Contractor Questions and Government Answers v5.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Deburring System
- Solicitation number
- W519TC25QA010
About this file
The file is a Contractor Questions and Government Answers document (version 5) for Solicitation Number W519TC25QA010, focusing on a deburring machine procurement for the Rock Island Arsenal, Joint Manufacturing and Technology Center (RIA-JMTC). The document reveals key technical requirements and clarifications about the deburring system, including that it must be a standalone, fully enclosed machine with a conveyor system capable of processing variable parts from fiber flat lasers. The government seeks a machine with abrasive heads/belts that can remove burrs and potentially provide surface finishing, with specific requirements including a 63-inch minimum width conveyor and the ability to handle parts with varying sizes and weights.
The solicitation is being managed by Army Contracting Command - Rock Island (ACC-RI) and is targeted at small businesses. The Q&A document highlights the government's flexibility in design approach while maintaining specific technical parameters, such as the need for dust collection, constant pass height, and the ability to process static parts moving on a conveyor. Critical technical specifications include the machine's ability to handle parts from a job shop with extreme part variability, with materials likely being steel. Vendors are advised that significant deviations from specified requirements, such as a belt width reduction of nearly 20%, may be considered a major non-compliance and could potentially disqualify a submission.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Contractor Questions and Government Answers v4.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B08 Contract Questions and Government Answers v2 and v3.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Contractor Questions and Government Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Solicitation - W519TC25QA010.pdf | ||
| RIPD E4000-25-3-12 Deburring System rev2.docx | DOCX document | |
| 25-3-12 Evaluation Criteria.docx | DOCX document | |
| 25-3-12 Time Line Deliverable.docx | DOCX document | |
| 25-3-12 CDRL- Deburring System.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Solicitation Number: W519TC25QA010 | ||
| Contractor Question | Government Answer | |
| 1 | Is there any specific vendor associated with the line item? | No, there is not a specific vendor for any of the associated line items. We can only base information off of what we know and determine during market research. We welcome different solutions but it is the responsibility of the bidding vendor to showcase capability when compared to that which is being requested via compliance and non compliance statements with associated information. |
| 2 | We do not have a belt system, but the tool holder can hold a deburring cutter. Does this work for you? | The technical team would need more information regarding a deburring cutter. Our understanding is that this processing is performed with either flap wheels, abrasive belts, or similar type abrasive drums. |
| 3 | Can you share a drawing of the workpiece with us? | There is not a set workpiece that is intended for this machine. We are considered a job shop level production facility that has extreme part variability. The intended use of this machine is to debur parts coming off of our fiber flat lasers. |
4 If we meet the deburring requirements but not the physical configuration of the machine will our submission be disqualified? For example we don't have a belt and conveyor setup. Our product is based on a robotic arm that has the tooling and processes the parts. Same result but different setup. The intent for this requirement would be a standalone machine that would allow for parts to pass under a series of abrasive heads/ belts to remove burrs and potentially provide surface finish. The technical team can review your solution however this type of solution would raise question regarding part movement as well as ability to provide surface finish back into a part.
| 5 | The information reads its a generic cell, but size and weight of the parts help determine robot size for reach and also for weight of deburring heads? | See above answer. This should be a deburring machine fully enclosed. Size and weight of parts is to ensure the conveyor can withstand part load |
| 6 | The conveyor mentioned is holding a base plate and elevation changes, are you forecasting a shuttle system of taking parts in and out of cell? | The machine is required to maintain a constant pass height in order to be designed into a roller/conveyor system later on |
| 7 | The cell will be an enclosure so you can utilize a vacuum system? | Yes this is an enclosed piece of equipment. This is not a "cell" rather a machine with dust collection |
| 8 | Parts will assume to be static without any manipulation? | The parts will be traversing underneath the abrasive mechanisms. They will be static on the conveyor however the conveyor will be moving |
| 9 | A plant visit is always beneficial to see type of parts so we ensure equipment is sized proper and deburring tools can handle forecasted material. | A site visit will not be necessary as the specification outlines the equipment required. Because this is a standalone piece of equipment it should not matter where it is placed if the site can support the utilities. Workload varies and therefore we cannot accurately state what all will be run across the machine. |
| 10 | Can you please consider a site visit or virtual walkthrough to better understand the nature of the parts and facility layout? This would help ensure the proposed system is appropriately sized and configured for the intended materials and operations. | The sizes are identified in the RIPD. What sizing are you refering to that a site visit would be necessary? |
| 11 | Spec 4.7.1 requires 63” minimum width. The widest sanding belt we’ve found is 51”, would this be acceptable? | This is a close to a 20 percent reduction in capability. The technical team would need to review but this would most likely be considered a major non-compliance. |
| 12 | What is the largest part size Length x Width x Thickness and weight. What is the smallest part size Length x Width x Thickness and weight? | We cannot accurately provide this data which is why the RIPD states the limits for part weight and machine "throat" size |
| 13 | We are considering using an off the shelf belt sanding machine which would make maintenance easier and spare parts more accessible. The parts would then move by conveyer belt to an area an operator can inspect and determine if the part requires a second pass through the sanding belt. This also allows the operator to reload the part opposite side down so both sides are sanded. | This sounds like it would be a "cell". We are more interested in an all in one machine that can be easily relocated if deemed necessary. |
| 14 | Then the second part of the system the operator would load the part or parts if they are of the same thickness into the deburring section of the system. (Option 1) This section would be a robot with wire brush wheel. (Option 2) The operator can perform the deburring prosses using a machine assisted sander shown below. | Please see above response |
| 15 | The entire system would be enclosed with dust collection and light curtains at locations the operator would handle the parts. If the robot deburring option is preferred, we’d need to know if your site has a preference on the type of controls. It would be a FANUC robot unless another brand is preferred. | Please see above response |
| 16 | What is the part? (Image or drawing of the part - preferably with the burr intact) | Please see Previous Responses |
| 17 | What is the material of the part? (Steel, aluminum, etc.) | Most likely Steel but please see previous responses |
| 18 | What are the dimensions of the part? | Please see previous responses |
| 19 | What are the deburring requirements? (Edge radius, remove sharp edge, etc.) | To remove sharp edge and burrs but potentially also add surface finish depending on the grit abrasive belt being utilized. |
| 20 | What is the desired cycle time? (How many parts per hour/day? | Please see previous responses |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .