I am comparing pads for our UR5e sleeve transfer and the softer sample has left a broad dull patch instead of the narrow line on the first sample. Supplier calls that better. I need quality to tell us whether either finish is acceptable, and I need the eventual operator to recognise the difference without holding a sleeve under every lamp in the room.
Keep both sleeves identified and get quality to define the viewing method. I have a faceplate review where moving glare was labelled damage; the label needed holding back until somebody judged the part.
Only the first, Thomas. The second came straight from the same stock box, which is not the same thing. I have separated it from the comparison instead of calling the patch pad damage.
Emma, they changed the contact profile too. Sam, supplier selected both. I asked for a less visible mark and got two changes at once, with no proper comparison agreed.
Then identify each complete pad arrangement. Or rather, do not make the eventual report sound like a material-only trial when the contact shape changed too.
Sam, no tray release shown. The sample exercise was bench gripping only. We are asking for holding and release to be assessed in the intended transfer as well as the appearance comparison.
Use a judged accepted sleeve and a judged rejected one to check the viewing method, then inspect the trial sleeves before and after. That avoids improving the light until every mark becomes invisible.
Yes, Emma. She says the current lamp position makes her turn the sleeve repeatedly to find the mark. Quality is working with her on the view rather than just writing inspect visually again.
Sam, that is included in the planned walkthrough. Thomas, the drawings now name the pad material and profile for each candidate. Thank you Jasper for catching the before-inspection gap; I had nearly presented that second sleeve as proof.
Has quality decided whether the broad patch is acceptable in its present condition? That can still be a useful judgement even without knowing what caused it.
They have rejected that sleeve under the agreed method. Cause still unknown because we lack its before check. No pad selected; the next comparison starts with inspected sleeves and includes the actual release task.