Our 126-blank fixture-exchange sketch makes the FR10 choice look easy. Then I noticed the gripper body and open door were missing. What comparison would tell me whether the proposed arrangement is actually worth pursuing?
The FR10 brass-blank drawing leaves the doorway argument unfinished
Morgan_Casey · 2026年7月28日 18:19 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
12 条回复
回复 Morgan_Casey
Start with the surveyed door positions and a dimensioned complete tool carrying the brass blank. Ask for the whole exchange route. I raised the same missing-geometry question on my FR5 proposal; reaching the point did not answer how the assembly entered and left it.
15分Survey requested. The tool sketch has fingers but omits the body and connection fittings, so I've asked the toolmaker to complete it before anyone chooses a base position.
2分回复 Morgan_Casey
Keep another grip arrangement in the comparison where justified, because moving the base to suit an unexamined tool can turn a provisional drawing into a surprisingly expensive commitment
11分Ella, who judges whether that other grip is suitable? Morgan can ask for a candidate, but we don't have enough part or tool detail here to say that changing the grip preserves holding and release.
9分The toolmaker, with the application reviewer; I meant retain an assessed option, not draw longer fingers ourselves and call the access problem solved
11分And keep the service panels in every candidate. A shifted base on one of my comparisons nearly lost that requirement because somebody simplified the drawing at the wrong moment.
2分回复 Morgan_Casey
Complete view now shows the proposed fitting entering the door space during withdrawal. Toolmaker is considering a changed connection arrangement; no alternative selected and no base move agreed.
0分回复 Morgan_Casey
That identifies a specific interference in the present proposal. Keep the first drawing with the finding, then review any changed assembly through approach and exit again. A fitting move can alter the route even if its local doorway outline becomes smaller.
7分Have you distinguished tool-fitting service access from machine service-panel access in the request? They both matter, but the toolmaker and machine team need different information to answer their parts.
13分Yes, two access requirements with separate owners. Thanks, Zara; I'd previously put one broad service-access note across both. The revised fitting proposal is still awaited.
10分回复 Morgan_Casey
Has a candidate come back since then? I'd leave the arm comparison open while the only complete arrangement still has that known interference.
17分Toolmaker sent a candidate arrangement, but its holding and complete-route review is pending. The initial clash is documented; I can't yet claim the candidate clears it or recommend the FR10 from this layout.
13分