A separator needs its own approval, so I'm asking about a different layer pattern this time. Our FR10 proposal leaves the packed case's end supports over the finger exits. Packaging and tooling are drawing opposite fixes.
Our FR10 turned cases need support where the fingers leave
SarahBaker0502 · 27 Nov 2025, 18:25 UTC
10 replies
Replying to SarahBaker0502
Are both teams using the same packed-case construction and pallet deck? Start there before comparing the fixes.
18pointsReplying to AnnaChen1199
Same case and deck. Packaging shifts the upper cases inward; tooling needs that space for withdrawal.
6pointsReplying to SarahBaker0502
Then put their sections together, including the open fingers, because two individually sensible sketches can still describe a pallet that cannot be built.
24pointsReplying to SarahBaker0502
Could a lower-count layer work with the present tool? Fewer cases is worth comparing, not automatically a failed design.
-2pointsReplying to AnilAllen0288
Anil, yes, with the resulting extra pallet handling included. Sarah's team should compare support and access before ranking capacity.
7pointsReplying to AnilAllen0288
Lower-count option requested. Dispatch wants its partial-order handling included before they'll compare it.
18pointsReplying to SarahBaker0502
Sensible request from dispatch. Does the proposed pattern still make sense when an order stops before a complete layer, or is the diagram quietly assuming every pallet finishes full?
20pointsReplying to JamieBrooks0817
Only full layers shown so far. Partial orders are routine here, so that's a real gap.
19pointsReplying to SarahBaker0502
Keep the awkward partial order in the review. A pattern nobody can finish is not saved by looking efficient when full.
23pointsReplying to SarahBaker0502
Who is drawing that partial-order case, Sarah? It needs an owner alongside the full-layer tooling comparison.
19pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .