We've only got top-view rectangles and a tool centre mark. The carton note specifies support direction, but the layer drawing doesn't show it.

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.

@YasminBennett0702 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.

You're right to qualify the suggestion. I intended an alternative for comparison, with both patterns requiring packaging assessment of support and stability using the specified filled cartons.

Doesn't alternating the carton directions strengthen a stack, or is that assumption too general here?

That rule is too broad because changing the pattern changes the load paths. The packaging reviewer needs the carton construction and support geometry to assess the result.

The layer overlay shows carton edges above gaps below. That gives me something specific to mark for packaging instead of saying the pattern feels wrong.

On my dispatch setup, the top view hid the pallet deck gaps completely. Adding the deck drawing changed which positions needed packaging review

@ElliotCarter1031 Did you tie the pattern to a pallet specification? Ours just says pallet size, which now seems a bit thin.

Include the deck geometry in the pattern's pallet reference. Matching overall dimensions don't establish identical support beneath the carton arrangement

@MeiBarnes0603 For access, show the whole tool beside neighbouring cartons at the corner placements. The centre mark won't reveal body or finger overlap.

With the complete outline added, my offline layout shows a tool overlap with a neighbouring carton at one corner. I'll identify that specific position for the integrator's assessment.

Include approach and release, not just the final pose. Clearing the outline at the destination wouldn't establish access to it.

I'll keep that review offline and include every layer. I'm not going to explore the corner with manual jogging.

@MeiBarnes0603 What about the last layer if it isn't full? Does that need a drawing too?

@SofiaChan1065 Any partial layers permitted by the process belong in the review. The packaging assessment needs to cover the resulting loads that dispatch may actually receive.

Could I ask packaging which partial arrangements they'd permit, instead of assuming every possible missing box is acceptable?

Ask packaging to establish the permitted arrangements and use those in the integration requirements. Assessment of a full pattern doesn't automatically cover every incomplete variant.

On my setup, that gave dispatch something specific to recognise. A picture of one perfect full pallet hadn't answered their partial-load question