our ur5e bracket summary assigns the final check to the wrong bracket

Original sheets found; the released failure belongs to the first bracket, and the pictured final pass belongs to another one checked later, so the summary has joined two separate pieces.

Does the first bracket have any later disposition recorded?

Also ask what clamped pass meant. I once untangled the sample IDs and still had a useless before-and-after comparison because the first check was visual alignment and the second measured a dimension. Sorting the identity was necessary, but it didn't magically make the checks comparable.

Mei, no later disposition has been recovered for the first bracket; Sam, its clamped tick is a visual witness check, not the released dimensional measurement, so both comparisons in that summary were misleading.

Keep the real released failure and the other bracket's pass in their own histories. The bad summary doesn't invalidate either actual observation; it invalidates the story built by joining them.

And leave the first outcome unknown until someone finds it. Unknown isn't shorthand for scrapped, corrected or probably fine.

Yasmin, exactly. People can swing from trusting the whole summary to throwing everything out. The useful bit is smaller: this identified part failed this released check, and somebody still owes an explanation of what happened next.

Quality has separated the two histories and the estimator removed the claimed correction success rate; fabrication is observing ordinary current brackets through fit-up, restrained checks, released inspection and any actual correction.

Ordinary brackets, or only the correction pile again?

Ordinary incoming work, Mei, with individual IDs before the first check; the correction pile stays useful for questions but isn't the sample used to estimate how often that work occurs.

Current observation followed eight brackets: six passed the released check directly, two needed the recorded correction and reinspection; the estimator has the active work and waiting separately, without claiming those eight describe every future UR5e job.

Useful current evidence. Did anyone recover the original failed bracket's final disposition, or does that older case remain explicitly unknown beside the new study?