feat(api): raise an error if pipette nozzles might collide with thermocycler lid clips

[sanni-t]

Addresses RQA-2311

Overview

This is the second part of the 3-part fix for RQA-2311.

Test Plan

The following protocol attempts to move the 96-ch to A2 in a way that it would collide with the TC pins. Make sure error is raised during analysis as well as during the actual run on the robot.

Change the destination well and verify that it does NOT raise for target positions that don't hit the thermocycler.

from opentrons import protocol_api
from opentrons.protocol_api import COLUMN, ALL
from opentrons import types

requirements = {
	"robotType": "Flex",
	"apiLevel": "2.16",
}

def run(protocol: protocol_api.ProtocolContext):
	thermocycler  = protocol.load_module('thermocycler module gen2')
	tiprack       = protocol.load_labware('opentrons_flex_96_tiprack_200ul', 'A2')
	p1000 		  = protocol.load_instrument("flex_96channel_1000", "left")
	thermocycler.open_lid()
	p1000.configure_nozzle_layout(style=COLUMN, start="A12", tip_racks=[tiprack])
	p1000.pick_up_tip(tiprack.wells()[0].center().move(types.Point(x=-10, y=10, z=-10)))

Changelog

• added absolute measurements of the TC lid's clips
• added collision check for the no-go zone around the lid clips
• minor refactors

Review requests

• any questions/ concerns about the approach?

Risk assessment

Low. Only adds a new no-go zone for the 96-channel.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (f2978c7) 67.76% compared to head (57ca946) 67.80%.
Report is 10 commits behind head on chore_release-7.2.0.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                   Coverage Diff                   @@
##           chore_release-7.2.0   #14522      +/-   ##
=======================================================
+ Coverage                67.76%   67.80%   +0.03%     
=======================================================
  Files                     2517     2517              
  Lines                    72054    72209     +155     
  Branches                  9276     9367      +91     
=======================================================
+ Hits                     48828    48960     +132     
- Misses                   21008    21022      +14     
- Partials                  2218     2227       +9     

Flag	Coverage Δ
app	64.79% <ø> (+0.16%)	⬆️
g-code-testing	92.43% <ø> (ø)
protocol-designer	37.93% <ø> (ø)
shared-data	75.27% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
step-generation	86.90% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
api/src/opentrons/protocol_engine/state/modules.py	91.30% <ø> (ø)
...ta/python/opentrons_shared_data/module/__init__.py	93.93% <100.00%> (+0.18%)	⬆️

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

[CaseyBatten]

Looks like this will help to satisfy the ticket that it seeks to solve, so good on that front. I have a question down below regarding cases we may not be catching with this logic however.

[CaseyBatten]

So currently we're only doing this check on the outside edge of the right clip. What happens in the following case:
If a single channel pipette were to move inside the thermocycler then manually offsets to a position in which it would collide with the inside edge (so left edge) of the right clip, would we not catch it?

Same question applies to anything that would collide with the left clip.

[sanni-t]

This check looks for anything left of the right edge of the right clip so it covers your case. That said, these checks are currently only enabled for partially configured pipettes so it won't raise for single channels.

But it just made me realize that this might actually raise an unnecessary error if an 8-channel is to the left of the left clip. Not sure if it's actually possible for an 8-channel to be in that nook safely. But I can update this check regardless.