<![CDATA[RoboDK Forum - All Forums]]>

<![CDATA[RoboDK Forum - All Forums]]> https://robodk.com/forum/ Sun, 03 May 2026 02:20:34 +0000 MyBB <![CDATA[curve follow project with point]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-curve-follow-project-with-point Thu, 30 Apr 2026 13:12:54 +0000 SagarMangulkar]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-curve-follow-project-with-point For polishing how to make a program in which the grinder blade tool should be parallel to each curve follow point without collision.

Please suggest I am attaching station here.

.rdk

Polishing SGP Down RH.rdk (Size: 2.51 MB / Downloads: 10) ]]> For polishing how to make a program in which the grinder blade tool should be parallel to each curve follow point without collision.

Please suggest I am attaching station here.

.rdk

Polishing SGP Down RH.rdk (Size: 2.51 MB / Downloads: 10) ]]> <![CDATA[Modifying a code instruction always changes the name]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Modifying-a-code-instruction-always-changes-the-name Wed, 29 Apr 2026 17:55:28 +0000 HenryInUtah]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Modifying-a-code-instruction-always-changes-the-name
Here is an image to help explain:

.png

RoboDK Always Renames Instruction.png (Size: 21.5 KB / Downloads: 11) ]]>
Here is an image to help explain:

.png

RoboDK Always Renames Instruction.png (Size: 21.5 KB / Downloads: 11) ]]> <![CDATA[Request to add Kuka Iontec ultra KR 120 R2700]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Request-to-add-Kuka-Iontec-ultra-KR-120-R2700 Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:22:59 +0000 AdamM]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Request-to-add-Kuka-Iontec-ultra-KR-120-R2700
Download page: KUKA KR 120 R2700]]>
Download page: KUKA KR 120 R2700]]> <![CDATA[Program instruction operations using the API]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Program-instruction-operations-using-the-API Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:16:53 +0000 HenryInUtah]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Program-instruction-operations-using-the-API
However, using program.Instruction(n) returns a tuple. So, I have a tuple and a robodk.robolink.Item with no way to check if they are the same. I cannot use the Item.Type() + Item.Name() because the names are not unique.

I hope that I explained that so it made sense...

This code is part of a PySide app - sorry if it looks a little different.

Code:
    def btnSelectedItem_Clicked(self):

        '''Show information about the selected item in the tree'''

        self.ui.textInfo.clear()

        currentSelection = self.rdk.Selection()

        if len(currentSelection) == 0:

            self.ui.textInfo.append('No items selected')

            return

        item = currentSelection[0]

        itemType = item.Type()

        itemName = item.Name()

        itemParent = item.Parent()

        itemVisible = item.Visible()

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemName=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemType=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemParent=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemVisible=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'type={type(item)}')

        # The parent is a program, so it must be an instruction

        if itemParent.Type() == 8:

            instructionCount = itemParent.InstructionCount()

            self.ui.textInfo.append(f'Looping through {instructionCount} instructions...')

            for n in range(instructionCount):

                self.ui.textInfo.append(f'Instruction {n}')

                current = itemParent.Instruction(n)

                # How to compare if item == current?

                # current is a tuple and item is an robodk.robolink.Item

]]>
However, using program.Instruction(n) returns a tuple. So, I have a tuple and a robodk.robolink.Item with no way to check if they are the same. I cannot use the Item.Type() + Item.Name() because the names are not unique.

I hope that I explained that so it made sense...

This code is part of a PySide app - sorry if it looks a little different.

Code:
    def btnSelectedItem_Clicked(self):

        '''Show information about the selected item in the tree'''

        self.ui.textInfo.clear()

        currentSelection = self.rdk.Selection()

        if len(currentSelection) == 0:

            self.ui.textInfo.append('No items selected')

            return

        item = currentSelection[0]

        itemType = item.Type()

        itemName = item.Name()

        itemParent = item.Parent()

        itemVisible = item.Visible()

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemName=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemType=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemParent=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'{itemVisible=}')

        self.ui.textInfo.append(f'type={type(item)}')

        # The parent is a program, so it must be an instruction

        if itemParent.Type() == 8:

            instructionCount = itemParent.InstructionCount()

            self.ui.textInfo.append(f'Looping through {instructionCount} instructions...')

            for n in range(instructionCount):

                self.ui.textInfo.append(f'Instruction {n}')

                current = itemParent.Instruction(n)

                # How to compare if item == current?

                # current is a tuple and item is an robodk.robolink.Item

]]> <![CDATA[Educational license failure when generating program for Fanuc]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Educational-license-failure-when-generating-program-for-Fanuc Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:01:50 +0000 Rco2003]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Educational-license-failure-when-generating-program-for-Fanuc <![CDATA[RoboDK CAM toolpath too long]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-RoboDK-CAM-toolpath-too-long Mon, 27 Apr 2026 13:54:53 +0000 ALEJANDRO]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-RoboDK-CAM-toolpath-too-long
I am comparing the roughing trajectory generated using RoboDK CAM Rough operation and RhinoCAM. On both cases, I use the same operation and the same part so i would assume I would have a similar number of points in the APT file but on RoboDK i get x4 times the points.

/GOTO points comparison
RoboDK: 44523
RhinoCAM: 8417

I have not found a way to reduce the number of points generated by RoboDK. I have looked for some "tolerance" or "min distance between point" setting that could help me reduce it.

The large number of points make the reachability validation take longer.

Also, is there a way to speed up the material removal simulation?

.rdk

MilledPanelSDU.rdk (Size: 9.92 MB / Downloads: 11)

.png

Screenshot 2026-04-27 154623.png (Size: 419.12 KB / Downloads: 10) ]]>
I am comparing the roughing trajectory generated using RoboDK CAM Rough operation and RhinoCAM. On both cases, I use the same operation and the same part so i would assume I would have a similar number of points in the APT file but on RoboDK i get x4 times the points.

/GOTO points comparison
RoboDK: 44523
RhinoCAM: 8417

I have not found a way to reduce the number of points generated by RoboDK. I have looked for some "tolerance" or "min distance between point" setting that could help me reduce it.

The large number of points make the reachability validation take longer.

Also, is there a way to speed up the material removal simulation?

.rdk

MilledPanelSDU.rdk (Size: 9.92 MB / Downloads: 11)

.png

Screenshot 2026-04-27 154623.png (Size: 419.12 KB / Downloads: 10) ]]> <![CDATA[Maintenance expired message after update with valid license]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Maintenance-expired-message-after-update-with-valid-license Mon, 27 Apr 2026 08:56:07 +0000 lukasz.lecki]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Maintenance-expired-message-after-update-with-valid-license
After updating RoboDK to version 6.0.3, I'm experiencing a critical issue — the software displays an "Maintenance expired" error, despite my license (with updates included) being valid until 2027.

Here's a summary of my situation:
- License is active and valid until 2027 (includes updates)
- After updating to v6.0.3, the software reports an invalid license and refuses to run
- I've already submitted a support request via email, but have received no response yet
- I'm currently unable to work due to this issue

Since I need to keep working while waiting for a fix, I'd like to ask:

Could someone from the team (or the community) share a download link for RoboDK v6.0.0 for Windows? That version was working fine for me and would allow me to continue my work in the meantime.

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you!]]>
After updating RoboDK to version 6.0.3, I'm experiencing a critical issue — the software displays an "Maintenance expired" error, despite my license (with updates included) being valid until 2027.

Here's a summary of my situation:
- License is active and valid until 2027 (includes updates)
- After updating to v6.0.3, the software reports an invalid license and refuses to run
- I've already submitted a support request via email, but have received no response yet
- I'm currently unable to work due to this issue

Since I need to keep working while waiting for a fix, I'd like to ask:

Could someone from the team (or the community) share a download link for RoboDK v6.0.0 for Windows? That version was working fine for me and would allow me to continue my work in the meantime.

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you!]]> <![CDATA[Question about Calibration Warning]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Question-about-Calibration-Warning Fri, 24 Apr 2026 00:03:31 +0000 Keisuke.Sakai]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Question-about-Calibration-Warning

I would like to ask for your guidance regarding a tool calibration warning we are seeing in RoboDK when using a FARO laser tracker.

