Do the two entries share the same bracket identity? I've seen inspection note a return to fabrication while fabrication recorded doing it; two entries, one piece of work.
Bracket correction copied into the FR10 route twice
RosaChan1075 · 8 Feb 2026, 02:11 UTC
17 replies
Same bracket ID. Inspection says returned for correction; fabrication says corrected and sent back. Both have been given a correction duration in our summary.
17 pointsIdentify who observed the work behind each duration before adding them. Inspection may be recording waiting or a handoff, not another correction operation. Preserve the released measurement and its inspection support alongside the route.
13 pointsAre the durations original entries, or numbers the estimator added later? That changes what you can recover from the sheet itself.
5 pointsSarah's question first, Rosa. A perfectly matched pair of bracket entries still cannot supply two times nobody measured.
7 pointsEstimator added the same remembered allowance to both. Original sheets have no duration, just the returned and completed entries. We can identify the route, not time it from these notes.
21 pointsWhich drawing revision and inspection support belong to the released failure and final pass?
18 pointsRevision K for both, same identified inspection support. Quality checked the readings against K. Released result fails, result after the one correction passes.
19 pointsThat is enough to retain the observed route without the doubled allowance. A current timing study should record active correction, waiting and repeat inspection separately, with whoever does each task identified.
15 pointsAnd use the current job for that study. Your old paired entries do not show how often the present brackets need correction.
10 pointsAgreed. The old example is one corrected bracket, not a batch rate. Current process owner and quality will choose the observed work, including first-time passes.
21 pointsWho is correcting the existing estimate, Rosa? Otherwise the double allowance may survive in the version purchasing already has.
11 pointsOur estimator replaced the two correction lines with one explicitly unmeasured operation and separate repeat inspection. Purchasing has that revision. No guessed duration has been retained as a convenient starting value.
23 pointsDoes the revised description still show the failed released check before that operation? It should not read as optional tidying after an accepted part.
9 pointsYes, Beth. Failed released check, correction, repeat inspection and final pass are in order. Thanks, Hazel, the one-trip explanation led us back to the actual technician rather than another spreadsheet total.
7 pointsAnd the technician confirmed one correction trip for that bracket. I've attached that explanation to the old entries so they don't get counted twice again in the next export.
21 pointsUseful cleanup. The missing timing remains work for the current study, but the old route no longer invents a second person doing the same correction.
20 pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .