I cannot select the proposed softer pads from our marked bench samples alone. These coated round housings will be loaded into inspection trays by an FR5, and we have not agreed how to judge the visible cylindrical finish. I need appearance, holding and release assessed on the same identified samples.
Softer FR5 pads need an agreed housing-finish comparison
MeiAbbott0081 · 17 Aug 2026, 21:55 UTC
3 replies
Replying to MeiAbbott0081
Have quality define the viewing conditions and provide acceptable and unacceptable physical references. Record each housing before contact and after the agreed handling stages. The tooling assessment must also retain slips, poor placement and reluctant release, not just the attractive parts that reached the tray.
19pointsReplying to AnnaBaker0503
Quality has agreed the viewing method and identified reference housings. The supplier will compare the original contact and softer candidate under a recorded handling scope. We have not run that comparison, so the softer material remains a proposal.
13pointsReplying to MeiAbbott0081
Include pad condition after repeated use in that scope. A fresh pad can behave differently once it has picked up debris or worn. Someone must own the inspection and replacement criteria if this becomes the selected tooling.
13pointsAdd 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.