Setup summary:
- Measurement system: FARO VantageE
- Target: Single SMR
- SMR mounting: on the tool Z-axis, approximately 160 mm from the robot flange
- Task: calibration / TCP definition (position-based, 3 DoF)

Observed behavior in RoboDK:
- The TCP position (SMR center) is stable and repeatable.
- However, RoboDK shows:
- “Nominal distance = 0 mm”
- The tool appears in a red / warning state
- After running the adjustment, even if it becomes green and the error is 0, pressing “Update” shows a message like “Valid calibration axes are missing”.

Our current understanding:
Because the SMR is located on the tool Z-axis, rotation of Axis 6 produces almost no observable XYZ displacement of the SMR center. Therefore RoboDK cannot observe an effective lever arm from wrist rotation and evaluates the nominal distance as 0 mm, even though the TCP position is consistent.

Questions:
1) Is our interpretation of the “Nominal distance = 0 mm” warning correct for this configuration?
2) For laser tracker–based tool calibration in RoboDK, is it required that the SMR be offset from the tool axis so Axis 6 rotation produces measurable positional displacement?
3) Do you have a recommended minimum offset distance (or an example mounting geometry) for using a single SMR?
4) If the TCP definition is stable but calibration axes are considered insufficient, is it acceptable to ignore the warning (use it for TCP definition only), or should the configuration always be changed for proper calibration?
5) If there is documentation or a known example for FARO VantageE + single SMR, could you share a reference?

If needed, we can share screenshots of the warning message and photos of our SMR mounting.

Thank you very much for your support.

Best regards,
Keisuke Sakai
IDEC Factory Solutions (Japan)

.rdk

Calibration-with-KUKA-KR-6-R700-sixx.rdk (Size: 5.59 MB / Downloads: 17) ]]>

I would like to ask for your guidance regarding a tool calibration warning we are seeing in RoboDK when using a FARO laser tracker.

Setup summary:
- Measurement system: FARO VantageE
- Target: Single SMR
- SMR mounting: on the tool Z-axis, approximately 160 mm from the robot flange
- Task: calibration / TCP definition (position-based, 3 DoF)

Observed behavior in RoboDK:
- The TCP position (SMR center) is stable and repeatable.
- However, RoboDK shows:
- “Nominal distance = 0 mm”
- The tool appears in a red / warning state
- After running the adjustment, even if it becomes green and the error is 0, pressing “Update” shows a message like “Valid calibration axes are missing”.

Our current understanding:
Because the SMR is located on the tool Z-axis, rotation of Axis 6 produces almost no observable XYZ displacement of the SMR center. Therefore RoboDK cannot observe an effective lever arm from wrist rotation and evaluates the nominal distance as 0 mm, even though the TCP position is consistent.

Questions:
1) Is our interpretation of the “Nominal distance = 0 mm” warning correct for this configuration?
2) For laser tracker–based tool calibration in RoboDK, is it required that the SMR be offset from the tool axis so Axis 6 rotation produces measurable positional displacement?
3) Do you have a recommended minimum offset distance (or an example mounting geometry) for using a single SMR?
4) If the TCP definition is stable but calibration axes are considered insufficient, is it acceptable to ignore the warning (use it for TCP definition only), or should the configuration always be changed for proper calibration?
5) If there is documentation or a known example for FARO VantageE + single SMR, could you share a reference?

If needed, we can share screenshots of the warning message and photos of our SMR mounting.

Thank you very much for your support.

Best regards,
Keisuke Sakai
IDEC Factory Solutions (Japan)

.rdk

Calibration-with-KUKA-KR-6-R700-sixx.rdk (Size: 5.59 MB / Downloads: 17) ]]> <![CDATA[Trying to create my own lines so that I can use them for a weldingpath]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Trying-to-create-my-own-lines-so-that-I-can-use-them-for-a-weldingpath Mon, 20 Apr 2026 03:59:05 +0000 MohammedAshaif]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Trying-to-create-my-own-lines-so-that-I-can-use-them-for-a-weldingpath
I am on a MacBook. Can I still download the Robodk plugin, and can the plugin be used on Onshape so that I can get cleaner paths for my welding arm?

Robodk didn't have the welding arm that I use. How would I go about adding a tool to Robodk that isn't in the tool library already? I have a laser welder with a mount for my robot arm.

