. y , . .
"mi... 4 A . ‘ .
, £42.»...Rmm... .

u...G.IJ.fl...r.un
~ .

«chair

.241;
a‘
. if:
x... at\ if
. 3:31... ll.
. u ‘ .44..
I 31.. :
.2322).
T. t is“
(A . it )
it\ I
. I. L
I? ‘tivnrdili I.
. tn)! . tr. .I um
.17
2 u ’1

 

2 Irwummiw P.

“$9.an .tcwth

(1.95? p.

 

THESIS
’}

of
2009

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled
Thermal Insulated Packaging Design with S-Flute
Corrugated Board
presented by

Oranis Panyarjun

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph . D . degree in Packaging

 

Date WORL—

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0—12771

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State

University

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE
I n

(1 ant

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

j I 506

VL"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 cz/CIRC/DaIeDue.p65«p.15

THERMAL INSULATED PACKAGING DESIGN WITH S-FLUTE
CORRUGATED BOARD

By

Oranis Panyarjun

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College of Agricultural and Natural Resource

2002

ABSTRACT

THERMAL INSULATED PACKAGING DESIGN WITH S-FLUTE
CORRUGATED BOARD

By

Oranis Panyarjun

The objectives of this research were to evaluate suitability of S-flute
corrugated shipping containers for use as insulated containers, to quantify R-
values, to evaluate insulated containers made of corrugated board and other
materials, to demonstrate the examples of insulating structural design providing
heat transfer resistance for longer time, and also to prove that packaging
structural design is a factor which affects insulating ability.

Double wall construction with an air space was included in two thermal
shipping packaging designs. Each insulated container was composed of an outer
box and an inner box. There were two styles of inner boxes: interlocking and
folding. An RSC was used as the outer box for both designs. Artios software was
used to create the prototype models.

The ice requirement method was used to evaluate different designs and
other insulating materials. It gave estimated package R-values by determining
the heat transfer resistance for each design and material combination including
other insulating containers. Computer simulation was examined to quantify

temperature distributions and R-values.

Copyright by
ORANIS PANYARJUN
2002

Dedicated to my grandfather,
Phya Sriphikar Banchong (Samahn Panyarjun),
Director of Royal State Railway of Thailand (1932-1933),

and my relatives who have passed away.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Throughout more than three years of doctoral study, I received
tremendous assistance, suggestion, and encouragement from many people
whom I will never forget.

First of all, I would like to greatly express appreciation to my major
advisor, Professor Harold Hughes for his guidance. He initiated using a new 8--
flute corrugated board into my research. Dr. Hughes helped me embrace other
considerations about heat transfer. Also, he took me to Jefferson Smurfit World
Research Center, IL to locate and discuss original and advanced research on S-
flute corrugated board. During the design process, I felt happy to develop new
alternative designs, knock on his door, and discuss them with him. His open
mind, inspired my creativity and imagination. In addition, Dr. Hughes also taught
me how to write the dissertation systematically.

I also wish to thank my committee, Professor Gary Burgess, my major
advisor in my master program, who influenced me to study the heat transfer area
as well. His publication enabled me to learn how to evaluate my thermal
container designs by comparing R-values. By using his simple method, I saved a
lot of testing time. Also, his suggestion assisted me to solve R-value problems.
Moreover, through his recommendation, I met a person who was able to
determine Thermal conductivity of corrugated boards. Mr. Bruce Malone, Dow
Chemical, Midland, MI helped me in conducting a Thermal Conductivity. I am

highly appreciative of his effort.

My gratitude also goes to Dr. Paul Singh, one of my committee members
for his suggestion. Dr. Singh provided me more information about other insulated
packaging materials and ISTA 36. Furthermore, he helped me contact some
companies to get some samples of containers and materials. Also I would
especially like to thank Dr. lndrek S. Wichman, one of my committee members
who came from the College of Engineering. He suggested using heat transfer
computer simulation and gave me a contact list of people involved. Even though I
didn’t use his themal conductivity system, I greatly appreciated his offer. Also, I
thank Mr. Uldis levans, Jefferson Smurfit World Research Center, IL, for his
interview and information associated with S-Flute corrugated board. Another
Engineering student I would like to thank, Damien Fron, helped me by working on
the computer simulation.

Furthermore, I would like to acknowledge the financial support throughout
my program by Chulalongkom University, Bangkok, Thailand. I thank many
faculties for the encouragement I obtained while I went on break in Thailand and
thank the friends in Bangkok who contributed constant mental support through e-
mail and icq. I am also highly grateful to my American Family, Mr. Joseph & Mrs.
Betty W. Brooks, for their ‘warmth and liveliness’ second home in the US.

I would like to thank Krittika Tanprasert, Hsin-yen Chung, Supoj
Pratheepthinthong and other graduate students for their advice. Also thank to
Somvadee Chaiyavej for good days over three years. My thanks also go to the
School of Packaging, the School Director, Dr. Bruce Harte, as well as all faculty

and staff, for providing a stimulating learning environment and the program

vi

development. My fellow students in both Master and Doctoral Program also
created a colorful and stimulating environment through five years. Thanks to
everybody in the school who helped me move my stuff from place to place.

My deepest gratitude goes to my parents, Dr. Bhiyayo and Maliwan
Panyarjun. Since I was young, both have inspired me to appreciate the value of
education. My father has also been another academic counselor. Thank you
again for their love, guidance, and encouragement. I also thank my relatives, my
brother Pitipat, and my sister Areeya Panyarjun for their love and support for all

my life.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................
LIST OF FIGURES ...........................................................................

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................

Heat Transfer Theories ................................................................

Corrugated Shipping Container .....................................................
Thermal Resistance of Corrugated Board ........................................
S-flute Corrugated Board .............................................................
Thermal Testing Approaches for Packaging .....................................

CHAPTER 3

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ........................................
Inspiration ..............................................................................
Design Development ................................................................
Final Design ...........................................................................
Die Cut Pattern .......................................................................
Artios Software .......................................................................

CHAPTER 4
MATERIALS AND METHODS ...........................................................
Part I Experiment ....................................................................
Test Materials ................................................................
Conditioning ..................................................................
Test Method ..................................................................
Part II Simulation .....................................................................
Part III Cost Estimation ...............................................................

CHAPTER 5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...........................................................
R-Values of all specimens from the experiment .................................
Evaluating the computer simulation ................................................
The Effect of different flute combination and insulating materials .........
The Effect of Structural Design .....................................................
Cost Estimation ........................................................................

viii

X

xiil

20
20
23
36
39
4O

51
51
54
55
59
61

69
69
69
75
75
76
76

78
78
82
83
86
89

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION ............................................................................... 97

CHAPTER 7

FUTURE STUDY ........................................................................... 99

APPENDICES 100
Appendix A .............................................................................. 100
Appendix B .............................................................................. 1 10
Appendix C .............................................................................. 1 13

BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................. 115

ix

Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.

Table 9.

Table 10.
Table 11.

Table 12.

Table 13.
Table 14.
Table 15.
Table 16.
Table 17.
Table 18.
Table 19.

Table 20.

LIST OF TABLES

Distribution condition and their temperatures ............................ 6
Requirements of fruits and vegetables ..................................... 10
Requirements of meats ......................................................... 10
Requirements for poultry products ........................................... 11
Requirements for fish ............................................................ 1 1
Requirements of eggs, milk, and bakery products ....................... 11
Standard flute configurations .................................................. 24
Comparison of corrugated board characteristics ......................... 26
The most commonly used linerboard grades .............................. 27
The most commonly used corrugating medium weights .............. 27
Heat transfer resistance (Rp) of corrugated paperboard samples. 37
Measured heat transfer resistances of common liner and medium
papers used to manufacture corrugated paperboard .................. 38
Tested results for S-flute ...................................................... 40
Test sequences ................................................................. 42
24 hour domestic express small package freight transport (Air). 43
48 hour domestic express small package freight transport (Air). . .. 43
72-hour international expedited airfreight transport .................... 44
72-hour international expedited airfreight transport .................... 44
Corrugated boards used in the experiment .............................. 69
Dimension of the ISC container ............................................. 73

Table 21.
Table 22.

Table 23.

Table 24.

Table 25.

Table 26.

Table 27.

Table 28.

Table 29.

Table 30.

Table 31.

Tbale 32.

Table 33.

Table 34.

Table 35.

Table 36.

Corrugated prices ............................................................... 77
R-values of ‘interlocking’ corrugated box with various board
combinations ..................................................................... 78
R-values of ‘foIding’ corrugated box with various board

combinations ..................................................................... 79
R-values of #E-46 ISC containers .......................................... 79
R-values of SL 10-EPS containers ......................................... 80
R-values of Thennocor containers ......................................... 80
R-value of each corrugated flute type ...................................... 83
Cost estimation using the package weight only ......................... 89
Cost estimation using the package weight plus 5 lbs of the

product inside .................................................................... 90
Cost estimation using the package weight plus 10 lbs of the

product inside ................................................................... 90
Cost estimation using the package weight plus 15 lbs of the

product inside .................................................................... 91
Evaluation of the combined boards ......................................... 101
Analysis of single/double wall S-flute laminated bulk bins with 46-

1/4 x 38-1/4 x 41-1/2 inch dimensions ..................................... 101
0-8 flute double wall - compresion estimate ............................ 102
Calculations for expected compresion strength of 40 x 40 x 41

box .................................................................................. 102
Tested results for CL-flute .................................................... 103

xi

Table 37.
Table 38.
Table 39.

Table 40.

Table 41.

Table 42.

Table 43.

Table 44.

Table 45.

Table 46.

Table 47.

Table 48.

K-flute advertising from Montebello Contaienr ...........................
Comparison between BC-flute and K-flute ...............................
Comparison between two-box parameters with the same CS/SC
board ..............................................................................
Evaluation of single wall S-flute .............................................
Test data fr an unprinted regular bulk style with 46-1/4 x 38-1/4 x
41-1/2 inch dimensions ........................................................
Evaluation of S-flute ............................................................
Flute profiles and combined board characteristics .....................
Tested results for S-flute ......................................................
C-S flute bins with board combination: 69-36C-42-36S-42/69-
368-42-360-69 ..................................................................
Comparison between SISC and CA/AC combinations for a 40 x
34 x 36 inch bin ..................................................................
The strength properties of suggested 69-40-69l69-40-69-40-90
SISC combinations .............................................................

Predicted compresion strength of a tri-laminate bulk ..................

xii

103

104

104

105

105
106
106
107

107

108
108
109

109

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Heat Conduction ................................................................. 1
Figure 2. Heat Convection ................................................................ 2
Figure 3. Heat Radiation .................................................................. 3
Figure 4. Distribution of frozen food ..................................................... 7
Figure 5. Heat transfer in one box or one unitized load ............................ 8
Figure 6. EPS container .................................................................... 13
Figure 7. Corrugated boxes with EPS panels and shrink-wrapped

Polyurethane panels ............................................................ 13
Figure 8. Gas-filled bag ..................................................................... 15
Figure 9. Kraft lined EPS sheeting ...................................................... 15
Figure 10. Corrugated box with molded Polyurethane .............................. 16
Figure 11. Vacuum panels ................................................................. 17
Figure 12. Heat Conduction through plane wall of thickness L .................. 21
Figure 13. Single wall, double wall, triple wall ........................................ 23
Figure 14. Regular Slotted Container ................................................... 28
Figure 15. Full-Telescope Design-Style Box .......................................... 29
Figure 16. One-piece folder ............................................................... 30
Figure 17. A five-panel folder ............................................................. 30
Figure 18. Double-Side Box ............................................................... 31
Figure 19. Bliss Box ......................................................................... 32
Figure 20. Self-erecting Box .............................................................. 33

xiii

Figure 21.
Figure 22.
Figure 23.
Figure 24.
Figure 25.
Figure 26.
Figure 27.
Figure 28.
Figure 29.
Figure 30.
Figure 31.
Figure 32.
Figure 33.
Figure 34.
Figure 35.
Figure 36.
Figure 37.
Figure 38.
Figure 39.
Figure 40.

Figure 41.

Figure 42.

Figure 43.

The proportion of the box .................................................... 34
Box dimensions ................................................................ 35
Illustration of Packaging Components .................................... 45
Cross-sectional structure of new heat insulating cardboard ........ 47
Modular structure .............................................................. 51
Single square patterns ....................................................... 52
Traditional Thai food packages ............................................ 52
Folding pattern ................................................................. 53
Development of the folding design ........................................ 54
Side section elevation ........................................................ 55
Top section elevation ......................................................... 55
Assembly parts of the interlocking design ............................... 56
Side section elevation ........................................................ 57
Top section elevation ......................................................... 57
Assembly parts of the folding design ..................................... 58
Die cut pattern of the interlocking design ................................ 59
Die cut pattern for the folding design ..................................... 60
ArtiosCAD window ............................................................ 62
Toolbar ........................................................................... 62
Standard catalog ............................................................... 63
The inside dimension box ................................................... 64
The detail style box ........................................................... 64
The allowance box ............................................................ 65

xiv

Figure 44.
Figure 45.
Figure 46.
Figure 47.
Figure 48.
Figure 49.
Figure 50.
Figure 51.
Figure 52.
Figure 53.
Figure 54.
Figure 55.
Figure 56.

Figure 57.

Figure 58.
Figure 59.

Figure 60.

Figure 61.

Figure 62.

Single design setting box ....................................................
The properties box .............................. . .............................
Status bar with a drawing tool ..............................................
Six areas in Artios database ................................................
Board information in DataCenter ..........................................
Dimensions of the folding design corrugated box .....................
Dimensions of the interlocking design corrugated box ...............
EPS container ..................................................................
ISC container ...................................................................
Thennocor container of the interlocking style ..........................
Therrnocor container of the folding style .................................
Comparison of R-value with both designs and other containers.
R-value as a function of board thickness ................................
Graph showing R-value of corrugated boxes with interlocking
design ............................................................................
Graph showing R—value of corrugated boxes with folding design.
Graph showing comparison of R-value of both designs .............
Heat transfer through the interlocking design and the folding
design .............................................................................
Comparison between convection inside two different designs.....
Total cost comparison by UPS and USPS with various

packages and product weights ............................................

XV

65
66
66
67
68
70
70
72
73
74
74
81

84

84

85

86

87

88

92

Figure 63. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 5 lbs of the

product by UPS ................................................................. 93
Figure 64. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 10 lbs of the

product by UPS ............................................................... 94
Figure 65. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 15 lbs of the

product by UPS ................................................................ 94
Figure 66. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 5 lbs of the

product by USPS .............................................................. 95
Figure 67. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 10 lbs of the

product by USPS ............................................................. 95

Figure 68. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 15 lbs of the

product by USPS ......................... 96
Figure 69. One example of alternative designs ....................................... 111
Figure 70. The other example of alternative designs ............................... 112

Figure 71. The photographs of the interlocking design and the folding

design ............................................................................ 1 14

xvi

1 .0 INTRODUCTION

Heat is a form of energy which can be transferred from one item to
another when the temperatures are different. The energy transportation process
is known as heat transfer. Heat transfer is an area of study in several
engineering disciplines. There are three distinct modes of heat transfer:
conduction, convection, and radiation. Conduction (Figure 1) is the process by
which heat energy is transmitted from a region of higher temperature to one of
lower temperature within the same object or between objects in direct physical

contact.

Contact surface

   

Energy flow

ll:

Hot body Cold body

Figure 1. Heat Conduction.

Convection is the process of transferring heat through a fluid or gas
through the process of bulk fluid motion (Cengel, 1998). There are two kinds of
convection: natural convection and forced convection. Examples are shown in
Figure 2. For natural convection, heat is transferred to air and hot air moves
upward because it is less dense. Cold air moves in to replace the hot air. In
forced convection, the fluid flow which carries heat away from or to an object

occurs because of a mechanical action.

Natural convection

T I \Hot air
- §

    

 

 

Forced convection

 

Figure 2. Heat Convection.

Radiation is the process by which heat is transported from a high
temperature body to a lower temperature body by passing through a vacuum or a
transparent medium. (Kreith, 1973). For example, in Figure 3, the human feels
the heat of the sun, even while standing inside the building. The heat energy
coming from the sun transfers through the vacuum of space and the glass

windows. The person, in turn, radiates heat to cooler surfaces of the building.

v‘v
< >

S

Room 1 T surface

 
 

 

   

Q radiation

 

 

Figure 3. Heat Radiation.

Heat transfer knowledge has been applied to protect humans and objects
from injury and damage due to too high or too low temperatures. Thermal
insulation is a material or a combination of materials that retards heat transfer by
conduction, convection, or radiation. A measure of the effectiveness of thermal
insulation is the R-value (thermal resistance). Higher thermal resistance
indicates more effective insulation (ASHRAE, 1997). Reasons for using
insulation include energy conservation, personnel protection and comfort,
maintaining process temperature, reducing temperature variation and fluctuation,
fire protection and freezing protection, etc. Insulation also attenuates noise and
vibration. There are many relevant properties of insulation including: thermal
conductivity, density, service temperature, form, structural strength, surface
reflectivity and emissivity, acoustic effects, corrosiveness, and water vapor
transmission. These criteria are used to select insulation (Cengel, 1998). The
following are some issues that must be considered when selecting an insulation
material for a particular application:

1) Purpose: Why is the insulation to be used? The purpose may be to
conserve energy, to reduce the surface temperature for safety, to
prevent sound transmission, to minimize temperature variations or
fluctuations, to prevent freezing on surface, etc.

2) Special Refinement: Each insulation job has its own requirements.
For example, rigid boards cannot be used to insulate pipe. Flexible

insulation or preformed rigid pipe insulation is necessary.

3) Environment: The environment and the conditions of use limit
insulation choices. Insulation for underground steam pipes is
different from insulation for steam pipes in a production facility. Cork,
foam, and polyethylene insulation can be good choices for a moist
environment.

4) Ease of Handling_and Installation: Some insulation materials need
special maintenance in storage before installation. Some insulation
materials require specialists to install. Some insulation is simple to
install in a single step, but other materials require cutting, wrapping,
painting, etc.

5) Qo_st_: The selection of insulation is often based on cost. An
economic analysis should be conducted to identify the insulation
type with the lowest total cost. In this process, the thickness may
also be determined. Logically, the thicker the insulation, the slower

heat transfers through but higher the insulation cost.

There are many factors which can contribute to the damage to
temperature-sensitive products, including: inadequate insulation during package
distribution, the number of steps in the distribution process because the
temperature may not be controlled at some locations or times, temperature
fluctuation due to various environmental conditions, stacking patterns, etc.

For example, Federal Express ships individual packages by truck and

aircraft, mostly in overnight shipments (FedEx, 2001). Since there are many

different products in the packages, FedEx can’t guarantee an appropriate
shipping environment for each product. Handling operations involve 3 to 5
steps (ASTM D-4169, 1994). For example, in a simple case: 1) packages are
loaded onto a truck, 2) packages are taken from the truck into the store, and 3)
packages are bought by the consumers. During distribution, packages are

exposed to various conditions with different temperatures as in Table 1.

Table 1. Distribution condition and their temperatures.

 

 

 

 

 

Conditions Temperatures
Freezer -18 to —35 °C
Refrigerator 1 to 4 °C

Freezer truck, railcar, -18 °C or below
airplane -29 °C for ice cream only
Refrigerated truck, rail 0 to 5 °C
car, airplane

 

Based on ASTM D-4332-89:
Outside environment:
(depending on locations 20 i 2 °C for Temperature high humidity
and seasons) 40 :t 2 °C for Tropical

60 :l: 3 °C for Desert

Extremes, based oniFedEx:

 

-51 °C for Carrier vehicles and open dock areas
during the winter in northern climates

60 °C for Closed, parked carrier vehicles during
summer in southern climates (FedEx, 2001)
Wed on the US. Military assuming:

(the worst case)

 

-62 °C low for Worldwide
71 °C high for Worldwide

 

 

 

 

In the frozen food business, as products move from a manufacturer to a
consumer, they pass through a variety of distribution processes. For example, a
typical case of frozen food may be packed and stored in a freezer before being
shipped by truck to a warehouse loading dock. Eventually, the packaged
products are displayed in the freezer case of a retail store. Later, the product is

placed into a shopping cart and then loaded into a car, often in hot weather,

before it reaches the consumers’ freezer (Figure 4).

