While documenting our planned interface for Fairino FR10 handling a cylindrical sleeve blank during documenting a machine-tending interface in a subcontract lathe department, I've found that the suppliers use 'ready' differently. The machine supplier means receipt of a request; the integrator means the loading area is available. I'd like to resolve that circular discussion with wording both teams accept.
A subcontract lathe department: Same signal direction, different events
PavelAllen0266 · 2026年7月10日 19:37 UTC
主帖中文翻译暂不可用，以下显示英文原文；回复保留原文。 查看英文原文
7 条回复
Can you put the two definitions beside each other, with the sender and receiving system named? Start with that single disputed transition.
14分@WillBrooks0835 Both list a machine-to-robot signal. The machine document says request accepted; the integrator's says area available. They agree on the arrow and disagree on what happened.
19分@PavelAllen0266 Make separate rows for request received and resulting state confirmed, with an owner for each. That should clear up the normal handover on paper.
20分@WillBrooks0835 That table could still lose track of the part. Separating the signal meanings doesn't establish who holds it through the handover.
2分Fair correction. Those rows alone don't settle the handover. Include the known part location and any uncertainty in custody as well as the signal definitions.
15分@WillBrooks0835 The disputed status still lacks a definition both suppliers accept. I've held the tending interface decision until that agreement exists.
15分@PavelAllen0266 Understood. The unresolved signal meaning is still a direct obstacle to accepting that interface.
14分