Pallet pattern changed after the carton supplier moved an insert

They sent a section showing the load nearer one long edge. Our pallet plan was made from the old carton sample, thanks for pointing out that distinction.

Put that section beside both layer orientations. You want packaging to assess the actual support below the loaded edge, not just whether the boxes fit within the pallet boundary.

Has anyone told the tooling supplier the contents moved? Our gripper trial once used a beautifully balanced dummy while the real package pulled to one side. Same box, different handling behaviour. Or rather, the box was the only thing that matched.

That belongs in the same review. A packed sample will give the tooling team more useful evidence than the external carton drawing alone.

If they will, identify them separately in the trial. Mixing the results would make it hard to know which package your eventual approval covers.

We have some old stock left. Packing says the carton code changes, so I've asked them to keep both versions labelled for the comparison.

Tool supplier has a side-grip concept. Their first model had the existing layer pattern only; they are waiting for packaging's revised candidate before checking the placement order.

Check both proposed carton versions against that concept. A code on the box helps identification; it does not by itself establish one tool setup will handle both.

You could record each candidate as a carton revision, pallet pattern and tool configuration together. Then the trial result has a precise home instead of being filed under palletising works.

Packaging returned two candidates. One keeps the new loaded edge supported but leaves a narrow tool gap. The other uses fewer cartons per layer. Both still need assessment.

Fewer cartons may be the less expensive process once interventions are counted. Are you comparing complete pallet output, including resets and changeover, or just the seconds between placements? That's where our neatest layout lost its appeal.

We had only compared placement count. I've asked our planner for the dispatch requirement so we can judge whether the lower-count pattern would actually cause a problem.

What happens to the remaining old cartons if the new setup cannot handle both versions?

Worth deciding before trial stock gets consumed. A temporary manual route may be practical, but it needs agreeing rather than becoming an unplanned packing task.

Planner says old stock can finish on the current manual route. The lower-count candidate meets our daily volume on paper, so we are taking that into the combined packaging and tooling trial.

Include normal variation in the new packed cartons, especially the base condition and insert orientation. You want that candidate checked against the stock you will receive routinely.

Samples selected from normal packing are ready. Tooling hasn't been ordered. I was treating fewer cartons as failure tbh, but it may simply suit what we actually ship.