Identify what the limit includes before entering it
A worksheet gives a number of 390 kg but does not say whether it includes the pallet. That missing definition can change the permitted complete-layer count. The tool's gross field budgets the total of cases, tare, and ancillary materials. Its rated-payload field compares the packed-case cargo quantity with the entered payload value. Identify the responsible source's component definition rather than choosing whichever field produces more cases.
This guide uses 390 kg as a hypothetical comparison budget in both fields. It does not assign a real rating to a pallet. If a supplier's definition includes different cargo components, the input model must be reconciled to that definition. A label saying payload is not enough to infer whether every additional material is included or excluded.
Build the common layer and height record
Assume identical cases 600 by 400 by 300 mm on a 1200 by 1000 mm base, 162 mm high. Zero gaps and edge clearance are used and horizontal rotation is allowed. The mixed layer holds five cases. Each packed case weighs 18 kg, so a complete layer adds 90 kg. The supplied example tare is 30 kg, with 4 kg ancillary materials.
A 1400 mm total height budget allows floor((1400 minus 162) / 300) = 4 layers. Four layers contain twenty cases and stand 1362 mm. Their packed-case mass is 360 kg and gross is 394. Whether that stack passes a 390 kg constraint depends on which components the constraint budgets.
| Constraint record | Selected HI | Cases | Cargo mass | Gross | Limiting result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 390 kg gross only | 3 | 15 | 270 kg | 304 kg | Gross weight |
| 390 kg case payload only | 4 | 20 | 360 kg | 394 kg | Height and payload tie |
| Both 390 kg constraints | 3 | 15 | 270 kg | 304 kg | Gross weight |
Reproduce the difference in the real fields
Open 390 kg in the gross field. The case budget remaining after tare and ancillary mass is 356 kg. Dividing by the 90 kg layer mass permits three complete layers. The fourth would weigh 394 kg gross and exceed the entered budget by 4 kg.
Open 390 kg in the payload field. The payload budget allows floor(390 / 90) = 4 complete layers. Its gross display is 394, but no gross limit is set in that record. A passed payload check is not a passed 390 kg gross check.
Read tied limits as whole-layer results
In the payload-only record, height and payload both permit four whole layers, so the limiting label identifies both. That tie does not mean the load occupies every millimetre and kilogram. There is 38 mm of height headroom and 30 kg of case-payload budget, neither enough for another complete 300 mm, 90 kg layer. Whole-layer limits can tie even when their remaining numeric budgets differ.
If both gross and payload limits truly apply, enter both. The gross limit reduces HI to three while the payload check remains within. Do not remove a confirmed gross constraint merely because the payload-only record fits four. Conversely, do not subtract tare from a payload budget that the source already defines as case cargo unless its definition explicitly requires that treatment.
Check what remains known when tare is missing
The payload comparison can be calculated from packed-case mass without a known tare. Gross output cannot then be completed. The existence of a payload-limited HI is not proof that handling gross is known. Preserve the unset gross information rather than entering a zero tare to hide it. A genuine zero is an explicit component exclusion and needs a corresponding label.
The ancillary field is mass only. It does not add separator thickness or change the layer footprint. If the operation includes extra components in its defined cargo payload, reconcile them separately because the current rated-payload arithmetic compares cases. Record that boundary instead of assuming one field captures every possible supplier definition.
Confirm whether the number is per carrier or per shipment
The example's 390 kg constraints apply to one palletized group. If the source instead gives 390 as a whole-shipment gross budget, neither per-pallet field represents that aggregate check. Two fifteen-case groups at 304 kg each total 608 before considering another tail, despite each passing a per-pallet 390 comparison. Use the weight calculator's shipment-total check with the actual order distribution for that separate question. Preserve the repetition level of the source limit alongside its component definition.
Apply the accepted definition to the order
For a hypothetical thirty-eight-case order, the three-layer record has capacity fifteen and needs three carriers: fifteen, fifteen, and eight. With 18 kg cases and 34 kg carrier plus extras, gross weights are 304, 304, and 178, totaling 786. The payload-only four-layer record has capacity twenty and needs two carriers: twenty and eighteen, totaling 752 kg gross under the same per-carrier components.
Those carrier totals are conditional comparisons. They do not establish whether either physical stack or partial arrangement is approved. The 34 kg difference comes from one extra carrier and ancillary group. The actual equipment definitions must be resolved before choosing which capacity represents the release.
Weight-definition decision record
Case 600 by 400 by 300 mm, packed mass 18 kg. Base 1200 by 1000 by 162, tare 30 kg. Ancillary mass 4 kg. Mixed TI 5, zero spacing, rotation allowed. Height 1400. Record either gross 390, case payload 390, or both explicitly. Gross-only returns HI 3 and 304 kg; payload-only returns HI 4 and 394 kg gross. Save the source's component definition, not only the number 390.
The right field is determined by the meaning of the confirmed limit. Reproducing both alternatives is useful precisely because it exposes the ambiguity that must be resolved before the arithmetic becomes a planning specification.