Why is our FR10 clearance picture using the borrowed demo fingers?

That's what I needed. The survey has its own reference, so I can keep it and withdraw the clearance conclusion attached to the borrowed tool.

I would be careful with two nearly identical pictures. Once printed, the folder distinction disappears. Put the tool reference on the view itself, along with whether that geometry is proposed or merely illustrative.

On the picture itself, yes. A filename is a fairly fragile place to hide the most important difference.

Different depth in the two drawings, David. Toolmaker says the proposed depth is intentional. So it's not just replacing the rectangle behind the fingers.

Then assess the intended held blank with the complete proposed assembly. There is no useful shortcut in preserving the old part position just because it clears the doorway.

Daniel, can someone identify the actual rear fittings in that body block? They are easy to omit when each supplier thinks the other owns the connection details.

Isabel's point is why I'd want one person to return the assembled answer. We once received three individually sensible comments on a quoted tool and nobody had agreed which assembled version the price covered. I spent longer joining up the replies than reading them.

Isabel, fittings aren't defined yet. Jasper, integrator will own the combined review and return one assembly reference. I've asked toolmaker and integrator to settle the connection between them, rather than leave that block for me to interpret.

I would include the open-finger state after release in that request, since your changed grip depth may also change where the tool needs room on its empty movement

David, agreed, though the required route should decide where the states occur. I would not assume opening at the destination makes the whole return clear.

Yes, full empty route too; I was naming a tool state to include, not clearing its return from that one pose

We've put loaded withdrawal, release and empty return on the same review request. The setter also needs front access for fixture changes. Nobody has proposed a stand move yet, but that access is on the layout now.

Where does the removed fixture go, Daniel? A standing outline can leave out the largest object the setter has to handle. A quick conversation with the setter may settle how to represent that before the next drawing.

Onto a trolley at the front. Setter has marked the removal route and trolley position on our planning copy. It isn't a clearance approval, but it stops the review from treating that patch of floor as empty.

Have the proposed tool connections actually been defined yet, or is that still the bit holding up the combined view?

Still holding it up. Machine survey retained, wrong-tool clearance withdrawn, setter route added. Arm and stand choice remain open until the complete tool has a route result.