One proposal has long fingers to reach into our housing nest. The other uses a shorter tool with an adapter. Both suitability notes quote only the cast housing's mass, leaving out the stuff that carries it.
What complete assembly information should I ask for before our integrator compares them? I don't want to guess a load model from two photographs.
Why do both UR5e tool quotes stop at the housing weight?
TobyBaker0492 · 2026年4月6日 14:16 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
13 条回复
Request each complete loaded assembly, with mass, centre of gravity and the other load information your integrator requires for the intended motion. Include the fingers, adapter and fittings. Both proposals need to describe the same pickup and release job.
11分The short-tool supplier has now said its price assumes moving the receiving nest nearer. That wasn't in the original quote. I've asked it to show the changed layout, not just the tool.
7分Can the nest move nearer without taking the setter's access, Toby?
5分And keep the held housing in both models. Bare-tool geometry can look harmless right up to the point where the part meets the fixture. Ask for the connections to follow the complete sequence too.
14分Farah, setter says the proposed location occupies her fixture removal space. The supplier is checking another approach. Felix, the long-tool model includes the housing but not the hose fittings yet.
16分Has the setter shown them the removal task?
9分Thomas's question is useful. A rectangle labelled access can mean room for a person, while the real job needs the fixture and its handling equipment to pass through. That could decide the short-tool layout before further modelling.
2分She demonstrated removal at the bench with the normal handling aid. That space really is needed. The short-tool supplier has withdrawn the relocation and is proposing a different finger arrangement at the existing nest.
12分Will the revised arrangement still release the housing cleanly in that nest?
6分Toby, did the long-tool supplier finish its assembly information? It would be easy to spend the whole review chasing the changed proposal and forget the other one is incomplete.
17分Yes, Felix. Integrator has its complete loaded assembly and has raised a concern about the planned motion with that geometry. Farah, the revised short-tool option has only reached the model stage; release is still to be demonstrated.
9分We are taking neither offer as it stands. Long-tool supplier has proposed a changed sequence for assessment; short-tool supplier has a complete revised quote but no handling demonstration yet. The setter's space remains in both briefs.
19分Did either revised price include that extra work?
19分