A six-axis robot and a gantry solve different movement problems. Begin by mapping the part’s path through the cell, including the orientation needed at each station. Then review how the machine, tooling and operator fit around that path.
1. Map the transfer sequence
List where the blank starts, how it is gripped, how it enters the machine, how the finished component leaves and where it is placed. Include any regripping, cleaning or inspection step. A six-axis robot is worth evaluating when several approach angles or orientations are required. A gantry is worth evaluating when the transfer path is predominantly linear or overhead.
2. Check access, not just floor space
A compact-looking layout can still block maintenance or tool changes. Review door travel, chuck or fixture access, service clearances and the operator’s recovery position. For a gantry, also review overhead clearance, supports and machine spacing.
3. Account for the complete moving load
The part is only one part of the load. The gripper, adapters, hoses and any retained second part also matter. Reach, center of gravity and inertia affect the selection. Do not choose a robot from the catalogue payload alone.
4. Define changeover and recovery
Compare how tooling, programs, part presentation and fixtures change between batches. Walk through a missing part, a failed grip and a machine fault. Recovery should be part of the concept before a route is selected.
5. Compare scoped proposals
Use the same application data and acceptance criteria for both options. A route comparison should include tooling, machine interfaces, safeguarding, trials and operator access. Price and cycle-time comparisons are meaningful only when the scope is comparable.
Send the machine layout, part drawings and cycle sequence to review both approaches. No route is assumed to be universally faster, cheaper or more flexible.
Discuss your application
Use the RFQ form to share your machine, workpiece and process target.