The toolmaker and integrator have separate drawings. Neither includes the other assembly. I will ask who is combining them.

Get the actual door position measured too. I had assumptions wander between supplier drawings on a different review, and each drawing looked reasonable in isolation. Then everyone was very surprised when they were put together.

Front approach currently. Integrator is combining the drawings. We have asked them to show a side approach as an alternative too.

Where does the setter stand for changeover in each option? Put a person in that drawing.

Jo, yes. Also the tool-removal route for maintenance. Don't just check whether it can be assembled once and then assume it'll never need to come apart.

I'd keep the alternatives at rough-layout level until those bits are answered. No point paying for two polished proposals while the basic access assumptions are still moving.

Combined model is back. Front position conflicts with the parked door in the proposed removal sequence. Side position avoids that conflict but takes part of the changeover space.

There it is. The robot fits and the setter doesn't. What do they propose changing?

Is all of that space required during changeover, Hazel, or only a particular access route? I would ask the setter to show the actual work before deciding whether the side option is lost.

Ada is right. 'Changeover space' can mean a working position, a trolley route or somewhere people store things. They have different consequences. Get the real task into the review.

Setter walked through it with us. The side layout blocks removal of a changeover trolley. It isn't just storage space.

Could the side candidate move enough to preserve that route, or would the loaded tool then lose access? That's a comparison for the combined model now, not a guess from the reach figure.

And no, moving the trolley into the aisle isn't an answer. We still need it.

Jo, nobody has suggested removing the trolley. Zara is asking whether the equipment position can change while keeping its route. Those are different proposals.

Fair. I've had the trolley disappear in drawings before. Jumped ahead of this one.

The shifted side candidate keeps the trolley route, but only with a different tool arrangement. The integrator and toolmaker are comparing that explicitly now. Thank you Ada for asking what the changeover actually involved.

Get the altered tool identified in the proposal, not just its outline pasted into the layout. Mass, connections and access all change with it. This is where cheap arm comparisons quietly turn into different complete jobs.

Does the new price include that arrangement, Hazel? Worth asking before anyone compares it with the original bare-tool number.