I have identified the bracket through its released failure and final pass, but the two readings use different inspection supports; I want quality to explain that change before we describe the difference as a successful correction.
Our FR5 bracket summary pairs readings from two different supports
ReeceCarter0993 · 2026年3月21日 16:52 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
8 条回复
Trace the support references and the actual correction entry first. A final pass can remain valid while the proposed before-and-after explanation is wrong. Do not rewrite either original reading to make them look comparable.
7分The final check uses the specified support, while the earlier sheet names a temporary arrangement; quality is asking the inspector why it was used, and the correction note only says adjusted.
4分We found an extra prop changing an upright reading. Your temporary arrangement may be different, but have the inspector show the actual contacts rather than explain it from the name alone.
10分And keep the cause unresolved while that happens; the tutor should not learn either fixture distortion or bad inspection from a summary that cannot yet distinguish them.
2分回复 RaviAli0215
Inspector confirmed the temporary support had an extra contact and was not the specified method; quality has removed that first reading from the dimensional comparison and is reviewing where else it was used.
18分That answers why the readings cannot establish the claimed change. It still leaves what adjusted meant for that bracket. Was any physical correction actually recorded elsewhere?
19分No reliable detail found, so the bracket retains its valid final result but does not supply a correction duration or a cause for the earlier discrepancy; thanks, Ravi, the contact comparison was useful.
20分Glad it helped. Has the estimator received that reduced claim, rather than just the quality folder update?
18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： .