I'm being asked to compare two UR5e pallet layouts by cartons per layer. The denser one rotates every other layer and puts some carton feet across gaps. The simpler one keeps the feet lined up but fits fewer cartons. Neither has been reviewed with the proposed tool.
I can measure where the feet land. I can't turn those measurements into a packaging approval, and I don't want my annotated picture used as one. Has anyone made this comparison useful without getting stuck arguing about the biggest number?
Put support approval ahead of the capacity column. An option that has not passed it stays a candidate. And show the tool placing the final carton in a layer. The middle of an empty pallet is the easy picture.
Price the simpler one as well. We got so attached to a high count that nobody asked what the extra complication cost. Our eventual choice used fewer cartons per layer
That's the argument I'm trying to have, Leo. Purchasing keeps calling the simpler arrangement the fallback before anyone has compared the work involved.
Fewer packing interruptions. Changeovers weren't the deciding bit for us. We had to compare complete shifts before the high-count version stopped looking like the obvious winner.
Sofia's point matters even if the support is approved. But I would keep the reviews connected, not wait for packaging to finish before tooling sees either layout.
A side-gripping concept, Sofia. The current drawing shows its closed outline only. I've asked them to add the withdrawal space on both layouts. Lucy, both reviewers have the same two candidates now.
Thanks, that explains why the picture could look complete. Check the pickup end too. Does the feed arrangement leave space for those fingers around the carton?
Feed conveyor has clearance reserved, Sofia, though it hasn't been checked against the tool revision. Luca, dispatch currently finishes partial pallets by hand. I hadn't included that work in either comparison.
A reserved gap is a starting point. Have the tool designer check its actual opening and approach there. Otherwise you could solve the pallet and still be unable to collect a carton.
Packaging has ruled out the dense arrangement as drawn. Tooling still owes us the withdrawal check on the simpler one. I've stopped presenting this as a choice between two ready solutions.