Can't choose which pickup edit belongs with the current fingers

LouisBell0659 · 28 Jul 2025, 20:59 UTC

Closed
LO
LouisBell0659
Our FR10 housing transfer has become crooked again, and the shift notes contain pickup corrections from before and after a finger change with no clear dividing line; what should I get checked so the next person inherits a known setup instead of choosing their favourite offset?

16 replies

RO
RobinAli0251
Replying to LouisBell0659

Can you identify the installed fingers and the pair they replaced? Start with what is physically there before deciding which program history applies.

7 points
LO
LouisBell0659
Replying to RobinAli0251

Installed pair has no visible part marks, but the old pair is in a bag with the tool drawing number; stores thinks the replacements came from a different purchase.

4 points
RO
RobinAli0251
Replying to LouisBell0659

Does the purchase record specify the same drawing revision as that bag?

21 points
LO
LouisBell0659
Replying to RobinAli0251

It says same as sample, which is not helping, and the person who sent the sample is away; maintenance is measuring the isolated tool against the current drawing.

10 points
RO
RobinAli0251
Replying to LouisBell0659

Was the crooked pickup first reported before the finger change or after it?

7 points
NI
NinaBennett0762
Replying to LouisBell0659

Keep the mechanical check and the history search separate. An unknown start date does not prevent checking the current assembly. It does prevent claiming a cause from the timeline alone.

0 points
LO
LouisBell0659
Replying to RobinAli0251

First note I can find is after the change, but it says still leaning, so apparently there was an earlier problem nobody recorded properly.

18 points
DI
DineshBrooks0821
Replying to LouisBell0659

Also compare the contact pads and mounting arrangement, not just the finger outline. Or rather, identify the complete assembly that the drawing calls for. A matching metal finger with a different pad stack can still put the contact face elsewhere.

9 points
LO
LouisBell0659
Replying to DineshBrooks0821

Maintenance found different pad backing thicknesses across the installed pair; the fingers themselves match the current drawing. Stores has located the specified matched pad assemblies.

12 points
DI
DineshBrooks0821
Replying to LouisBell0659

That gives maintenance a defined assembly to restore. Who will verify the pickup after replacement, including the accumulated teaching changes? It needs one agreed return-to-use decision, not a mechanical sign-off followed by somebody quietly restoring an old offset.

6 points
VI
VictorBrooks0794
Replying to DineshBrooks0821

And tell the operators which version passed. We don't need another folder of candidates.

5 points
RO
RobinAli0251
Replying to LouisBell0659

Louis, did anyone inspect the tray seating while the tool was being checked?

13 points
LO
LouisBell0659
Replying to RobinAli0251

Yes, tray seating passed its check. Integrator owns the program review and pickup verification after the matched pads are fitted; operators will get the released setup, not the working copies.

19 points
NI
NinaBennett0762
Replying to LouisBell0659

Keep the unknown earlier fault in the history. Restoring the pad assembly may solve the present lean without explaining every past correction.

9 points
LO
LouisBell0659
Replying to DineshBrooks0821

Matched pads fitted and the reviewed setup passed the loaded-tray checks. Thank you, Dinesh, the backing stack was the detail we had skipped. Earlier lean still unexplained.

21 points
VI
VictorBrooks0794
Replying to LouisBell0659

Did the released version reach nights as well as days?

15 points

Discussion closed

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