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?
Why does our FR10 access sketch end at the aluminium blank?
AaronAllen0262 · 2025年12月12日 21:34 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
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分回复 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分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分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分Is fixture removal routine in this job, Aaron, or an occasional maintenance task? Both need access, but their frequency matters to the comparison.
6分Routine changeover, Ella; setter is comparing that route while tooling defines the adapter, and neither review substitutes for the other
14分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分回复 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分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分Any usable candidate left after the setter's review, Aaron? Interested whether the machine-side work narrowed it before the complete tool arrived.
13分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分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分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： .