Our bracket pass uses a different checking support from the failure

CalebArcher0406 · 27 Mar 2026, 02:48 UTC

Closed
CA
CalebArcher0406
I matched our released bracket failure and later pass to drawing revision D. The checking-support photos differ, though. Can those results guide our FR5 fixture study before that difference is explained?

11 replies

VI
VictorAllen0272
Replying to CalebArcher0406

Ask quality what each support establishes and which feature was measured, because matching the drawing revision does not make the two checking arrangements interchangeable.

4points
CA
CalebArcher0406
Replying to VictorAllen0272

The failure sheet names flange angle. The pass sheet says checked after correction, with no feature named. Its photo shows an extra block beneath the bracket.

6points
AD
AdaAdams0129
Replying to CalebArcher0406

Can the inspector identify that block and explain its purpose? I would not use the two readings as a before-and-after measure until the feature and checking method are matched.

11points
AN
AnikaBaker0508
Replying to CalebArcher0406

Is the block in the checking-equipment list? That might identify it without relying on the photograph.

12points
CL
ClaraBaker0437
Replying to CalebArcher0406

And who entered the correction, Caleb, or is that another unsigned note you're being asked to turn into a reliable process?

22points
CA
CalebArcher0406
Replying to AnikaBaker0508

Anika, the equipment list identifies the block as part of a later checking arrangement. Clara, correction is signed by the workshop lead, but the operation itself is not described.

6points
VI
VictorAllen0272
Replying to CalebArcher0406

The workshop lead can describe the correction route while quality checks the measurement change; neither needs to wait for the other to begin.

11points
AD
AdaAdams0129
Replying to CalebArcher0406

Was the later checking arrangement introduced because the earlier one was unsuitable, or for another bracket version? The equipment identity gives you someone a concrete question to answer.

-2points
CL
ClaraBaker0437
Replying to CalebArcher0406

Please leave the correction cost in the study as unknown for now; a signed entry is better than nothing, but it doesn't tell you the labour disappears with a robot.

9points
AN
AnikaBaker0508
Replying to CalebArcher0406

Link the block identification to the photo. Saves the next person repeating the stores search.

4points
CA
CalebArcher0406
Replying to AnikaBaker0508

The photo is linked. Quality has not established whether the first check used the right support, and the workshop lead has not reconstructed the correction method. Our study now states both gaps instead of claiming a measured improvement.

18points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .