ChloeAdams0135 · 12 Nov 2025, 09:52 UTC
Keep it as an observation, not a repeatability result. Are the original blanks retained?
15 pointsRetained as a mixed handful, not linked to readings. I can't reconstruct the order from memory.
14 pointsThen don't. Label the limitation on the sheet and have inspection define a fresh identified comparison. Length, the end against the stop, and the intended seating contacts need attention; exposed length alone mixes those questions together.
4 pointsAgreed. A tidy guessed order would make the sheet worse.
13 pointsI've kept the old sheet with that warning. Inspector is identifying the retained blanks and asking the machinist how each was intended to contact the stop. Automatic loading remains outside this check.
7 pointsWhat measuring reference did the old sheet use? Even if the individual readings cannot be paired, that description may help explain what was observed.
4 pointsChuck face to exposed end, confirmed by the person who measured it. Thanks Leah, I've added that description without inventing the missing sample links.
7 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .