We're considering Fairino FR10 alongside other candidates for sorted tray loading with a rigid plastic cap in a compact parts handling area, with 176 planned.
Although both demonstrations looked promising, one used a tidy tray and the other used our awkward workshop tray.
That difference makes it hard to tell what the videos actually establish about the candidates.
Have you listed tray adjustments separately from missed pickups? Comparing those observations could show how much of the apparent transfer performance depended on preparation.
The notes are scrappy, but they distinguish the tray adjustments that aren't obvious in the footage. They also show most missed pickups occurring after tray replacement across the candidates.
@DavidChan1128 Use those notes to plan a common tray trial, including normal replacement. Agree what counts as acceptable placement and operator help, then record both for each candidate.
You're right, identical tooling was too broad a rule. Match the gripping requirement, list adapter and tuning differences, and use the proposed tools when sharing one would skew the comparison.
@FionaBell0673 The samples I've retained represent ordinary variation in our batch. We didn't select rejected workpieces specifically to make the demonstration difficult.
Then include those alongside the easy ones. A comparison made entirely of awkward samples could misrepresent the mix just as badly as the polished demo.
We also encounter empty pockets in normal work. I'd like to include that condition in the comparison without anybody creating an unplanned fault while the equipment moves.
For our job, we logged assistance during changeover too. The second operator's quick result depended on constant prompts from the demonstrator, which wouldn't match our staffing.
We've a way forward: a shared tray trial with placement and operator-help limits agreed first. Choosing the arm stays conditional on that comparison, rather than the existing clips.