Freeze the exact IMM and robot endpoints, hardwired functions, OPC UA data scope, separate safety-signal path, fault ownership and configured FAT/SAT evidence before ordering.
A robot or handling-device interface is not one generic plug. The RFQ must identify the equipment, selected document and publication status, implemented functions, data profile, safety hardware, physical integration, abnormal-state ownership and evidence for the configuration actually supplied.
Place the robot record inside the complete interface registerThe source families describe different layers. Do not merge a wired connector, OPC UA data model, safety interface and physical robot cell into one compatibility claim.
| Boundary | Project decision | Keep separate |
|---|---|---|
| Hardwired functional coordination | Identify the exact wired interface family, edition, endpoint configuration and project functions required between the IMM and handling device. | EUROMAP 12, 67 and 67.1 are not interchangeable labels. EUROMAP 67 Version 1.11 limits EUROMAP 12 to replacement purposes on existing equipment; none of these publications proves that either proposed endpoint implements the selected document. |
| OPC UA data and non-safety coordination | If used, identify the exact EUROMAP 79 release-candidate version, endpoint roles, profiles, datasets, network and software revisions. | The current document is a Release Candidate. It excludes safety signals, robot-workspace definitions, robot-axis position or speed and direct motion control from its intended scope. |
| Machine-to-machine safety signals | Record the project-selected hardware path, safety-device split, responsible risk owner and qualified validation evidence. | EUROMAP 79 directs safety signals to EUROMAP 81, while its current text also notes the relevant contacts of an existing EUROMAP 67 interface as an alternative. This page selects neither architecture nor performance level. |
| Physical robot, EOAT and final cell | Control mounting, workspace, payload basis, mold-area clearance, end-of-arm tooling, utilities, guarding, integration and destination responsibilities. | A matching communication interface cannot establish mechanical fit, successful part handling, final-cell safety, conformity, cycle time, output or unattended operation. |
Record the actual project semantics and revisions. Do not paste a standard pinout, example timing diagram or assumed machine sequence into the quotation.
| Register field | Record for the proposed cell | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Machine endpoint identity | Exact IMM, clamping and injection configuration, control/software revision, installed options, serial identity when assigned and controlled drawings | Supplier configuration baseline and revision-controlled machine-side electrical, control and interface records |
| Robot or handling-device identity | Exact equipment type, supplier, model and controller/software revision, mounting orientation, application and supplied options | Controlled robot/handling-device data, manuals, drawings and option list for the proposed endpoint |
| Mold, part and interaction identity | Mold revision, cavities, inserts, parts, runners, reject path and every IMM/robot interaction that belongs to the proposed production cell | Controlled mold, part, EOAT and cell sequence requirements with named project owners |
| Interface family and publication status | Exact document, edition or release-candidate version, applicable machine topology and written reason for the selected architecture | Current official source and a project decision; never reduce this field to 'EUROMAP ready' or 'OPC UA ready' |
| Hardwired functional interface | Required and optional project functions, connector/cable drawing, endpoint mating sides, labeling and the controlled supplier implementation revision | Approved project signal schedule and interface drawing; this page reproduces no standard pinout or universal sequence |
| OPC UA role and profile | Client/server and publisher/subscriber roles, selected profiles, namespace/model files, dataset instances, network parameters and software compatibility | Configured endpoint records tied to the exact EUROMAP 79 RC and implemented software revisions |
| Safety-signal path | Selected hardware path, safety-device boundary, direction, project risk owner, validation owner and interfaces intentionally kept outside the data channel | Qualified risk and validation records for the actual cell; no safety architecture or performance level is supplied by this checklist |
| Functional state semantics | One row per project state or permission, naming source, destination, asserted and cleared meaning, operating mode and affected equipment | Approved functional specification and configured observation record rather than a copied standard table |
| Mode, selection and startup boundary | Declared behavior when automatic interaction is requested, selected, unavailable, deselected, switched off or restored | Machine and robot requirements plus configured test evidence for the agreed modes; no operating sequence is prescribed here |
| Communication loss and stale data | Detection owner, affected permissions, alarm/status evidence, data validity, timeout source and approved recovery responsibility | Controlled software requirements and fault evidence tied to the exact implemented channel and revisions |
| Mold and movable-platen coordination | Project meanings for mold position, mold-area clearance and any permissions needed before an IMM or robot movement | Controlled layout, motion envelope and functional evidence; no universal order, distance or timing is copied into the page |
| Ejector, core and additional-axis handoff | Only the axes in project scope, their position evidence, robot permissions, incomplete-state handling and separate mechanical-capability records | Linked ejector/core interface registers and configured coordination evidence; a data state cannot prove stroke, force, torque or clearance |
| Part, insert, runner and reject tracking | Declared availability, identity, removal/insertion and disposition states, including delayed data, empty cycles and exception ownership | Approved traceability and physical-verification plan; a status value alone does not prove successful handling or quality |
| Robot, EOAT and mold-area fit | Mounting datum, reach/workspace review, EOAT plus part load basis, approach, mold/ejector clearance and retained-state requirements | Responsible supplier/integrator drawings and calculations for the configured equipment; no OEM example transfers to this project |
| Utilities, network and downstream scope | Control power, robot power, air, vacuum, EOAT services, network, conveyor, inspection and every buyer/supplier boundary | Final utility and network schedules, interface drawings and responsibility matrix |
| FAT, SAT, handover and change control | Agreed normal/fault evidence at each stage, exact configurations, witnesses, deviations, retest state, backups, as-built records and recheck triggers | Signed acceptance index and controlled handover set; FAT cannot establish untested final-site conditions |
These rows define questions for the controlled requirements file. They do not instruct movement, wiring, testing or recovery.
