I now check support strips and finger withdrawal together before quoting a carton count. On this FR5 proposal, the revised drawing solves a rotated corner by using a different carton underside detail from the packaging sheet. Same outside dimensions, different reinforcement. Which combination are we actually costing?
Treat those as different combinations until packaging confirms otherwise. I am asking the same distinction about two pallet decks; matching outer dimensions do not make the support conditions interchangeable.
Packaging sheet is carton revision C. Layout uses revision A's underside. Purchasing confirms C is supplied. I have returned the revised pattern for correction.
Before it comes back, ask whether dispatch ever mixes old stock into a run. If A still appears occasionally, the operating rule needs to say what happens to it rather than pretend it vanished with the drawing.
Could receiving distinguish A and C from the carton markings? A revision rule is awkward if the person feeding the palletiser sees identical plain boxes.
Jamie, that is worth checking, though first establish whether A is actually in stock. Otherwise we can invent an extra changeover problem while the current drawing is still wrong.
Old A stock is gone. Packaging has a visible stock code for C and dispatch confirmed it. We'll handle a future substitution as a change, not assume it is equivalent because the size matches.
Good. Now make them show the C supports and the real fingers on one drawing. The wrong underside may have made the last proposal look easier than it is.
Interrupted pallet stays in a marked holding position for review. Dispatch already does that manually. We have not yet checked the operator's access with the proposed robot base there.
Does that position use the same pallet deck as the automatic build position? Only asking because moving a partly built load can introduce a support detail missing from the main drawing.
Aisha, if the same pallet travels with the cartons, the deck doesn't change at the holding position. We should ask how it moves before adding another deck comparison.
Same pallet moves as a unit. No transfer of cartons to another base. Access and partial-load handling still need reviewing, but there isn't a second deck in this job.
Thanks for clarifying. I was carrying my two-deck concern into your arrangement. The partial-load review is still relevant, but the extra deck question is settled.