Packaging has marked the bearing strips underneath our filled shipping carton. In the FR10 alternating pattern, one turned row puts those strips above gaps. The quote still presents the maximum carton count as its main advantage.
I want packaging and tooling to review the same stack, including the tool leaving it. I also want the packer involved before we solve the drawing by giving her another manual operation. We can compare a lower-count pattern, but I need the difference in actual dispatch work, not another animation with more boxes.
Show the packed-case section over the real lower layer, with the fingers at release and withdrawal. The support while the tool leaves matters as much as where the finished carton eventually rests.
Our rejected turns survived in the cost sheet after disappearing from the drawing. Get this lower count into the price comparison now, or you will spend the next meeting correcting the saving.
Use a representative filled case for that review. We once compared an empty carton section while the packed insert moved the load towards one end. Does packaging's marked support include the permitted packing variation?
Will Chan, yes, packaging included the accepted packing variation. Sam, short-order endings are missing. Lewis, the supplier has now suggested a sheet, but has not defined its handling.
Compare that sheet proposal and a different pattern separately. Either changes the handling arrangement. Neither gets the original pattern's claimed acceptance simply because it covers the same pallet footprint.
Sara Chan, partial pallets wait in the marked dispatch bay and return with the pallet handler. Sara Baker, the packer has seen it and objects to reaching across the stack to place a sheet. No sheet method agreed.
Have her walk through the partial return as well, with the proposed order and layer identity visible; otherwise the drawing may assume she knows where the old job stopped.
Dispatch has compared the orders. The straight pattern adds a pallet on some jobs, with extra handling included. It still has a smaller positive saving than the original quote. Complete withdrawal review is pending.
I would keep the sheet option alive only if somebody can offer a workable method at a real cost. On a small job we assessed, the sheet looked cheap in the materials list, but its storage position pushed the empty-pallet stack away and added walking to every exchange. The operator spotted it in the walkthrough, not the gripper designer. A lower box count with a straightforward job can be the better purchase, but it needs the same honest accounting as the clever pattern.
Gabriel, has the straight sequence addressed the unsupported strip during withdrawal, including the last few cartons? The smaller saving only becomes relevant if that arrangement works.
Joint drawing review accepts the straight sequence for the defined packed cases, including partial-layer withdrawal. We are taking it into detailed design. The undefined sheet-handling option is out of this comparison.
Yes, with the dispatch handler. It found a missing order label on the returning pallet; the revised method includes it and they repeated the walkthrough successfully. The lower saving now includes that work. Physical cell trials remain ahead.