I have used the create curves feature under tools, but the lines that are given to me aren't the lines that I need (they are weirdly short and give me different lengths of lines depending on where my mouse is). How do I create my own lines so that I can create a tool path for my welding arm?

.rdk

Weld Test.rdk (Size: 2.38 MB / Downloads: 31)

.step

Final part assembly.step (Size: 179.49 KB / Downloads: 26) ]]>
I am on a MacBook. Can I still download the Robodk plugin, and can the plugin be used on Onshape so that I can get cleaner paths for my welding arm?

Robodk didn't have the welding arm that I use. How would I go about adding a tool to Robodk that isn't in the tool library already? I have a laser welder with a mount for my robot arm.

I have used the create curves feature under tools, but the lines that are given to me aren't the lines that I need (they are weirdly short and give me different lengths of lines depending on where my mouse is). How do I create my own lines so that I can create a tool path for my welding arm?

.rdk

Weld Test.rdk (Size: 2.38 MB / Downloads: 31)

.step

Final part assembly.step (Size: 179.49 KB / Downloads: 26) ]]> <![CDATA[5axis cnc how to configure!]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-5axis-cnc-how-to-configure Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:08:23 +0000 Kamy]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-5axis-cnc-how-to-configure I wanna configure a 5 AXIS cnc in roboDK and please look my attached picture and red circles...
the symbols are not clear and numbers are not visible and i cannot read them can any one help me please which one is which one ?
I can not fill the table regarding my model
thank you in advanced

.png

5axis.PNG (Size: 53.35 KB / Downloads: 54) ]]> I wanna configure a 5 AXIS cnc in roboDK and please look my attached picture and red circles...
the symbols are not clear and numbers are not visible and i cannot read them can any one help me please which one is which one ?
I can not fill the table regarding my model
thank you in advanced

.png

5axis.PNG (Size: 53.35 KB / Downloads: 54) ]]> <![CDATA[Robot Ignoring Blending Radius During Multi-Axis 3D Printing]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Robot-Ignoring-Blending-Radius-During-Multi-Axis-3D-Printing Wed, 15 Apr 2026 20:46:27 +0000 ht133magnolia]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Robot-Ignoring-Blending-Radius-During-Multi-Axis-3D-Printing
For one of my RoboDK projects, I set the blending radius to 5 mm. However, when the robot moves vertically along a curved path, the motion from one point to the next becomes very abrupt instead of smooth.

I was wondering whether this could be due to too few points along the curve.

Could it also be because the printed object is very small, so the robot is not effectively applying the blending radius?

Please refer to the attached video for reference (it only shows the motion without extrusion).

Robot: JAKA Zu20

.mp4

20260412_050012_1_1.mp4 (Size: 23.47 MB / Downloads: 30) ]]>
For one of my RoboDK projects, I set the blending radius to 5 mm. However, when the robot moves vertically along a curved path, the motion from one point to the next becomes very abrupt instead of smooth.

I was wondering whether this could be due to too few points along the curve.

Could it also be because the printed object is very small, so the robot is not effectively applying the blending radius?

Please refer to the attached video for reference (it only shows the motion without extrusion).

Robot: JAKA Zu20

.mp4

20260412_050012_1_1.mp4 (Size: 23.47 MB / Downloads: 30) ]]> <![CDATA[RoboDK Workflow Gcode Tool Angle Tilt Issues]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-RoboDK-Workflow-Gcode-Tool-Angle-Tilt-Issues Tue, 14 Apr 2026 13:38:16 +0000 npbrock]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-RoboDK-Workflow-Gcode-Tool-Angle-Tilt-Issues
; File: Complex_Surface.gcode
G21 ; mm units
G90 ; absolute positioning
G0 Z5.0000
G0 X-63.3600 Y-70.0820 A4.9575 B0.0000 C0.0000
S0.0
G0 Z10.4105
M3
G5.2 P1 ; Begin NURBS curve
X-63.3600 Y-70.0820 Z10.4105 A4.9575 B0.0000 C0.0000 S0.0 F1200.0
X-63.3600 Y-69.3850 Z10.3644 A1.4371 B0.0000 C0.0000 S53.0 F1200.0
X-63.3600 Y-67.9910 Z10.4614 A-8.3558 B0.0000 C0.0000 S29.7 F1200.0
X-63.3600 Y-67.2941 Z10.5868 A-11.8905 B0.0000 C0.0000 S22.7 F1200.0

