I am revising the faceplate inspection lesson before the UR5e camera station is commissioned. Three slides name scratches, but the bright stripe changes position between them. What should connect each label to a judged physical feature instead of the demonstrator's arrow?
An identified retained faceplate and quality's judgement of the marked area. Keep the original full images with the close-ups. If the physical identity is lost, mark the example uncertain rather than treating the slide label as evidence.
Who is checking how those plates sit in the presentation holder? I can't diagnose the stripe, but a different seating position between images would leave your lesson mixing two questions.
Keep that separate comparison, Nadia. Retain the accepted plate and an identified reject once quality supplies one. Check that improved presentation still shows the real rejected feature, not only less glare.
Tooling owns the seating review. Quality has now identified a small physical scratch on the second plate, away from the slide arrow. We are correcting the arrow rather than tuning around the old one.
Loader review is included, but hasn't happened. The third slide is withdrawn as an unlinked example. Physical judgement, presentation and teaching-file changes have separate status in our notes.