two housing inserts, one unhelpful latch signal

WillAbbott0052 · 12 Oct 2025, 20:54 UTC

Closed
WI
WillAbbott0052
Our UR5e nest inserts look alike and fit backwards; the common latch signal cannot identify either family.

21 replies

OS
OscarBaker0445
Replying to WillAbbott0052

What tells the application which recipe belongs to the fitted insert, then?

6 points
TH
ThomasChan1060
Replying to WillAbbott0052

Can the operator see the insert's family mark after fitting it?

13 points
WI
WillAbbott0052
Replying to OscarBaker0445

Oscar, manual recipe selection. Thomas, family mark faces down when installed. Not much help on shift.

15 points
JO
JoBarnes0592
Replying to WillAbbott0052

Move the visible mark for the operator, certainly, but ask the designer about preventing reversal as well; a prettier label won't stop a convincing wrong fit.

12 points
OW
OwenBaker0486
Replying to JoBarnes0592

And the family still needs linking to the recipe, Jo, because a correctly oriented wrong-family insert can look just as neatly fitted

13 points
OS
OscarBaker0445
Replying to OwenBaker0486

Owen, exactly; does the proposed check identify the installed family or merely another form of insert present?

3 points
TH
ThomasChan1060
Replying to OscarBaker0445

Oscar, Will hasn't described a proposed check yet.

11 points
OS
OscarBaker0445
Replying to ThomasChan1060

Fair point. I meant that as a question for the eventual proposal, not something already supplied

17 points
WI
WillAbbott0052
Replying to JoBarnes0592

Designer is sketching asymmetric location. Controls is looking at installed-family identification. Nothing selected yet, including the visible mark.

13 points
JO
JoBarnes0592
Replying to WillAbbott0052

I'd keep both families on the designer's desk for that sketch, since fixing one reversed fit can leave the other combination untouched.

9 points
OW
OwenBaker0486
Replying to WillAbbott0052

Will, who owns the list of permitted insert and recipe combinations, including replacement revisions? That list can become somebody's memory if it is left between stores and programming

1 points
TH
ThomasChan1060
Replying to OwenBaker0486

And who explains a rejected combination to the operator?

23 points
WI
WillAbbott0052
Replying to OwenBaker0486

Tooling owns the combination list with controls. Our trainer will review the rejected-case wording with an operator.

-2 points
JO
JoBarnes0592
Replying to ThomasChan1060

Thomas, on our fixture the first message just said invalid, which told the operator precisely nothing about which part of the changeover needed checking.

8 points
TH
ThomasChan1060
Replying to JoBarnes0592

Jo, did you add the detected family and selected recipe?

4 points
JO
JoBarnes0592
Replying to ThomasChan1060

The selected setup and the detected insert name, yes, plus a separate message when the identity could not be read at all; no point pretending unreadable means definitely the wrong family.

6 points
OW
OwenBaker0486
Replying to JoBarnes0592

That unreadable case deserves its own test in Will's review too, especially after an insert has been removed and the software might still remember the last valid one

11 points
OS
OscarBaker0445
Replying to WillAbbott0052

Will, has the orientation proposal changed the physical fit yet, or is it still a drawing?

17 points
WI
WillAbbott0052
Replying to OscarBaker0445

Still drawing review. Proposed keying blocks reversal in both families on paper. Installed-identity method remains undecided.

6 points
TH
ThomasChan1060
Replying to JoBarnes0592

Jo, thanks for the unreadable distinction. That's easy to lose in a short message.

12 points

Discussion closed

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