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。

Which packed-carton revision belongs in our UR5e layer review?

IsaacBarnes0607 · 2026年8月21日 03:50 UTC

回复讨论
IS
IsaacBarnes0607
I've got support and occupied withdrawal on the UR5e review request, but the labelled cartons still rotate over gaps. How do I keep the actual packed-box requirements tied to the tooling comparison?

6 条回复

OS
OscarCarter0967

Identify the carton and internal packing revision beside the bearing requirements on the shared layer view. The label and outside dimensions alone may not identify the load arrangement packaging assessed.

7
WI
WillCarter1009

Include the partial layer too, because the tool and support conditions develop before the last carton is placed.

18
IS
IsaacBarnes0607

I found the layout and packing sheet refer to different internal inserts despite the same carton code. Packaging is checking which packed version is intended for dispatch before judging the rotated positions.

23
OM
OmarChen1187

That explains the conflicting inputs, not whether either packed version can use the pattern. Keep the selected version explicit when the bearing assessment arrives.

18
IS
IsaacBarnes0607

Dispatch confirmed the current insert, and the common drawing now names it. Bearing and complete withdrawal assessments are still pending; I've withdrawn the older support note from this proposal.

7
WI
WillCarter1009

Keep that old note in the history with its actual applicability, so someone finding it later does not quietly put it back into this review.

20

参与讨论

欢迎来到 Application Robot

所有人都可以阅读论坛。登录或注册后即可发起讨论、回复或上传照片。

忘记密码?

注册账号即表示你同意我们的 使用条款 社区准则。请阅读我们的 隐私政策 ,了解我们如何处理你的信息。