My FR10 packing-department proposal has the same review problem as the UR5e box layout: a tidy alternating pattern is ahead of its support evidence. Here the corrugated component cases have preferred bearing areas over gaps. I want packaging's support judgement and the complete tool exit on one identified arrangement before accepting it.
Start by marking which positions lack the preferred support, with filled-case requirements supplied by packaging. Include the first layer on the actual pallet. That gives tooling a specific conflict to assess rather than a general instruction to make the boxes stable.
Does the tool drawing show fingers opening among cartons already placed, or only the carried case? The release sequence may restrict which support changes are usable.
Only the carried case, Isabel. I've requested the occupied sequence and asked packaging to identify the bearing regions on that version. We have not received a support finding yet.
Who will keep the two revisions aligned? I would put one person in charge of returning the combined answer, while leaving the actual packaging and tooling judgements with their respective specialists.
Agreed on coordination, but don't let a single cover-page signature replace their separate conditions. Packaging may accept one load variant while the tooling review assumes another.
Integrator will coordinate. The review brief names our filled component cases, and each specialist must state conditions and exclusions. I also asked for partial layers because they are part of our normal dispatch work.
Moved during dispatch, Gabriel. Packaging is including that handling condition. Their first return identifies unsupported bearing areas in the rotated row, so the designer is comparing a lower-count pattern.
The lower count may provide useful finger space, but ask for the actual opening and withdrawal. Empty floor area between drawn cartons is not necessarily where the tool needs it.
And update the dispatch comparison with the revised count. Keeping the old pallets-per-order figure would hide work your operators will still have to do.
They did for the lower-count drawing, but the complete assessment isn't finished. Tooling's review shows a workable proposed release route; packaging still needs its filled-load check, including partial-pallet handling.
Keep proposed in that description until the agreed checks are complete. You have resolved a drawing conflict, which is useful, without yet establishing the whole pallet arrangement.
I've labelled the candidate that way and changed the dispatch estimate. No tooling order yet. Thanks, Daniel, I would have carried the old carton count into that estimate without noticing the extra pallet handling.