A servo motor holding brake needs its own identified option and documented application review. Keep a brake’s holding rating separate from the motor’s running-torque data. Ask the supplier to explain the purpose of the proposed brake within the complete axis.
For an aluminum cutting-machine RFQ, “servo with brake” is a starting description. A useful offer identifies the motor, brake option, associated drive and supported configuration. It also makes clear which part of the machine the description concerns.
Resolve three purchasing questions
- Which motor and brake option are included?
- What do the reported ratings and conditions describe?
- Which complete-axis functions and records are supplied?
On this page
What does a servo motor holding brake describe?
Kollmorgen’s Essentials brake documentation describes static shaft holding with the brake coil de-energized. It identifies the brake’s purpose as holding a stationary motor, rather than dynamic braking.
The manufacturer’s AKM/AKMH support article states that the AKM holding brakes are not suited to repeated operational braking. It also says built-in holding brakes without further equipment must not be used to ensure personnel safety.
Those statements concern the named manufacturer documentation. For a proposed machine, request the actual component documentation and the responsible supplier’s application review. Do not extend a component label into a complete machine-function claim.
Have the relevant engineering and machinery-safety reviewers assess the actual requirements. This purchasing guide does not select a brake, design its controls or provide a procedure for testing a moving or suspended load.
Question 1: which option is on the order?
Start with the axis identity. A material-positioning axis, a blade drive and another movement are different items in a proposal. Ask the supplier to name the movement to which the motor and brake description applies.
Request the complete motor code, brake option code and manufacturer document reference. Keep any suffix or option identifier in the quotation and equipment list. A shortened family name can leave the buyer unable to identify what is actually included.
Ask whether the quoted package includes the drive, relevant cables, configuration records and commissioning support. Record who supplies each part of the arrangement. A motor-only price and a completed-axis price need different inclusion lists.
If an option changes between quotations, highlight that change in the comparison. Ask the supplier to provide the revised component documentation and explain which supporting records still apply.
The stepper-versus-servo guide organizes the broader motion-package comparison. Here, the question is the identified brake option within the proposed servo arrangement.
Question 2: what do the rating fields describe?
Kollmorgen’s AKM/AKMH support table separates operating voltage, holding torque, power, inertia, backlash and release/engage delay times. These are distinct fields in its component documentation.
Ask for the corresponding current data for the option actually proposed. Retain units, stated conditions, document revision and any limitations with each value. Have the supplier explain a field that is unclear rather than filling it from a similar motor family.
| Quotation field | Question to resolve |
|---|---|
| Motor operating data | Which motor, shaft and operating point are described? |
| Brake holding rating | Which brake option and documented conditions apply? |
| Other brake data | Are units, timing labels and limits retained? |
| Application review | Who confirms suitability for the actual axis? |
Keep each numerical field attached to its technical meaning in the comparison sheet. Similar units do not make differently labeled ratings interchangeable. A single column called “torque” can hide the purpose of an entry.
The motor torque and power guide helps identify operating-point data. Use it for that separate comparison, with the actual motor and drive information.
Also preserve whether an entry is manufacturer data, a supplier calculation or a recorded result. If an application calculation is provided, retain its assumptions and reviewer. A catalog field should not silently become an observed machine result.
Question 3: which complete-axis functions are documented?
Give the supplier a representative description of the movement, installed mechanism, stock handling and planned job sequence. Ask it to identify the approved configuration and the documentation for the intended use.
Request a clearly named description of the relevant holding and stopping functions. Have the supplier state the affected equipment and the basis of its explanation. Keep protective-function review with the responsible specialists.
The protective-function purchasing guide addresses the broader evidence request. A motor component record is one document within that review; it does not close every machine requirement.
Ask what approved operating and service documents will be delivered. Identify which tasks require authorized support and who handles a fault or replacement question. Keep the machine identity and configuration revision available for that discussion.
A fictional quotation revision loses the option identity
Imagine a fictional file called M38. The first quotation contains a complete motor code and named brake option. A revised quote keeps the motor family name but removes the option suffix and says only “equivalent replacement.”
Ask the supplier to identify the proposed replacement and its brake configuration. Request the relevant documentation and review of the changed arrangement. Keep the revision pending until the responsible team records its decision.
A matching family label or power entry does not answer which option will be delivered. This example includes no actual rating, supplier incident or approval result. It shows how abbreviated purchasing text can remove an essential configuration identifier.
Confirm the records that accompany delivery
Match the delivered equipment list to the approved quotation and component identities. Keep the applicable motor, brake and drive documents with the machine file. Record unresolved mismatches against the affected component.
Ask how replacement parts are identified later. Provide the complete existing reference when requesting a substitute, and keep any approved change with its revised documents. A visual similarity should not be the basis of a replacement decision.
For a complete cutting-system review, identify representative stock, cut requirements and the agreed inspection plan. Keep component configuration records separate from the actual finished-part results.
Buyer questions about a servo motor holding brake
Can a quotation simply say “with brake”?
Request the complete option identity, relevant documentation and the supplier’s explanation for the actual axis.
Should every torque entry share one comparison column?
Use separate headings for the quantity and conditions reported. Retain the original technical label.
Does a motor option establish the complete machine’s approved functions?
Obtain configuration-specific documentation and the responsible team’s review of the complete arrangement.
Prepare the movement requirements for your cutting proposal
Send JiurunCut your profile drawing and representative cut list, production sequence and installation context. Identify which axis information needs to be included so the quotation stays clear and reviewable.