I can separate restrained and released checks now, but this bracket history still hides the correction before final acceptance; which of its figures can guide our UR5e welding-fixture plan without inheriting that unexplained work?
First identify what each figure describes, including measurement condition and whether correction had already occurred. A final accepted dimension may be genuine while still being unsuitable evidence of what the welding fixture alone achieved.
The final dimensions are identified to brackets, but the restrained note is a batch-level tick and the correction entry gives neither operation nor individual bracket IDs.
Then the person estimating the new process needs that distinction beside the final readings, because an accepted part is useful evidence but it doesn't tell them how much work someone did to get there.
Henry, yes. Robin can use them to show the achieved final condition under the recorded inspection method, while declining to attribute that result to the proposed fixture or an unrecorded sequence.
Quality checked the inspection-method references and retained the final measurements as historical acceptance evidence, but the fixture designer has removed them from the column labelled first-pass results.
That column change matters, Robin, and I'd ask whoever priced the correction allowance to see it too; otherwise the drawing can improve while the cost sheet carries on believing the old story.
Henry, there is a general rework allowance but no identified operation or frequency behind it; Rebecca, I have marked that allowance provisional for the planner rather than treating it as measured process time.
We agreed an identified through-stage measurement sheet for the next bracket trial, including any correction before final inspection, so the old records have a bounded use now but the new process estimate still needs that trial evidence.