MinaChan1120 · 28 Jan 2026, 07:40 UTC
Put the two actual features beside their results before choosing either; similar numbers are very good at making unrelated checks look like agreement.
24 pointsThe outside check is a tick for fitting between blocks while clamped. Hole centres have a number after release. No outside measurement written down.
12 pointsThen you do not have a measured change in width. You have a fixture-fit observation and a separate dimensional result. Keep both, with those descriptions.
19 pointsWhich drawing revision belongs to that hole-centre result?
9 pointsMina, I met much the same trap with a clamped tick and a released dimension. The tick was useful for explaining the operation, but it could not supply the missing measurement. Are you trying to choose an inspection method or explain a claimed movement?
8 pointsTobyArcher, revision G is on the inspection sheet. TobyChen, explain the movement. Our proposal says it opened by the difference between the block spacing and the hole-centre number.
7 pointsThat subtraction should come out of the proposal; it uses different features, even before you get to the clamped and released conditions.
11 pointsAgree with Yasmin about the subtraction. Do not remove the failed released result with it. That may still be a real acceptance problem on revision G.
9 pointsWas that result actually outside revision G's requirement?
13 pointsYes. Quality checked the sheet against G. The released bracket failed, then passed after correction. I had started thinking the bad comparison meant the whole fault was only paperwork.
9 pointsEasy mistake to make once one part of the explanation falls apart. Your new review can still carry the observed failure and correction work without claiming that the old notes identify the cause
18 pointsHas the fixture designer seen the corrected description yet, Mina? It would be a shame to keep designing around that invented movement.
15 pointsYes. Designer and quality signed off the rewritten comparison. No calculated movement now. Released failure and later corrected pass are separate entries, with G and the inspection supports named. That answers my folder question.
25 pointsGood, thanks for answering the revision question.
17 pointsAlso found the block-spacing number was copied from the fixture drawing, not measured on that bracket. Added that note so nobody puts the subtraction back later.
20 pointsUseful distinction. The fixture review still has a genuine released failure to investigate, just without a borrowed before-measurement steering it.
16 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .