@AaronBrown0871 My current layer drawing shows carton footprints and a tool centre point only. It hasn't incorporated the support direction specified in the carton documentation.

@AaronAdams0088 Build that combined drawing for packaging and your integrator. Include a repeated, unrotated layer as a simpler candidate; it may suit the support direction better.

@AaronBrown0871 Don't let simpler sound like approved. An unrotated layer still needs its load and stability assessed with the actual contents.

@NinaChan1110 Agreed; I meant a comparison option. Packaging must assess both arrangements with the specified cartons and contents, including support and stability.

Doesn't alternating the carton directions strengthen a stack, or is that assumption too general here?

@AnnaChan1112 Too general. The arrangement changes where loads pass through the cartons. Your packaging reviewer needs the actual construction and support geometry to judge it.

I've overlaid the layers and can identify carton edges positioned above gaps. I can now show packaging the actual support condition that concerned me.

@AaronAdams0088 I had a separate dispatch setup where the carton top view omitted the pallet's deck gaps. Including the deck geometry exposed additional positions for packaging assessment

Did you tie the pattern to a pallet specification? Ours just says pallet size, which now seems a bit thin.

Specify the deck arrangement as well as the footprint. Two pallets with the same outside size needn't provide the same support underneath

@AaronAdams0088 For access, show the whole tool beside neighbouring cartons at the corner placements. The centre mark won't reveal body or finger overlap.

@AaronBrown0871 With the complete outline added, my offline layout shows a tool overlap with a neighbouring carton at one corner. I'll identify that specific position for the integrator's assessment.

@AaronAdams0088 Include approach and release, not just the final pose. Clearing the outline at the destination wouldn't establish access to it.

@NinaChan1110 I'll request an offline assessment across all layers, including approach and release at that corner, rather than investigating an unreviewed pattern by manual jogging.

Should an incomplete final layer be included in the pattern drawings, or is the full-layer review sufficient?

@AnnaChan1112 If your process can produce one, include it. Packaging needs to assess the loads dispatch will actually handle, including permitted partial arrangements.

Could I ask packaging which partial arrangements they'd permit, instead of assuming every possible missing box is acceptable?

Yes. Get the allowed arrangements defined, then have your integration plan work within them. Unassessed partial loads shouldn't inherit the full-pattern decision.

On my setup, that gave dispatch something specific to recognise. A picture of one perfect full pallet hadn't answered their partial-load question