
collapse into a line, on or close to the Z axis. In the extreme case, it is possible that this will
generate a computing error which can cause a run-time error.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 42 of 86 Page 42

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Testing indicates to us that if you experience this problem, the chances are that your payload is
way too high. Solve this problem before claiming that there is Roboload software bug!

Q9. Can I just copy data files from the Windows operating system to jump start my Roboload
analysis?
We strongly urge you not to copy data files. By copying the data file, you are also copying some
of the analysis also. Thus, by copying an old data file, you could cause conflicts with a newer
version of Roboload.
You can, on the other hand, paste in – using Excel’s copy and paste commands – appropriate x,
y, z, dX, dY, dZ, Density and Mass data into a newly created Roboload data file.
Finally, note that we have a convert button that permits you to update old Roboload data files.

Q10. Why can’t I convert a pre-v2.2 data file by clicking on the “Convert old file” button?
As indicated in Section 4.2, the active worksheet needs to be a pre-v2.2 worksheet. Further,
ensure that the worksheet is named “EOAT Data” – the code is intolerant of any changes in the
name. Failure to do so, will result in the inability to convert old files.

6.2 Common sources of problems

1. Mixed units
2. Mixed frames
3. Inertia ignored or calculated in the wrong frame
4. Data entry
5. Not performing sanity tests to check inputs and analysis results

7 SUPPORT

7.1 Roboload registration

You have to register with GM in order to use the software. Also, fill in and fax the attached document
in Appendix I ("Roboload registration") to the Roboload support team. Upon receipt of signed faxes,
you will be notified of the class date and provided the class manual.

Support will not be provided:

For non-GM work;
For those who have not been trained in the use of this product; and
For those who work at companies that have not been registered to use the software.

7.2 Roboload problem resolution process

In order to respond to your Roboload software queries in the most efficient manner, we have
developed a process in consultation with the major stakeholders (see Figure 31). Here are some
pointers to get you started:
1. Have you followed the instructions carefully? Are you sure that you have installed Roboload
correctly and verified that it is running well? (follow instructions in Section 2)

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 43 of 86 Page 43

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

2. Check the "Frequently asked questions and encountered problems" section (Section 6) of this
document for a solution to your problem. It is quite likely that the problem you are trying to
resolve is one that others have already asked. If you encounter a problem and find an answer,
please email it to [email protected] so we can share it with others12.
3. Check your input data file carefully -- ensure that you do not have any typographical errors in the
data entered. Also check your numbers from a common sense perspective (“Does a mass of
260kg and an inertia of 134kgm2 make sense?”)
4. Contact your site/corporate Roboload expert
If the above steps have failed, your first resource is the designated Roboload support engineer
in your company. Please go to him/her to resolve the issue.
5. Contact your GM program engineer
If your corporate expert cannot resolve your problem, kindly contact your GM CRW engineer
responsible for the vehicle program you are working on.
6. Contact the GM CRW Roboload support organization
If the CRW engineer is unable to help you out, he/she will contact the GM CRW Roboload
support team in the Warren Tech Center for help. (Please do not call the CRW support
organization directly unless it is an emergency.)
The best way to provide supporting documentation to help resolve the problem is to fill in the
attached "Roboload problem report documentation" and to email it (along with the requested
supporting documentation) to [email protected] in parallel with the report that the CRW
engineer turns in.
A problem report is not considered complete till the call and the email message are received
at the CRW Roboload Support center from the CRW engineer.

12
There will, hopefully, be a reward of $1 for the first report on a bug once v2.3 is officially released! (Subject
to GM management approval.) However, more importantly, you will be listed in the Roboload Hall of Fame
later in the document.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 44 of 86 Page 44

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Figure 31: The robot payload analysis process from design time through validation of tooling hardware built.

7.3 Robot vendor support process

In order to respond to your robot queries (as opposed to Roboload software queries) in the most
efficient manner, we have developed a process in consultation with out robot suppliers (see Figure 31).
Kindly follow it carefully.
1. You will contact the robot vendor's engineer to get his/her buyoff on each robot in the process.
This is a necessary and critical part of the processing.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 45 of 86 Page 45

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

2. If, after several redesign attempts per Figure 31, further analysis is still recommended by
Roboload, please contact the following personnel, unless otherwise instructed by your CRW
engineer:
ABB
Name: Nick Hunt
Telephone: 248-391-8713
Fax: 248-391-6114
Email: [email protected]

Fanuc
Name: Mike Eckert
Telephone: 248-377-7442
Fax: 248-276-4040
Email: [email protected]

Kuka
Name: Michael Breen
Telephone: 810-533-1079 (Cell)
Fax: 1-866-Fax-Kuka (1-866-329-5852)
Email: [email protected]

The designated robot manufacturer's engineer is responsible for all interactions required within
his/her company to complete the load analysis. He/she will bring the appropriate resources to bear
to resolve all relevant matters.

8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We acknowledge the significant efforts of Nathan King, Graduate Student at RPI, Troy, NY in the
development of v2.3. Nathan's wizardry with Excel and his thorough modeling and methodical work
were crucial to the rapid development of v2.3.
In developing v2.3, we leaned heavily on the lessons learned from earlier versions of Roboload
written by Dr Ningjian Huang of the GM R&D Center. We appreciate Ningjian sharing his models
with us. We also appreciate the numerous designers and engineers who patiently worked with us
while we set the direction for v2.3 and debugged it: Lydia Sobo, Walt Rybak, Brad Whitehouse,
Gadrian Zayas, Dr. Jim Witzerman, Joe Caporuscio, Jim Wells, Leroy Rodgers, Gary Snavely, Todd
Rockafellow, Rohit Khanolkar amongst many others.
Finally, in creating the robot models, we had to work closely with the technical staffs of our robot
manufacturers. v2.3 benefited tremendously from the work of Paul Copioli and Don Bartlett of Fanuc
Robotics USA and Jakob Westrom of ABB Sweden. Their detailed knowledge of their products was
the key in developing the quantitative metrics that we use here.

The Roboload Hall of Fame

The Hall of Fame honors those who have been the first to identify bugs in the software. The list, with
the year of induction, follows:
Rohit Khanolkar, 1998.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 46 of 86 Page 46

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

9 REFERENCES
GRS-1, GM Global Common Technical Specifications for Production Robots, General Motors
Corporation, http://supplier.body.gm.com/crw/production/main/standards/normative/robotics/grs1.pdf, May
2002.
PED-948, Welding gun design standards manual, May 2002.
ABB Robot Users Manuals.
Fanuc Robot Users Manuals.
Kuka Robot Users Manuals.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 47 of 86 Page 47

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX I: ROBOLOAD REGISTRATION

Kindly fill in this registration form and fax to:
Roboload Support
CRW Robotics/General Motors Corporation
Fax: 586-947-1039

The person designated in this form will be the single point of contact for any roboload related
problems and issues. Further, Roboload updates will be emailed to solely this person as appropriate.
Only upon registering and taking the training class will GM support the use of this program.

Design shop name:

Single Point Contact (SPC): (print name)
SPC Telephone:
SPC Fax:
SPC Pager/Cell:
SPC Email:
SPC Address:

This must be filled out and signed by SPC’s supervisor or company representative ensuring the use of
Roboload for General Motors business only.

I, ____________________ (SPC’s Supervisor), employee of___________________________, duly

certify that Roboload will be used only for General Motors Corporation authorized analyses. I
understand that use of this software for non-GM analyses is strictly illegal.

Signature:
Date:
Tel:

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 48 of 86 Page 48

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX II: ROBOLOAD TRAINING REQUEST FORM

Fax to: Roboload Support, CRW Robotics/General Motors Corp.
Fax#: 586-947-1039.

Date:
Vehicle program or Project Description:
Robot vendor: ABB Fanuc Kuka
Program start date:
Training window:
Drop dead training date:

Design shop name:

Single Point Contact (Print):
Signature:
# of engineers to be trained: # bringing laptops
CRW Robotics Engineer (Print):
Signature:

Mandatory pre-class assignments (no exceptions!)

Read Sections 1 & 3 of this manual. Feel free to go back and review your physics/math/dynamics
texts to be clear on concepts – particularly coordinate frames and inertia concepts.

Material to be brought for the training class

Notepad, pencil, eraser, scientific calculator
Complete data (drawing, mass/c.g. information, any other relevant information) on a typical piece of
tooling/payload that you are currently evaluating. If not, bring the data for one you had to do in the
past and had problems analyzing if you have one.
Make up a little wire frame coordinate frame (sort of like the one shown in Figure 1) and bring it to
class. Doesn’t need to be fancy. It’s a great learning tool that you’ll probably use for a long time.
Please build it so that each “leg” (i.e., axis) is about 5 to 7.5 cm long.
A laptop running Microsoft Excel 97/2000 on a Windows 95/98/NT/2000 operating system and with
at least 3Mb of hard disk space. (It has to meet the specifications laid out in Section 2.1). If you don’t
have enough laptops, please bring at least one computer for every two participants. If this is a
problem, please indicate so above.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 49 of 86 Page 49

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX III: ROBOLOAD TRAINING EVALUATION FORM

Course Evaluation

Todd Watson
Course: Roboload 2.X Instructor Yanli Zhou
Location Program
Date Time

Scoring Scale
1: Unsatisfactory 2: Poor 3: Average 4: Good 5: Excellent

Material
Material & concepts clear
Teaching methodology clear
Familiar technical terminology used
Props used well
Alternate methods used for clarity

Content
Instructional material appropriate
Content understandable
Content beneficial

Instructor
Instructor was knowledgeable
Instructor was well prepared
Instructor provided feedback
Instructor communicated well
Instructor presented concepts well
Instructor encouraged questions

What did you like about the class?

What didn't you like about the class?

Recommendations for improvement

Miscellaneous

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 50 of 86 Page 50

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX IV: ROBOLOAD PROBLEM REPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Kindly cut, paste and fill in this questionnaire and email to [email protected] as also send a fax to
"Roboload Support, CRW Robotics/General Motors Corp." at 586-947-1039.

Date:
Priority level: 1 (critical) 2 (average) 3 (non-critical)
Vehicle program:

Design shop name:

Engineer name:
Telephone:
Fax:
Pager:
Email:

CRW Engineer name:

Computer:
Excel Version:
Station #:
Robot #:
Robot Model: ABB Fanuc Kuka
Weld gun #:

Have you followed the steps suggested in "Problem resolution process" in the "Support" section of
this document? Yes No

Problem description: (Please provide detailed information -- the more, the better. Just saying
"Roboload is not working" does not help very much! Attach supporting documents, as required.)

Files attached:
Your gun or end of arm tooling data file
Your roboload analysis summary sheet

When was the last time that you were able to run Roboload successfully in your facility?

Was it on this computer? Yes No

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 51 of 86 Page 51

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX V: EXAMPLE END OF ARM TOOLING DRAWING

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 52 of 86 Page 52

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX VI: EXAMPLE END OF ARM TOOLING DRAWING -- BROKEN UP

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 53 of 86 Page 53

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX VII: EXAMPLE END OF ARM TOOLING TABLE

Generic Data
ITEM SIZE DISTANCE TO CG
ITEM x y z dX dY dZ Density Mass
Desc. inch inch inch inch inch inch lbm/in^3 lb
1 0.75 0.75 4 34 0 3 0.29 0.6525
2 1.5 1.5 5 32.5 0 7 0.29 3.2625
3 6.5 1.5 1.5 28 0 8.8 0.29 4.24125
4 1.5 1.5 6.5 25.5 0 3.8 0.29 4.24125
5 3 1.3 1.3 24 0 0.3 0.29 1.4703
6 3 0.5 0.5 30.3 0 -1 0.29 0.2175
7 2.8 1 1 27.5 0 -2.3 0.29 0.812
8 4.3 2 2 24.5 0 -3.3 0.29 4.988
9 0.5 4.5 4.5 10.3 0 5.5 0.29 2.93625
10 6.5 1.5 1.5 19 0 -2 0.29 4.24125
11 1 3.5 7 22 0 0.5 0.29 7.105
12 0.8 4.5 4.5 21 0 2.5 0.29 4.698
13 10 4.5 0.5 15.3 0 4 0.29 6.525
14 10 0.5 4 15.3 2.5 4.3 0.29 5.8
15 10 0.5 4 15.3 -2.5 4.3 0.29 5.8
kick 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
kick 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
transf. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
cylinder 0 0 0 20 0 -5.3 0 10
misc 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
misc 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTALS 66.9908

This region intentionally left blank

6

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 54 of 86 Page 54

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX VIII: COMMONLY USED INFORMATION

This section is, clearly, incomplete. Suggestions for data to be included are welcome.

Section H of PED-948, the Weld Gun design standards manual, contains useful information on
material densities as well as on cable and cylinder masses.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 55 of 86 Page 55

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX IX: SAMPLE OUTPUT TO TEST INSTALLATION

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 56 of 86 Page 56

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 57 of 86 Page 57

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX X: CASE STUDY 1

Date Created Date Printed
09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-120 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case1.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.3 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.2 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.15 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 0.042 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 0.104 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 0.104 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

0.40
196%
200%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35
141% 141% 141%
0.30 150% 131%
117%
0.25
100% 83%
0.20 59% 59%
0.15 50% 24%
0.10 0% 0%
0.05 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
83% 196% 131% 141% 117% 24% 141% 59% 141% 59% 0% 0
100 0.15 0.2 0.3 --- 6.292 --- 31.35 --- 31.35 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 58 of 86 Page 58

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-120 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case1.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.213 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.2 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.15 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 0.042 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 0.104 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 0.104 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

0.40
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
100%
83%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35
0.30
80%
0.25 60% 44% 44%
0.20 40% 24%
0.15
20%
0.10 0% 0%
0.05 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 24% 100% 44% 100% 44% 0% 0
100 0.15 0.2 0.21 --- 6.292 --- 23.41 --- 23.41 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 59 of 86 Page 59

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-120 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case1.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.3 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.153 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.15 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 0.042 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 0.104 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 0.104 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

0.40
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
100%
83%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35
0.30
80%
56% 56%
0.25 60%
0.20 40%
0.15 18%
20%
0.10 0% 0%
0.05 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 18% 100% 56% 100% 56% 0% 0
100 0.15 0.15 0.3 --- 4.633 --- 29.69 --- 29.69 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 60 of 86 Page 60

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-120 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case1.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.3 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.2 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.077 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 0.042 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 0.104 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 0.104 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

0.40
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
100%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35 83%
0.30
80%
56% 56%
0.25 60%
0.20
40%
0.15 18%
20%
0.10 0% 0%
0.05 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 18% 100% 56% 100% 56% 0% 0
100 0.08 0.2 0.3 --- 4.635 --- 29.7 --- 29.7 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 61 of 86 Page 61

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XI: CASE STUDY 2

Date Created Date Printed
09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-175 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.3 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.3 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.70 Specification Ratings

500% 500% 500%
0.60 500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.50 400%
0.40 300%
189% 189% 215%
0.30 200% 125%
0.20 100% 57% 48% 48%
0% 0%
0.10 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 189% 189% 500% 125% 215% 500% 48% 500% 48% 0% 0
100 0.3 0.3 0.01 --- 58 --- 32.41 --- 32.41 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 62 of 86 Page 62

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-175 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.159 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.3 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.70 Specification Ratings

191%
0.60 200%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.50 150%
0.40 100% 100% 106% 100% 106% 106%
100%
0.30 57%
50% 39% 39%
0.20
0% 0%
0.10 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 100% 100% 106% 100% 191% 106% 39% 106% 39% 0% 0
100 0.3 0.16 0.01 --- 51.53 --- 25.94 --- 25.94 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 63 of 86 Page 63

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XII: CASE STUDY 3

Date Created Date Printed
09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-175 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.009 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.15 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.29 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.70 Specification Ratings

200% 188%
0.60
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.50 150%
0.40 95% 96%
100% 85%
0.30 57%
50% 37% 37%
0.20 17% 17% 17%
0% 0%
0.10 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 95% 85% 17% 96% 188% 17% 37% 17% 37% 0% 0
100 0.29 0.15 0.01 --- 50.66 --- 25.03 --- 25.03 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 64 of 86 Page 64

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-175 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.009 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.15 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.29 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 21.27 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.70 Specification Ratings

118%
0.60 120%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

95% 96%
0.50 100% 85%
80%
0.40 57%
60%
0.30 37% 37%
40%
0.20 17% 17% 17%
20%
0% 0%
0.10 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 95% 85% 17% 96% 118% 17% 37% 17% 37% 0% 0
100 0.29 0.15 0.01 --- 31.93 --- 25.03 --- 25.03 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 65 of 86 Page 65

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/09/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMT xyz Result: Pass

Station # : A Zone xyz
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : ABB M96 6400 2.4-175 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME within robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.009 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.109 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.211 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 21.27 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in ABB coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.70 Specification Ratings

100%
0.60 100%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.50 80% 66% 70%

57%
0.40 60%
41%
0.30 40% 30% 30%
0.20 20%
3% 3% 3% 0% 0%
0.10 0%
Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 Mass Cx Cy Cz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 66% 41% 3% 70% 100% 3% 30% 3% 30% 0% 0
100 0.21 0.11 0.01 --- 26.91 --- 20.01 --- 20.01 NA NA

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 66 of 86 Page 66

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XIII: INSTRUCTIONS FOR CREATING SOLID MODEL INPUT DATA

Creating Mass Property Outputs from Unigraphics

Courtesy of Argus & Associates

Purpose
This document details the step-by-step process required to consistently and accurately construct Mass
Property Analyses for end effectors and guns within the RoboLoad process. The results will provide
the mass, center of gravity (CG) and moment of inertia about the CG for use in the RoboLoad
software.

Step #1: Prepare the Assembly

Open the end effector/weldgun file in Unigraphics.
File > Open > [Select filename.prt]

All make details must have the correct density for the type of material used (refer to the Mechanical
Design Standards (MD1) for a listing of densities – Section 1, Page 19).

Commercial components (clamps, cylinders, etc.) must have the correct density assigned to reflect
the actual mass of the component.

How To Assign Density of “Make” Details & Commercial Components

Run the “Stock Size” program at the detail level to assign the proper density for
Steel and Aluminum.
For any other material type, follow these commands:

At the detail level:

Edit Feature > Edit Solid Density > [Change to the desired units]
[Key in the solid density from the MD1]
OK > [select geometry] > OK > OK > Cancel

In the component file:

Info > Other > [Select desired units (as reflected in the commercial item)]
Info > Analysis > Mass Properties Using Solids > OK > OK
[Select geometry] > OK > Area/Volume/Mass
[Record the volume] > [Calculate density (d=m/v) – mass is actual weight]
Edit Feature > Edit Solid Density > [change units & key in density]
OK > [select geometry] > OK > OK > Cancel

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 67 of 86 Page 67

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

When studying end effectors, it is critical to consider the “worst-case” condition for that tool. The
“worst-case” condition will be the end effector plus whatever total product it is expected to handle, so
remember to add this product assembly to the end effector to complete the study.

Note:
Although all math data product is being maintained on Unigraphics, some older
product is still in surface-body format (which lacks volume and mass). As a result,
a solid-body replica must be constructed that approximates the shape and mass of
the panel to accurately run the Mass Properties analysis in UG.

Step #2: Setup the Coordinate System

Orient the WCS to the center of the robot mounting plate.
WCS > Orient > CSYS of Curve or Plane > [Pick the circular edge of the mounting surface]

Rotate the WCS to accommodate the GM Standard faceplate configuration.

WCS > Rotate

Note:
It is critical that the WCS is oriented in the proper “GM Standard” faceplate frame.
The csys on the face of the end effector/weldgun must match this frame when
mounting the end of arm tooling (regardless of the robot being studied). Use the
following diagram to help orient the csys on the faceplate:

Y,β

X,α

Save the adjusted WCS.

WCS > Save

Step #3: Verify the Units of Measurement

Change the units of measurement to Kg-Meters (MKS).
Info > Other > Units > Kg-Meters

Step #4: Run the Mass Property Analysis

Run the mass property analysis.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 68 of 86 Page 68

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Info > Analysis > Mass Properties > Using Solids > OK > OK > [Box all data to be
analyzed] > OK > List All

Step #5: Layout the Results for Plotting

While in Modeling, rotate the end effector/weldgun view to the desired orientation and save it.
View > Save As > [Key in a view name (e.g., “ISO”]

Go to Drafting.
Application > Drafting

Open the Annotation Editor to layout the results.

Toolbox > Annotation Editor

Highlight the Mass Property results from the information window.

Cut & paste the Mass Property data into Annotation Editor.

Insert the previously created view of the assembly that is being studied.
Drawing > Add View > [Select name of saved view (e.g., “ISO”)]

Following the view placement, scale and move the view as desired.

Document the following text on the output form:

• Name of UG operator performing the study
• Tool Number (and what product the end effector has been studied with)
• Date the study was performed

Adjust text styles & sizes as needed.

Preferences > Lettering > [Pick the text to edit]

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 69 of 86 Page 69

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 70 of 86 Page 70

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Deneb’s Igrip

Waiting for Deneb to provide information requested of them 9/98.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 71 of 86 Page 71

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XIV: ROBOLOAD 2.3 WISH LIST – FEATURES THAT NEED TO BE

ADDED

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 72 of 86 Page 72

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XV: ROBOLOAD 2.3 BUG LIST – PROBLEMS REPORTED AND YET TO
BE FIXED

Last update: 10/1/98

1. Applies only to laptops with docking stations. If Roboload was installed in the docked
configuration, Roboload might not run within Excel when undocked!
2.

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 73 of 86 Page 73

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XVI: CASE STUDIES USING FANUC ROBOTS

Case 1b
Date Created Date Printed
09/15/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : Innovate Result: Pass

Station # : A Zone xyz
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : S-420i W (2.4m) EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME within robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case1b.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.3 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.2 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.15 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 0.042 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 0.104 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 0.104 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in Fanuc coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

95%
0.5 100% 89% 94%
83%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

80% 65% 65% 66% 65%

0.4 62% 64%
60% 50%
0.3 39%
40%
0.2
20%
0.1
0%
Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
65% 83% 89% 94% 50% 39% 65% 66% 65% 95% 62% 64%
100 0.15 0.2 0.3 245 6.292 548 31.35 548 45.26 1823 345.7

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 74 of 86 Page 74

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Case 2b
Date Created Date Printed
09/15/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : Innovate Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : S-420i W (2.4m) EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2b.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.3 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.3 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in Fanuc coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

500% 500% 500%
0.5 500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

400% 361%
0.4
300%
0.3
200% 157%
0.2 85%
100% 65% 55% 68% 55% 59% 65%
0.1
0%
Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
65% 500% 500% 500% 85% 361% 55% 68% 55% 157% 59% 65%
100 0.3 0.3 0.01 416 58 464 32.41 464 74.63 1739 354.5

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 75 of 86 Page 75

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/15/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : Innovate Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : S-420i W (2.4m) EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2b.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.3 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.3 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 11.08 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in Fanuc coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

500% 500% 500%
0.5 500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.4
400%
300%
0.3
181%
200%
0.2 85% 108%
100% 65% 55% 68% 55% 59% 60%
0.1
0%
Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
65% 500% 500% 500% 85% 181% 55% 68% 55% 108% 59% 60%
100 0.3 0.3 0.01 416 29.08 464 32.41 464 51.4 1739 325.6

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 76 of 86 Page 76

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/15/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : Innovate Result: Pass

Station # : A Zone xyz
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : S-420i W (2.4m) EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME within robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2b.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.155 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.155 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 11.08 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in Fanuc coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

