Our aluminium blank clears the machine opening on paper. Where should the complete gripper enter this comparison?
our fr5 blank fits the door without its tool
AdaCarter0999 · 2026年2月10日 10:04 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
10 条回复
Before selecting the arm position. Use the identified body, fingers, adapter and connections with the held blank, surveyed open door and fixture. Check withdrawal and the empty return as separate tool states.
7分Tool supplier has sent two connection orientations. Integrator is adding both to the surveyed opening.
6分We found the rear fitting, not the finger, chose the bad position. Has either complete orientation survived the first check?
2分Rear-facing one conflicts with the door. Side-facing one clears the loaded withdrawal in the model.
17分What about the empty return with the fingers open? The loaded result is useful, but it does not settle the route back into the machine.
8分And preserve the setter's access. A surviving robot route can still occupy the fixture-change space.
18分Empty return conflicts at the handle. Setter's space is clear. Integrator is considering a different base position.
8分That was the cheaper option to study in our room, though yours may differ. Keep the same complete tool in the new comparison so the apparent improvement has a fair baseline.
19分Shifted base clears both routes in the model. Maintenance panel access is now restricted, so it is still provisional.
23分Has maintenance defined the space it actually needs there? That can decide whether this candidate can change or should be dropped.
16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： .