Our fixture-to-tray puck grip keeps needing pickup nudges. Receiving tray looks unchanged, but the hold is less square before it gets there. What should maintenance compare at the source and tool first?
Compare the identified puck seated in the source fixture with its position through closure and withdrawal. Preserve the point versions. The receiving tray cannot establish whether the source location or assembled tool has changed.
Maintenance saved the versions. Same puck leans in the source fixture before closure; another sample does too. The fixture stop moves under the specified inspection check, so the investigation has a physical starting point.
Have maintenance compare that stop's mounting with the intended assembly and keep the as-found position recorded. Finding movement does not yet tell you what restoration requires, or which compensated points will be appropriate afterward.
The stop mounting had loosened. Maintenance restored its specified assembly and location, then checked the pucks and tool against their requirements. Integrator has selected the point version for the restored setup; supervised transfer checks are next.
Those checks are complete now. Pucks sit square before grip and remain square through the agreed transfer, with normal source loading, tray changes and release included. The handling repair is closed; maintenance has added the stop-mount check to its service instructions.
Keep that sequence in the handover, including the selected point version. It explains why restoring the source fixture fixed this case, rather than leaving the next person to think one more robot offset eventually worked.