Connected
Ask
Saved answers
Saved
Line A · 3
| Question | Topic | Saved by | Confidence | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Line A viscosity driftViscosity rose 38 mPa·s over 9 batches with end-of-hold torque; a small agitator increase is modelled to bring it back. | Quality | Quality head A.20 Oct | Modelled2430 to 2560 mPa·s after the change | Still current |
| Will a shorter hold work on Grade A-12?A 50 min hold was predicted to keep viscosity inside spec. | Process | Process engineer A.11 Oct | Modelled2300 to 2620 mPa·s | Stale since 17 Oct |
| Lot 3307 outlookPredicted viscosity sat near the upper spec; the band was unanchored at the time. | Quality | Shift lead A.18 Oct | Estimated2540 to 2630 mPa·s | Stale since 19 Oct |
Line B · 3
| Question | Topic | Saved by | Confidence | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tool T3 cycle change, valueParts per shift rose 2.6% after the cycle change; the value at the plant's prices is on the owner's Home. | Process | Owner A.19 Oct | Measured1.9 to 3.3% parts per shift | Still current |
| Hold pressure 720 bar, did it hold?Scrap fell 0.6 points and was still holding at the last check. | Process | Plant head A.14 Oct | Measured0.3 to 0.9 points less scrap | Still current |
| Light parts on cavity 2Part weight on cavity 2 recovered after Process raised hold pressure. | Quality | Quality head A.7 Oct | Measured48.0 to 48.4 g | Still current |
Went stale
Will a shorter hold work on Grade A-12? · since 17 OctModel of the mixer recalibrated to a-2.2 and its fit is no longer accepted; the safety filter has since withheld this change.Lot 3307 outlook · since 19 OctA correction was sent to Process after this was saved, and lab results for the lot are still missing.
By line and topic
Evidence the thread behind each answer cites
| Id | Label | Claim | Saved answer | Proof |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV-B-2101 | Measured | Parts per shift rose 2.6%, interval 1.9 to 3.3%. | Tool T3 cycle change, value | Cycle time 33.2 s, Line B |
| EV-A-1180 | Measured | Viscosity rose 38 mPa·s over the last 9 batches. | Line A viscosity drift | Source record |
| EV-A-1188 | Measured | End-of-hold torque rose with it on the same batches. | Line A viscosity drift | Lot 3307 viscosity save |
| EV-A-1191 | Modelled | A small agitator speed increase would bring it back inside the band. | Line A viscosity drift | Source record |
| EV-A-1180 | Measured | Viscosity rose 38 mPa·s over the last 9 batches. | Will a shorter hold work on Grade A-12? | Source record |
| EV-A-1188 | Measured | End-of-hold torque rose with it on the same batches. | Will a shorter hold work on Grade A-12? | Lot 3307 viscosity save |
| EV-A-1191 | Modelled | A small agitator speed increase would bring it back inside the band. | Will a shorter hold work on Grade A-12? | Source record |
| EV-B-2101 | Measured | Parts per shift rose 2.6%, interval 1.9 to 3.3%. | Hold pressure 720 bar, did it hold? | Cycle time 33.2 s, Line B |
| EV-B-2214 | Measured | Two proposals accepted on Line B, one waiting on Line A. | Light parts on cavity 2 | Source record |
Tool T3 cycle change, value
Still current
Parts per shift rose 2.6% after the cycle change; the value at the plant's prices is on the owner's Home.
MeasuredBand 1.9 to 3.3% parts per shift
Answer as saved, from the threadWhat did the Tool T3 cycle change earn last month?
MeasuredWeakest of 1 cited claim
Why this confidence
- Method
- Each claim carries the label of its evidence; the answer takes the weakest. Uncited numbers are removed before an answer is shown.
- Evidence
- EV-B-2101
- Parts per shift rose 2.6%, interval 1.9 to 3.3%.EV-B-2101Measured
Cycle time 33.2 s, Line B
ImprovedR4 VerifiedMeasured
Effect Parts per shift +2.6 %, interval 1.9 to 3.3 %.
Why this confidence
- Method
- Proof record
- Diagnostics
- All passed
Open in AskSaved 19 Oct