I've asked maintenance to inspect beneath our tray as well as around it; another discussion made that hidden seating point worth remembering. This housing sits square before the fingers close, though. It rolls as one finger touches, and our UR5e program has several pickup corrections already. What should we compare at the tool?
A replacement finger profile caused that roll on a job I inherited. Compare the fitted fingers and pads with the intended assembly, including spacers and contact faces. Have maintenance do the intrusive inspection with the equipment isolated.
There is, Nadia. Pads replaced after the first complaints but before the latest corrections. Carla, maintenance has the drawing and fitted-part check on the job. I won't pin every old miss on the replacement.
Our inspection results once lost the first condition when a second check overwrote it. Keep the before-replacement complaints distinct from what maintenance finds now.
Preserve the corresponding program versions too, because the repaired physical setup will still need checking against those corrections rather than whichever backup happens to be easiest to find.
Maintenance found one pad installed on the wrong spacer. Correct assembly is being restored. Omar, the earlier complaint remains separate, and Dinesh we have the program copies for the review.
Yes, Nadia. Full stack shown in the revised instruction. Thanks Carla for asking about the spacer; the pad labels themselves were both correct. No production result to claim yet.
Keep that distinction in the handover. Correct assembly, reviewed program and verified handling are separate pieces of the result, not interchangeable ways to say finished.