Our FR10 alternating pattern shows cartons and finger gaps, but not the internal supports carrying each packed carton. When rotated, some supports sit over the gaps below. I want one packaging and tooling review before the pattern enters the handover. What should that review show?
Put the filled-carton support detail through both layers in a section, with the opening fingers on the same version, because at the moment each team can stare at a different rectangle and believe the other has solved it
Packaging marked the required end support on the section. One rotated row is unacceptable. Tooling says closing that gap would trap the proposed fingers during withdrawal.
Then ask for another arrangement, not two signatures on separate objections; keeping the carton direction or losing a row might be worth comparing, but packaging and tooling need to assess the actual candidates together
Our process engineer owns it. They have proposed layer P2 with fewer cartons and unchanged carton orientation. The tool designer is assessing release. Packaging has not approved a trial yet.
Include the same packed contents in P2. My earlier pallet problem depended on the carton end structure, so keeping the outside size alone would have made a misleading comparison. And keep P2 provisional until both reviews are back.
Dispatch is costing P2. Same carton construction and contents, Lucy. The original pattern is withdrawn. No combined approval yet, so the handover has neither pattern marked ready.
Please keep the trial conditions beside the eventual drawing revision. That should save the next person reconstructing which carton and sequence the approval covered.