The sketch uses the incoming end face. Its length allowance is on the blank drawing, but our sheet doesn't identify individual samples. Annoyingly basic omission.

Start a labeled bench set with overall length and the intended seating reference. An exposed-length comparison can then help flag seating differences for review.

Exposed length still needs a caveat there. A shorter blank with a seating gap could give the same reading as a correctly seated longer one.

Fair correction: i meant paired measurements, not a standalone pass mark. The acceptance reference needs to distinguish permitted blank variation from a seating gap.

Does that mean the seating face has to be the finished-part datum?

Not necessarily. There needs to be a defined relationship between them. The drawing owner can explain which incoming surface supports the intended machining reference.

@SaraAdams0113 Our downstream operation references a shoulder, not that end face. The planning sketch doesn't show the relationship between the two. That explains some of the argument.

@HanaChan1057 We had a different sleeve project with two perfectly respectable spreadsheets that couldn't be matched. Putting IDs on the physical samples made the measurements useful.

@OwenAli0225 Would you include end-face photos with those IDs? Some edges look rough, but I don't want a gallery replacing measurements.

@HanaChan1057 I'd attach them to the measurements. That lets another person locate the same edge or contact mark without assuming it's responsible for the variation.

@HanaChan1057 Also mark the actual stop contact area on the sketch. A named face isn't enough if the proposed geometry only touches its edge.

The removed workholding inspection photos show a partial witness patch. They don't link to particular samples, so I can't connect it to the length readings.

Useful clue, but uneven witness marks don't tell you whether chips, geometry or an old contact condition produced them.

Agreed. Have the workholding specialist inspect the removed components under the site's isolation procedure and compare them with the drawing. Keep this an offline investigation.

When would you choose the seating sensor? Our purchasing people would already be asking for its part number.

After defining what it must distinguish. Ask the integrator how a proposed method handles an obstructed seat and both ends of the permitted blank range.

@SaraAdams0113 So I can give them paper examples of a correctly seated short blank and an obstructed longer one, without choosing the technology myself?

Exactly. Include cases that could produce the same exposed length too. Those make the limitation of the original check much easier to explain.

I can't justify a seating acceptance rule from what we've. The loading decision is on hold until the blank dimensions and seating reference give us a sound basis.