Robot Types
Robot Types
Section titled “Robot Types”Robot-type pages should help a plant narrow the class that matches the work, not turn payload charts into strategy. The wrong robot class usually shows up later as awkward guarding, fragile EOAT, poor uptime, or a cell that looked elegant in a demo but does not survive shift pressure.
Quick robot-type map
Section titled “Quick robot-type map”| Robot type or shortlist class | Strong fit | Weak fit |
|---|---|---|
| Collaborative robot | Lower-payload tasks, easier first-cell adoption, flexible tending, constrained facilities | High-speed guarded work, heavy parts, dirty duty cycles, unrealistic collaboration claims |
| Standard six-axis industrial robot | Higher duty, stronger acceleration, conventional guarded cells, repeatable production | Projects that need simple operator proximity more than throughput |
| Compact industrial arm | Small-footprint machine loading, inspection, kitting, fixture-adjacent work | Large reach, heavy payload, or high-inertia EOAT |
| SCARA-style automation | Fast planar handling, assembly, packaging, simple vertical motion | Complex orientation, deep reach, or broad spatial manipulation |
| Gantry or Cartesian system | Long travel, heavy loads, structured pick/place, machine rows | Flexible multi-SKU manipulation where six-axis motion matters |
The class decision should happen before vendor preference. A familiar brand cannot fix a wrong class boundary.
What matters more than the brochure
Section titled “What matters more than the brochure”The useful comparison is rarely just collaborative versus traditional, or six-axis versus something smaller. The real questions are:
- how stable the part presentation is,
- how much cycle time pressure exists,
- what kind of guarding and access are realistic,
- and whether the cell needs graceful recovery when upstream conditions degrade.
What should be known before RFQ
Section titled “What should be known before RFQ”Before requesting quotes, define:
- real part weight including gripper, adapters, cables, and safety margin;
- required reach at the actual pick/place positions, not maximum brochure reach;
- cycle-time target including robot motion, sensing, machine wait, and recovery;
- number of product families and changeover frequency;
- guarding, operator access, and maintenance access expectations;
- fault recovery owner on first shift, second shift, and weekends.
If those items are still vague, the RFQ will reward sales confidence instead of engineering fit.
Core paths
Section titled “Core paths” Cobots vs industrial robots Use this page when the team is still sorting out where collaboration is real value versus a misleading buying shortcut.
Robot payload, reach, and cycle time shortlist Use this page before RFQ when nominal payload, maximum reach, and real cell throughput are still being mixed together.
Universal Robots e-Series and UR20 or UR30 Use this page when collaborative deployment speed and lighter payload handling are both real parts of the shortlist.
FANUC CRX and standard FANUC robots Use this page when the plant is choosing between easier collaborative adoption and a more traditional high-duty path.
ABB GoFa and IRB 1200 Use this page when compact-cell flexibility and long-term industrial robustness are both in scope.
What is the best first robot application for a mid-sized factory? Use this page when robot-class debate is outrunning the harder question of where the first win should come from.
Cell design Move here when the robot class is mostly understood and the harder question is how the cell should actually be built.
How to narrow robot class without wasting time
Section titled “How to narrow robot class without wasting time”- Start with the application, not the robot family.
- Write down the payload, reach, part variability, and recovery expectations.
- Decide whether collaboration is operationally real or just visually attractive.
- Choose the class that minimizes total cell complexity, not just the robot that demos well.