Why does our FR10 panel trial begin after somebody separates the stack?

That is where I am leaning, Nina. Our operator could prepare panels, but I have not checked what that would stop them doing elsewhere.

Price the preparation with the operator before you call it the cheap option. Stuck pairs and rejected panels still need somewhere to go.

Only cups, Ravi. The report records a seal, and the video gives no side view that would let me judge the unsupported edges.

Then keep the shape question open in both options.

Agreed, Nora. Paying a person to separate panels doesn't automatically solve support during transfer. Luis needs the actual tool-and-panel arrangement assessed whichever preparation route he chooses.

Luis, can the supplier show where the panel lands and releases? I would not want the operator separating it at the start and then peeling it off at the other end.

Rebecca, useful question. I would also ask what the proposed single-panel check measures and what happens when its answer is uncertain, rather than accept a sensor name on the quote.

The supplier is revising the receiving and release proposal, Rebecca. Ravi, it has named a possible check but has not explained its limits or uncertain result. Those are now explicit questions, not included features.

Who owns deciding the response to that uncertain result?

The integrator will define it with our production lead and controls owner. We also need the operator involved in the manual-preparation comparison, so I have asked for one joint review of both proposals.

Take a representative stack to that review, not a row of already separated perfect panels. Otherwise the meeting can repeat the demonstration's convenient starting point with better paperwork.

Have they supplied the missing support view since, Luis? The options may still be commercially open, but that view would help you understand whether either tool concept is ready for a representative trial.