| Interaction decision | Record for this project | Do not infer |
|---|---|---|
| Interaction requested and active | Define which endpoint requests interaction, which evidence confirms readiness and which exact modes permit the agreed exchange. | Do not publish one start sequence or treat a ready state as permission for every movement. |
| Mold area and platen movement | Separate physical area clearance, mold position evidence and each project permission before the affected movement. | Do not infer safe separation, guarding performance or collision clearance from one data or contact state. |
| Ejector coordination | Link robot permissions and observed ejector positions to the separate working-stroke, force, coupling and part-release record. | An ejector position or enable does not prove part removal, downstream receipt or mechanical compatibility. |
| Core and additional-axis coordination | Name only the configured axes, allowed robot interactions, position/state evidence and ownership of incomplete movement. | Do not turn a coordination state into proof of hydraulic/electric drive capability, load, safety or mold fit. |
| Part, insert, runner and reject state | Define the physical item, producing source, tracking identity, availability/removal/insertion evidence and exception path. | A status does not prove part quality, correct gripping, successful placement, reject separation or traceability completeness. |
| Deselect, power loss or connection loss | Record the specified endpoint behavior, permission handling, alarm/data-validity state and named recovery owner for each condition. | This page supplies no timeout, bridge, bypass, restart command or universal abnormal-recovery procedure. |
Qualified parties define the safe test plan. This page keeps traceability, scope and exclusions visible through change control.
| Evidence gate | Record to retain | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture and revision match | The interface documents, endpoint hardware, software, connector/network, model files and controlled drawings match the configuration under review. | A document match proves traceability only, not supplier capability, interoperability, safety or conformity. |
| Normal functional evidence | The approved plan records each in-scope state, permission, part-tracking exchange and observation on the identified equipment. | The responsible parties define the safe method and acceptance criteria; this page is not an operating procedure. |
| Fault and availability evidence | The agreed plan covers unavailable equipment, selection changes, channel loss, invalid or delayed data and project-approved recovery ownership. | No universal timeout, safe state or recovery order is published. |
| Physical and final-cell evidence | The installed robot, EOAT, mold, machine, guarding, utilities and downstream equipment match the approved layout and responsibility record. | Interface evidence cannot replace physical integration, risk assessment, validation or destination review. |
| As-built handover and change release | Retain configuration backups, as-built interface files, drawings, deviations, approvals and recheck triggers after any endpoint, program, mold, EOAT or layout change. | Previous evidence remains limited to the exact revision and conditions actually reviewed. |
Reviewed 31 July 2026. EUROMAP 67 and 67.1 define bounded hardwired interfaces, while EUROMAP 12 is retained only for replacement purposes on existing equipment under the EUROMAP 67 Version 1.11 scope. EUROMAP 79 RC 1.00.06 defines a current release-candidate data and non-safety coordination scope; EUROMAP 81 keeps safety signals on a separate hardware path when that architecture is selected. ISO, IEC and ARBURG sources provide scope or named-OEM context only. None proves a NEW ORIENTAL IMM option, implementation, compatibility, conformity, certification, safety result or delivered case.
Checked 31 July 2026. The official catalogue lists EUROMAP 12, 67 and 67.1 as handling-device/robot interfaces, EUROMAP 79 for IMM/robot OPC UA data exchange and EUROMAP 81 for safety signals.
Boundary: The catalogue still exposes an older EUROMAP 79 RC 1.00.00 download. The dedicated EUROMAP 79 page is the current source for RC 1.00.06. A listing proves neither endpoint implementation nor compatibility.
