简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文;未对原文作自动翻译。

ur5e delivered fingers were not the fingers in our housing trial

JasperChen1160 · 2026年7月8日 01:47 UTC

回复讨论
JA
JasperChen1160
Our housing trial confirmed one finger set. Another arrived with the UR5e. Seven days asking for equivalence evidence, tooling still unfitted. What comparison should decide whether this substitute is usable?

5 条回复

LI
LiamChan1099

Compare the identified trial and delivered assemblies against your actual housings, grip and receiving arrangement, with holding, location, surface condition and release assessed rather than inferred from a matching mounting pattern.

19
JA
JasperChen1160

The delivered fingers have wider tips. Tooling's dimensional comparison shows they cannot enter the required housing feature at the confirmed grip. We have rejected that arrangement for this task.

1
LI
LiamChan1099

Ask whether the confirmed set can actually be supplied, with its complete reference and terms, before treating the demonstrated fingers as an available replacement rather than merely evidence of the original agreement.

14
JA
JasperChen1160

Seller confirms the original reference is available and agrees to replace the wrong set. Return and replacement shipping details are still outstanding; neither set has moved yet.

15
LI
LiamChan1099

Keep those movements separate in the shortage and return records, and check the actual replacement on arrival; an agreed reference resolves the proposed remedy, not its fulfilment or the later installation checks.

8

参与讨论

欢迎来到 Application Robot

所有人都可以阅读论坛。登录或注册后即可发起讨论、回复或上传照片。

忘记密码?

注册账号即表示你同意我们的 使用条款 社区准则。请阅读我们的 隐私政策 ,了解我们如何处理你的信息。