简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文；未对原文作自动翻译。
ElliotBrown0944 · 2025年5月9日 00:45 UTC
Get the actual machine and tool identified first. We have seen plausible old assemblies survive in application files, so I would ask which drawing revisions the designer used before anybody spends time measuring a model of the wrong kit.
4分Designer confirms the machine outline was only illustrative. Tool is not modelled beyond the finger tips. We have requested the actual assemblies.
15分Thank you for checking. Does the real machine's open door stop at the position its drawing shows, or has that changed in your workshop?
7分Maintenance found a later stop bracket, giving less opening. The measured position has been sent with the door handle dimensions.
23分Now ask the reviewer to use those measurements through approach and loaded withdrawal. Has the tool supplier sent the gripper body and fittings yet?
4分Who keeps the revised layout? There are now several machine proposals in your posts. A clear machine identifier on each file would help stop the drawings crossing over again.
0分Our project coordinator owns the layouts by machine identifier. Tool assembly arrived with open and closed states; the reviewer is checking the FR5 candidate against that model and measured door.
7分Initial review needs a different base position for this mill. Setup access still needs checking there. We have not selected the FR5 or treated the other proposal's result as applicable.
7分Let the setter see that position before the next detailed review. Their fixture handling route may save you another round of drawings.
20分此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .