简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文;未对原文作自动翻译。

Repeated teaching changes after a finger replacement

ChloeBennett0744 · 2025年4月16日 23:44 UTC

已关闭
CH
ChloeBennett0744
Our FR5 polymer-housing transfer became less reliable after replacement fingers were fitted, although several teaching changes have since obscured the sequence. The grip now appears slightly skewed. I would like maintenance to inspect the physical setup before another adjustment, but I am unsure which records will help them distinguish the replacement from the later changes.

13 条回复

MI
MiaChan1079

Give them the finger replacement record and the saved program versions, with the approximate order of events. Also describe the skew you observed. You do not need to decide its cause before asking for an inspection.

21
CH
ChloeBennett0744

The replacement record names a spare set, but the drawer contains two nearly identical sets. Maintenance has isolated the cell and is comparing the installed identifiers with the drawing.

19
MI
MiaChan1079

Photographs of the installed parts and their contact faces may help later, especially if the fingers are removed. The drawer is already offering more candidates than the records intended.

19
CH
ChloeBennett0744

The installed set is correct. They found a thin burr beneath one locating shoulder, which prevented full seating. It has been dealt with under the maintenance procedure; the setup still needs verification.

11
MI
MiaChan1079

Use an agreed reference for that verification and retain the teaching history. Some later point changes may have compensated for the incorrectly seated finger. The mechanical correction does not tell you which saved version is appropriate.

9
HA
HazelBrown0919

Don't just load the oldest file and hope. Check what else changed since then (tray, part variant, tool data). An old program can be old for several reasons.

13
MI
MiaChan1079

Agreed. I meant preserve the versions for review, not select one by age. The responsible person needs to verify the intended combination.

11
JO
JonasAbbott0024

Who is checking the combination, and who tells the next shift which one they may use? I have seen this left between maintenance and production before.

1
CH
ChloeBennett0744

Our controls lead owns verification, with maintenance confirming the tool assembly and production accepting the handover. We have kept the job unavailable while they complete that work.

23
JO
JonasAbbott0024

Does the operator screen make that clear? A saved program that still opens can look ready to use, even when the handover folder says otherwise.

3
NI
NinaAli0240

Also identify those similar spare sets in stores before the next replacement. This time the set was correct, but a drawer requiring detective work is still a poor spare-parts system.

21
MI
MiaChan1079

The screen status and stores issue are both worth closing. Neither changes what caused this occurrence, but both affect how the next person handles it.

13
CH
ChloeBennett0744

Verification is complete and the job is back under supervised use with the approved setup recorded. Stores has separated the spare sets. No skew seen in the checked runs, though we are still monitoring the original interruption rate.

15

讨论已关闭

此讨论已连续六个月没有活动,现已关闭新回复。 最后活动: .