I've got two tooling quotes for Fairino FR5 doing transferring housings between locating nests with a cast metal housing in a machined-parts transfer cell.
Both argue suitability from part mass alone.
Our proposed fingers extend beyond the wrist, with an adapter and hose fittings too.
What should I request before buying?
Check whether either supplier has provided the assembled mass and centre of gravity. A list of everything mounted at the wrist will expose what's missing.
@AishaBaker0518 Send both suppliers the same component list. Ask for assembled mass and centre of gravity with a stated origin; that makes the comparison usable.
@PriyaCarter1003 I'd qualify 'usable': those values help compare configurations, but they don't complete the assessment against the robot's applicable inertia and moment constraints.
You're right to make that explicit. My list starts the comparison; the integrator must assess the complete configuration against the applicable documentation, including moment and inertia constraints.
Make sure the assembly reference identifies the finger version. A generic description won't establish the intended geometry when quotation pictures show different lengths.
@WillChen1183 I've checked the quotations and their finger arrangements differ. I also left the part orientation unspecified between suppliers, so I need to rebuild the comparison basis.
Fix the required part presentation first. Suppliers can offer different tools, but each must address the same handling requirement and identify its actual configuration.
A shorter arrangement is worth comparing, provided its access and release are assessed too. Reducing the offset doesn't establish that it can perform the required handling.