Should brush direction be fixed in our UR5e trim-plate references?

AnilCarter0984 · 3 Feb 2026, 08:37 UTC

Closed
AN
AnilCarter0984
Same accepted stainless plate, rotated in its bench holder, now looks like a reject. Full edge is visible in both images. I suspect the brush direction needs an arrow in our setup sheet. Or a large sign.

17 replies

OM
OmarChan1100
Replying to AnilCarter0984

An arrow sounds useful. Can the loader actually distinguish the two orientations?

17 points
AN
AnilCarter0984
Replying to OmarChan1100

Yes, there's an offset hole. My sheet shows the face but manages to crop that hole out of the setup photo. Not my finest page.

4 points
AN
AnilAli0201
Replying to AnilCarter0984

Did the light move too, or just the plate?

17 points
IM
ImranBennett0740
Replying to AnilCarter0984

Show the offset hole in the loading view, because an arrow alone still needs a recognisable starting point.

2 points
TO
TobyBaker0492
Replying to ImranBennett0740

Would a picture of the wrong orientation help? We have people copying a photograph without reading the note underneath it, me included when the shift is busy.

7 points
OM
OmarChan1100
Replying to TobyBaker0492

Maybe, but don't make the wrong picture the biggest one.

21 points
AN
AnilCarter0984
Replying to AnilAli0201

AnilAli: only the plate moved. Imran: I'll put the hole back in view. Toby: a smaller crossed-out reverse view might help, though Omar's right about which picture grabs you first.

18 points
AN
AnilAli0201
Replying to AnilCarter0984

Then keep that reversed image as a setup example, not another defective part.

5 points
TO
TobyBaker0492
Replying to OmarChan1100

Agreed, Omar. I was picturing a tiny inset, not a choose-your-own-loading adventure.

14 points
AN
AnilCarter0984
Replying to ImranBennett0740

Found the original full setup photo. Hole is perfectly clear. I'd cropped it to make room for a heading. Heading is now shorter.

4 points
IM
ImranBennett0740
Replying to AnilCarter0984

Use the corrected page with someone who did not help make it, and let them point to the starting orientation before you explain anything.

12 points
OM
OmarChan1100
Replying to ImranBennett0740

And include an accepted plate with the brush pattern that caused the confusion.

14 points
TO
TobyBaker0492
Replying to TobyBaker0492

I tried the wrong-view inset on a different instruction sheet once. One reader thought it was the second step. We ended up removing it and keeping one big correct view, with the snag described beside it. So I'd test that bit, not assume my suggestion improves yours.

21 points
AN
AnilAli0201
Replying to TobyBaker0492

One clear view gets my vote.

23 points
AN
AnilCarter0984
Replying to TobyBaker0492

Toby, your warning saved us a round. The loader wanted to know why there were two orientations, so we've kept one full correct view. They located the hole without help on the revised page.

11 points
IM
ImranBennett0740
Replying to AnilCarter0984

That settles the page layout; are the accepted and rejected image examples both using that orientation now?

2 points
AN
AnilCarter0984
Replying to ImranBennett0740

Yes. Re-shot the bench examples with the hole on the specified side and kept the reversed image outside the reference set. Setup-sheet problem closed. Threshold work for the planned cell can finally start with like-for-like pictures.

6 points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .