Technician · Mould · Junior · 3+ years of relevant experience
Make the requested part unmistakable
You know the tool and can recognize its working parts. The ordering problem is different: a supplier must connect your description to the correct recorded item. For a zinc-alloy slider or bag-hardware workshop, a useful identification pack links the physical part, its parent mould and its order history. “The moving core in this photo” is not a complete purchasing reference.
This guide concerns identification before ordering, not fit approval, tolerance acceptance or mould redesign. Photographs help locate a candidate part; they cannot prove dimensional conformity. The two customer requests below are documented. The pack-building steps are recommended workshop practice, not claimed customer outcomes.
Real request: confirm the spare-parts photographs
A group of recorded Brazilian workshop enquiries includes a request to confirm that spare-parts photographs meet the requirement. The grouped note does not identify the individual sender or establish that the pictured parts were mould components. No confirmation result is recorded.
Practical lesson: for your mould-part enquiry, connect each image to a named item and tool record. Ask the supplier to return the proposed part reference in writing. Do not convert a general photo-confirmation request into a claim that a replacement fits.
Real request: when will the M#5 moving core be replenished?
Section III, question 10, records an Indian customer asking when an out-of-stock M#5 moving core could be replenished. This is a historical availability enquiry, not evidence of current stock, a promised delivery date or successful replacement.
Practical lesson: combine the requested designation with the previous PI, tool identification and quantity. Ask separately for item identification and confirmed availability. A model label alone should not silently become an approved substitute or delivery commitment.
The identification pack: one row per requested item
| Pack field | What to attach | What it establishes |
|---|---|---|
| Parent identity | Machine model, mould ID and existing part markings | Where the requested item belongs in your records. |
| Purchase history | Previous PI/order and line-item reference, if available | A route to the supplier's original item record. |
| Photo set | Context view, separate part views, readable label and ruler reference | Visual identity and approximate scale, not tolerance. |
| Revision and request | Available drawing revision, known change record, quantity and required-by date | Which recorded version and purchasing need require confirmation. |
Prepare pictures without losing traceability
Use an existing safely accessible view or follow the workshop's approved isolation and removal procedure. Do not dismantle equipment just to improve a photograph. Keep removed parts labelled so similar-looking items cannot become mixed.
Use the same item code in the photo filenames and enquiry row. Include a readable ruler near the part for scale, avoiding a steep camera angle. Treat that scale as identification support only. If dimensions are requested, record measurements separately under the approved inspection procedure; do not read tolerances from image pixels.
Keep missing information visible
Mark an unavailable PI or revision “not located”; never invent one. Identify any local modification as reported history, not an approved drawing change. Keep the supplier's identification reply beside the pack, and keep identification status separate from quotation, availability and technical acceptance. Escalate unresolved identity to the toolroom lead before purchase release.
Eight questions before ordering
1. Can you supply the part shown in my photograph?
FAQ Q72 requests clear photographs, a ruler or label, machine model and PI number. Supply those together so the supplier can compare its drawings and identify the candidate item. A photo reply is not fit approval.
2. What if our previous PI cannot be found?
State that it is unavailable and provide the mould ID, machine details and readable markings. Ask purchasing to check archived records. Do not borrow an order reference from a visually similar tool.
3. Is a ruler photograph enough for dimensions?
No. FAQ Q72 uses it as a size reference. Perspective and image quality limit its meaning. Dimensions and tolerances require the applicable drawing and an appropriate inspection record, not a scaled photograph.
4. Can you send an original sample for comparison?
FAQ Q73 describes requesting original spare-part samples with the machine model and required items. Confirm the sample's identity and revision. Receiving a comparison sample does not automatically approve installation.
5. Can we assume an M#5 moving core is available?
No. The the Indian customer enquiry records a replenishment question without its answer. Request present availability and lead time against the identified item; do not reuse that historical request as a stock statement.
6. Why include the old order when buying mould wear parts?
FAQ Q13 asks for the previous PI when reviewing parts from an earlier order. It helps locate records and avoid duplicate purchasing. It is a traceability reference, not proof that every earlier part remains interchangeable.
7. Which drawing revision should accompany the request?
FAQ Q75 calls for the latest version to be confirmed. Attach the version held in your records and its status, plus known changes. If approval history is missing, flag it for the responsible technician rather than declaring the file approved.
8. Can specialized mould parts be bought locally?
FAQ Q41 distinguishes standard industrial items from specialized mould components. Do not order a specialist replacement on visual similarity alone. Seek a traceable item specification and the workshop's technical purchasing approval.
What Would You Like to Solve?
Send the identification pack through our contact page, stating which item needs identification and whether availability is urgent. We normally respond within 2 working days. Identification support does not replace dimensional inspection or technical acceptance.
Source: QLQ internal customer-enquiry records and real-email product FAQs. Historical requests are documented; completed implementation outcomes are not recorded. Recommended checks are engineering guidance, not claims of customer results.