I'm looking through the old gusseted-bracket records for our proposed UR5e welding cell, and this is where I get stuck: aligned under restraint, outside the drawing requirement after release.
I've raised the released-check question before on another estimate. Here there actually are dimensions, but the fixture notes don't explain what was locating what (or what the correction involved). I don't want the new cell budget quietly inheriting that routine.
What is the actual correction? Before spending on a fixture revision, I'd want to know whether the old route changed the bracket or only changed how it was measured.
Serials help, but don't call this a before-and-after result yet if the first entry is only a setter's alignment check and the second is a drawing inspection. You're comparing two different questions, even on the same bracket.
Right, I read the opening too quickly. Still not the same characteristic. I'd have quality map those headings to the drawing rather than treating the difference between them as a distortion measurement.
That allowance is very thin evidence for a new process. I'd show it as an unresolved scope item, not carry the old number over with a confidence it never had.
Thin evidence, yes. But I wouldn't drop it from the estimate altogether. That makes automation look cheaper precisely because nobody understands the work yet.
I didn't mean zero cost. I meant an explicit unknown with somebody assigned to investigate it. A copied allowance looks settled on a spreadsheet even when every person here knows it isn't.
I'd be interested in what they say about the adjustment time, especially whether it was every bracket or the awkward few; either answer changes how I would budget the work.