Our UR5e pallet proposal rotates the next layer very neatly, except the filled cartons carry their load through two internal end supports and those ends now sit over gaps; the gripper designer wants the same gaps for release, so I need both teams looking at one drawing before this neat picture gets approved.
Request a section through the filled carton and both layers at the troublesome position, with the opening tool included, so packaging and tooling can see the support and release conflict together.
Packaging supplied the internal support view and it makes the problem obvious, with one support almost entirely above the finger gap; I have put their drawing beside the tool-open view.
Ask them to compare a revised layer rather than approve that position independently, because accepting the carton arrangement while assuming tooling will somehow close the gap leaves the same conflict unresolved.
Dispatch wants the outer labels readable from the aisle, Pavel, though they will review alternatives; packaging has proposed fewer cartons without rotating the support direction, and tooling is looking at release on that version.
Does fewer cartons mean fewer on each finished pallet or just a different repeating layer, because dispatch will probably price those rather differently?
And keep the filled-carton condition unchanged when comparing those options, otherwise a different internal pack can make the revised pattern appear to solve a support problem that has merely moved.
Lin, fewer per finished pallet in the current proposal; dispatch is costing that, and the same filled carton is specified for both comparisons, Nora, with no approval of the revised handling trial yet.
Tooling found enough release room in the lower-count drawing, but packaging still needs the agreed support trial with filled cartons; I have withdrawn the first alternating pattern from our decision pack.