Our plan for planning alternating carton layers on a pallet with Fairino FR10 in a workshop packing department has a very neat alternating layer drawing. But a packed rectangular product box has a preferred support direction, and some rotated cartons sit over gaps.
I want packaging support and tool access reviewed together before I accept the pattern. Where should I start?
@JoCarter1027 Does your layer drawing show the load-bearing carton edges and pallet deck beneath them? Add those, then overlay the complete gripper outline.
@ClaraAllen0263 My current layer drawing shows carton footprints and a tool centre point only. It hasn't incorporated the support direction specified in the carton documentation.
@JoCarter1027 Give packaging and the integrator a drawing combining those details. A repeated unrotated layer is worth assessing alongside the alternating one because it may better suit the specified support direction.
The repeated arrangement remains a candidate, not an accepted solution. Its support and load stability still need assessment for the cartons with their actual contents.
Too general. The arrangement changes where loads pass through the cartons. Your packaging reviewer needs the actual construction and support geometry to judge it.
@ClaraAllen0263 I've overlaid the layers and can identify carton edges positioned above gaps. I can now show packaging the actual support condition that concerned me.
I had a separate dispatch setup where the carton top view omitted the pallet's deck gaps. Including the deck geometry exposed additional positions for packaging assessment.
Include the deck geometry in the pattern's pallet reference. Matching overall dimensions don't establish identical support beneath the carton arrangement.
@JoCarter1027 For access, show the whole tool beside neighbouring cartons at the corner placements. The centre mark won't reveal body or finger overlap.
My next step is defined: combine support geometry and the complete tool in the layer drawings for packaging and integration assessment. The planning question is answered, with pattern acceptance still dependent on that review.