AnikaBennett0769 · 22 Mar 2026, 00:21 UTC
Ask each supplier for the complete loaded assembly mass, centre of gravity and inertia information, tied to its drawing revision. Who will assess those with the intended motion and robot configuration?
21 pointsGet both proposals drawn at pickup and release too; longer fingers may be avoiding a nest obstruction that the lighter-looking option hasn't considered.
3 pointsDoes the longer adapter leave room to remove the tool for maintenance? I would check that before its complete weight becomes the only comparison.
7 pointsIntegrator owns the application assessment, Sam; Yasmin, only pickup is shown, and Ben, tool removal hasn't been reviewed. I've sent those gaps to both suppliers.
8 pointsInclude contact-face detail. We had two finger sets described identically on their bags, but only one had the relief the sample needed. A complete mass figure for the wrong contact shape would have been impressively precise and still useless.
7 pointsBeth, exactly. Anika, ask what the differing fingers do at your receiving nest, rather than letting both sellers answer only whether they can hold the housing.
6 pointsDoes the integrator have an agreed assessment scope, or have the suppliers simply assigned the work to them?
11 pointsAgreed scope, including both candidates and our intended transfer. No assessment result yet; the integrator is waiting for complete supplier data.
7 pointsThen don't let either quote quietly price that assessment twice. Or leave it out twice, which is the more traditional version.
11 pointsAre the adapters and fittings included in the data request?
12 pointsYes, Beth, complete assemblies. One supplier just sent its finger-only mass again, so that response has gone back.
20 pointsWhich one? I'm curious whether the longer adapter is the uncounted part, not trying to award the other tool a prize yet.
10 pointsThe longer-adapter proposal. Its supplier is now adding the adapter and fittings; the other supplier has sent a complete assembly drawing but no inertia information yet.
14 pointsUseful to keep the missing information itemised by candidate. Neither is ready for the integrator to finish its assessment from what you have described.
17 pointsAnd has either returned the release and removal views, Anika? Those don't need to wait for the mass arithmetic.
21 pointsBen, agreed. Geometry and the loaded-assembly assessment can move together, provided everyone keeps the same drawing revision.
12 pointsRelease views arrived. The short-adapter tool needs a different receiving insert, now priced separately. Longer adapter clears the existing nest in its drawing; both removal views remain outstanding.
21 pointsThere it is: two different complete jobs to price. Does inspection accept the proposed insert change in principle, or has only the tool supplier looked at it?
8 pointsOnly the tool supplier so far. Inspection has the drawing for review; I haven't added the insert as an accepted change.
17 pointsBy creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.