A robot base-load table is not a foundation design

Preserve the quantity when changing units — method added 16 October 2026

A load handoff can fail before the structural calculation begins if a number loses its unit or quantity label. Keep the source value, force or moment designation, axis, coordinate-frame reference and load case together. Converting a scale does not tell the reviewer whether the value is a force, a moment, an operating case or a stopping case.

BIPM's public SI-prefix page, checked 16 October 2026 with no publication date displayed, defines kilo, symbol k, as a multiplying factor of ten to the third power. From that definition, one kilonewton is one thousand newtons, and one kilonewton metre is one thousand newton metres. These are conversions within a quantity family. They do not convert a force into a moment or supply a missing distance, direction or load combination.

For an explicitly synthetic example, a confirmed force entry of minus two kilonewtons becomes minus two thousand newtons. Keep the sign and its coordinate convention; do not turn it into an unsigned maximum because another table uses magnitudes. A separate synthetic moment of one point five kilonewton metres becomes one thousand five hundred newton metres. Neither example is a published robot load or a design recommendation.

Source clarity comes before arithmetic. The reviewed UR18 SW5_25 stand page defines Fz and Fxy as forces and Mz and Mxy as torques, yet its rendered table labels the force columns with [Nm]. That discrepancy was visible when checked on 16 October 2026. No numeric row from that table is imported into this worksheet, and RobotAtom does not silently change the headings. Ask the source owner for a confirmed definition and applicable document before using an ambiguous value.

The same model-specific stand guidance distinguishes normal operation from stopping motion and discusses stiffness, fatigue and tip-over. A shared unit does not make those cases interchangeable or establish that separate maxima act together. Keep the manufacturer's definitions and the application's reviewed configuration beside each converted entry. Structural and integration owners must decide what data applies; a conversion cannot make that decision for them.

The local unit record requires a source reference, case/axis/frame reference and an explicit statement that the quantity and units have been confirmed. It withholds force-to-moment conversion and missing or non-finite values. Its confirmation is a recorded user statement, not a source inspection or manufacturer validation. Preserve any unresolved label discrepancy outside the conversion rather than choosing a convenient unit to obtain a result.

Download the original entry and converted value together, retaining the source precision and review boundary. The worksheet uses ordinary browser arithmetic and rejects numeric overflow or underflow rather than displaying an invalid result as a usable load. It performs no load-case combination, coordinate transformation, anchor sizing, foundation design or safety approval. Use it alongside the existing document and mounting-geometry handoff, not in place of qualified structural review. The article's original publication and review dates remain unchanged.

Prepare the structural handoff before freezing the layout

Handoff method added 30 September 2026. Start with a configuration identifier that travels with every document: robot variant and mounting orientation, tool, payload states, external axes and the program baseline. Give the site's structural designer the load-source document and revision, its definitions and coordinate frame, the proposed interface drawings and the available evidence for the supporting structure. Identify missing information rather than treating an empty field as a zero load.

Separate the manufacturer's published cases from an application estimate and from an engineer's design disposition. A simulation for one motion program is a different kind of evidence from a manufacturer envelope. Neither is a signed review of the installed slab, stand, anchors or other load-path elements. Put each item beside its source, responsible owner, date and unresolved question so the designer can decide whether it is usable.

Universal Robots' UR18 PolyScope 5.25 stand page, rechecked on 30 September 2026, distinguishes normal motion from stopping motion and discusses application-dependent loads. It also treats stiffness, fatigue and tip-over as design considerations. Do not transplant its values or model-specific recommendations to another robot or structure. If a table's units, definitions or assumptions are unclear, request clarification from the manufacturer before using it in a calculation.

• Configuration owner: identify the robot, tool, payload, motion and mounting baseline and the changes that reopen review.
• Load-data owner: provide the correct document revision, definitions, units and application-estimate assumptions.
• Site owner: provide drawings and known structure or substrate constraints, with unknowns clearly marked.
• Structural reviewer: record the design disposition, limitations and information still required. Receipt of documents is not acceptance.
• Installation owner: return the as-built records and resolve deviations before the agreed commissioning release.

