简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文；未对原文作自动翻译。
Ian_Briggs · 2026年3月9日 16:12 UTC
Ask packaging to assess the filled carton against that section, with tooling present. A better top view will not settle the missing support.
13分They have the section. Tooling had drawn the layer below as solid.
8分Draw the real lower layer first. Then compare the fingers through placement and withdrawal. No point approving support which occupies the same space as the tool.
1分Include the incomplete last layer, Ian, because dispatch will have to finish actual orders rather than only the repeating arrangement.
4分Added two normal short orders. Different endings, same carton.
0分Keep those endings identifiable in the operator brief. A single picture labelled normal pallet is not enough if the orders finish differently.
7分Our alternative supported the carton but still trapped the tool beside a returned partial pallet. Has yours included that access, or only new builds?
6分New builds only here. We do not resume returned pallets on this proposed job.
3分Useful boundary. Put it in the proposal so nobody quietly adds returns once the station exists.
12分Isabel Bennett, I would avoid making that an eternal ban; Ian can define the current scope without predicting every later assessed change.
9分Current scope, yes. I meant no unnoticed addition.
5分Packaging rejected the turned positions. Straight-row alternative is drawn with both short-order endings now.
14分Who is checking the extra pallet handling that creates?
17分Dispatch. Their estimate includes more pallet exchanges but no rebuilding of awkward final layers.
14分Have they checked where the extra pallet waits, Ian, rather than only counting the exchanges?
8分Not yet. That space is the remaining argument before we choose the alternative.
11分Keep the straight-row price provisional until that is settled. A waiting place can bring its own work.
16分此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .