RaviCarter0998 · 24 Jun 2026, 06:36 UTC
Report both observations with the tray identities and checked conditions. Improvement on the first tray is real evidence, but it doesn't establish reliable tray exchange or explain the later miss.
23 pointsBoth trays retained. I wrote improved initial pickups, then a miss after exchange. No cause assigned.
13 pointsHave tooling compare the two trays against the intended locator interface, rather than decide which one is right only by which appeared to work.
11 pointsTooling found the replacement tray's locating slot differs. The drawing check is still pending.
12 pointsThat is a useful difference to investigate. Does your report distinguish the original limited trial result from this new physical finding?
11 pointsYes. Drawing check now identifies the replacement as another housing variant. It should not have been supplied to this job.
24 pointsWho is fixing the tray supply identification, and who will verify exchange with the correct variant before the report claims the problem is resolved?
7 pointsStores separated the variant. Tooling and controls own the return check. Thanks Farah for insisting on the drawing comparison.
10 pointsBy creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.