TPT September 2017

64 / 124

T E CHNOLOG Y
62 SEPTEMBER 2017
Robots as tube bending machines?
THE trend towards flexibility in machining
processes with a high degree of
automation is a major focus in many
sectors. Nonetheless, with all the
innovative strength and performance
power of such systems the question
remains: When and how does it make
sense to automate? And is the robot a
means to an end or the deciding factor?
Stefanie Flaeper, managing director
at transfluid, has the answer. The
specialist for high-tech tube processing
equipment has been developing its
‘t motion’ solution for process automation
for many years and for a great variety of
application areas.
“Of course, with all the enthusiasm for
automation there is always the question
of benefits. Because the reasons for
deciding to go for an automated process
are certainly diverse.
“Sometimes the objective is to
achieve process capability and quality
independent of the operator. In other
sectors or applications, the focus is on
cost reduction for a process. Because a
great deal of ‘know-how’ is required to
be able to leverage the optimum results
from the machining components through
to operation,” explained Ms Flaeper.
With the integration of well-proven
technologies for tube bending or
forming, the automation options are
always being consistently exploited.
For example, if it is necessary to cut
at the start, transfluid’s chipless orbital
tube cutter provides a fast route for
direct further processing. As a result, it is
possible to carry out forming processes
at the end of the tube and bending pre-
formed tubes, for example, without delay.
With the great variety of possibilities,
such as integrated labelling systems
or optical measurement systems, the
clarification of the general question of
the layout of the respective handling
system is one of the most important.
“Robots are one variant, the other
could be an electrical servo driven
four-axis linear handling unit, for
example. Both systems have their
appeal – certainly the linear system
if the central factors are the handling
times, short tubes or machining prior to
the bending process,” said Ms Flaeper.
The advantages of the linear systems in
comparison to robots lie in particular in
the high speed and that they are easier
to program.
“Linear systems increase the degree
of utilisation of the integrated machines.
In contrast, a robot is a great deal
more flexible. At least when it comes
to automated tube bending,” explained
Ms Flaeper.
A supplementary concept for the
forward-looking ‘t-motion’ automation
systems from transfluid is the option to
employ the robot as a machine rather
than only for handling tasks. “With one
of our current projects we must find a
solution and decide whether we install a
bending machine and automate this via
a robot or simply take the opportunity
to use a robot as a machine,” said
Ms Flaeper.
In order to realise this the transfluid
engineers have simply put a bending
machine into the robot’s hand. This
robot bending machine is able to bend
right-left with a single setting. It is
flexible, in particular when long tubes
have to be bent or, for example, pipe-
hose combinations whereby the hose
has already been installed prior to the
bending process.
Because this enables the bending
head to be equipped with several levels,
it is possible to bend different tube
diameters without a tool change.
In addition to conventional bending
methods, there is also a further process
available for using robots to bend tubes
with an internal mandrel. This is of inter-
est if both ends of the workpiece have al-
ready been machined, for example. The
robot can start the bending from both
sides. As a result the transfluid concept
has opened up an opportunity to bend
both ends into the final shape without an
additional length being required.
transfluid Maschinenbau GmbH –
Germany
Email:
Website:
Stefanie Flaeper
transfluid
networks its
tube bending
technologies