I'm reviewing historical records for our planned preparing robotic welding of gusseted brackets with Fairino FR10 and a fabricated gusseted mounting bracket in a robotic welding project review.
The notes describe alignment under restraint but dimensions outside the drawing requirement after release.
I'd like to distinguish incoming fit-up, fixture location and final acceptance before carrying an unexplained correction routine into the new cell; no live welding adjustments are involved.
Does the inspection procedure define the released condition and reference supports? Check that alongside whether each old measurement says how the assembly was held.
My sheets contain both restrained and released results, with some conditions unlabelled. Although the drawing specifies the dimension, the inspection procedure doesn't clearly define the supports.
@BethAdams0150 Ask quality and the design owner to establish the intended acceptance condition, then group historical results by their documented measurement state to support comparison.
@KaiChen1150 I can describe the measurement uncertainty better, although the cause of released variation remains open.
Any fixture change still needs a specialist assessment supported by the inspection basis and traceable records.
@BethAdams0150 The remaining cause and assessment questions explain the open fixture decision. Improving the measurement basis is useful without claiming those questions are settled.