GraceCarter1016 · 24 Dec 2025, 15:20 UTC
Does he need an allowance for the whole route to acceptance, or only the time someone spends correcting the bracket?
12 pointsDon't hand over the final-pass count on its own. I've watched that become a 'first time right' figure because it was the only column with a sensible heading. The rejects hadn't vanished, somebody had worked on them. Then our technician looked slow for doing exactly the work that got those pieces accepted. I'd give the estimator the route with its gaps showing, even if that makes his spreadsheet untidy.
5 pointsSam, whole route. Daniel, correction is shown, but he wants to fill its blank time from the old sheets.
8 pointsWhat do the old sheets contain between the released failure and final pass? There may be a usable observation without a defensible duration.
14 pointsGrace, has anyone established that the old and current brackets use the same drawing revision and acceptance method? A recorded duration could still describe a different job
21 pointsI'd keep a description of the old correction if the person who did it can still explain it, although I wouldn't turn their memory of a quick job into a timed allowance; useful background and reliable timing needn't come from the same source.
14 pointsOur bracket estimate recently began at the correction bench and missed the preceding check and queue. That omission was easier to find than a missing duration. Sam's whole-route question is worth pinning down before anyone tries to improve the arithmetic.
21 pointsJames, who notices that a bracket is waiting for correction in your arrangement? I'm interested in the handover as well as the queue, because a person covering the job may not know where the rejected work gets left.
1 pointsCould the estimator show a range pending the current observations? A single borrowed number will look settled once it is in the total.
18 pointsA range still needs a reason. Otherwise the covering shift gets two unexplained numbers instead of one. I'd rather see the missing work named until somebody can estimate it
23 pointsAnd keep 'passed after correction' visible. It is not an insult to the fixture or the person who made it. Hiding that stage makes the next person's job harder.
15 pointsBeth, same revision, but old supports aren't recorded. Harish, just 'reset' between failure and pass. Current method is defined.
19 pointsI'd leave the old durations out of the current allowance then. 'Reset' could mean half a dozen things to different people. The old sheet tells you to ask about correction; it doesn't tell you how long your present job will take.
14 pointsHas the estimator separated time occupying the fixture from time waiting for inspection or correction, since the whole route may contain both?
20 pointsSara, the handover assignment is being added to our draft. I cannot tell you that the covering person has tried it yet. Your question gives me something specific to take back, thanks.
0 pointsDaniel, agreed on the allowance, but I'd still ask what the old reset meant if the author is available; it might point to a support or fit-up question for the new trial without becoming an instruction to repeat the old correction.
4 pointsSam, fixture occupancy is separate now. Toby, old author isn't available. We'll use the current linked observations, with quality's review still pending.
10 pointsHazel, fair point about inventing a range. I meant one based on observed work, which Grace hasn't got reviewed yet. I would leave that field open for now.
14 pointsGrace, who will add the inspection waiting time to those observations? It can disappear if the welding team records only the work at its own bench.
7 pointsInspection owns that entry. Estimator has agreed to leave the allowance open until the linked checks are reviewed.
4 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .