Both housing-transfer quotes omit fingers, adapter and fittings from their load argument. What should complete the comparison?
I cannot compare FR5 loads from the housing mass alone
EllaBaker0468 · 2026年4月5日 22:19 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
7 条回复
Ask for the offered assembly identities and combined mass, centre of gravity and relevant inertia information for the intended movement. Have each supplier include the complete carried arrangement, rather than adding a loose-tool total to an unrelated part calculation.
21分回复 TobyChen1188
One supplier has an assembly list. The other calls the adapter customer supplied without identifying it.
12分Then the second has not defined the assembly it is claiming suitable. Who chooses and assesses that customer-supplied adapter, and is its cost included anywhere in your comparison?
8分Also ask why the finger lengths differ. They may be solving different fixture-access problems, so a lighter total will not necessarily describe an equivalent transfer.
20分回复 TobyChen1188
Longer fingers clear the receiving wall. Shorter set assumes a revised insert, which inspection has not accepted.
12分Include that proposed insert and its assessment in the second scope. It may still be useful, but it is not the same job with a smaller gripper.
13分Has either supplier shown release and withdrawal at the receiving fixture, Ella? The complete movement views should accompany the complete load information before you choose.
21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： .