As you can see all of the toolhead tilt for now is done in the A direction (about the X-axis). Currently this is being ignored in RoboDK. I can change the output of the CAM software if needed, I just need some direction. I've read through and watched several videos on the topic, I know I'm likely missing and older post and I apologize if I've missed it.]]>
; File: Complex_Surface.gcode
G21 ; mm units
G90 ; absolute positioning
G0 Z5.0000
G0 X-63.3600 Y-70.0820 A4.9575 B0.0000 C0.0000
S0.0
G0 Z10.4105
M3
G5.2 P1 ; Begin NURBS curve
X-63.3600 Y-70.0820 Z10.4105 A4.9575 B0.0000 C0.0000 S0.0 F1200.0
X-63.3600 Y-69.3850 Z10.3644 A1.4371 B0.0000 C0.0000 S53.0 F1200.0
X-63.3600 Y-67.9910 Z10.4614 A-8.3558 B0.0000 C0.0000 S29.7 F1200.0
X-63.3600 Y-67.2941 Z10.5868 A-11.8905 B0.0000 C0.0000 S22.7 F1200.0

As you can see all of the toolhead tilt for now is done in the A direction (about the X-axis). Currently this is being ignored in RoboDK. I can change the output of the CAM software if needed, I just need some direction. I've read through and watched several videos on the topic, I know I'm likely missing and older post and I apologize if I've missed it.]]> <![CDATA[Request to add KUKA FORTEC KR 340 R3400-2 robot]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Request-to-add-KUKA-FORTEC-KR-340-R3400-2-robot Tue, 14 Apr 2026 06:46:39 +0000 tschmitz]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Request-to-add-KUKA-FORTEC-KR-340-R3400-2-robot Hello,

would it be possible to add Kuka Fortec KR340 R3400-2 to the library?
Please find below link and attached CAD zip.

https://my.kuka.com/s/product/kr-340-r34...=Downloads

Thanks

.zip

KR_340_R3400-2_V01_STP.zip (Size: 10.64 MB / Downloads: 42) ]]> Hello,

would it be possible to add Kuka Fortec KR340 R3400-2 to the library?
Please find below link and attached CAD zip.

https://my.kuka.com/s/product/kr-340-r34...=Downloads

Thanks

.zip

KR_340_R3400-2_V01_STP.zip (Size: 10.64 MB / Downloads: 42) ]]> <![CDATA[Modified DH Parameters Not Matching RoboDK]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Modified-DH-Parameters-Not-Matching-RoboDK Tue, 07 Apr 2026 16:26:23 +0000 tktyler117]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Modified-DH-Parameters-Not-Matching-RoboDK
To provide more information, I solve the transformation between each joint using the transformation matrix in the image attached, then I multiply the transformation matrices for each joint to get from the base to the flange. I don't have any additional tools on the robot, so I don't have any additional transformations to get to the TCP.

Thank you!

.png

MDH Transformation Matrix.png (Size: 24.14 KB / Downloads: 52)

.png

Robot DHM Parameters.png (Size: 15.71 KB / Downloads: 48) ]]>
To provide more information, I solve the transformation between each joint using the transformation matrix in the image attached, then I multiply the transformation matrices for each joint to get from the base to the flange. I don't have any additional tools on the robot, so I don't have any additional transformations to get to the TCP.

Thank you!

.png

MDH Transformation Matrix.png (Size: 24.14 KB / Downloads: 52)

.png

Robot DHM Parameters.png (Size: 15.71 KB / Downloads: 48) ]]> <![CDATA[Add Borunte BRTIRPZ2080A into the library]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Add-Borunte-BRTIRPZ2080A-into-the-library Mon, 06 Apr 2026 18:58:48 +0000 Higor]]> https://robodk.com/forum/Thread-Add-Borunte-BRTIRPZ2080A-into-the-library
.robot

BRTIRPZ2080A.robot (Size: 657.98 KB / Downloads: 42) ]]>
.robot

BRTIRPZ2080A.robot (Size: 657.98 KB / Downloads: 42) ]]>