Getting consistent inspection evidence before commissioning

ElenaArcher0427 · 30 May 2026, 09:24 UTC

Reply to discussion
EL
ElenaArcher0427
We're planning presenting reflective components for surface inspection, with Fairino FR5 presenting a reflective aluminium bezel to a fixed camera in a robot-presented camera station. Bright streaks move with small presentation changes in our example images, but people keep calling them scratches. We haven't commissioned the cell. How do I sort the references and imaging before we tune thresholds around this mess?

4 replies

HA
HazelAdams0136
Replying to ElenaArcher0427

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.

8 points
EL
ElenaArcher0427
Replying to HazelAdams0136

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.

8 points
HA
HazelAdams0136
Replying to ElenaArcher0427

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.

5 points
BE
BenAbbott0022
Replying to HazelAdams0136

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.

16 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.