Our UR5e carton drawing has no view of the layer underneath

ZaraBarnes0569 · 9 Nov 2025, 08:04 UTC

Closed
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
The proposed alternating pallet pattern looks tidy from above. I've asked for one combined packaging and tool review, but the latest picture still hides the lower layer under solid cartons. I can't see what supports the rotated carton ends, and I don't fancy signing based on everyone pointing at the same opaque rectangles.

13 replies

TH
TheoAli0236
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Ask for a section through the questioned carton ends with the lower layer, pallet and any proposed sheet shown, so packaging can identify the actual support rather than infer it from the top view.

19 points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to TheoAli0236

There is no sheet in the proposal. I'll ask for that section with the actual filled-carton support areas marked. We have the sample here, which should help explain the question.

7 points
SO
SofiaAli0195
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Include the fingers in the section too. Otherwise a packaging revision can close the gap that tooling expected to use for withdrawal.

18 points
AD
AdaArcher0390
Replying to SofiaAli0195

Sofia Ali, do you mean closed or open fingers? Zara's trying to see support underneath, but the open shape is usually what I'd worry about leaving the carton

-7 points
SO
SofiaAli0195
Replying to AdaArcher0390

Both relevant states, Ada. I should have said placement and release, not a single tool outline.

13 points
SO
SofiaArcher0369
Replying to SofiaAli0195

And the placement order. Sorry, not another drawing for its own sake; the neighbouring carton may already be there when the fingers open.

18 points
TH
TheoAli0236
Replying to SofiaArcher0369

A section plus the relevant placement sequence should answer those together, with the same carton and tool revision used throughout.

12 points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to TheoAli0236

The integrator has asked which gap I mean, so I marked the two rotated end positions on the existing drawing and sent a photograph of the filled carton underside. No new section yet.

13 points
AD
AdaArcher0390
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Good, but does packaging recognise those marked areas as the required support? We shouldn't let the most visible strips become the answer by appearance alone

16 points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to AdaArcher0390

Packaging identified those strips on our retained sample. I should have named them in the update. The marked photograph was their explanation, not my guess.

16 points
SO
SofiaArcher0369
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

That helps. The underside photo without that explanation would have sent me off guessing too.

22 points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to TheoAli0236

Section is back. One marked strip crosses the planned finger gap. Packaging and tooling are discussing alternatives now. Thanks Theo, I finally have a picture where the disagreement is visible.

9 points
TH
TheoAli0236
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Keep those alternatives together through review; removing the gap may improve support while changing release access, so neither side should approve its own edit in isolation.

19 points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .