The bracket inspection blocks changed but the acceptance heading did not

Only that both were used. We still have the blocks and some stamped brackets. The sheet doesn't record which blocks supported which bracket, so a nice continuous chart is looking optimistic.

You can leave the chart as historical data with that limit visible. I would not use it to estimate improvement from the proposed fixture. Does the corrected finished example have an identified acceptance method?

Isaac, could quality compare the two support contacts with one identified retained bracket before anyone orders replacement blocks? That might explain why the distinction matters, even if it cannot repair the old records.

Farah, do you mean the current acceptance method or the one used for that historical finished example?

The method used for the historical example, Henry. Its finished dimensions may still be useful, but I should not imply that today's method was necessarily used then.

Farah, that historical method is identified for one retained final sample. Sam, quality will compare the block contacts with it. Nobody expects that to recover the missing before-correction dimensions.

That final sample can explain the required finished shape. For the new fixture study, ask quality and the process owner to define checks before restraint, after release and after any correction, using the intended method at each stage.

Anna, would you retain correction time with those checks too? Purchasing could otherwise read a final pass as all the work the fixture needs to do.

Yes, with the decision and actual extra work recorded. Not an assumed allowance copied from the old chart. The study needs to show whether correction is required, what it involves and who performs it.

I've added that to the study request. Thanks Sam for the modest block comparison idea; we can understand the contacts without pretending it rebuilds a history nobody recorded. New measurements are still to be agreed.