Our UR5e layer count ignores the carton underside

Two corner boxes on the rotated layer. The rest have support under both strips, according to packaging's marked drawing.

On my current proposals the fingers are the reason some gaps exist. Ask tooling which gaps they actually need before moving every carton to cure those two corners.

Our awkward corner once needed somebody to slide the last carton sideways by hand, so ask how these last two are meant to arrive as well as where they finish.

A hand finishing the layer belongs in the cost, not outside the drawing.

Could you leave those two positions empty and compare the smaller layer? I don't know whether that helps the complete load, but it is a candidate packaging could assess.

Anika, exactly, and somebody has to notice when the station needs that hand; a manual task hidden inside automatic time makes the staffing estimate rather imaginative.

Tooling says the current fingers need one of the two corner gaps during withdrawal. I have asked for a lower-count candidate and a different finger approach. No manual finishing step in our agreed scope.

Good. Then don't quietly accept one in the replacement drawing. Does the lower-count option leave the stack symmetrical or take two boxes from one side?

Jane's question belongs with packaging's full-load assessment, not just the section through a single box; leaving positions empty can change more than the count.

Jonas, I like having the smaller candidate visible. I'd still show pallet handling cost beside it. Lower count can be sensible without being free.

Agreed. I was trying to offer something to assess, not declare the smaller pallet better. The two unsupported positions seemed a sensible place to start.

And try getting a partly built load out in the review, because stopping before the last two boxes is not always the same thing as planning a shorter layer.

LuisArcher, would that change the recipe or just the end-of-order handling? I'm trying to understand where the operator sees the difference.

Depends on the agreed handling, Sean; I mean ask who deals with an interruption, not invent a recipe change from a sketch.

And don't call it end of order when it stopped halfway through one.

Michael, I'd be interested in the two replacement drawings when they're ready. Particularly whether a different approach keeps both corner boxes without giving the operator another job.