EmmaBaker0463 · 29 Aug 2025, 20:42 UTC
Yes. Use the filled-carton details, not an empty box outline.
13 pointsPackaging has the filled specification, and I have asked them to mark the bottom support areas.
14 pointsAsk why those positions need rotating at all. If it's just because alternating looks familiar, there's no reason to protect the original pattern from a proper comparison.
18 pointsPlanner wants labels visible on both long sides of the load; no other reason given yet.
-3 pointsLabel visibility needs solving too. It doesn't make the gaps disappear.
22 pointsBring dispatch into that comparison. They may be able to work with a different label arrangement, but let them describe the actual scanning and load-removal tasks before assuming it is an easy change.
2 pointsElena, agreed on asking dispatch. I wasn't suggesting hiding labels and calling it done. I want another arrangement priced instead of everyone defending the first drawing.
20 pointsDispatch can accept labels on the two short sides, and packaging is reviewing a non-alternating option with that orientation.
13 pointsDoes the tool supplier have that option too? The changed carton orientation could affect where the fingers approach and leave.
15 pointsYes, both teams now have pattern revision P3 with the support areas and proposed finger spaces shown.
11 pointsHave they returned a joint answer on P3, or are the two checks still separate?
9 pointsEmma, keep P3 provisional until both answers are in. A shared drawing isn't a shared approval.
16 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .