FR5 spacer ticket with the wrong receiving-fixture arrow

Corrected. Source T2, receiving fixture F6. Original image retained.

We once spent a support call discussing a perfectly healthy source nest. Ask them to confirm which physical location their latest answer refers to, not just acknowledge the new attachment.

They now refer to F6. Asking for the seated confirmation state there.

Does the recording show the actual seating contact? On our holder, the top view looked convincing while the edge could sit above a lip. I would not infer seated solely from where the block appears in the wide image.

Contact hidden behind F6. I can only show the spacer above it.

Ask which recorded indication supplies that seated state, so maintenance can compare the relevant signal with the physical arrangement instead of trying to diagnose through an obstructed picture.

Is there an event history tied to the image time?

Caleb, and the time from the original recording if available. A forwarded image time can send them to the wrong occurrence before they've even started.

Original file time retained. Maintenance has the corresponding event window.

Louis, was F6 exchanged after that occurrence? The current contact arrangement might not answer for the old image if an insert has changed in between.

No exchange recorded; operator confirms same fitted insert. Maintenance will check its identification too.

Keep both fixture and insert identities with that window, because F6 can remain the station name while the removable part is what the technician actually needs to identify.

Has support named the source of the seated indication yet?

That answer should come from the supplied sequence owner. Louis shouldn't need to reverse-engineer their program before they can tell him which signal they want.

Yes. PLC input identified. Maintenance is comparing its trace with F6's inspected arrangement.

Thanks Thomas. The corrected arrow finally got the technical question aimed at the right fixture.

Post what the comparison actually shows. A correctly named input is useful progress, but the hidden seating contact still leaves room for more than one explanation.