Our supplier's alternating pattern uses empty carton models. The real dispatch carton has an insert supporting the load at its ends, and some rotated ends land over gaps. I have asked for the filled construction but the next drawing only changed the colour.
How should I set up a review that considers support and finger withdrawal together? I can compare the drawings, but I am not the person who can decide whether the packaging will tolerate those gaps.
Get the packaging owner to specify the required support on a section through the filled carton. Then overlay that on the proposed lower layer. Top views hide this.
Bring dispatch into it. Fewer cartons may be acceptable, but they need to see the handling and order consequences before everyone agrees a reduced layer count on their behalf
Dispatch says fewer per pallet is possible. They want a comparison of pallet movements and storage space. Tool supplier wants more space beside the corner carton, not less.
Then compare an alternative arrangement explicitly, including the actual tool and packaging revisions; a sequence of individually reasonable drawing changes can leave nobody responsible for the combination
Yes, one owner for the combined drawing. Also keep the original count in the comparison so dispatch can see what the support and access constraints cost them
Designer is comparing a lower-count non-rotated arrangement. Packaging wants a loaded trial before approving it. The original pattern is no longer the assumed answer.
Thanks, Julia, for getting dispatch into this. They found a collection route the proposed base would block. That is now included in the layout comparison too.
Has packaging accepted the proposed support for the trial, or are they still specifying it? I'd distinguish permission to test from approval of the finished pallet.