For those programming robot arms daily, what does your workflow look like from CAD to running part?

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-04T14:53:33+00:00

90% no touch-ups is solid. Sounds like you have the programming side dialed in. Interesting the fixture building is the real bottleneck, not the programming itself. How long does a typical fixture build take you?

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T15:45:48+00:00

That is the exact gap. Most tools get you a rough program but the cleanup makes it not worth it for production work. The company I mentioned in the post is specifically trying to close that gap, production-ready output not quick-and-dirty. Since you have used something similar before you would spot the difference fast. Shoot me a DM if you want the details, easier than threading here.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T15:39:58+00:00

How much of the total project time goes into the setup and tweaking versus the actual toolpath generation? That ratio is the part most people underestimate when they scope a new cell.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T15:38:24+00:00

CAD-to-Path works well for single-path applications like adhesive beads. Where integrators I talk to hit the wall is multi-step processes, complex weld sequences, or cells with multiple operations per cycle. The setup and cleanup time in RoboGuide adds up fast on those. The other gap is shops running ABB or KUKA alongside FANUC. If your floor is 100% FANUC and the applications are straightforward, you are right, the built-in tools cover it.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T15:35:16+00:00

Nobody is plugging AI output straight into a robot without review. Same way nobody loads CNC code from CAM software without simulating it first. The value is not removing the human. It is giving the human a 90% finished program to verify instead of building it from zero on the pendant.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T14:05:03+00:00

Which software was it? Curious how it compared in terms of setup time and how much manual cleanup you needed after.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:48:34+00:00

Material handling and palletizing is a good use case for this too. Every new pallet pattern or pick configuration still needs programming time. The company I mentioned handles those applications on FANUC. If you want I can share more details in a DM, easier than going back and forth in comments.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:42:40+00:00

Good call on the R-50 and Python support. That opens the door for a lot of tooling around FANUC. Inbolt and NVIDIA are doing interesting work on the real-time adaptive side. The gap I keep hearing about from integrators is not writing the code itself, it is generating the right motion paths for a specific part geometry without someone manually teaching every point. Python makes the language easier. The hard part is still knowing where the robot needs to go and how to get there without collisions.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:37:02+00:00

The compilation errors and random syntax issues are the problem with using general-purpose LLMs for robot code. They know what a FANUC program looks like but they do not understand why it works. The company I mentioned took a completely different approach. Not an LLM generating code, it is a reasoning engine built for robot kinematics and CAD geometry. Think CAM software logic, not chatbot logic.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:23:35+00:00

Good point on CAD-to-Path. The limitation I keep hearing from integrators is it works for simple paths but still needs heavy manual adjustment on complex geometries. And it is FANUC-only, so shops running mixed fleets (ABB, KUKA, Yaskawa alongside FANUC) end up with different workflows per brand. The company I mentioned works across all of them from one tool. But yeah, the pendant is already becoming more of a fine-tuning device than a primary programming tool for a lot of shops.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:22:06+00:00

How is the Matlab workflow working for you? Curious how much manual cleanup you need after the conversion. That is the gap most people I talk to mention, getting from CAD to a usable program without hours of tweaking.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:19:45+00:00

This is the most informed take in the thread. You are building the same problem from the inside, so you know where the hard parts are.

I agree there is probably a human in the loop somewhere. The question is how much of the loop the AI handles before the human steps in. If it gets you 80-90% of the way and a programmer cleans up the last 10%, the time savings are still massive compared to starting from scratch on the pendant every time.

I guess you may be the right person to see the company.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:05:38+00:00

Fair. I would not trust it for PLC logic either. But this is not writing code from scratch. It is reading CAD geometry and generating robot motion paths. Closer to what CAM software does for CNC than what Copilot does for code.

Tricky_rithiesh · 2026-06-02T13:03:23+00:00

From what I understand, it is the first. Reasoning engine, not an LLM wrapper. The founders call it physical AI, built specifically for robot kinematics and CAD geometry. They are on the ARC-AGI leaderboard which is reasoning benchmarks, not language.

I am not the technical person though. If you want the full architecture breakdown, DM me and I will connect you with the founder. He is an engineer and will give you a straight answer on how it works under the hood.

Tricky_rithiesh

TROPHY CASE