Our proposed pallet layer has gaps which suit the fingers and apparently don't suit the carton base. Packaging says support the reinforced ends; the alternating top view never shows those ends underneath. I want a joint check before anyone mistakes a full-looking pallet for a supported one.
An underside section helped expose this on our comparison. Put the marked support areas and finger withdrawal on the same revision, then ask packaging which positions they can accept. Don't let the section replace checking the whole layer sequence.
I've got the underside drawing now. One rotated end sits right over a finger channel. Tooling says closing the channel would trap the fingers, which makes a joint review fairly unavoidable.
Gabriel, that is worth asking, though changing the order won't help if the tool needs the channel beneath the final carton itself. We need their actual withdrawal, not an imagined convenient one.
They say the current fingers need that space under the last carton too. Different sequence alone won't do it. A lower-count layer is being compared with a different tool approach; neither has packaging approval.
Include dispatch in that comparison. More pallets and a different label direction can each add work, even if the robot finds both layouts equally agreeable.