 

Figure 4. Distribution of frozen food.

Stacking is another factor that affects heat transfer in distribution
packages. lf packages are unitized onto a pallet, heat transfer rates in different
locations are varied. Products in boxes on the inside of a stack keep better than
products in the outside boxes. This is because the outside shipping containers of
a unitized load act as insulation to prevent heat gain in the center of the unitized

load (Figure 5).

 

 

 

 

f I

/ /
/X /X //

Figure 5. Heat transfer in one box or one unitized load.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Insulation can be applied in packaging systems to solve the problem of
temperature variation that can cause product damage or loss. Insulated shipping
containers offer more resistance to heat flow than other containers. Insulated
shipping containers perform the same functions as insulation materials. Excellent

insulated containers offer energy cost saving (e.g., electricity, gas, etc), by

reducing the amount of refrigeration required and reducing the required thickness

of the package wall, thereby saving space during transportation. Generally, there

are five insulated shipment applications (FedEx, 2001):

1.

To maintain products within allowable temperature ranges (chemicals,
food, medical drugs).

To keep products frozen (seafood, diary products, medical specimens,
meat).

To prevent products from freezing (chemicals, blood specimens, seafood).
To minimize the effect of temperature variation (plants, flowers, live
lobsters, sensitive electronics, polymers).

To prevent melting and thawing in hot weather (chocolates, ice cream).

Each temperature-sensitive product has own characteristics. For example,

live products such as fresh fruits, vegetables, and live seafood continue to

respire. Sugar is combined with 02 to produce C02 and H20. Heat of the

respiration is released. The rate of respiration depends strongly on temperature

(Cengel, 1998). It is likely that if the package had excellent insulation ability, the

temperature inside would rise and the respiration rate would increase

correspondingly. This would cause rapid decay. Tables 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 showed

the requirements of food samples affecting consideration of their suitable

shipping containers (Cengel, 1998 and ASHRAE, 1994).

Table 2. Requirements of fruits and vegetables.

Corrugated
containers with
vents.

corn,

green peas, parsley, spinach,

cabbage, mushrooms, carrots,
onions

 

Table 3. Requirements of meats.

-No specific
suggestion.
-Presenting free
space in a

container of
frozen food
and bacon caused subliming
and condensing

and bacon ice on the
package.

 

Table 4. Requirements for poultry products.

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. .:.... . F—F—I ............
ngroduatétypes? ;. .lce'chrllin'g, 96 Deep Chilling; _______
Shortlt‘erm Long term: 3: . .2; ......... .........
Poultry 1-2_ -2 -18 Below -18
, -No specific suggestion.
f§[_.contalners, '
Table 5. Requirements for fish.
Product Short 1 year or Occasional Retail store, Transported,
I types term, °C more, °C storage, °C °C °C
Frozen -26 or -29 -23 -18 or below -18
fish below
Ei'S'IJgge‘stedi? -Proper fit of package to the product, the surface area of the
3’; shipping ' package, and the maximum used of the freezer space are important.
tcontainers

 

 

 

 

Table 6. Requirements of eggs, milk, and bakery products.

room,
shipping

preferably below —20
for several months

on
(Assuming 45°F and 70 % RH for average
conditions of American

yeast-raised, and
cake

layer, chocolate
cakes

cakes

 

Container manufacturers have produced a variety of insulated containers.
After examining the use of insulated containers from several companies, it was
observed that there were two approaches to marketing temperature sensitive
products: 1) mass prOduction industries and 2) mail order or E-Commerce
companies. Mass production industries use many similar sized containers which
are transported by vehicles to warehouses or distribution centers and, finally, to
retail stores. Mail order and E-Commerce companies tend to buy fewer
containers in a range of sizes and send them directly to individual customers by
small package delivery companies such as FedEx. However, even though
ordered products are of different sizes, many mail order or E-Commerce
companies prefer to solve this problem by adding dunnage, such as foam
peanuts or scrap paper, to fill oversized packages, rather than buying correct
sized packages. Consequently, in the current market place, there are many
kinds of insulated containers that are used to protect products from heat and cold
temperature, such as the following:
1. EPS (Expanded Polystyrene) container

An EPS box is the most common type of insulated container. The EPS
box is made by injecting EPS into a mold (Figure 6). EPS containers are
reusable stackable, cheap, and lightweight. They can be produced by standard
technology with no special equipment. The tight interlocking joint between the
base and the cover minimizes heat loss or gain. EPS containers, however, are
bulky, cumbersome, and prone to cracking and leaking. Also EPS is hard to

recycle.

12

 

Figure 6. EPS container.

2. Corrugated box with assembled insulation panels

This type of container is a “conventional box” with six foam panels that line
the inside (Figure 7). It can be cheap and can be produced on standard
equipment. It facilitates transport cost saving since box suppliers can send
collapsed boxes to their customers to assemble during packing. It is simple to
separate the panels from the corrugated box for recycling. However, holes at all
corners of the corrugated box and joints where the panels meet allow heat loss

or gain. Also the assembly process is labor intensive.

 

Figure 7. Corrugated boxes with EPS panels and shrink-wrapped Polyurethane

panels.

3. _B|_arllse_t

A blanket made of plastic film can be packed with cellulose or granulated
foam to a thickness of an inch or more. For warm products, the inside of the
plastic bag may be laminated with aluminum foil to reflect radiant heat energy.
For cold products, the outside of the bag may be similarly laminated with
aluminum foil to prevent heat gain. The product can be wrapped in the blanket
and put into a corrugated container or the entire container can be wrapped in the
blanket. The blanket is flexible and adjustable for use on various sizes of
products. It can be reused, saves space during shipping, and generally is not
damaged by water. However, it requires special technology to produce, is not
stackable, and is complicated to recycle. The appearance is similar to the gas

filled bag shown in Figure 8.

4. Gas-filled bag

The gas filled bag is similar to the blanket but ordinary air or inert gas is
used to inflate the bag. The gas filled bag is made of plastic film with internal
baffles that prevent convection heat transfer (Figure 8). The bag is used in
ordinary corrugated boxes for shipping perishable products by air without
refrigeration. The bags can be transported flat to shippers to save warehouse
space and delivery cost as compared to other package forms. The gas filled bag
is an advanced insulating approach that requires special equipment and
technology. It is labor-intensive to wrap the bag around the products and

assemble the corrugated container.

14

 

Figure 8. Gas-filled bag.