0.5 500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.4
400%
300%
0.3
200%
0.2 96% 96% 99%
65%
100% 44% 35% 40% 35% 45% 53% 49%
3%
0.1
0%
Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
65% 96% 96% 3% 44% 99% 35% 40% 35% 45% 53% 49%
100 0.16 0.16 0.01 215 15.89 298 19.22 298 21.66 1573 268.2

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 77 of 86 Page 77

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Case 3b
Date Created Date Printed
09/15/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : Innovate Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : S-420i W (2.4m) (175kg) EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3b.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.009 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.15 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.29 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in Fanuc coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

500% 500% 500%
0.5 500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.4
400% 327%
300%
0.3
200% 121%
0.2
100% 57% 63% 43% 54% 43% 51% 55%
0.1
0%
Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 500% 500% 500% 63% 327% 43% 54% 43% 121% 51% 55%
100 0.29 0.15 0.01 320 50.66 380 25.03 380 56.06 1655 324.8

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 78 of 86 Page 78

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

09/15/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/15/99

Vehicle Prog. : Innovate Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : S-420i W (2.4m) (175kg) EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3b.xls
As Built
Process Shop : XYZ Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.008 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.136 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.263 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 33 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 8.25 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 8.25 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in Fanuc coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

500% 500%
0.5 500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.4
400%
300% 270%
0.3
200%
0.2 99%
100% 57% 57% 40% 46% 40% 50% 53%
11%
0.1
0%
Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
57% 500% 500% 11% 57% 270% 40% 46% 40% 99% 50% 53%
100 0.26 0.14 0.01 290 41.77 355 21.34 355 45.91 1630 309.2

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 79 of 86 Page 79

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 80 of 86 Page 80

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

APPENDIX XVII: CASE STUDIES USING KUKA ROBOTS

Case 1c
Date Created Date Printed
08/30/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/12/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMX XYZ Result: Pass

Station # : A Zone xyz
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : KR150 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME within robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case1c.xls
As Built
Process Shop : The Rhodes Design Shack Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.3 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.2 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.15 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 0.042 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 0.104 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 0.104 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in KUKA coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.6 Specification Ratings

0.5 100%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

78% 77% 76% 78%

80% 67%
0.4 63% 60% 61%
55% 51% 51%
60% 45% 47%
0.3
40%
0.2
20%
0%
0.1
0%
mass Cmx Cmy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
67% 45% 55% 63% 51% 60% 78% 77% 61% 76% 51% 78% 0% 47%
100 0.15 0.2 0.3 5.64 452.7 8.58 12.36 6.7 12.159.116 27.25 0.03 16.47

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 81 of 86 Page 81

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Case 2c
Date Created Date Printed
08/30/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/13/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMX XYZ Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : KR150 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2c.xls
As Built
Process Shop : The Rhodes Design Shack Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.3 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.3 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in KUKA coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

0.4
500%500%
500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35
0.3
400%
0.25 300%
0.2 200% 146%
0.15 87% 66% 79% 51% 85% 40% 72%
100% 67% 39%
0.1 5% 11%
0.05 0%
mass Cmx Cmy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
67% 500% 500% 5% 87% 146% 66% 79% 51% 85% 40% 72% 11% 39%
100 0.3 0.3 0.01 9.58 23.34 7.22 12.61 5.64 13.617.249 25.2 1.9 13.66

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 82 of 86 Page 82

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

08/30/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/13/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMX XYZ Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : KR150 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2c.xls
As Built
Process Shop : The Rhodes Design Shack Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.248 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.248 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 27.4 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in KUKA coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.5 Specification Ratings

0.45 168%168%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.4 150%
0.35 114%
0.3
100%
0.25 67% 72% 67% 71% 70%
57%
0.2 44% 40% 38%
50%
0.15
3% 11%
0.1
0.05 0%
mass Cmx Cmy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
67% 168% 168% 3% 72% 114% 57% 67% 44% 71% 40% 70% 11% 38%
100 0.25 0.25 0.01 7.93 18.17 6.26 10.68 4.89 11.357.249 24.45 1.9 13.47

