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。
Aileen_Chambers · 2026年8月20日 15:18 UTC
Use the existing samples before buying more tooling. Can the person responsible for appearance identify acceptable and unacceptable examples under a repeatable viewing setup?
16分And please don't let the nicest phone photo become the reference part; shiny bits are very cooperative when photographed from the forgiving side.
7分Keep the untouched condition for each sample as well as the after-handling view. Otherwise the team can spend a whole meeting arguing about which marks came from the pads and nobody can actually answer, even if the lighting is agreed.
20分Quality can own the appearance decision. Some current samples have no before record, so I'll keep them for discussion rather than call every mark gripper damage.
4分Holding and release need their own observations. A cosmetic pass does not establish retention, and a successful hold does not establish that the part separates cleanly at the receiving nest.
20分Who will recognise the approved pad after replacement, including its material and contact shape? Softer is not an orderable description.
3分Ask for the supplier's proposed pad specification before treating it as a repeatable candidate.
6分We had samples that looked different after someone wiped them. I don't know your finish, but I would agree preparation with quality and keep that recorded too. Otherwise the pad comparison includes a cleaning comparison nobody intended.
5分Quality identified a faint incoming ring on an untouched bezel that we had blamed on contact. Fresh samples now have before views, and the supplier has identified the proposed pads.
7分So the pad wasn't making that ring, though it may still be making other marks; good reason not to sentence it from the old pile.
-1分What appearance decision did quality make about the incoming ring? Its origin matters for the tooling comparison, but the receiving shift also needs to know whether that part belongs in the acceptable pile or the hold pile.
9分The ring is acceptable against their signed examples. A separate scuff is not. Bench comparisons now distinguish those, and both current and proposed pads still need the full handling assessment.
13分That may save buying pads to cure an acceptable incoming feature. What happens to the separate scuff with the proposed material?
20分In the controlled bench comparison, the proposed pads avoided that scuff on the recorded samples. Holding was maintained, but one bezel followed a pad briefly on opening instead of settling directly into the nest.
16分Record that delayed separation as a release observation, including the receiving support and sample identity. It is enough to stop calling the candidate a complete improvement, but not enough to identify why it happened.
20分Will the supplier investigate with your receiving nest represented, or just repeat the free-air opening demonstration?
12分They agreed to include the nest and investigate the delayed separation. Thanks, Sean; the preparation record also stopped us mixing wiped and unwiped samples. Appearance method is agreed, pad selection is not.
17分Keep the agreed appearance examples with the trial record so the next pad candidate gets the same judgement.
17分