We\u2019ve captured a few of Mike\u2019s important comments in this blog. To read the complete story, follow this link to Engineering.com<\/A>.<\/H2><\/p>\nWhen using simulation software to program a robot, it\u2019s important to remember that no simulation will accurately represent what will really happen when you run the program with the real robot. The movement of cables and hoses is not simulated by most software environments, so it\u2019s possible that the programmed motion may snag or stretch cables, causing failure.<\/EM><\/P><\/p>\n\u201cI think that dynamics and physics modeling will also help make simulations more accurate,\u201d said Rouman. \u201cWe have started to do some of that in the design of machines in our software, but in terms of simulation, I still think there’s some ground to cover. If you think about when a robot moves at high speed with a high payload, when it stops, it’s not going to just stop. It’s going to settle and there’ll be some movement and so on. With those kinds of fine adjustments and things, we have to make some assumptions. I think that in the future we won’t have to make so many assumptions. We’ll be able to more closely match what the real robot will do.\u201d<\/EM><\/P><\/p>\nOne factor that contributes to better simulation is a shift from time-based simulation to event-based simulation. \u201cIn the past, simulation developers would have to sort of guess the amount of time a given event would take,\u201d explained Rouman. \u201cBut that’s not really how these robotics systems work. They work in an event-based mode, and if we can simulate the system the way it’s actually operating on the floor by having these events starting and stopping and coordinating with one another, we’ll also achieve a higher level of accuracy between the simulation and the real world execution of that program model on the shop floor.\u201d<\/EM><\/P><\/p>\n
\u201cI think that dynamics and physics modeling will also help make simulations more accurate,\u201d said Rouman. \u201cWe have started to do some of that in the design of machines in our software, but in terms of simulation, I still think there’s some ground to cover. If you think about when a robot moves at high speed with a high payload, when it stops, it’s not going to just stop. It’s going to settle and there’ll be some movement and so on. With those kinds of fine adjustments and things, we have to make some assumptions. I think that in the future we won’t have to make so many assumptions. We’ll be able to more closely match what the real robot will do.\u201d<\/EM><\/P><\/p>\n One factor that contributes to better simulation is a shift from time-based simulation to event-based simulation. \u201cIn the past, simulation developers would have to sort of guess the amount of time a given event would take,\u201d explained Rouman. \u201cBut that’s not really how these robotics systems work. They work in an event-based mode, and if we can simulate the system the way it’s actually operating on the floor by having these events starting and stopping and coordinating with one another, we’ll also achieve a higher level of accuracy between the simulation and the real world execution of that program model on the shop floor.\u201d<\/EM><\/P><\/p>\n
![\"siemens](\"http:\/\/blogs.sw.siemens.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/7\/2019\/09\/siemens-process-simulate-2.jpg\" "\\"siemens")
<\/span><\/P><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"