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 83 of 86 Page 83

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

08/30/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/13/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMX XYZ Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : KR150 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case2c.xls
As Built
Process Shop : The Rhodes Design Shack Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.01 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.248 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.148 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 27.4 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in KUKA coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.5 Specification Ratings

0.45 100%100% 100%
100%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.4
0.35 80% 67% 65% 69%
59% 61%
0.3
60% 50%
0.25 39% 40% 38%
0.2 40%
0.15 20% 11%
0.1 3%
0.05 0%
mass Cmx Cmy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
67% 100% 100% 3% 59% 100% 50% 61% 39% 65% 40% 69% 11% 38%
100 0.15 0.25 0.01 6.52 16 5.49 9.698 4.29 10.417.249 24.16 1.9 13.46

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 84 of 86 Page 84

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Case 3c
Date Created Date Printed
08/30/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/12/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMX XYZ Result: Further

Station # : A Zone xyz Analysis Required.
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : KR150 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME outside robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3c.xls
As Built
Process Shop : The Rhodes Design Shack Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.009 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.15 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.29 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in KUKA coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

0.4
500%
500%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35
0.3
400%
0.25 300%
0.2
191%
200% 123%
0.15
100% 67% 67% 54% 68% 42% 75% 40% 71% 39%
0.1 3% 11%
0.05 0%
mass Cmx Cmy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
67% 191% 500% 3% 67% 123% 54% 68% 42% 75% 40% 71% 11% 39%
100 0.29 0.15 0.01 7.37 19.72 5.94 10.94 4.64 12 7.242 24.71 1.9 13.61

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 85 of 86 Page 85

Roboload v2.3 Users Manual
General Motors Corporation GM Controls, Robotics & Welding

Date Created Date Printed

08/30/99 RoboLoad 2.3 Analysis Report 09/12/99

Vehicle Prog. : GMX XYZ Result: Pass

Station # : A Zone xyz
Robot # : R 1
Robot Model : KR150 EOAT Device is
EOA Tooling : ACME within robot specs.
EOA Tool File : case3c.xls
As Built
Process Shop : The Rhodes Design Shack Buyoff : Engineer Robot Manuf.
Engineer : Ray L. Rhodes Name : ___________ ____________
Telephone : 123-456-7890 Signed: ___________ ____________
Design Date : ___________ ____________
Buyoff: EOAT Designer GM Mechanical GM CRW Robot Manuf.
Name : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Signed: _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________
Date : _______________ _______________ _______________ _______________

General Summary, in GM coordinates

EOAT Parameters Dress Parameters EOAT Frame
Design As Built Design GM Coordinates
Mass : 100 kg kg Mass: 0 kg Z
Mass Center Mass Center Y
(from face plate) (from axis 3)
x : 0.009 m m x' : 0m X
y : 0.15 m m y' : 0m
z : 0.152 m m z' : 0m
Mass Moment of Inertia Mass MOI Dress Frame Axis 3
(about mass center) (about axis 3)
Ixx : 40 kgm^2 Ixx' : 0 kgm^2
Iyy : 10 kgm^2 Iyy' : 0 kgm^2
Izz : 10 kgm^2 Izz' : 0 kgm^2

Load Diagram, in KUKA coordinates, with respect to Face Plate

0.45 Specification Ratings

100%100% 100%
0.4
100%
NORMAL OFFSET - Z(m)

0.35
80% 67% 65% 69%
0.3
58%
0.25 60%
44% 42% 40% 39%
0.2 40% 33%
0.15
20% 11%
0.1 3%
0.05 0%
mass Cmx Cmy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Mass CMx CMy CMz T6 I6 T5 I5 T4 I4 T3 I3 T2 I2
RADIAL OUTSET - L(m)
67% 100% 100% 3% 44% 100% 42% 58% 33% 65% 40% 69% 11% 39%
100 0.15 0.15 0.01 4.82 16 4.62 9.296 3.61 10.467.242 24.23 1.9 13.61

Version of 10/01/2002 Page 86 of 86 Page 86