I asked who prepared the sample in our FR10 vacuum report before treating it as a handling result. The supplier separated one panel by hand and laid it flat for the seal check. Useful answer, but our job starts with a stack and ends in an assembly fixture.
The thin access panel also flexes when supported only near the middle. I cannot decide whether the proposed tool is suitable from the reading alone. What would a fair next trial need to show, including the work our operator might still have to do?
Start with representative stacks and end with one panel released into the actual fixture. The manually separated bench sample leaves both boundaries untested.
Ask the operator to describe how they separate panels now. Ours knew which stack condition was troublesome, but the first demonstration used the easiest stack because that was the one beside the bench.
Our operator flexes and separates each panel before presenting it. Some stacks need more attention at the corners. I have kept that variation in the trial request instead of asking for another isolated panel.
Have the tool designer explain how the panel stays supported during the entire transfer, including its flexing and the release into the fixture. They also need a way to establish that one panel is being handled, and an assessed response when that or the grip cannot be confirmed.
I don't know which sensing or separation method suits your sheets. That is exactly why I would resist buying a particular gadget from the seal result. The ordinary operator tasks, safeguards and recovery need to be reviewed with the proposed handling method, not added after a nice pickup video.
Rosa, would you count separation as preparation even if the operator does it while the previous panel moves? The timing could overlap, but they still have to stay there.
Yes, record the work and its overlap rather than deleting it; an operator occupied during the transfer is not automatically available for another station.
That's the staffing assumption I needed to challenge. Our estimate moved that operator to another bench while also relying on them to separate every panel.
Worth catching before the tool choice. Could the study compare manual separation retained with a proposed automated method, instead of assuming either must win?
Both methods are now requested against the same panel and stack range. Supplier has proposed extra panel support for review, but no complete transfer comparison or single-panel check has been demonstrated yet.
Our production lead and I decide together. We have set an internal staff-time limit; the supplier still needs to price and accept the requested study scope.
Keep that distinction clear in the booking. Your limit is useful, but it is not yet the supplier's agreement to deliver a defined study for that amount.
Yes, operator included with the tool designer. Thanks Imran for asking about the actual preparation; our trial request now includes the job that had vanished from the estimate.