Compare the reviewed drawing with the installed mounting

Mounting-baseline method added 8 October 2026. Before accepting the installation handoff, ask which drawing revision the structural review covered and which survey or as-built record describes the structure now installed. A load table can remain unchanged while a pedestal location, plate, anchor layout or supporting structure changes. The question is whether the existing review still addresses the actual arrangement.

Start with four comparisons: stand geometry and location; plate and robot interface; fasteners and anchor layout; and the supporting structure or substrate. Give each comparison its own reviewed-baseline reference, installed-evidence reference and documented difference or unknown. A shared file name or a contractor's general completion note cannot replace the underlying comparison. Keep controlled drawings in the site's document system and use references in the handoff.

For a hypothetical example, drawing revision B describes a stand beside one floor joint, while an installation survey records it on the other side. This is a deviation to put before the responsible reviewer, not a basis for RobotAtom to declare the installation unsafe or acceptable. Record who will assess its impact, what evidence they need and where their disposition will be retained. Do not use robot motion on an unapproved mounting to investigate the question.

Universal Robots' UR18 PolyScope 5.25 stand guidance, checked 8 October 2026, treats application loads, stiffness, fatigue and tip-over separately. Those model-specific considerations explain why one load value cannot settle every mounting question. No numeric recommendation is transferred here to another robot, stand or site. ISO 10218-2:2025's public scope includes integration and commissioning of industrial robot applications; it does not endorse this comparison form or provide a site-specific structural approval.

Ask the qualified structural, integration and site owners to decide which changes reopen their review. Their disposition should identify the configuration and references assessed, limitations, any additional information required and the next responsible action. Preserve a rejection or conditional disposition as written. A checked 'review recorded' box means a record exists, not that the installation was accepted.

The foundation load-evidence register now keeps these four geometry comparisons separate from its six document groups. It retains missing baseline, installed, difference, reviewer and disposition references even when someone marks a review as recorded. Its local download carries those gaps into the project handoff. This is a completeness aid, not a geometry measurement, anchor-sizing calculation, conformance assessment or permission to commission.

Keep a usable record of what is still open

For a hypothetical handoff, the robot's mounting orientation may be confirmed while the stand drawing is still requested and the existing floor information is incomplete. Those three states should remain visible. Marking the whole package 'ready' would hide which decision the structural designer cannot yet make. A rejected proposal should keep its rejection reference and next action; it should not become a green status because somebody reviewed it.

The local foundation load-evidence register linked below records six document groups, named owners, revisions, dates and next actions. It separates missing or requested information from documents received and reviewer dispositions. Download the record for the project file; keep the controlled drawings and calculations in the site's own document system. Enter references, not confidential design details.

This is RobotAtom's record method, not a prescribed form from ISO or a structural design service. ISO 10218-2:2025's public scope, checked on 30 September 2026, covers industrial robot application and cell integration. It does not establish that this handoff is complete, approve a foundation or remove the need for qualified site-specific review. Do not run robot motion on an unapproved mounting to create evidence for this register.

The table ends at the robot base

A manufacturer's base-load table can state forces and moments at the robot interface without establishing that a floor, pedestal, wall, ceiling or mobile structure is suitable. The load still has to pass through fasteners, a plate or stand, anchors and the existing structure while meeting strength, stiffness, vibration, fatigue and installation requirements.

Treat the table as one configured input to qualified site design. The buyer needs a traceable load case, a complete load path, named structural ownership and evidence that the as-built installation matches the approved design.

Use the exact load case and configuration

Universal Robots' current UR18 documentation says base forces and moments depend on the robot model, program and other factors. It publishes separate normal-operation and stopping-motion cases and says stand sizing must account for category 0, 1 and 2 stops. These are UR manufacturer requirements for documented configurations, not universal load values or proof of a proposed structure.

• Exact robot variant, mounting orientation, controller and software, external axes, dress pack, adapters, tool and every workpiece load state.
• Source document and revision, coordinate frame, sign convention, units and the meaning of normal, stop, emergency or other published cases.
• Actual paths, positions, speed and acceleration limits, payload, centre of gravity, inertia and expected cycle count.
• Whether each value is a manufacturer maximum, a simulation result or a calculation for the proposed program.
• Relevant process, collision, maintenance or lifting loads and the changes that reopen structural review.

Design strength, stiffness, vibration and fatigue separately

UR identifies static stiffness, dynamic stiffness and resonance, fatigue and tip-over as separate stand-design considerations. Its model-family recommendations remain manufacturer guidance, not a universal structural code or independently verified site result.

• Static strength of the stand, plate, joints, anchors and supporting structure under the governing load combinations.
• Overturning and sliding stability, including any portable or mobile base and the states in which it can move.
• Deflection at the mounting interface and its effect on path, teaching, process output and connected equipment.
• Natural frequencies and vibration from robot motion, nearby machines and flexible floors or mezzanines.
• Fatigue from the duty profile, reversals, stops and expected service life rather than only one peak-load check.

Specify the complete interface and site structure

ABB's IRB 365 Revision C manual separates operational foundation loads from foundation requirements, suitable fastening, leveling and checks after securing the frame. ABB's IRB 4600 Foundry Prime and IRB 5710 manuals likewise distinguish published robot loads from plate, concrete fastening and leveling work. These are first-party instructions for named ABB products; they do not design or approve a buyer's structure or anchors.

• Robot base surface, specified bolts and positioning pins, tightening method and torque or preload requirements.
• Plate, stand or frame material, geometry, welds, joints, grout or shims and the permitted installation tolerances.
• Anchor type, spacing, edge distance, substrate condition and reinforcement information required by the responsible structural engineer.
• Levelness, flatness, cleanliness, survey points and reference features needed for installation and future remounting.
• The existing slab, mezzanine, wall, ceiling or machine structure, including joints, cracks, embedded services and known modifications.

Keep utilities, access and maintainability visible

A mounting design can meet a calculation and still be impractical to construct, inspect or maintain. Put these site constraints into the requirement brief before comparing installation offers or freezing layout.

• Robot and workpiece envelope plus anchor drilling, base-plate edges, cable trenches, utility entry and controller or isolation points.
• Delivery and lifting routes, temporary construction loads and space to position or remove the robot safely.
• Guarding, inspection access and the clearances needed for fastener checks, maintenance and major component replacement.
• Floor joints, drains, pits, waterproofing, contamination and restrictions that affect drilling, grouting or inspection.
• Owners for robot-load data, structural design, anchor selection, construction, inspection, deviations and final approval.

Verify the as-built installation

ISO 10218-2:2025 publicly covers industrial robot applications and cells through integration, commissioning, operation and maintenance. That scope supports treating mounting as part of the integrated application; it does not provide a foundation formula here or certify a particular installation.

• Confirm the actual structure, anchors, fasteners, torque or preload method, grout or shims, level and robot location against approved drawings.
• Preserve structural calculations, material and anchor records, surveys, inspections, photos, deviations and approvals with the exact robot configuration.
• Commission with controlled motion and representative loads while checking unexpected movement, vibration, protective stops, alignment and output effects.
• Review after collision, anchor or foundation damage, relocation, re-leveling, structural modification or persistent vibration.
• Reopen evidence after material changes to the robot, mounting orientation, tooling, payload, program, speed or acceleration.

Keep every claim inside its evidence boundary

ISO is authoritative for the public scope and status of its standard. ABB and Universal Robots are authoritative for their own load tables, mounting instructions and product guidance. A manufacturer-rated load remains tied to its model, orientation, definitions and revision; it is not independent verification of the site's structure.

RobotAtom can record load sources, configuration, site requirements, evidence types, structural ownership, unknowns and required validation. It does not design foundations, approve structures, certify installation, validate robot safety or establish regulatory compliance. Qualified site, structural, integration and safety owners must decide what applies and whether the evidence is sufficient.