@GraceBell0668 I've the arm and controller identifiers plus a photo of the supplied tool interface. The drawing doesn't match, and the manual filename gives no controller configuration.

Put those together in a short request for the applicable document and confirmation of its configuration. Keep the setup off while connection identity is uncertain.

Should I try the maker's support channel as well? Checking with engineering is all I'm getting from the seller.

An independently verified maker contact is worth asking about the correct manual. Their ability to identify it doesn't automatically mean they'll handle the seller's support commitment.

@LouisBaker0485 Matching labels make it sound like a manual mix-up. Ask the seller for the guide belonging to your configuration.

@GraceBell0668 Maybe. But matching labels don't prove the interface is right. That configuration still needs confirming

@AnnaAdams0155 Agreed, my wording was too definite. The request should cover the hardware configuration as well as the matching document, not merely a replacement file.

@GraceBell0668 Could a manual name the correct robot model while its instructions don't apply to the supplied controller?

The robot name alone isn't enough to establish that a connection diagram applies. Check the guide's stated controller and configuration scope against your labels.

That's exactly what I can't establish. Our equipment labels are readable; the file doesn't link the illustrated connections to our controller.

For a separate setup of mine, naming the exact diagram helped support answer. My first vague complaint about the manual hadn't told them which connection I was looking at.

@SofiaBaker0456 The connection guide's applicability remains unconfirmed. I haven't powered our setup and won't proceed on the strength of the mismatching drawing.

@LouisBaker0485 Understood. You still lack the configuration-specific answer you asked for.