I pulled one bracket traveller because the FR10 proposal repeats its correction allowance. The restrained check says aligned. The first released measurement is marked failed, then the final sheet passes after a correction entry.
The sketch on the first sheet measures from the outside face. The final sheet looks as though it uses the inside face, but the photocopy loses the arrowhead. Before we decide this demonstrates movement after release, I want to establish whether we are comparing the same dimension. Has anyone untangled a trail like this without remeasuring a part that is long gone?
Are these bracket readings even measured from the same face?
CarlaAbbott0053 · 19 Mar 2026, 12:52 UTC
19 replies
Replying to CarlaAbbott0053
Find the original inspection instruction and the drawing revisions named on both sheets. The correction entry may be genuine, but those two numbers cannot describe its effect until their references agree.
7pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
What does the correction entry actually say, Carla? I would distinguish a recorded operation from someone's later explanation written beside the measurements.
18pointsReplying to AdaAdams0129
It says straighten, signed by fabrication. The first sheet names drawing revision C; the final sheet names D. I had missed that change while squinting at the arrow.
13pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
Did the requirement change between C and D?
1pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
And why did the proposal use this as its representative bracket? One unusually confusing traveller is a poor place to find an average correction allowance.
3pointsReplying to SarahCarter1024
I had an old bracket example that looked useful until I realised the first released reading was missing entirely. We kept it to explain the gap in the process, not to estimate fixture performance. Yours has more information, but I would still want more than this one example before pricing the new job.
13pointsReplying to SarahCarter1024
Sarah's quantity point matters after the measurement question. Carla can still establish what this traveller supports without pretending it represents the whole product family.
10pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
Who owns the waiting brackets while this review happens? I mean the current work, not the old part that cannot be found.
14pointsReplying to CalebArcher0406
Quality retains disposition of current work. Caleb, revision D changes the datum for this dimension. I found a readable drawing, so the two readings are not a before-and-after pair.
16pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
That disposes of the claimed amount of movement. Does the proposal still attach a time saving to it?
11pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
The straighten entry still belongs in the history. It just does not tell us how much this feature changed, particularly across the revised measurement reference.
10pointsReplying to AnnaBennett0764
AnnaBennett, fair point. I don't want the record thrown away. I want the spreadsheet to stop treating one unexplained correction as the normal job.
18pointsReplying to EllaBarnes0555
Ella, yes. It had a time allowance copied from a supervisor's estimate, not a timed correction on this traveller. I've marked both the assumed duration and the unmatched readings.
9pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
That estimate can remain an estimate if the supervisor explains its basis. I wouldn't replace it with zero just because the paperwork is poor.
2pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
Is there a current instruction using revision D throughout?
12pointsReplying to CalebArcher0406
There is. Inspection has selected a current batch for a matched study using that instruction, with part identities carried through any correction. The old traveller is now excluded from the measured saving calculation.
8pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
Please include the time spent waiting for disposition as well as the correction work. Different people may own those delays.
17pointsReplying to CarlaAbbott0053
Will you post the matched results? Interested whether the correction allowance survives with a decent basis.
15pointsReplying to AdaAdams0129
Yes, when that study is complete. Thank you, Ada, for making me read the correction entry separately. We have fixed the misleading example, not explained the bracket behaviour yet.
16pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .