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。

Our bracket measurements were taken with two different support blocks

RosaChan1075 · 2025年2月25日 23:16 UTC

已关闭
RO
RosaChan1075
I found two photographs attached to old angle-bracket inspection sheets and the bench supports aren't in the same places. We're reviewing the fixture for FR5 welding, but the records blame springback without saying how the released part was supported. I'd like to check that measurement difference first.

13 条回复

LU
LucaBarnes0526

Compare the support arrangement with the drawing datums first, because changing where a part rests can change the reading without anything new happening in the welding fixture.

19
RO
RosaChan1075

One arrangement supports the base near the holes, the other near the ends. Same inspector initials. I'm asking quality whether those were intended for different part variants.

21
LU
LucaBarnes0526

That is plausible, and I'd keep the photographs tied to their exact sheets rather than assuming the initials mean the measurement method was identical.

13
EL
EllaArcher0381

Do the sheets identify the thickness as well as the bracket name? We have similar-looking parts that use different inspection supports, though I don't know if that's relevant here.

-1
LU
LucaBarnes0526

It could be, and the drawing revision is worth checking alongside thickness so you know which requirement each reading was judged against.

10
RO
RosaChan1075

Quality found a revision note introducing a different inspection setup after the base feature changed. Both sheet groups had been exported under the same short description.

14
LU
LucaBarnes0526

Then split those groups before drawing a process trend, because comparing them directly would blend a design and measurement change into your supposed welding behaviour.

24
JO
JonasAbbott0024

Does that leave enough records for the current bracket, or will the review still need new measurements before anyone can choose a fixture change?

13
DA
DanLoop

Preserve the full drawing revision and inspection-method reference in the new data structure; a short description is a poor join key when several different physical parts share it.

19
LU
LucaBarnes0526

And did any current-revision records include readings both before and after physical correction? Those would help distinguish the original released shape from the accepted result.

6
RO
RosaChan1075

Only a small current-revision set remains, and two entries were taken after straightening. We're not using them to estimate untouched released dimensions. More measurement work is needed.

7
RO
RosaChan1075
回复 DanLoop

I updated the review pack with the two inspection methods and their drawing revisions. The fixture decision is on hold while quality defines a consistent current-part trial.

7
LU
LucaBarnes0526

Please bring back the trial outcome, because it will be interesting to see how much of the old scatter came from mixed records and how much remains in the actual parts.

17

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: .