What this category of data looks like
This category of data comes from resin batch property sheets, injection molding machine parameters, mold temperature machines, MES systems, and dimensional and appearance inspection results. Daily documents include injection molding process cards, raw material drying records, mold history logs, first-piece inspection forms, patrol inspection forms, and material change and machine cleaning records. Data updates are triggered with each production batch, each mold or material change, and each shift. Documents include fields such as filling, holding, and cooling window parameters, raw material drying and regrind ratios, and defect analysis records. Units include temperature, pressure, time, ratio values, and more.
What constraints these characteristics impose on the document parsing and chunking step
Document types cover structured tables and unstructured analysis text, with high update frequency, so precise parsing for multi-format content must be supported. Fields include multiple sets of related physical parameters, so chunking must retain the contextual association between parameters to avoid semantic fragmentation after splitting. Significant structural differences exist across different documents, so custom parsing rules must be supported to adapt to different document types. There are frequent requirements for uploading large packaged documents, so upload and parsing threshold limits must be relaxed.
How to set the configurations
This chapter’s configurations are based on FastGPT v4.17.0.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
chunkSize | 800–1200 characters | Adapts to the semantic unit length of parameter groups and defect analysis in injection molding documents, avoiding splitting parameter associations |
chunkSplitter | By paragraph + semantic boundary | Matches structured paragraphs of process cards and inspection forms, and natural semantics of unstructured defect analysis |
customPdfParse | Enable structured parsing | Adapts to structured content such as tabular process parameters and mold history in injection molding documents, retaining field associations |
UPLOAD_FILE_MAX_SIZE | 500 MB | Covers scenarios such as uploading complete mold history logs for a single batch and packaged multiple process cards |
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 300 seconds | Adapts to parsing time for large injection molding process documents and multi-page patrol inspection forms, avoiding timeout failures |
chunkSettingMode | Manual configuration | Adjust chunking rules for different document types (process cards / patrol records) to adapt to differentiated content structures |
Three common errors
- Symptom: Fields in the parsed result are empty after uploading an injection molding process PDF. Cause: The
customPdfParseconfiguration is not enabled, and the default general parsing cannot recognize tabular parameter fields in injection molding documents. - Symptom: A timeout error is returned when parsing Excel-format raw material drying records. Cause: The
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDSis not adjusted to an adapted value, and the parsing time of large Excel ledgers exceeds the default threshold. - Symptom: Adjacent filling and holding pressure parameters and cooling window parameters after chunking are split into different chunks. Cause: The
chunkSizeis set too small, causing semantically related parameter groups to be forcibly split.
How to confirm configurations are correctly set
A standard injection molding process card PDF may be uploaded, and the parsed result checked to confirm whether complete associations of parameters such as filling pressure and holding time are retained. A patrol inspection document with more than 100 pages may be uploaded, and confirmation made that the parsing progress does not trigger a timeout error. An Excel-format raw material drying record may be uploaded, and the parsed result checked to confirm whether fields such as batch number, drying temperature, and duration are included. chunkSize may be adjusted to different ranges, the chunking results compared, and confirmation made that parameter groups are not forcibly split.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.