RobinAli0251 · 21 Mar 2025, 01:58 UTC
Establish the measurement datum and restraint condition for each column; the shared word height does not make the values comparable.
16 pointsThe jig column measures from its baseplate. The bench column appears to use the underside of the finished bracket. No instruction for how it was supported.
5 pointsMark the bench condition unknown until you find supporting evidence; subtracting the two columns will not isolate release distortion.
13 pointsAre any of the measured brackets still available with their inspection numbers? Comparing one identified part using an agreed setup might be cheaper than trying to reconstruct every old entry.
7 pointsUseful for establishing present measurements, though it cannot prove how the historical bench value was obtained.
8 pointsFound two retained brackets with matching numbers. Quality will measure them against the drawing. The old jig has also been altered since those sheets, so its current shim stack is not evidence of the old setup.
22 pointsKeep the current jig revision separate in the review; otherwise you will accidentally explain old measurements with newer hardware.
17 pointsQuality confirmed one retained part is outside the finished height requirement. The records cannot tell us when it departed from nominal. We have excluded the undocumented shim stack from the new fixture specification.
8 pointsSpecify the missing measurements for the pilot: incoming fit-up, located condition and released acceptance, with traceable part identities and defined setups.
13 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .