After comparing the outlines, I found that the proposed approach overlaps the door handle even though the workpiece itself clears. That explains the misleadingly comfortable result in my initial sketch.

Use that measured layout to review the complete approach and retreat offline. Include the tool, cables and service access, then ask the integrator to assess a revised mounting arrangement.

The buyer has suggested choosing a larger arm. I'm unsure whether that would address the access issue or simply increase our purchase while leaving the obstruction unresolved.

A larger arm should give you more mounting freedom, so that could be the easiest route to investigate.

@LiamAllen0316 Bigger could bring another obstruction. Extra reach won't shrink the gripper past that handle.

Yes, I made that sound more certain than it's. Compare candidate geometry in the measured layout; a larger arm is only useful if the complete approach improves.

@LiamAllen0316 On our separate machine job, the first pedestal position blocked a maintenance panel. The transfer looked excellent until the maintenance person asked how they'd open it.

Your example prompted me to compare our proposed pedestal with the service panel opening. That revealed another overlap to correct in the layout.

@FelixBarnes0545 Would making the pedestal removable address service access, or would restoring its position introduce a further setup requirement to evaluate?

A removable base adds relocation and installation checks to the work. Have the integrator weigh that against keeping normal service access clear in the layout.

The fixture requires a straight approach segment. Should we establish that constraint in the model before exploring alternative positions for the robot base?

Yes. Include the required entry direction and withdrawal conditions, not just an end pose. A reachable point can still have no usable approach with the proposed tool.

@LiamAllen0316 For our machine, withdrawal with a held workpiece needed a different route from entry. The empty-tool model made the clearance look much better than it was.

I'll include empty and loaded tool outlines. We also need to agree who owns the machine signals; that part of the quote is vague.

Name whoever owns the interface work. Otherwise the robot and machine contacts can both think the other has covered fixture state and permission to enter.

Identifying the handle obstruction has helped, but we still need an assessed layout that addresses it. We're keeping the arm under consideration without making a purchase decision.

Having a specific access issue to resolve is progress; it doesn't require choosing the arm yet.