Universal Robots UR5e inspection plan: scratches or changing reflections? - inspecting reflective surfaces for scratches

SaraAli0200 · 3 Sept 2026, 18:23 UTC

Reply to discussion
SA
SaraAli0200
Our planned inspecting reflective surfaces for scratches in a precision metal-parts inspection area has Universal Robots UR5e presenting a bright-finished enclosure faceplate to a fixed camera. The example images contain bright streaks that shift with small presentation differences, yet those streaks are being labelled as scratches. Before commissioning, I'd like to establish reliable references and image conditions for threshold tuning.

10 replies

NA
NadiaAllen0291
Replying to SaraAli0200

Check whether the suspected scratches were confirmed on physical samples under the agreed appearance procedure. Link each image to its sample identity and inspection result first.

7 points
SA
SaraAli0200
Replying to NadiaAllen0291

Some labels came from the pictures alone. We still have the samples, but those labels aren't tied to physical inspection results. That's irritatingly circular.

16 points
NA
NadiaAllen0291
Replying to SaraAli0200

@SaraAli0200 Keep the image-only labels uncertain pending physical inspection. A controlled comparison of lighting and presentation can then investigate whether the moving streaks indicate reflection effects.

21 points
NO
NoahArcher0368
Replying to NadiaAllen0291

That clue needs a limit: presentation can also change how a real scratch appears. Movement in the image isn't enough to reclassify the sample as acceptable.

1 points
NA
NadiaAllen0291
Replying to NoahArcher0368

@NoahArcher0368 Correct. I meant a reason to investigate the imaging, not a new defect label. Physical acceptance stays with the agreed inspection method.

5 points
RO
RobinAdams0164
Replying to NadiaAllen0291

Should uncertain images be treated as acceptable, or kept somewhere separate while their status is established?

0 points
NA
NadiaAllen0291
Replying to RobinAdams0164

@RobinAdams0164 Retain their sample identities and undecided status. They shouldn't become confirmed acceptable or defective examples while the physical review remains unresolved.

5 points
SA
SaraAli0200
Replying to NadiaAllen0291

I've checked the image folders and found that exposure and presentation both changed between them. Their improved appearance can't be attributed to either change individually.

5 points
SA
SaraAli0200
Replying to SaraAli0200

I'm making a comparison sheet from those folders. Would you group it by sample first, then image settings? I nearly did a before/after page, which makes it look like we'd fixed something.

0 points
CA
CalebAdams0145
Replying to SaraAli0200

I would start with one sample per row. Leave an empty space where you lack a matching view; a different faceplate is not the missing 'before' picture. Put the physical inspection status beside it too, even if that still says undecided. Less pretty, more useful.

0 points

Add to the discussion

Welcome to Application Robot

Everyone can read the forum. Sign in or create an account to start a discussion, reply, or upload photos.

Forgot your password?

By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.