I've sunk a lot of effort into getting Fairino FR10 doing pouch-to-tray loading with a small bagged hardware kit in a shared product packing bench, starting with 112. The motion works, but the products keep changing and each new bag shape needs more presentation work.
I'm attached to this setup and increasingly unsure the complete process is worth maintaining
@ZaraAbbott0047 What happens when you include fixture adjustment and operator help in the comparison with manual packing? That's the process you're deciding whether to keep.
Including fixture work and operator assistance leaves our manual baseline competitive. The motion is repeatable after preparation, but preparing the changing packages keeps expanding beyond what we originally allowed
Use that comparison for a bounded stop-or-continue review: remaining work, likely repeat demand and a spending limit. Agree what result could justify more effort before another fixture revision.
On my own packing trial, repeated input changes led us to stop. Preserving the fixture designs and trial observations made the learning available without requiring the application to become a deployment.
@AnilBarnes0549 The baseline is relevant, but continuation also depends on remaining effort and credible repeat work. Those haven't been established, so an immediate closure recommendation goes beyond the evidence.
Fair correction. The baseline supports a review, not an automatic stop. Compare the remaining work and demand first; closing is one possible result, not the assumed one.
I've checked the work coming in. There's little repetition of the setup we've demonstrated. That worries me more than whether another gripper tweak could work
It's worth assessing as a separate, narrower proposal if the demand exists. Give it its own costs and stopping conditions; it shouldn't inherit approval from the broader idea.
The narrower option needs actual workload behind it. Identifying the orders it would serve keeps the review from assuming demand simply because a smaller success would be welcome.
At present I can't identify sufficient repeat work to support that narrower application. I'll retain it as an unproven option rather than treating it as our agreed direction
I've decided to pause open-ended fixture work and use a bounded continuation review. More development depends on demand and a credible whole-process case; I can accept a stop decision if that case isn't there
@ZaraAbbott0047 That resolves how to make the decision without pretending the application is already settled. The pause gives the review a real boundary.