Packaging rejected the unsupported turned positions in our FR10 carton plan. Tooling proposes a layer sheet; another option uses fewer cartons. I want the support and withdrawal review joined to the work of feeding that sheet, not hidden behind a fuller pallet picture.
Which FR10 layer option includes the sheet-feeding job?
LinBaker0444 · 2025年12月8日 12:11 UTC
主帖中文翻译暂不可用，以下显示英文原文；回复保留原文。 查看英文原文
8 条回复
回复 LinBaker0444
Keep both options with the same current packed carton and pallet. The sheet needs an identified construction and its own support assessment, not just a line inserted under the boxes.
19分The sheet is not specified yet. The supplier says standard sheet, which is apparently expected to answer both material and feeding questions.
-1分回复 LinBaker0444
We chose fewer cartons rather than add sheet feeding on our job, but that only helps as a reminder to compare the extra work; it doesn't decide which option suits your dispatch.
22分回复 LinBaker0444
Include the order mix and partial pallets, Lin. A full-layer comparison may hide where the extra sheet task is most disruptive.
-4分Partials are common. The current estimate assumes full pallets only. Dispatch is supplying actual order sizes before we compare the two options.
23分回复 LinBaker0444
And have tooling check the changed withdrawal spaces in the lower-count pattern. Fewer cartons do not automatically make every tool movement straightforward.
18分回复 LinBaker0444
If the sheet option stays, ask who replenishes it and where the stack lives; our first picture made that person's space disappear very neatly.
8分Both options remain open. Packaging is defining the proposed sheet, tooling will assess withdrawal for each, and dispatch is adding feeding, replenishment and partial-order work. No sheet or tool ordered.
6分讨论已关闭
此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .