Can't sign the UR5e check from an overhead clip
Aileen_Bailey · 18 Jul 2025, 07:21 UTC
11 replies
Tell them exactly which two views are missing. Readable package identification and the sample staying in its pocket as the fingers leave.
16pointsI've asked. They sent a label photo separately and said the clip is the same machine. No tooling identifier on the photo.
12pointsAsk for the identifiers connected to the demonstration. Another loose photo leaves you doing the joining up.
4pointsNew clip starts at the label and follows the tool. Better. But it cuts before the fingers come out of the tray, so release is still hidden.
23pointsOne demonstration I reviewed ended at placement too. The awkward part was the empty withdrawal. I'd ask for that whole attempt through to a clear view of the placed samples
21pointsThey say showing the filled tray afterwards should be enough. I said we agreed to see the handling, including the tool leaving. Getting tired of asking for five more seconds.
18pointsHave your acceptance owner send the missing criterion with the agreed trial outline. You can acknowledge the improved identification without signing off the hidden release. That may prevent them treating this as another new request
22pointsYes, and stop calling each partial clip almost accepted. That's an invitation to argue about how close they've got.
3pointsAileen, is the receiving tray in the clip the one specified for your samples? The final pocket spacing matters when you ask them to show withdrawal.
19pointsRavi, that is worth checking. My earlier example used a roomier trial tray, which was part of why the short clip looked convincing.
15pointsIt is our specified tray, checked against the drawing. Purchasing has sent the outstanding release criterion with the original agreement. No complete recording yet, so no acceptance.
8pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .