Yes. Quality accepts both, though they are not identical at that corner. I have asked the fixture designer to look at the actual contact with the samples.

Accepted variation needs to fit the locating scheme without the clamp forcing the bracket into a different shape; the designer should identify intended contacts and accidental ones.

Look at what catches before blaming that corner dimension. It might be a nearby lead-in or fixing. Has anyone actually seen the first contact?

Fiona, our production lead suggested the clamp, not the designer. Farah, the designer has now shown the first contact: an internal nest radius catches one bracket before its foot reaches the pad.

Did the designer propose a relief there?

Will the intended locating faces stay unchanged?

A relief may be appropriate, but that is the designer's decision after checking the accepted bracket range, not an invitation to file the corner until this one sample fits.

The designer proposed a local clearance change that leaves the locating pads and faces intact. It is going into the prototype nest drawing. No stronger clamp in the revision.

That sounds more useful. Does the loader have a way to recognise proper seating, rather than just seeing the top look level?

Yes, the revised view shows the pad contacts from the loading side. We have had the prototype changed and quality is checking the retained bracket range in it.

The checked brackets now reach the intended contacts without rocking or being pulled down by the clamp. Quality accepted the seating comparison and the drawing has been updated. Thanks, Farah, the first-contact question stopped us arguing about which bracket looked odd.

Did the production lead keep the stronger-clamp quote as a souvenir?