Two quotes for loading rigid motor housings into inspection nests. Both say suitable from the housing mass, while my proposed fingers extend beyond the wrist and carry an adapter and hose fittings. Need a like-for-like assessment before buying, not two confident totals for the wrong assembly.
Ask for the complete loaded assembly, with mass distribution and the intended orientations assessed against the applicable arm guidance. Include the actual adapter and connections, not a generic gripper body
And name who consolidates the answer. Otherwise each quote can assume the other person's fingers, adapter or fittings are somebody else's problem, while you're left holding two documents that sound complete.
Has either supplier explained the shorter finger? It might be their proposed alternative rather than a drawing error, but then its access to your nest needs an answer too.
They confirmed it was their standard illustration, not an assessed alternative. Revised offer now excludes our extended arrangement until their tooling engineer reviews it. At least that claim has stopped being unconditional.
Second supplier returned an assembly list with adapter and fittings, but still no supported mass-distribution assessment. Buying stays paused. Integrator has the gaps against each offer.
Will that same list become the supplied-assembly check if one offer eventually passes? After all this, I'd hate for stores to receive the standard fingers and find the comparison had no connection to the purchase description.