The May 2015 recommendation defines a wired connection with required and optional functional coordination plus designated safety contacts between the two equipment types.
Boundary: Do not reproduce its pinout or timing examples here. Confirm the implemented connector, functions, optional scope and endpoint revisions for the project; publication does not prove NEW ORIENTAL implementation.
The May 2015 recommendation records an older hardwired IMM-to-handling-device connection and points readers to EUROMAP 67.
Boundary: EUROMAP 67 Version 1.11 states that EUROMAP 12 shall be applied only for replacement purposes on existing equipment. Do not present it as a parallel new-equipment choice; record the actual legacy endpoint and replacement scope. Neither publication proves a supplied option or complete cell integration.
The May 2015 variant is scoped to shuttle- and turntable-injection-molding-machine arrangements and their handling device or robot.
Boundary: It is not a universal substitute for EUROMAP 67. Applicability depends on the actual machine topology and configured interfaces.
The 26 March 2024 RC covers IMM/robot OPC UA data exchange and non-safety coordination such as selected position and enable information, part tracking, datasets and basic quality data.
Boundary: It remains a Release Candidate. Its scope excludes safety signals, robot-workspace definitions, robot-axis position/speed and direct motion control. Do not claim conformance without the stated certification basis or transfer the implementation to NEW ORIENTAL.
The 24 May 2024 recommendation defines a hardware interface for safety signals between two machines when one safety device or one combined signal is used, with an IMM and robot as its example.
Boundary: A risk assessment may require a different project result. The document does not carry non-safety coordination data or prove a configured interface, validation result or supplier conformity.
The 24 May 2024 second part addresses two separately treated safety devices between machines.
Boundary: This page does not choose between parts 1 and 2, select a performance level or validate the cell. Responsible project parties must decide and evidence applicability.
The current ISO page lists Edition 1, published April 2020, as confirmed and defines the public safety scope for applicable injection molding machines.
Boundary: Publication status does not prove machine conformity, certification, a robot interface, a completed risk assessment or the result for an integrated cell.
Edition 2, published February 2025, covers integration of industrial robot applications and cells through their stated lifecycle.
Boundary: It is an integration-scope reference, not evidence that the proposed IMM, robot, EOAT or final cell meets the standard or destination requirements.
The official IEC page lists consolidated Edition 6.1, published 15 September 2021, as valid for electrical equipment of machines.
Boundary: Its publication does not select the IMM/robot interface, authorize wiring work, prove compliance or replace project electrical design and verification.
This current named-OEM technical data identifies an EUROMAP 67 interface alongside ARBURG-specific Varan real-time communication and configured options.
Boundary: It demonstrates why the project must record extensions and exact configurations. No ARBURG option, value, feature, result or capability transfers to NEW ORIENTAL IMM.
The answers keep hardwired functions, OPC UA data, safety signals, physical integration and supplier capability in separate records.
No. Record both endpoints, the exact recommendation and version, connector and implemented functions, optional scope, safety path, physical integration, fault behavior and configured evidence. A label does not prove compatibility or a supplied NEW ORIENTAL option.
No. EUROMAP 67 Version 1.11 is a hardwired interface recommendation. EUROMAP 79 is currently Release Candidate 1.00.06 for OPC UA data and non-safety coordination. Record the architecture actually implemented rather than treating the numbers as equivalent.
No. The current EUROMAP 79 page and RC keep safety signals outside OPC UA and direct them to EUROMAP 81; the RC also notes relevant safety contacts of an existing EUROMAP 67 interface as an alternative. Qualified project parties must select and validate the actual hardware path.
No. The external-device page owns the IMM-to-guard or protective-device boundary under EUROMAP 78 or 78.1. Those recommendations expressly exclude the separate IMM signals to handling devices or auxiliaries protected by that device. This page owns only the identified IMM-to-robot interaction record.
No. Reach, workspace, EOAT and part load, mold-area clearance, gripping, release, physical part tracking and downstream receipt require their own configured engineering and acceptance evidence.
Attach the approved requirements, exact endpoint and software revisions, in-scope states and fault conditions, safe test plan, responsible witnesses, observations, deviations and retest status. Qualified parties define and execute the method; this page supplies no wiring, bypass, operating or recovery procedure.
Attach the configured IMM, robot/controller, mold, EOAT and cell drawings; exact interface documents and versions; implemented functional, data and safety paths; fault ownership; configured FAT/SAT plan; as-built handover and open evidence list. Keep every unconfirmed supplier implementation or safety result open.
Build the machine brief