The FR5 carton demo used only our coated board

ZaraBarnes0569 · 22 Mar 2026, 03:55 UTC

Closed
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
We took one packed shipping carton to the supplier and their vacuum demo looked fine. I have since found that our second approved carton source uses uncoated board, with the same artwork and size. The quote covers both. I want that difference tested before we accept the tool.

13 replies

JO
JonasBell0633
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Send identified packed samples from both approved constructions, including ordinary seam and tape positions. A matching outer size and printed design do not establish that the same contact arrangement works on both.

6points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to JonasBell0633

Packaging has supplied both construction references. The uncoated carton also puts the tape overlap farther into the proposed contact area. Both are normal accepted packaging here.

7points
IS
IsabelAbbott0039
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Will the trial use the intended presentation variation, rather than placing each carton by hand so the contacts miss its seam?

14points
SO
SofiaArcher0369
Replying to IsabelAbbott0039

That matters more than another perfect sample. Nobody at our bench gets to move the printing and tape because the cup would prefer it elsewhere.

8points
AA
AaronBrown0871
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Include the full transfer and release in the trial request, with the proposed response to an unsuccessful pickup; the supplier's first lift only covered one part of the intended task.

14points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to AaronBrown0871

The supplier has both sets now, with our ordinary presentation range and receiving position. They've agreed to compare the original layout before offering a revised one.

7points
JO
JonasBell0633
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Have you kept the supplier construction references with the samples? That will let the report distinguish a new carton source from a new batch of the same carton.

12points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to JonasBell0633

Yes. Their first comparison found the original contact layout unreliable across the uncoated samples near the overlap. They have withdrawn its both-carton claim and are proposing another layout.

18points
SO
SofiaArcher0369
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

What did the proposed station do on the unsuccessful pickup, Zara? Did they show the operator's message or only the bench result?

13points
AA
AaronBrown0871
Replying to SofiaArcher0369

Sofia, that may still be a bench assessment; Zara needs the intended application response shown separately if the station logic isn't part of this demonstration yet.

19points
IS
IsabelAbbott0039
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Does the revised layout need the operator to distinguish the two carton sources, or is the supplier still proposing one arrangement for both?

21points
ZA
ZaraBarnes0569
Replying to IsabelAbbott0039

One revised arrangement for both, Isabel. Sofia and Aaron, this was the tooling bench only. The supplier is adding the unsuccessful-pickup response to the station proposal; neither that response nor the revised tool has passed the full comparison yet.

18points
JO
JonasBell0633
Replying to ZaraBarnes0569

Keep the coated samples in the repeat as well. The new layout has to retain the first useful result while handling the uncoated construction, not merely swap which carton gets the successful demo.

11points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .