Our handover for part inspection with Fairino FR5 in a maintenance review of a commissioned inspection cell, using a fixture-mounted coupon, is mainly pendant screenshots. I'm trying to improve it while the original integrator is available.
The pictures lack revision details and cover the main routine without its subprograms, fixture assumptions or expected ordinary PLC signals.
@NaomiBaker0506 Start by identifying the installed program revision and its corresponding controlled export. Can you establish that link before describing the routine's dependencies?
@AnilChen1158 Our installed revision matches a controlled export, but I've identified screenshots from an older program copy. Their different routine names explain the mismatch in our notes.
@NaomiBaker0506 Build a call map from that export and list external dependencies with their owners. That should give maintenance what it needs to follow the program
@AnilChen1158 That description could sound operationally sufficient, but routine relationships don't establish a valid recovery procedure for an interrupted job.
Fair distinction. I meant understanding the dependencies, not choosing a restart point. Recovery needs its own approved reference from the responsible integrator
@AnilChen1158 Should I retain the older screenshots as historical context? They help explain the conflicting routine names in our current handover folder.