Can you mark one actual turned case over the layer below and send that section to both packaging and tooling? A single clear example may expose the error before they redraw everything.
our fr10 layer approval changes when the carton is turned
EmmaBaker0463 · 13 Jan 2026, 22:39 UTC
14 replies
I've done that with our current filled case, and one marked strip now lies above the gap reserved for finger withdrawal
4 pointsCorrect the other turned positions too before the review. One example explains the mistake, but they still need to know which positions the proposed layer actually uses.
21 pointsAlso identify the layer revision on the packaging comment. If their earlier approval referred to the unrotated case, leave it there rather than transferring it to the corrected drawing by optimism.
9 pointsLeo, yes, I meant one example to get the error understood, not one position as the complete assessment. Emma, is the first layer on the actual pallet included too?
17 pointsAnd include the partial orders your team actually finishes. The middle of a full layer can borrow support that the last loose case doesn't have.
6 pointsRobin, first layer is included now; Aaron, dispatch has supplied the common partial builds, so the corrected review contains those as well as the repeating full layers
22 pointsGood. I'd hold the original count open while they compare options. Otherwise people will try to squeeze a support answer into whatever preserves the number already written in the quote.
8 pointsHas purchasing seen that the old count is provisional? The drawing may be corrected while the commercial summary continues cheerfully without it.
22 pointsPurchasing has the corrected status and hasn't ordered tooling; the integrator is comparing a different finger arrangement at the original count with a lower-count layer using the proposed tool
3 pointsPlease keep the same packed case in both. A nicer carton sample would give you a different question, not a fairer answer.
10 pointsDid either option get a joint answer on those turned support positions yet?
17 pointsThe original-count alternative was rejected because it still leaves the required strip unsupported; packaging has accepted the lower-count candidate's support arrangement, but tooling's withdrawal check for the partial build is still outstanding
8 pointsThat is a clearer split. Ask the integrator to return the outstanding partial-build check against the same candidate revision; it should not arrive as a disconnected sketch that purchasing has to interpret.
13 pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .