The FR5 cover-nest proposal uses two nearly identical removable inserts. Both appear to fit backwards, and the screen only asks the operator to choose a family. I want the installed insert checked against that choice before automated use, without relying entirely on somebody recognising the shape.
Cannot approve our FR5 cover recipe from an insert that looks right
ImranAllen0305 · 12 Dec 2025, 12:08 UTC
4 replies
Replying to ImranAllen0305
Have tooling review preventing reversal and making the fitted identity clear, then have controls define the recipe agreement. Try the proposed logic with a wrong family and unreadable identity too. Otherwise the first awkward insert will turn your automatic check into another operator guess.
10pointsReplying to HarishBrooks0837
Tooling is considering keying, and controls has added the wrong-family and unreadable cases to its draft. The proposed identifier is still under review; no insert check is implemented yet.
10pointsReplying to ImranAllen0305
Include removal after a successful check. The old identity must not remain good when someone swaps the insert, even if they put the same-looking family back. Who owns that changeover behaviour?
18pointsReplying to HarishBrooks0837
Controls owns it with the tooling lead. Their draft now invalidates the earlier agreement after removal and requires the installed state to be checked again. The design and tests remain unfinished, so automatic use stays unapproved.
7pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .