I've retained the pickup versions for our FR10 housing transfer after seeing how useful that was on another discussion. The grip still looks less square, and maintenance has been asked to check the physical setup. What I don't want is a repaired tool sent back to whatever combination of offsets happened to be last saved
Have the cell team agree the intended tool and fixture configuration, then review those program changes against it. The correct program is not necessarily the first version or the most recent one.
That's exactly where our recent carrier repair is: seating restored, program verification still outstanding. Keep those as two jobs, even when everybody wants the first discovery to be the ending.
Ask what maintenance actually found before choosing which correction to remove, because an offset may have been compensating for something different from the fault now being repaired
David, no finding yet. I jumped ahead with repaired tool. The inspection request covers the finger mounting, housing seat and fixture location, with the known replacement history attached.
Useful correction. Keep the program review prepared, but let the physical findings determine what needs changing rather than declaring every stored offset wrong in advance
I would include the toolmaker if the contact geometry or replacement identity is in doubt. Maintenance can identify an unexpected assembly without necessarily owning the design decision about what should replace it.
And keep useful strip-down pictures. We recently needed a view hidden by the assembled tool; another photo of the gripper looking normal from above wouldn't have helped much.
Let the operator show where it first looks wrong too. On our training jobs, the person who spots the fault often gets left out once the interesting engineering discussion begins.
Reece, does your plan still allow for the program-verification time? A hardware repair marked complete can make that remaining work disappear from the schedule.
Val, cell owner is coordinating maintenance and controls, with the toolmaker for any disputed assembly. NoahArcher, the operator who filmed it is included. The schedule has separate inspection, correction and verification work.
Rosa, yes, ours still carries that time. The restored seating isn't being reported as a released job. I learned that distinction after the cloth-under-carrier discovery made everyone rather cheerful.
Owen's photographs will also help the eventual changeover instruction, provided they show the confirmed intended assembly rather than leave a dismantled faulty arrangement as the only illustration.
Ben, has maintenance identified anything inconsistent with the intended assembly yet? The missing history and the visible grip concern justify the inspection, but neither is itself the answer.
They found wear on one finger contact. Toolmaker is checking whether it explains the uneven grip and what replacement is appropriate. Fixture seating hasn't shown an obvious fault. No pickup version chosen yet.
Keep an identified housing for the restored-contact comparison, then include other relevant parts and positions; the one that exposed the wear shouldn't become the only example used to approve the job