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。

Why does our FR10 access sketch end at the aluminium blank?

AaronAllen0262 · 2025年12月12日 21:34 UTC

已关闭
AA
AaronAllen0262
I have left the arm choice open because the cylindrical blank reaches its fixture in the sketch but most of the tool is missing; how should we compare approach and withdrawal with the actual mill door before the quote acquires an agreed base position?

13 条回复

LE
LeoAli0188

What assembly has actually been proposed behind the blank: fingers, gripper body, adapter and connection routing? Have the toolmaker identify that complete held arrangement, then combine it with a surveyed opening and door in the access study.

8
AA
AaronAllen0262
回复 LeoAli0188

Fingers and gripper named, adapter depth still unspecified; the machine outline is generic and omits our internal door handle, so both sides of the comparison need completing

8
JA
JamieBarnes0556

Survey the known machine geometry now and keep the missing tool envelope explicit; you can identify definite conflicts without pretending an unspecified adapter clears the remaining space

16
IM
ImranBrown0914

Let the setter see the stand candidates too. Our robot layout once gave the tool a route and left the person removing the fixture with nowhere comfortable to stand. The drawing had a very fortunate definition of access.

0
EL
EllaArcher0381

Is fixture removal routine in this job, Aaron, or an occasional maintenance task? Both need access, but their frequency matters to the comparison.

6
AA
AaronAllen0262

Routine changeover, Ella; setter is comparing that route while tooling defines the adapter, and neither review substitutes for the other

14
LE
LeoAli0188

Does the gripper need to release the blank while still inside the machine opening? If so, the open fingers and empty withdrawal belong in the study as well as the loaded approach.

14
AA
AaronAllen0262
回复 LeoAli0188

Yes, release is inside the opening; I've included open fingers and empty withdrawal in the request, not only the held blank arriving at its final position

15
JA
JamieBarnes0556

Tie the returned study to the actual assembly revision, so a later adapter choice does not inherit clearance from a different length drawn for convenience

17
IM
ImranBrown0914

Any usable candidate left after the setter's review, Aaron? Interested whether the machine-side work narrowed it before the complete tool arrived.

13
AA
AaronAllen0262

The nearer candidate blocks normal fixture removal, so that one is rejected; the farther position is still under full-tool review, with the adapter now defined but the connection route unfinished

14
EL
EllaArcher0381

Who is supplying that last connection detail? A named open item should help prevent the farther position being treated as approved simply because it is the only candidate left.

12
AA
AaronAllen0262

Tool supplier owns it and the integrator owns the combined study; no position or arm order accepted, and the setter will see the combined revision before we decide

3

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: .