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。
LucyChan1089 · 2026年6月28日 13:40 UTC
Show the packed case's required support regions over the preceding layer, with the proposed tool opening and leaving in placement order; the gap someone wants for a finger may be the bit packaging needs underneath the load.
23分Packaging has marked the supported ends. One rotated case bridges an end across a gap. Tooling's view only shows it being carried, not released, so both questions remain on the marked drawing.
6分Who is responsible for returning one combined revision, Lucy? Separate comments will not tell you whether the changes can coexist.
23分What does dispatch do with orders that stop partway through the layer? I'd include that work now. A pattern that depends on someone finishing every short order can make an attractive cycle figure fairly irrelevant.
9分Alex, our integrator owns the combined revision. Oliver, partial orders are common and presently finished by hand. We asked for them to remain in the comparison rather than pricing only full pallets.
8分That is a real constraint, not necessarily a reason to reject all automation. Could the proposed job cover a worthwhile subset of full orders without leaving dispatch more sorting and setup than it saves?
18分Toby, possibly, but Lucy would need the actual order mix. I wouldn't count the leftovers as free labour just because they sit outside the robot supplier's scope.
12分The order mix rules out a full-order-only job for us. Most of the labour would remain at the manual station and we'd add a separate setup. The integrator is considering a lower-count single-direction layer instead.
11分That candidate keeps the case ends supported and its illustrated tool exit clears the neighbours. Packaging still needs to assess the stack and partial layers. We have dropped the original alternating arrangement, not approved its replacement.
9分Does the replacement drawing identify the same packed-case specification packaging used for its support marks? That link should survive the pattern change.
16分