5. Modified corrugated board or Kraft lined EPS sheeting

Two Kraft liners with a foam core, typically EPS (Figure 9) are produced in
sheets and distributed to customers who convert them into boxes. The material is
light, easy to recycle, and cost saving because it is flat during shipment. It can be
produced by cutting the flat pattern and assembling into the box. However, labor

is required to assemble the boxes and there are holes at all corners of the box.

 

Figure 9. Kraft lined EPS sheeting.

6. Corrugated box with molded Polyurethane

A corrugated box with molded polyurethane is a corrugated container with
a layer of polyurethane applied to the interior to reduce heat transfer (Figure 10).
There are no holes at corners or other joints allowing heat leaks or gains. This
improves insulating ability. In addition, the foam strengthens the boxes,
improving stackability. The whole box, however, is hard to recycle since molded
Polyurethane is on the surface of the corrugated. Also, this style of box is
expensive, bulky and cumbersome to handle. Special equipment is required to

inject the foam into the corrugated box.

Open cell
foam

Products

Polyurethane

 

Figure 10. Corrugated box with molded Polyurethane.

7. Vacuum Panel

A vacuum panel is a core material sealed by a barrier film to keep a
vacuum inside. The “microporous” core material with low thermal conductivity is
used to form box structures. The material, like EPS panels, can also be used as

wall liners in shipping containers to improve the insulating ability of the packages.

16

Vacuum panels are thin, light, durable and space saving during transportation.
The insulation values are much higher than the insulating values of conventional
foams. A vacuum panel container can be designed to maintain the temperature
of a shipment for 1 to 5 days. However, vacuum panel containers are expensive
since special technology is required to produce the panels. The panels sealed

with the barrier film are complicated to recycle.

 

Figure 11. Vacuum panels.

Summary of container options

There are three primary considerations involved in the selection of an
insulated package: 1) strength of the container, 2) insulating ability, 3) costs, and
4) knock down ratio. Corrugated boxes generally have not been able to provide a
combination of strength, insulation, and cost to meet the needs of the market for

an insulated container. However, corrugated has often been combined with

other insulating materials, such as EPS panels and molded Polyurethane, to
provide form containers which are acceptable.

A new corrugated board, S-flute, which is thicker than any other single
wall corrugated board, has recently been introduced into the market.
Theoretically, the larger flute size, even with the same grammage liners, should
make this board a more effective insulating material than the conventional
corrugated boards, (eg. A, B, D, and E-flute). As was noted previously,
increasing the thickness of an insulating material produces an increase in the
insulating ability. Before the introduction of S-flute, the highest heat transfer
resistance of corrugated paperboard was provided by A-flute, followed by C-flute,
B-flute, and E-flute, respectively (Thompsonson et al., 1998). Therefore, it is
likely that S-flute should be able to enhance insulation effectiveness of
corrugated containers.

Structural design of the packaging (e.g. shape, size, wall construction,
etc.) should be another factor which influences insulating ability of corrugated
containers. However, due to the fact that S-flute has only recently become
available, there is little specific information available about this material and very
little design work has been done using it. Therefore, the overall goals of this
project were to develop new designs for thermal insulated corrugated packages
made of S-flute and to compare the new designs with to existing insulated'
containers. The following were the specific objectives:

1. To evaluate the suitability of S-flute for thermal insulated containers.

18

2. To demonstrate that particular structural designs affect the length of time
that a corrugated container can protect against heat gain or loss

3. To quantify and compare the R-value insulated containers of various
types and materials.

4. To evaluate computer simulation as a means of determining R-value of

corrugated insulating containers.

19

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Heat Transfer Theories
The fundamental equation (Equation 1) for heat conduction through a

large plane wall of thickness L and surface area A, as shown in Figure 12, is

shown below (Cengel, 1998),

 

Q: kA AT (1)
dt L

 

T = the temperature difference across the insulation
L = the thickness of flat insulation

k = thermal conductivity

dQ/dt = the rate of heat transfer

A = surface area

R-value, thermal resistance of material per unit area (°F. ftz. hlBtu), is a measure

of insulation effectiveness. For flat insulation, the R-value is defined in Equation
2.

R-value = L/k (2)

 

k = the thermal conductivity of the material

Whenever R-value is known, the rate of heat transfer through the insulation can
be determined from,

d0 = AT x A (3)
dt R-value

 

20

 

Figure 12. Heat Conduction through plane wall of thickness L

Equation ( 2 ) can not be applied directly to a box since it was developed for flat
insulation, not for a box composed of flat insulated walls.

Based on the principles of heat flow, the overall thermal resistance to heat
flow through a flat surface, such as a ceiling, floor, or wall, equals to the sum of
the resistances (R-values) of the various parts of the construction in series as
shown in Equation 4 (ASHRAE, 1997):

R = R1+R2+R3+...+Rn —-—-- ~~~~~ (4)
R1 + R2 + ...+ Rn = individual resistances of the parts
R = resistance of the construction from inside surface to outside

surface

21

A wall with an air space of conductance C, made of two homogenous
materials with conductivities k1 and kg and thickness x1 and x2, respectively would
have resistance as shown in Equation 5 (ASHRAE, 1997).

RT = 1 + X1 ‘I' 1 '1' X2 4' 1 (5)
hi k1 C k2 ho
hi and h0 = the heat transfer film coefficients

 

 

 

There are many factors that affect heat transfer across air spaces, such as
the nature of the boundary surfaces, the thickness of the intervening air space,
the orientation of the air space and the distance between the boundary surfaces,
as well as the direction of heat flow. The air space conductance coefficient
equals the total conductance from one surface bounding the air space to the
other. It is the sum of a radiation component, a convection component, and a
conduction component. The most effective arrangement is airtight. Convection
and conduction are affected by the orientation of the air space, the direction of
heat flow, the temperature difference across the space, and the thickness of the
space but only slightly affected by the mean temperature of the surfaces.
Radiation, on the other hand, is strongly affected by the temperature of the two
boundary surfaces including their respective surface properties characterized by
emissivity but only affected slightly by the thickness of the space, its orientation,
the direction of heat flow, and the order of emittance (hot or cold surfaces)

(ASHRAE, 1997).

22

Corrugated Shipping Container
Board Structure
Figure 13 shows how single wall corrugated board is composed of a

corrugated medium sandwiched between two liners or facings.

/

NWV

/ \

WVV_

/ \
NWVW
NWVV\
/\/\/\/W\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 13. Single wall, double wall, triple wall.

