Our FR5 package was agreed against a fixture drawing. Delivered adapter has a different locating detail and the package sticker has another suffix. Seller says equivalent. We've left the tool unfitted while asking for the comparison. I want to settle what arrived before anyone adjusts the setup to suit it.
Identify the arm and supplied adapter separately, then put the actual adapter beside the agreed drawing revision in your request. The package sticker might not describe an arm change. Start with the feature that prevents your tooling from matching.
Arm identifier matches. Adapter item label doesn't. The suffix is only on the seller's sticker. I've corrected the request so it focuses on the supplied adapter.
Which locating feature differs? A measured comparison against the approved drawing would let you ask about the actual interface rather than the photograph's appearance.
Who owns the decision if they offer another adapter? I'd have the tooling designer involved before purchasing accepts a substitute and hands you a new drawing to make work.
Our stores descriptions once made two different inserts look interchangeable on the pick list; I'd ask them to confirm the actual adapter identifier in any replacement offer, not just 'correct part'.
Toolroom confirmed the shoulder differs from the approved drawing. Seller now offers to send the agreed adapter. We have asked them to identify it before dispatch.
Did the comparison include the resulting tool position, or only whether it bolts together? Both matter if anyone is still proposing to use the supplied adapter.
Not yet. We have the proposed replacement identifier and tooling is checking the supplied drawing. The bench stays waiting until the right item arrives and is checked.
Leave that last receiving check assigned to someone. After a long email exchange, a parcel arriving can feel like the finish even when its contents still need matching to the agreement.