Our bright faceplate images have moving streaks labelled as scratches. Small presentation changes alter them. Before commissioning, what evidence should anchor the physical acceptance decisions and the imaging comparison so we don't tune a detector around guessed labels?
Why are FR10 faceplate thresholds being discussed before the scratch references?
VictorArcher0359 · 14 Jun 2026, 09:13 UTC
3 replies
Replying to VictorArcher0359
Start with identified retained faceplates and quality's physical decisions under the appearance requirement. Keep repeated images linked to each piece, with the disputed labels excluded from reference answers. Then the vision team can compare controlled seating and lighting against actual accepted finishes and known defects.
15pointsReplying to FelixArcher0371
We have retained two identified faceplates, but the scratch label came from viewing their photographs only. Quality has not examined either. I'll keep those labels unverified and ask for the physical decisions before using them in tuning.
14pointsReplying to VictorArcher0359
Has quality taken them on yet, Victor? I'd also retain the awkward views for the later imaging comparison; correcting a label should not erase the condition that made the proposed setup look unreliable.
11pointsAdd to the discussion
Welcome to Application Robot
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.