Die Stamping Pre-Run Inspection

It covers the checks a press operator, setup technician, or supervisor should complete before releasing a stamping press for production. The template walks through press setup verification, tonnage and mechanical readiness, safety guards and feed line protection, material readiness, and final sign-off. It is designed to confirm the press, die, and feed system are aligned to the job before the first stroke. It also creates a record of who approved the setup and what was verified.

Use it before every new setup, die change, material change, or restart after maintenance or a stoppage that could affect alignment or guarding. It is also useful after tooling adjustments, feed line changes, or any event that may alter shut height or press settings. If the job traveler changes, the inspection should be repeated. Do not treat it as a one-time daily form if the press is reconfigured during the shift.

The person who understands the press setup should complete the inspection, typically a qualified operator, setup technician, or authorized lead. A supervisor or designated approver should review the sign-off before first-piece production starts. If your site uses a separate maintenance or tooling team, they can complete the mechanical readiness portion and hand off to operations for final verification. The key is that the person signing off must be able to recognize a deficiency and stop the run.

It supports machine guarding, control reliability, and safe setup practices expected under OSHA general industry and, where applicable, construction or manufacturing programs. The guarding and feed protection checks help document that point-of-operation safeguards, interlocks, and presence-sensing devices are in place and functioning. The lockout-tagout step reinforces that isolation is cleared only after setup verification is complete. It is not a substitute for a written energy control program or a formal hazard assessment.

Common issues include using the wrong shut height, running with a die that is not fully secured, and starting production with feed line guards removed or bypassed. It also catches mismatched material thickness, damaged coil stock, and misaligned feed paths that can cause jams or part defects. Another frequent problem is assuming the press is ready because the previous job ran successfully. This template forces a fresh check for the current job, not the last one.

Yes, and it should be customized to your specific press types, die families, and feed systems. You can add fields for press model, die ID, tonnage monitor settings, lubrication checks, or first-piece quality criteria. If you run progressive dies, transfer presses, or servo feeds, add the controls and measurements that matter for those setups. Keep the core sequence intact so the inspection still follows the way the operator actually prepares the press.

No, it complements first-article or first-piece quality checks but does not replace them. This template is focused on pre-run readiness: setup, guarding, mechanical condition, and material alignment. A separate quality form should verify part dimensions, hole locations, burr limits, and other product requirements after the first piece is made. Many shops use both forms together to separate safety/setup verification from product acceptance.

Repeat it whenever something changes that could affect safety or part quality, such as a die change, coil change, feed adjustment, or maintenance intervention. If a press stops for an abnormal event like a jam, overload, or guard fault, the setup should be rechecked before restart. For stable long runs, some sites also require a periodic re-verification at defined intervals. The frequency should match your risk level and internal procedure.

An informal check depends on memory and conversation, which makes it easy to miss a loose fastener, guard issue, or incorrect press setting. This template creates a repeatable record of the exact items verified before production begins. It also makes handoffs clearer between setup, operations, and supervision. If you need traceability for audits, incident reviews, or internal quality control, a documented inspection is much stronger than an ad-hoc verbal go-ahead.