I pulled one bracket traveller because the FR10 proposal repeats its correction allowance. The restrained check says aligned. The first released measurement is marked failed, then the final sheet passes after a correction entry.
The sketch on the first sheet measures from the outside face. The final sheet looks as though it uses the inside face, but the photocopy loses the arrowhead. Before we decide this demonstrates movement after release, I want to establish whether we are comparing the same dimension. Has anyone untangled a trail like this without remeasuring a part that is long gone?
Are these bracket readings even measured from the same face?
CarlaAbbott0053 · 2026年3月19日 12:52 UTC
主帖中文翻译暂不可用，以下显示英文原文；回复保留原文。 查看英文原文
19 条回复
Find the original inspection instruction and the drawing revisions named on both sheets. The correction entry may be genuine, but those two numbers cannot describe its effect until their references agree.
7分What does the correction entry actually say, Carla? I would distinguish a recorded operation from someone's later explanation written beside the measurements.
18分回复 AdaAdams0129
It says straighten, signed by fabrication. The first sheet names drawing revision C; the final sheet names D. I had missed that change while squinting at the arrow.
13分Did the requirement change between C and D?
1分And why did the proposal use this as its representative bracket? One unusually confusing traveller is a poor place to find an average correction allowance.
3分I had an old bracket example that looked useful until I realised the first released reading was missing entirely. We kept it to explain the gap in the process, not to estimate fixture performance. Yours has more information, but I would still want more than this one example before pricing the new job.
13分Sarah's quantity point matters after the measurement question. Carla can still establish what this traveller supports without pretending it represents the whole product family.
10分Who owns the waiting brackets while this review happens? I mean the current work, not the old part that cannot be found.
14分Quality retains disposition of current work. Caleb, revision D changes the datum for this dimension. I found a readable drawing, so the two readings are not a before-and-after pair.
16分That disposes of the claimed amount of movement. Does the proposal still attach a time saving to it?
11分The straighten entry still belongs in the history. It just does not tell us how much this feature changed, particularly across the revised measurement reference.
10分AnnaBennett, fair point. I don't want the record thrown away. I want the spreadsheet to stop treating one unexplained correction as the normal job.
18分Ella, yes. It had a time allowance copied from a supervisor's estimate, not a timed correction on this traveller. I've marked both the assumed duration and the unmatched readings.
9分That estimate can remain an estimate if the supervisor explains its basis. I wouldn't replace it with zero just because the paperwork is poor.
2分Is there a current instruction using revision D throughout?
12分There is. Inspection has selected a current batch for a matched study using that instruction, with part identities carried through any correction. The old traveller is now excluded from the measured saving calculation.
8分Please include the time spent waiting for disposition as well as the correction work. Different people may own those delays.
17分Will you post the matched results? Interested whether the correction allowance survives with a decent basis.
15分回复 AdaAdams0129
Yes, when that study is complete. Thank you, Ada, for making me read the correction entry separately. We have fixed the misleading example, not explained the bracket behaviour yet.
16分讨论已关闭
此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .