For this faceplate trial, the physical samples and quality decisions are already identified and assigned to an inspection technician. That part is not missing. The problem is that two people use different seating positions in the temporary holder, and the shifted highlight is still being labelled as a new scratch in comparison slides.
I want the presentation method made repeatable before the thresholds are adjusted. How should we preserve the useful variation evidence without leaving those labels in circulation as acceptance examples?
Separate the diagnostic images from the acceptance set, and describe the seating difference in their captions; keeping evidence does not require keeping its unsupported scratch label
I have separated them. The technician's physical decisions remain attached to the samples. The slide author has the correction list but has not replaced every embedded image yet.
Sarah's question before a shopping list of lights. On our tray comparison, measuring from the outside edges hid a locating difference. I would check which features the holder is meant to use, not just whether both people can make it look settled.
Two pins and a rear rest. One person seats against both pins; the other catches a return edge on the rest first. You can see the front contacts, not the rear contact.
Zara, would you change the holder for visibility even if the rear contact turns out dimensionally correct? I can imagine a correct rest that is still awkward for someone learning the loading job.
The rear rest is a temporary item without a controlled drawing. Tooling is defining it from the faceplate range. I have told training the current holder does not establish repeatable presentation.
I'd keep the awkward faceplate too, not just a new one that slips into the proposed rest nicely. Otherwise the difficult sample gets quietly retired before the holder has to answer for itself.
The inspection technician owns condition checks as well as storage. The awkward accepted faceplate and the faint reject are both retained. No new reference images released yet.
Yes. Its bench comparison prevents the previous false seat on the retained pieces. Wider part variation and the image comparison are still outstanding, so I have limited the result to that seating check.
Thanks for limiting it. That's the distinction I had to make on our tray update: an improvement on the retained examples, not a promise about every replacement that might arrive.