I'm including partial orders as well as the full FR10 pattern, but some rotated component cases still sit above gaps in their preferred support direction; what should packaging and tooling establish on one view before I accept it?
Start with the actual filled case and its required bearing regions, including the internal packing arrangement; the same outer carton can put different loads on the lower layer, so the support arrow needs something definite behind it.
We use two internal packs in that same outer case, and the drawing only names the carton, so packaging is assessing the filled arrangements separately rather than extending one result to both.
Mina, both were included in our initial brief; Sofia, yes, and packaging now finds one pack acceptable across the proposed allowed loads while the other requires end bearing that two rotated positions lack.
That is a scope split, not proof the whole idea fails. Compare the value of automating only the acceptable pack with the cost of a different complete pattern for both. Include the work needed to keep the two packed arrangements identifiable at dispatch
Farah's last point matters because the robot cannot learn the contents from the case outline; I mean the process must establish which packed variant is being handled, not ask the operator to remember which identical-looking stack arrived first.
Operations proposes automating only the acceptable pack and keeping the other on its existing manual route; our packed-case code identifies the internal variant, but the integrator must include that identity in the assessed loading method.
The complete model clears placement and withdrawal for that pack's full and allowed partial loads; the code-to-variant check and physical handling assessment remain outstanding, so narrowing the scope has not released the cell.
Include a wrong or unrecognised case code in the agreed assessment. The team needs an explicit response to uncertainty, not a default that silently treats everything as the permitted pack. That decision belongs with the integration and operations owners
The restricted arrangement passed the agreed physical placement and release checks, including partial loads, and the assessment confirmed the defined wrong-code and unknown-code responses; packaging and integration have signed for the identified permitted pack only.
Operations has issued the separate routes and matched the pattern instructions to that scope; the other internal pack remains manual, with its support finding retained rather than relabelled as a robot-capable carton.
That is a useful bounded result: one packed arrangement accepted through the defined method, another excluded for a stated reason, even though both arrive in the same size carton.