our ur5e bracket estimate skips whatever happened before final acceptance

SarahBarnes0589 · 27 Jun 2026, 08:50 UTC

Reply to discussion
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Old angle-bracket notes say aligned while restrained, outside the drawing after release, then corrected. The proposed UR5e review uses the final pass without explaining that correction. I need fit-up, location and final inspection separated before we price the work.

10 replies

RO
RosaChan1075
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

I would start by asking what aligned meant to the person making the note. We had a tick that meant touching the stops, while the later sheet was a dimensional inspection. Comparing them as pass then fail made the fixture look more mysterious than the evidence justified.

6 points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to RosaChan1075

The fabrication lead says aligned meant the parts sat against the fixture stops before welding. It was not a measurement of the released assembly against the final drawing.

18 points
WI
WillBarnes0574
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Then keep it as fit-up evidence, with that meaning stated. It cannot establish that the later dimensional requirement was met under restraint either.

15 points
CA
CarlaAbbott0053
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Do any records identify the incoming components and their relevant dimensions? Before commissioning a large new study, I would check what starting-condition evidence already exists and whether it can be linked to the assemblies on the released sheet.

15 points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to CarlaAbbott0053

Incoming inspection is batch-level. Released readings identify assemblies, but there is no component-to-assembly link. The correction tick is also batch-level, so I can't allocate work or an incoming condition to an individual result.

15 points
RO
RosaChan1075
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

That is enough to stop a false comparison. It doesn't make the old records worthless; they tell the next study which links were missing. I'd keep the fabrication lead's explanation attached as an account, not silently rewrite the original tick.

15 points
WI
WillBarnes0574
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Has the proposed estimate been changed, or is the final pass still being treated as the result of the new fixture?

13 points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to WillBarnes0574

Planner removed that direct-result assumption. The fixture designer and quality lead now propose an identified sample study, with starting dimensions, actual locating conditions, released measurement and any correction recorded separately.

18 points
CA
CarlaAbbott0053
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Include ordinary incoming variation in the selection, not just the most troublesome retained examples. A focused sample can investigate a particular failure, but the process estimate also needs to know what work the normal mix demands.

14 points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to CarlaAbbott0053

Selection now includes the ordinary supplied range as agreed by quality. Study has not run. The estimate shows development uncertainty, and the old alignment note no longer pretends to be final dimensional acceptance.

22 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.