I've got pendant screenshots for the training inspection station, but no clear revisions, subprograms or ordinary PLC expectations. The original integrator is still available. I want a maintainer to follow the reference-plate job without needing its author beside them the whole time.
Can you identify and export the installed project first? A dependency map needs a definite source, otherwise you will spend the handover explaining screenshots from several revisions and still not know which one the station runs.
Integrator can export it. The screenshots have no revision labels and one shows a routine name absent from the current pendant list. I don't want that quietly merged into the new document.
Only visible so far, Farah. Fixture owner is supplying the drawing and reference-plate seating notes. Jo, our evening maintainer has agreed to try the draft with the integrator present for questions.
Map the main routine to its called programs, ordinary PLC inputs and outputs, and expected states at each handoff. Explain what the signal means and who owns it, not just its address. An unexplained true bit makes a very small and surprisingly unhelpful handover.
Installed export is now identified. The old screenshot was from a removed trial routine, which the integrator confirmed. Current dependency map includes the inspection-result record path as well as the ordinary PLC exchange.
Farah, give each section an owner, but keep one release record for the combined handover. Separate owners are useful; five independently current documents can still describe five different versions of the same station.
Jo, the draft links the result location and explains pending versus completed records. Farah, our cell lead owns the handover release, with named controls, fixture and quality contributors. The removed trial page is outside the current instructions.
He found two gaps. A called check routine wasn't in the dependency list, and fixture-index meant two different things in the signal table and operator note. Very glad we tried this before calling it complete.
They did. The operator note had used index for a selected fixture type, while the PLC signal confirms its position. Those are separate entries now, with the responsible source named. Missing check routine is included and linked to the installed export.
Evening maintainer repeated the document walkthrough without hints. He found the called routine, matched both fixture entries and located the sample result record. Cell lead accepted this documentation handover; it isn't a new validation of the inspection process.
Keep the walkthrough findings with that released version. They explain why those sections are separate, which is useful when somebody later suggests shortening the document by merging them again.