our trim-plate crop leaves the brush direction to imagination

They do, including the locating notch, and I can see two orientations in what was supposed to be one normal-seating group

Ask which orientation the intended presentation permits before merging or excluding either group. If both are valid inputs, the comparison needs both; if not, the holder and loading check need to make the intended one recognisable.

The crop link should point to the checked original, not another manually relabelled copy. We have already managed to correct a reference index while leaving the attractive worksheet with its old decisions.

Tooling confirms the notch belongs on one specified side in this job; the other images were exploratory reversals, now separated, and I've made each crop open its actual full original rather than a second illustration

Our loader once recognised the part orientation from the back of a fixture but couldn't see that cue from her working position. Can yours see the notch when the plate is seated? Worth checking before another arrow goes on the instruction sheet.

Not with the current holder lip in front of it, Rachel, which makes our instruction to check the notch rather optimistic; tooling is reviewing a visible orientation cue tied to the actual seat

Can the wrong orientation still be fitted? A visible cue may help the loader, but the proposed check should address what happens when the plate is reversed or incompletely seated.

Henry's question is separate from the crop repair. Both worth doing, but don't hold up correcting the teaching images while a holder design is discussed.

Old worksheet withdrawn and corrected one issued; tooling's prototype now locates the notch asymmetrically, with the intended seat visible from the loading side, though the loader still needs to try it

Were the same physical accepted and rejected plates retained for the repeat? A cleaner presentation reference should still expose the actual rejected feature.

Same plates retained, loader repeated the normal seats and recognised the reversed example without help, and the vision comparison keeps the real scratch visible beside the accepted finish; reference and holder trial closed, with actual UR5e presentation still to assess

Thanks for checking it from the working side. That is the part of the handover I would want the relief loader to see first.