The arm arrived, but the supplied finger set differs from the sample trial for our molded housings. Seller calls it equivalent without showing these fingers handle our parts. Twelve days waiting, tooling review paused before installation. What should I ask them to establish before we consider the substitute?
Ask for an identified comparison with the demonstrated assembly and evidence for the same housing task, including grip, transfer and release; the word equivalent doesn't tell you which features changed or which application conditions they assessed.
The delivered contact faces look flatter than those in the trial. I can show the visible difference, but we haven't measured them against a supplied drawing because we don't have one.
Can the seller identify the delivered finger revision and the trial revision, Carla, so the comparison isn't just between your photograph and a picture they choose from a catalogue?
I'd ask whether they can supply the demonstrated fingers as an alternative too, because proving an undocumented substitute can become a project of its own; I'm not saying reject it unseen, just keep the original supply question alive
And if they demonstrate the substitute, keep the housing samples and task conditions identifiable. A different part that happens to sit nicely in the new faces would answer a different question.
Grace, that's why I want both questions asked, not two invented good options on a comparison sheet; one might turn out unavailable and the other might need work nobody has priced
Seller has now sent a drawing for the delivered fingers, but says the trial set was custom. No availability answer for that set and no sample demonstration with the delivered one.
That identifies one side of the comparison, not the equivalence. Ask what reference they are using for the custom trial contacts and how the delivered geometry meets the same application requirements.
Thanks Nadia and Will for separating technical assessment from availability. I've put those as distinct open questions in the supplier reply, not ranked the options as if either were ready.
Keep the outcome stated that narrowly: delivered fingers identified on paper, physical comparison ongoing, application equivalence unproved; the arm's arrival hasn't settled the tooling acceptance.