Unlike the gantry, which requires overhead clearance to accommodate the vertically-moving gantry Z-axis mechanism, the 2-axis delta is well-suited for placement under mezzanines or in facilities with height limitations. In addition, PLC based kinematics motion control and minimal use of mechanical parts reduces maintenance requirements and costs for improved up time and availability.
Ideal for pick-and-place top-loading applications, offering high-speed, precision placement of up to 40 cycles/min. for a wide range of product types and case styles. Cartons, rigid, and flexible products can be loaded in horizontal or vertical pack patterns into regular or half slotted containers (RSCs or HSCs), bliss boxes, cartons or trays, making the Delta Robot an excellent solution for retail-ready packaging requirements.
Saturns’s comprehensive set of fully customizable case and carton loading capabilities includes articulated arm robots, two and three-axis delta robots, Cartesian robots and drop pack technology to provide the most suitable solution for any top-loaded application.
Both the 2-axis delta and gantry top loaders are servo-controlled, using a parallel link (Delta) and Cartesian robot respectively. With dual-axis pick and place functions, end-of-arm tooling moves forward and backward, up and down (X and Z axis) - picking and placing products, rotating them as needed and placing them into cases. Ideal for retail-ready packaging, both solutions are flexible in accommodating a wide range of product types and case styles – whether it’s loading cartons, rigid, or flexible products into regular or half slotted containers (RSCs or HSCs), bliss boxes, or trays. A wide range of pack patterns, including horizontal or vertical product orientations, can also be supported. So which option is better? Comparable in terms of function and cost, the 2-axis delta is smaller, potentially faster and easier to maintain. However, for applications with extremely heavy products or large case sizes (requiring greater horizontal and vertical motion), the gantry may be the better-suited option. Understanding the benefits and limitations of each technology and consulting with equipment manufacturers will help determine the option best-suited to a particular application.
Machine footprint vs. work envelope
Arguably the most differentiating characteristic of the 2-axis delta is its compact footprint, which allows for more flexible introduction into existing automated system layouts. Unlike the gantry, which requires overhead clearance to accommodate the vertically-moving gantry Z axis mechanism, the 2-axis delta is well-suited for placement under mezzanines or in facilities with height limitations. Larger by comparison, the gantry’s size may be an attribute in its own right - enabling a larger work envelope. A wider range of horizontal and vertical movement allows the gantry top loader to accommodate wider and deeper case sizes compared to the 2-axis delta. Payload vs. pick rate Both the 2-axis delta and gantry have a high payload capacity compared to other top load technologies. The 2-axis delta is capable of lifting most packable products, with a maximum payload of 40kg. The gantry’s payload capacity is even more impressive at upwards of 100kg, although the need to pack products of such extreme size and weight is relatively uncommon.The 2-axis delta does provide a faster pick rate of up to 40 cycles per minute – twice that of the gantry. Depending on factors like product type, size and pack pattern, this can translate to a faster pack speed, fitting for high output applications
In addition to 2-axis delta and gantry top load solutions, Saturn offers other top load case packers including 3-axis deltas, articulated arm robots and drop loaders.Taking factors like product size, shape and weight, pack patterns, desired output, machine footprint and cost into consideration, Saturn’s Applications Engineering team can help determine the best solution to fulfill your packing needs now and in the future.
With so many loading technologies available, determining which one is best-suited to meet specific needs can be a challenge. Often times, the selection process means prioritizing system requirements over nice-to-have machine features. And since no single machine is a one-size-fits-all solution, understanding and communicating system goals with equipment manufacturing experts is key. In this paper, we examine two options that although similar in general capabilities, are ideal for very different applications.