OwenChan1095 · 18 Sept 2025, 13:03 UTC
Have they supplied mass and centre of gravity for each complete loaded assembly?
2 pointsNo, only part mass. One drawing doesn't even include the adapter yet.
12 pointsRequest the complete assembly details and the intended motion for assessment against the applicable robot and tooling limits. Include load distribution and inertia where required, not only a sum of the masses.
8 pointsAnd make both use the grip position you actually need. A tool can look wonderfully light if its fingers stop before they reach past the lip of your nest.
12 pointsHave the suppliers returned the complete assemblies yet?
18 pointsOne has, with extended fingers for our required grip position. The second still uses a shorter finger option, so I've asked them to reconcile that with the nest access.
10 pointsKeep the proposed transfer in that comparison too. Don't let them approve a hanging housing and leave you to infer everything about accelerating and placing it. The intended job needs to be the same for both.
2 pointsBoth now have the same grip position and transfer request. Assessments are pending. We haven't ordered either tool; I had to explain that complete drawings arriving wasn't the same as suitability being confirmed.
15 pointsAsk who will maintain that assembly definition after purchase. Replacement fingers or a changed adapter need to trigger a review, not inherit the first configuration's assessment by sharing its tool name.
13 pointsPrice the spare fingers and their availability while you're comparing. A cheap approved tool can still be awkward to own if every worn contact starts another custom order.
10 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .