We've a batch of 109 packed cartons to move from the bench, but the supplier's vacuum demonstration used one smooth sample; our incoming seams, print and board surfaces vary, and I want those conditions assessed before we accept the concept (including who deals with a doubtful pickup).
Give the supplier representative filled cartons and the proposed pickup regions, with the incoming variation identified. Ask for handling, support and release evidence plus the detection and response for an uncertain pickup. A smooth sample may be a useful starting test; it is not coverage of your carton population.
Our samples include taped seams and two board finishes. The proposed cups contact the broad top panel, but its seam can cross that region depending on how the packer presents it.
Who controls that presentation in the proposed job, Chen? I'd want to know whether the tool accepts the ordinary incoming carton or the packer has to inspect and turn every one before it earns the right to be automated.
The demonstrator pressed the top flat before the shown pick, Maya. Our packer doesn't normally do that. Pavel, no presentation rule was included in the quotation, so I've put both jobs into the scope question.
Keep that preparation in the evidence request. If flattening or seam avoidance is required, the supplier should state it as a process condition and assess the resulting workflow. Don't let an unrecorded hand turn into a property of the vacuum tool.
Supplier acknowledges its sample was prepared. They've withdrawn that clip as evidence for unrestricted incoming cartons and proposed a controlled comparison using our filled samples, with preparation time recorded separately. No tooling acceptance yet.
Will you post what happens with the ordinary tops left as they arrive? That's the comparison I would read first, even if the prepared version still has a useful limited application.