Our planned FR10 purchase includes a molded-housing transfer demonstration with the tool mounting adapter. After 26 days asking the unnamed Chinese seller, I still have only general movement, no identifiable package or clear tooling and sample handling. How should I request the missing order-specific evidence?
Which FR10 is moving in this adapter demonstration?
AlexAdams0124 · 2026年8月1日 00:39 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
8 条回复
Send back the agreed demonstration scope with the missing views marked. Package identity, fitted adapter and the actual housing transfer need a credible link. A separate label photograph does not establish what moved in the clip.
9分Is the problem that the adapter is off camera, or that its identity cannot be read? Those call for different filming changes. I'd describe the exact gap rather than ask for a better video and give them another opportunity to choose what better means.
6分Both. The general view gives me neither a clear adapter identification nor the sample handling detail.
9分Then request a recording sequence that establishes the package and fitted assembly before showing the agreed transfer clearly. Close details can be additional views, but the seller needs to explain how those views belong to that package rather than supply unrelated illustrations.
7分Keep this tied to what was agreed. Are you asking for a new application acceptance trial, or evidence of the existing demonstration requirement? The seller should not be able to blur that distinction either.
17分The existing requirement. I have sent it back with the three missing views. They have agreed to record again, but nothing new has arrived.
8分Keep the intended supplied configuration in that request. If they demonstrate an adapter they plan to replace before dispatch, an identifiable package still leaves you assessing a different assembly from the one proposed for your tray station.
10分And leave the demonstration outstanding until you can review the replacement. Agreeing to film is not the missing evidence.
25分