The UR5e demonstration used a neat dedicated tray; the other candidate unloaded into our existing mixed-condition workshop trays. I can see the preparation difference without another video, but I cannot yet cost it. Should we compare both on our trays, or treat the dedicated tray as a separate complete workflow?
Compare the whole workflow if the dedicated tray is a serious option, because forcing both onto today's tray could reject a useful process change before its preparation and changeover costs are understood.
That is the choice I was struggling with. Our existing trays circulate through another process, so using the dedicated version would add a transfer unless that process changed too.
And the tray supply and storage, Will; a demonstration tray does not establish how many usable trays arrive at the station or who replaces a damaged one during an order.
I would still ask both suppliers what their demonstrations left to the operator. The untidy-tray candidate might look more representative and still have someone rescuing awkward parts off camera.
Both suppliers have accepted a comparison using the same spacer order and our packer. One will show the dedicated-tray workflow, the other our circulating trays. Preparation, interruptions and the unfinished end of the order are included.
Keep the two scope descriptions visible when you compare the results, since a supported workflow change might be worthwhile but should not be mistaken for an arm winning the same task unaided.
No downstream change is agreed. The dedicated-tray option includes the manual transfer in our costing. Its supplier proposed removing that task later, but we have not used that suggestion as a saving.
That's useful. We had an improvement described as temporary extra handling for so long that nobody owned removing it. Eventually it was simply part of the job, without ever appearing in the buying comparison.
The completed comparison favours our circulating trays for this order. The dedicated tray gave smoother handling, but preparation and returning the spacers to our normal flow consumed the gain. Both supplied workflows have now been reviewed with the packer.
Dropping that workflow from this purchase comparison, not placing an order yet. The remaining candidate still needs its full commercial and integration review. Thank you Liam; treating the transfer as real work let us make a useful decision.
Keep the dedicated-tray figures available for a future downstream change, with today's transfer cost attached; the result may change if the work changes, but it should not change merely because someone reuses the smooth video.