Connected arches are formed as flutes in the corrugated medium. An arch
with a proper curve, glued at both facings. can support many times its own
weight. (Fibre Box Association, 1994). Double wall board is composed of two
fluted medium plies and three linerboard plies while triple wall board combines

three fluted medium plies and four linerboard plies (Saroka, 1995). The purpose

23

of the medium is to separate the facings, prevent them from sliding relative to
one another and prevent localized buckling. The medium acts like a low-density
core, which makes corrugated board strong and lightweight. The higher the
quality of paper and process used in corrugated production, the higher the quality
of board produced, (Wright, 1991). Single wall corrugated board is primarily used
for manufacturing shipping containers, partitions, cushions, pads, and display
stands. VVIth its higher stacking strength, double wall board is used for heavy or
bulky products such as machinery, appliances, or furniture. Large and very heavy
products are mostly contained in corrugated boxes made of triple wall. Moreover,
instead of using wood, triple wall board is used to construct large bulk bins and

boxes.
Flute Standards
Most corrugated boards are classified into one of four standard flute sizes

(Table 7).

Table 7. Standard flute configurations (Source: ASTM D 4727-91).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Type Flutes per linear Approximate height Takeup
foot . Factor
A-flute 36 i 3 3/16—inch 1.54
D-flute 50 i 3 3/32-inch 1.32
C-flute 42 i 3 9/64-inch 1.43
Tflute 94 j: 4 3/64-inch 1.27

 

 

 

 

The size of the teeth in the meshed corrugating roll used to form the

medium designates the flute size (Muldoon, 1984). The thickest flute is A,

24

 

followed by C, B, and E-flute. In general, the bigger flutes provide greater
stacking strength and compression strength, but the smaller flutes provide
greater puncture resistance (Saroka, 1995).

In selecting the correct flute for each packaging transport purpose, a
carrier classification should be used. C-flute is usually a good for starting point
since it is a common size. E-flute is typically not used for shipping containers.
Replacing paperboard is a main purpose of E-flute. A-flute is thicker than the
other flutes. Theoretically, the highest thickness should offer the best stacking
strength. However, there are exceptions. For example, A—flute with 26-pound
medium is hard to transport without damaging the flute structure. Therefore, A-
flute is mostly used for cushions or triple wall board. \Mth the highest flat crush
strength, B-flute is a good choice for packaging such heavy rigid goods as cans
or bottles since a high stacking strength is not needed. C-flute gives better
stacking strength than B-flute. Corrugated shipping containers made of C-flute
use less space than equipment containers made of A-flute. Table 8 illustrates

characteristics of each flute (Soroka, 1995).

Materials

Generally, natural Kraft fibers are used for linerboards. Recycled or
secondary fiber can be used to produce either linerboards or mediums.
Corrugated boards, made of recycled fiber, can be made to the same

specifications as virgin fiber containerboard. Sometimes, recycled board is

25

produced with slightly greater thickness if there is a concern about weaker

recycled fiber.

Table 8. Comparison of corrugated board characteristics.

 

A-flute is subject to the limitations of flat crush when a light medium is used.

Typically, recycled board has lower coefficient of friction than virgin Kraft;
therefore, its surface looks smoother. Because of this property, a good recycled
board offers an excellent printing surface. A disadvantage of recycled board is
that it absorbs water more rapidly than virgin Kraft. Due to the lower stiffness of

virgin Kraft, it is a good choice for wraparound cases (Soroka, 1995).

26

ComgMardmades

Grammage, weight in grams per square meter, and “Basis Weight”, weight
in pounds per 1,000 square feet (lb/MSF), are used to categorize fiberboard
grades (Table 9 and 10). Component grammage starts from the outside, the
smoother finish, to the inside, where embossed lines from the corrugating rolls
are visible. Thus, 205/127C/161 consists of the following components: outside
liner of 205 grams per square meter, medium of 127 grams per square meter,

formed to a C—flute, and inside liner of 161 grams per square (Soroka, 1995).

Table 9. The most commonly used linerboard grades.

North American uropean

rammage rammage

127 125
61 150

205

337

 

Table 10. The most commonly used corrugating medium weights.

127

147
161
195

weight in pounds x 4.885 = grammage)

    

27

Manufacturer's joint

Corrugated boxes are assembled by gluing, taping, stapling, and stitching
(Fiber Box Association, 1994). Glued joints are common and strong and can be
produced at high speed. Taping, stapling, and stitching are semiautomatic, so

they are slower operations.

Box style
1. Slotted styles

 

Slotted style boxes are formed from a single piece of corrugated
fiberboard which is scored and slotted for folding into a box. At the
manufacturer’s joint, one side panel and one end panel are brought together and
held by glue, tape, or stitching. The examples of slotted boxes include RSC
(Regular Slotted Container), OSC (Overlap Slotted Container), FOL (Full-Overlap
Slotted Container, CSSC (Center Special Slotted Container). The most common
slotted style is the RSC (Regular Slotted Container) (Figure 14). All flaps on an
RSC are the same depth. This style is the most economic design since it

produces the least production waste (Fibre Box Association, 1994).

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 14. Regular Slotted Container.

28

2. Telescope boxes

Telescope boxes are composed of more than one part. For example, one
piece can be the separate top or cover and the other piece can be the body. The
cover slides onto the body. There are many telescope boxes such as FTD (Full-
Telescope Design-Style Box), FT HS (Full-Telescope Half-Slotted Box), PTD
(Partial-Telescope Design-Style Box), and PTHS (Partial telescope Half-Slotted
Box). The FTD, which is a common style, produces the least manufacturing

waste (Figure 15).

=I----i= ‘
=. \ V

Figure 15. Full-Telescope Design-Style Box.

 

 

 

 

"[["'""

 

 

 

 

3. EQL®J§

Folders are made of one or more pieces of fiberboard that fold around a
product. Folders include 1PF (One-Piece Folder), 2PF (Two-Piece Folder, 3PF
(T hree-Piece Folder), FPF (Five-Panel Folder), wrap-around blank, self-locking

tray, tuck folder, etc. A 1PF (one-piece folder) (Figure 16) uses one piece of

29

corrugated board, scored to form the sides and ends, and extensions of the side

flaps to form the top.

 

5::- . é
i::::::::: /—

Figure 16. One-piece folder.

 

 

 

 

 

-------d

 

 

 

 

 

 

A five-panel folder (FPF) (Figure 17) is composed of five panels which are slotted
and scored. The fifth panel is the closing flap that covers one side panel. The
FPF is appropriate for long products. Penetration of the end is prevented by

several layers of the FPF flaps (Fibre Box Association, 1994).

 

TI----I|-.I----I ~
5 Q.

"TWITT—

/l]\
"i'_\\

 

 

 

Figure 17. A five-panel folder.

4. Slide-type_boxes

A slide-type box is an outer tube and an inner shell which are formed from
two rectangular and scored pieces of board. The tube slides onto the shell. It is
very easy to close or open the box. The examples of slide-type boxes include DS
(Double-Slide Box) and TS (T ripIe—Slide Box). A DS (Double-Side Box) (Figure
18) is two shells made of two pieces of board that slide onto each other. The two
thicknesses of four sidewalls provide stacking strength (Fibre Box Association,

1994).

