I'm comparing two tooling proposals for our planned transferring housings between locating nests with Universal Robots UR5e and a cast metal housing in a small component assembly workshop.
Each supplier bases suitability on the part's mass, although the assembly also has extended fingers, an adapter and hose fittings.
I'd like to know what information a purchase decision needs.
Check whether either supplier has provided the assembled mass and centre of gravity. A list of everything mounted at the wrist will expose what's missing.
@SarahCarter1024 I'd qualify 'usable': those values help compare configurations, but they don't complete the assessment against the robot's applicable inertia and moment constraints.
Agreed, I meant the comparison basis. Your integrator still needs the complete load assessed against the applicable documentation, including moment and inertia constraints.
@RebeccaBrown0952 Yes, if each configuration is clearly labelled and tied to its own values. Show where your part sits rather than just adding its mass.
@SarahCarter1024 I had a separate setup where tooling documented the adapter but purchasing left it out. Each department's sheet appeared complete until we compared the assembled configuration.