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。

The faceplate reference folder contains contradictory judgements

FarahBennett0765 · 2025年3月19日 13:09 UTC

已关闭
FA
FarahBennett0765
I am helping prepare the image set for an FR5 cosmetic inspection station. Two images of one faceplate have opposite labels, apparently because a bright streak is visible in only one. I would like to establish the sample's physical condition before these labels become our reference. What should I ask the inspection team to record?

12 条回复

LU
LuisBrown0956

Ask who inspected the actual faceplate, using which product acceptance criteria. Then connect that judgement to its sample identity. A label chosen from one photograph is not enough when the imaging itself is what you are still developing.

17
FA
FarahBennett0765

The labels were assigned from thumbnails by two engineers. Neither inspected the faceplate. It has been retained, so quality can still examine it directly.

7
LU
LuisBrown0956

Good, get that judgement before treating either label as correct. Also retain both images with their conditions if you have them. Their disagreement can help the vision team understand what changes with presentation.

5
AI
AishaBarnes0605

Are those conditions actually saved? Image files often have camera settings but nothing about the lamp position or how the part was held. The missing half matters here.

-3
LU
LuisBrown0956

Exactly. If something is unknown, mark it unknown rather than reconstructing a precise setup from memory. The old pair may illustrate a problem without being suitable for a controlled comparison.

5
OS
OscarBennett0706

Can you make a small controlled comparison with that retained sample before paying for a large labelled image collection? You need to know what conditions and judgements the collection must include.

8
LU
LuisBrown0956

Include confirmed acceptable and damaged parts when you do. A setup that suppresses the bright streak on this one faceplate may also suppress a real defect on another.

17
FA
FarahBennett0765

Quality has inspected the retained faceplate and found it acceptable under the existing criteria. We have prepared a small identified set including confirmed damage. The new image records include illumination and presentation details.

12
MI
MiaChen1166

Who can change an acceptance label in that set, and where is the reason recorded?

8
FA
FarahBennett0765

Quality will approve changes, with the original judgement retained. I should clarify that the vision engineers can propose a review, but cannot silently relabel a part to fit a threshold.

10
MI
MiaChen1166

Will the same ownership remain after commissioning, when the original engineers are no longer on site?

19
LU
LuisBrown0956

Put that responsibility in the handover with the reference set and acquisition settings. Otherwise the first person covering a difficult shift may inherit the same two conflicting thumbnails that started this thread.

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: .