 

 

 

 

-——--—
p------q
---cooooo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 18. Double-Side Box.

5. Rigid boxes

Rigid boxes are made of three pieces of fiberboard. Two identical end
panels have flaps to attach to a body which is made from one piece of the
fiberboard folded to form the two side panels. The examples of rigid boxes are

Recessed-End box, No.2 Bliss Box and No.4 Bliss Box. Figure 19 showing a

31

No.2 Bliss Box is made from one scored piece formed to be the body and two
end pieces with four flaps to provide good stacking strength. Seams are formed

on the body panels (Fibre Box Association, 1994).

 

 

l"""

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 19. Bliss Box.

6. Self-erecting boxes

Self-erecting boxes are made of one piece of die-cut board with slit-scored
bottom flaps. Two pairs of bottom flaps are designed to be fastened to each other
when forming the joint. Self-erecting boxes are appropriate for small-volume
shippers who load automatic set-up equipment. Self-erecting boxes (Figure 20)
have two pairs of adjacent bottom flaps that slide together to form the bottom
while four panels with top flaps are similar as a regular slotted container (Fibre

Box Association, 1994).

32

 

   

 

Figure 20 Self-erecting Box.

Shapes of corrugated boxes

The shape and style of a corrugated box is determined by the size,
weight, and shape of the products inside. The shape of the box is defined by the
ratio of the length of the longest side to the length of the shortest side and by the
ratio of the length of the intermediate side to the length of the shortest side. The
ratios, W and DNV, where L = box length, W = box width and D = box depth

give the proportions of the box as in Figure 21 (Wright, 1991).

Sizes of corrugated boxes

In the fiberboard box industry, the manufacturer states inside box
dimensions in the order of length, width and depth. The definitions of length,
width, and depth are based on which panel side is the opening. Even though two
boxes have the same size, it doesn’t mean that they have the same dimensions

as well (Figure 22). The longer dimension of the opening is the length and the

33

length of

the shorter side is the width. The depth is determined by the distance

perpendicular to the innermost surface of opening (Muldoon, 1984).

End Proportions

DNV

A

l

 

fjall square based box

’
Narrow squared sided box

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

{a Long square ended box
Cubic
1 2 3 LA7V

Figure 21. The proportion of the box.

34

D=18” L=12”

t/IH

w=10"

 

 

 

 

 

 

L=18” W=12”

I/tH

 

o=1m

 

 

Figure 22. Box dimensions.

35

Thermal resistance of corrugated board

The same heat transfer principles apply to corrugated board as other
materials. There are two types of heat resistance: the surface resistances and
the material resistance (Thomson et. al, 1998). If the exterior temperature is
higher than the interior temperature, heat transfers from the outside environment
to a liner surface by conduction, convection, and/or radiation. Heat then passes
through the liner by conduction. The heat transfers through the air spaces of the
flute section by convection and radiation. The heat conducts from the inner liner
to the product if they are in contact. There may also be radiation and/or
convection (Ramaker, 1974).

Ramaker (1974) developed a mathematical model to estimate the thermal
resistance of corrugated fiberboard by adding the thermal resistances of the
individual components: facing and fluted section. ASTM C 518 was conducted to
determine the thermal resistances of different linerboards and mediums. The
study concluded that reducing the weight of the corrugated medium increased
the thermal resistance while reducing the weight of linerboard decreased the

thermal resistance.

Thomson, Robertson, and Cleland (1998) searched for an inexpensive,
simple, and quick method to measure the thermal conductivity of packaging
paperboard. Instead of using ASTM C177: Standard Method of Test for Thermal
Conductivity of Materials by Means of the Guarded Heat Plate, requiring
complicated apparatus and considerable time for the measurement, the method

of Cleland and Earle (1976) was used to measure time-temperature data at the

36

surface of a semi-infinite slab for a short period of time after the onset of cooling
or heating.

The overall heat transfer coefficients (1lh), obtained by calculating, were
plotted against the number of sheets of packaging. The slope of this plot was the
heat transfer resistance (R,,) of a single packaging layer. Therefore, the heat
transfer resistance for the corrugated paperboards that were tested could be

estimated (Table 11).

Table 11. Heat transfer resistance (Rp) of corrugated paperboard samples

(Thomson et. al, 1998).

160/120/160
220/12
220/120/220
120/290
120/290
160/120/160

0/120/220

0/12
290/160/220
120/120/120
220/12
220/120/220
290/160/220

 

Recent work by this Thomson ‘steam was focused on developing a model

for predicting the thermal resistance of a broad range of corrugated paperboards

37

for industrial applications. Overall resistance to heat transfer across a corrugated

board equals the sum of a series of resistance as in Equation 7, 8, and 9:

 

Rpk = Rliner1 'l' Rn 'l' Rliner2 (7)

r1 .. i1
'1 Lmerl fl A Lmer2

Rune, = thermal resistance of corrugated liner

/\

8)

Rn = thermal resistance of corrugated flute
x = wall thickness
7. = thermal conductivity of test material

From equation 7, thermal resistance of the flute section can be determined as:

x x

H -H
fl Pk ’1 Lincrl '1 Lmer2 \

 

Heat transfer resistance of common liner and medium paper for manufacturing
corrugated paperboard was measured and shown in Table 12 (Thomson et. al,

1998).

Table 12. Measured heat transfer resistances of common liner and medium

papers used to manufacture corrugated paperboard.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paper Nominal Average Number of Mean Heat
Grade Grammage Thickness Samples Tested Transfer
(mm) Resistance ,
(g I'D-2) Rllner
(mzKW‘)
1 120 0.175 1 0.0022
2 160 0.236 2 0.0030
3 220 0.332 3 0.0042
6 290 0.437 2 0.0056

 

 

 

 

 

 

38

This study concluded that increasing flute thickness increased heat transfer

resistance.

S-flute Corrugated Board
General information

Steel Stack, trade name, provides 23% greater stacking strength than
275# single wall, 10% greater stacking strength than 275# double wall, 60%
greater shock absorption than single wall, and also 10% greater shock

absorption than double wall (Curley, 1993).

Specification

Flute Count: 24 per lineal foot
Take up Factor: about 1.58 (slightly above A-flute at 1.52-1.54)
Thickness: 0.25 inches

Medium: 36# medium

Application and Development Research

levans (2000) stated that S-flute, a large size corrugation, was developed
by Bobst and used by the Greater New York Box Co. It was tested and evaluated
by Smurfit for the application in laminated bulk boxes at Ravenna. Reports of
research on S-flute to improve the compression strength of laminated bulk boxes

have been included in Appendix A.

39

S-flute with a specific basis weight and board combination was tested by

Smurfit (1998). The results are shown in Table 13.

