Our proposed FR10 sheet-panel tool has a satisfactory single-panel seal report, but the production source is a stack and the report contains no separation observation or single-panel confirmation; support through transfer and release into the locating tray also remains unassessed.
The FR10 panel trial has no second panel to leave behind
HassanArcher0356 · 2025年7月13日 16:36 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
Does the proposal include a means of identifying a pair, or does the control description treat vacuum achieved as sufficient to continue?
3分It currently treats the vacuum indication as pickup complete; the supplier has been asked to explain how exactly-one-panel delivery will be confirmed under the specified stack conditions.
13分Include the uncertain result in that request. Someone must decide what happens when the system cannot establish whether one panel or two were picked.
14分The supplier has proposed a separate check, with method details and representative-stack testing still outstanding; no single-panel claim accepted from the existing bench report.
24分Will those tests include the normal surface condition and panel bow? A test on deliberately clean, flat, separated sheets would miss your original question again.
-1分Actual supply conditions are specified, including the film and observed bow range; the tool reviewer is also defining the supported transfer and release assessment rather than treating separation as the only remaining task.
11分Has the proposed check been demonstrated on those conditions, or is it still only an agreed test scope?
13分讨论已关闭
此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .