Our proposed alternating layer fits the product boxes neatly, but some rotated cartons sit over gaps in their preferred support direction. I want packaging and tooling to assess the same arrangement. What should that joint view show before this drawing gets accepted?
What support requirement has packaging actually supplied? A direction arrow is not a bearing-area definition. Ask for the filled carton's required contacts on the lower layer and actual pallet deck, with complete tool placement and release beside them
Only the direction arrow exists so far. I have asked packaging to mark the required bearing regions and the integrator to add the complete tool route to the same revision. No alternative pattern has been proposed.
And keep the placement order visible, because the tool leaves each carton among what is already there, not among every carton absent except the one being illustrated.
Both are in scope. Packaging has now marked the required ends and rejected one rotated row for insufficient bearing. Tooling has not supplied its access result yet, so there is no jointly accepted replacement arrangement.
Then keep that rejected row out of the usable pattern set. If a support change is proposed, show it with the complete release movement before comparing quantities; neither department's result can stand in for the other