Robot Joint Actuator RFQ Template: 25 Fields Buyers Should Send

Key Takeaways

RFQ quality determines quote quality. Most delays come from missing technical fields, not supplier response speed.
This template covers 25 mandatory fields across 5 categories: project context, mechanical/motion, electrical/control, validation/quality, and commercial/delivery.
Expect a qualified supplier to return a technical response in 3–5 business days and a formal quote in 7–10 business days. If no response after 14 days, deprioritize.
Watch for supplier red flags: quotes without technical assumptions, peak-only torque claims, and missing revision control.

Why Most RFQs Produce Weak Quotes

In actuator projects, RFQ quality determines quote quality.

Most delays come from missing technical fields, not supplier response speed. If the first RFQ lacks duty profile, thermal boundary, or interface revision, every quote becomes provisional — and every subsequent round of clarification adds 1–2 weeks to the timeline.

Based on our experience processing hundreds of OEM RFQs, the three most common data gaps are:

No continuous torque at speed — only peak or stall torque is provided, making it impossible to validate thermal feasibility.
No mechanical interface revision — the supplier builds a sample against an assumed interface, then the buyer rejects it for dimensional mismatch.
No protocol specification — the supplier quotes an EtherCAT variant while the buyer needs CAN, triggering a re-quote cycle.

25-Field RFQ Template (Copy This)

A. Project Context

Field	Example	Mandatory
Product program name	Humanoid arm axis v2	Yes
Application scenario	Shoulder pitch axis	Yes
Project stage	Concept / prototype / pilot / MP	Yes
Target SOP date	2027-Q1	Yes
Destination country	Germany	Yes

B. Mechanical and Motion Inputs

Field	Example	Mandatory
Continuous torque at speed	68 Nm @ 52 RPM	Yes
Peak torque and duration	140 Nm, 1.2 s, <10% duty	Yes
Motion profile	Frequent reversal + dwell	Yes
Gear ratio expectation	80:1 to 120:1	Yes
Backlash limit	<= 8 arcmin under defined method	Yes
Shaft/flange drawing revision	DWG-R3	Yes
Envelope limit	Dia <= 145 mm, length <= 210 mm	Yes

C. Electrical and Control Inputs

Field	Example	Mandatory
Bus voltage	48 VDC	Yes
Protocol	EtherCAT	Yes
Feedback requirement	Absolute multi-turn	Yes
Harness/connector constraint	2.0 m, M23 keyed	Yes
Functional safety expectation	System-level integration intent	Optional

D. Validation and Quality Inputs

Field	Example	Mandatory
Prototype acceptance criteria	Torque, backlash, thermal, noise	Yes
Sample size for validation	6 sets	Yes
Required evidence package	Test report + traceability per QA process	Yes
Compliance file expectation	CE/RoHS/ISO support scope	Yes
Engineering change process	Revision control with effective lot	Yes

E. Commercial and Delivery Inputs

Field	Example	Mandatory
Prototype quantity	12 sets	Yes
Annual demand forecast	2,500 sets/year	Yes
Incoterm preference	FOB / EXW	Yes
Target ship window	6–8 weeks after PO	Yes
Packaging requirement	Export carton + anti-vibration inserts	Yes
Contact owner	Name + email + role	Yes

Complete Fill-In Example: Humanoid Shoulder Axis

Here is a realistic example showing how a buyer would fill in all 25 fields for a humanoid robot shoulder pitch joint:

Field	Filled Value
Program name	Atlas-Next Shoulder Module
Application	Shoulder pitch axis, 50 kg humanoid platform
Stage	Prototype (EVT phase)
SOP target	2027-Q2
Destination	South Korea
Continuous torque	45 Nm @ 25 RPM
Peak torque	110 Nm, 0.8 s, < 5% duty
Motion profile	Sinusoidal reversal, 120° range
Ratio	100:1 (harmonic)
Backlash	≤ 1 arcmin, full reversal under 20% load
Interface revision	DWG-SH-R2, ISO 9409 flange
Envelope	Dia ≤ 110 mm, length ≤ 85 mm
Voltage	48 VDC
Protocol	EtherCAT (CoE), CSP mode required
Feedback	20-bit absolute single-turn
Connector	1.5 m pigtail, M12 8-pin
Safety	STO input required
Acceptance criteria	Torque, backlash, thermal rise < 35°C, noise < 55 dB
Sample size	8 sets (6 for integration + 2 for destructive test)
Evidence	Full test report + batch traceability
Compliance	CE + RoHS + REACH declaration
ECO process	Revision-controlled with lot-effective dating
Prototype qty	8 sets
Annual forecast	3,000 sets/year starting 2028
Incoterm	DDP Incheon
Ship window	8 weeks after PO
Packaging	ESD bag + foam insert + export carton
Contact	Park Joon-ho, [email protected], Mech Lead

Visual Handoff Map

Expected Response Timeline

Milestone	Expected Timeframe	Action If Late
Initial technical acknowledgment	1–2 business days	Follow up; supplier may have missed the RFQ
Technical questions/clarifications	3–5 business days	Normal — a supplier who asks good questions is engaged
Formal quotation with assumptions	7–10 business days	If delayed, request a status update with expected date
No response after 14 days	—	Deprioritize this supplier; move remaining candidates forward

Buyer note: A qualified supplier will ask clarification questions. If a supplier returns a quote within 24 hours with zero questions, it likely contains hidden assumptions that will surface during prototype.

Supplier Red Flags to Watch

When evaluating supplier quotes, these patterns indicate potential downstream risk:

Red Flag	What It Signals	What to Do
Quote lists only peak torque, not continuous	Thermal performance may be overstated	Request continuous T-N curve at your duty cycle
No technical assumptions documented	Supplier will claim misunderstanding later	Reject the quote and request assumption disclosure
"Similar model" recommended without data	Fit has not been verified against your specs	Request dimensional and performance comparison table
No revision control on quoted drawing	Interface mismatch risk during sampling	Require drawing revision tag in quote confirmation
Lead time stated without tooling/NRE breakdown	Hidden costs will appear after PO	Request itemized cost structure
Compliance scope listed as "available on request"	Documents may not exist yet	Request proof of current certificate validity

Quote Comparison Matrix (Use During Supplier Review)

Review Dimension	Supplier A	Supplier B	Supplier C
Data completeness score (0-10)
Continuous torque margin adequacy
Backlash test condition transparency
Thermal evidence credibility
Change control clarity
Lead-time assumption clarity
Compliance package alignment
Red flag count	0 / 1 / 2+	0 / 1 / 2+	0 / 1 / 2+
Overall risk flag	Low / Mid / High	Low / Mid / High	Low / Mid / High

First Email Skeleton (Ready to Send)

Subject: RFQ - Robot Joint Actuator Program [Project Name]

Hello Robot Joint Actuator Team,

Please review our RFQ baseline below and advise recommended models:
- Application:
- Continuous torque at speed:
- Peak torque duty:
- Backlash target:
- Protocol / voltage:
- Mechanical revision:
- Prototype quantity / SOP target:
- Compliance package expectation:

Please return model recommendation, lead-time assumptions, and validation test scope.

Practical Rule

Do not start commercial negotiation until the technical baseline is frozen. Otherwise, every price update will be accompanied by a hidden technical assumption shift.

Next Steps

After you receive quotes and shortlist suppliers:

Use the Selection Guide weighted matrix to rank candidates objectively.
Plan your validation with the 12-gate prototype-to-MP execution model.
Review OEM customization capabilities to understand what changes are feasible.
Start a gated discussion through Contact / RFQ.