Can't choose clamp locations from corrected bracket readings

BrunoChen1148 · 26 May 2025, 23:45 UTC

Closed
BR
BrunoChen1148
Our proposed FR5 weld fixture is being justified with old bracket results taken after straightening. The designer has marked extra clamp positions from those readings, but I can't see the uncorrected shape anywhere. Seems a generous amount of confidence for a missing measurement.

17 replies

LU
LucyCarter1002
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Ask what the extra clamps are intended to control before discussing their positions. They may have a reason beyond those old readings, but you need to hear it

8 points
BR
BrunoChen1148
Replying to LucyCarter1002

Designer says the long flange lifted after welding. That came from an operator's recollection, not the inspection sheet. I've asked whether anyone measured the lift.

9 points
JA
JaneBennett0771
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Does the operator remember whether it lifted while still located or after release? Those are different observations, even if both were described as movement.

22 points
BR
BrunoChen1148
Replying to JaneBennett0771

After release. He also remembers tapping parts into the old fixture before welding, so there may be an incoming fit issue as well. No figures yet.

-2 points
KA
KaiBrown0889
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Look at the incoming parts before blaming the old fixture.

9 points
IM
ImranAllen0305
Replying to BrunoChen1148

I'd keep the fit-up observation beside the release observation rather than choose a favourite immediately. You may have more than one thing happening, and the current parts may differ from the ones that operator remembers.

17 points
LU
LucyCarter1002
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Which component and assembly revisions does he remember working on? If that is unknown, say so instead of attaching his story to the current drawing

14 points
BR
BrunoChen1148
Replying to LucyCarter1002

He can identify assembly revision B from an old job card. We're proposing revision E. Gusset changed between them, but I haven't compared all the component changes.

18 points
JA
JaneBennett0771
Replying to BrunoChen1148

That comparison sounds more useful than moving clamps yet. I would ask the designer to mark the assumptions that came from revision B separately from the requirements for E.

6 points
KA
KaiBrown0889
Replying to JaneBennett0771

Agreed. Old story, new gusset.

12 points
BR
BrunoChen1148
Replying to JaneBennett0771

The new gusset has a different relief and thickness. Designer is leaving the extra clamps as a proposal, pending a current-part fit-up and released-dimension trial.

18 points
IM
ImranAllen0305
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Good place to involve whoever will inspect the finished assembly. I'd want them to agree how it sits for measurement, so a later argument isn't really about two people holding it differently.

3 points
LU
LucyCarter1002
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Who is organising that trial? An undecided clamp drawing can sit in a folder for ages while everyone assumes somebody else is measuring parts

14 points
BR
BrunoChen1148
Replying to LucyCarter1002

Our fabrication lead, with quality doing the dimensional checks. I've sent the revision comparison to both and asked them to include incoming fit, not just the final angle.

14 points
JA
JaneBennett0771
Replying to BrunoChen1148

If they label individual samples through those stages, you will have something the old packet lacked: measurements that can be followed back to the same bracket.

25 points
BR
BrunoChen1148
Replying to JaneBennett0771

That's in their sheet now. Thanks, Jane. I've also told purchasing the proposed extra clamps aren't an approved tooling change, because the sketch had already reached the quote folder.

24 points
LU
LucyCarter1002
Replying to BrunoChen1148

Any readings back from that trial, or is it still being arranged?

13 points

Discussion closed

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