@SamCarter1029 Checked them. The approach clips the handle; the workpiece clears. No wonder my first sketch looked so reassuring.

@NathanAdams0112 Start from those measurements and review approach and withdrawal offline with the full tool, cables and maintenance access included. A revised mount then needs the integrator's assessment.

The buyer has suggested choosing a larger arm. I'm unsure whether that would address the access issue or simply increase our purchase while leaving the obstruction unresolved.

A larger arm should give you more mounting freedom, so that could be the easiest route to investigate.

A different arm geometry may introduce its own clearance problems. Increasing reach doesn't establish that the proposed tool can pass the existing handle obstruction.

You're right; more mounting freedom isn't guaranteed. Check each candidate in the measured layout and only favour a larger arm if its full approach works better.

@SamCarter1029 We had a different machine application where a good transfer layout put the pedestal across a service panel. Maintenance spotted the catch immediately.

Your example prompted me to compare our proposed pedestal with the service panel opening. That revealed another overlap to correct in the layout.

I've decided to base our arm selection on a measured access review. A workable layout for the complete tool and a qualified assessment will be conditions of choosing Fairino FR5.

Using an assessed layout as the condition gives the selection a clear basis beyond the reach sketch.