Table 13. Tested results for S-fiute (Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test Testing Units Identification
Method
Board Caliper Tappi T411 mils 252.06
Om89 fi
ECT Tappi T839 lbsfin. 63.6
Pm-95

Flexural Stiffness Tappi 820 lbs. in. 207.07
MD cm-85

Flexural Stiffness Tappi 820 lbs. in. 156.57
£3 sun-85

Flexural Stiffness Tappi 820 lbs. in. 180.06
EEO. MEAN cm-85 _

Flat crush Tappi T825 Psi No end point

_ Em-BIL

Comb. BD. Basis Tappi T410 lbs/MSF 222.1
weight gm-93 _

Basis weight Tappi T410 lbs/MSF 79.2
Double Back Om-93

Basis weight Tappi T410 lbs/MSF 42.3
Medium (S-flute) om-93_ _

Basis weight Tappi T410 lbs/MSF 78.4
Single Face Om-93

 

Thermal Testing Approaches for Packaging

There are several test procedures, for estimating the rate of heat transfer

for insulated containers such as ASTM D 3103-92 (ASTM, 1994) and ISTA 3G

(ISTA, 1999). Some companies and researchers have developed other testing

standards and methods. Examples of each type are discussed in the following

sections.

 

ASTM Standard

The objective of ASTM D 3103 is to determine thermal insulation
capability of a package with or without various refrigerants and with or without
interior packaging. Temperature indicating devices such as thermocouples are
used to measure the interior temperatures. A package with constant interior area
(12 x 12 x 12 in.) enclosing the actual items or a dummy load is used as a single
specimen. ASTM suggested that the interior cavity should be surrounded by a 1-
in thickness of solid insulation and a 14 x 14 x 14 in. container.

The sensors are inserted into the package with or without the contents
inside in different locations. In the case of packages designed with interior walls
separating product and refrigerant, more thermocouples are needed.
Refrigerants are weighed, measured, and placed into the package.
Temperatures of water ice or refrigerant gel are recorded at the beginning of
testing. The package is sealed and put on a wooden shelf in the chamber or test
environment. The date, time, and temperature are recorded for each period of

time (ASTM, 1994).

ISTA Standard

ISTA 3G: Development Test for Thermal Performance of Insulated
Transport Packaging is used to test individual packaged-products shipped
through a parcel delivery system for protection against temperature extremes. In
addition, the ISTA procedure can measure the ability of the package to protect a

product by exposing it to test cycles that simulate extreme temperature

41

conditions. Samples should be the untested actual packages and the product
substitutes should have properties as similar as possible to actual items such as
inside content, composition, thermal mass, consistency, specific heat, and other
physical properties. Replicate testing is recommended. The procedure should be
performed five or more times, using new packages with each test. The packages
are tested by following the sequence in Table 14. The atmospheric test is
conducted by choosing the cycle (Table 15, 16, or 17) which is closest to the
conditions the packaged-product will be exposed to during transportation (ISTA,
1999)

Table 14. Test sequences (ISTA, 1999).

uence ‘ " est ‘ ‘ orl
Certification .

1
ui
4
5 uired

7 T uired

 

“Equipment required for Atmospheric Test are Draft-free chamber and temperature
indicators complying with the apparatus section of ASTM D 3103-92.

42

The extremes of winter and summer transport conditions within the United States

Table 15. 24 hour domestic express small package freight transport (Air)

T T

18°C (65° 22°C

-10°c (14°F) 35°C (95°F)
10°C (50° 30°C (
-10°c (14°F) 35°C °F)

 

Table 16. 48 hour domestic express small package freight transport (Air)

T re T

18°C (65°F) 22°C (72°F)
-10°c (14°F) 35°C (95°F)
10°C (50° 30°C (86°F)
-10°c (14°F) 35°C (95°F)

 

43

The extremes of winter and summer transport conditions for international

shipments from the United States

Table 17. 72-hour international expedited airfreight transport.

ummer
Hot

re

18°C (65°F) 22°C (72°F)
-10°C (14°F) 35°C (95°F)
10°C 50° 30°C (86°

-10°c (14°F) 35°C (95°F)

 

Table 18. 72-hour international expedited airfreight transport.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VIflnter Profile Summer Profile
Cold Shipping & Cold Receiving Hot Shipping & Hot Receiving
Temperature Hours Temperature Hours
18°C (65°F) 0-4 22°C (72°F) 0-4
-10°C (14°F) 4-10 35°C (95°F) 4-10
10°C (50°F) 10-42 30°C (86°F) 10-42
22°C (72°F) 42-66 35°C (95°F) 42-66
35°C (95°F) 66-72 -1 0°C (14°F) 66-72
Other methods

 

Krebs (1994) examined the relationship between rising temperatures in a
trailer and the corresponding rise in temperature of a packaged product. He
exposed computers to simulated trailer temperatures in the laboratory and
observed the insulating effect of packages. He placed the sample packaged

product in a temperature controlled chamber. He located four temperature

44

probes at different locations: inside the unit, on the outer surface of the unit,
inside the carton but not on the unit, and outside the carton as shown in Figure

23.

Heat probe on the outer

% Surface of the unit

\/
Heat probe inside the unit
Heat probe inside the carton,
but not on the unit /
. \/
Heat probe outside the carton

Figure 23. Illustration of packaging components (Krebs,1994).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The packaged-product was preconditioned at 73 °F and placed in a heat
chamber at 107 °F. The heat chamber temperature was increased from 107 °F to
138 °F for 8 hours to simulate the conditions inside a trailer. The results of this

experiment showed that the temperature inside the cartons increased at the

same rate as the chamber temperature. The outer surface temperature of the

45

display terminal cover, which increased with the heat chamber temperature,
lagged behind by 30 °F while temperature inside the computer with insulated
foam end cap cushions and the plastic display cover lagged behind by an
average of 40 °F. This study showed that insulated corrugated boxes with foam
cushioning materials can protect a product exposed to the extreme temperature
of 138 °F.

Fava, Piergiovanni, and Pagliarini (1999) demonstrated that a new
package with expanded polystyrene and water-absorbing polymer provided
better thermal insulation than a conventional corrugated container for pizza.
Consumers desire pizza to have the characteristics with which it left the oven:
warm and not softened. They tested water absorption, WVTR, thermal insulation,
and sensory profile. Four sheet materials were tested: single-wall corrugated
board, Expanded polystyrene (EPS), Ultra-high density polyethylene (UHDPE),
and Absorbent paper. Tested pizza was delivered from the Pizza store within 10
minutes.

Six needle-shaped thermocouples, placed in three different locations on
the pizza (bottom, crust, and topping), recorded temperature every 8 seconds for
15 minutes from the time the Pizza was placed in the box. A panel of 20 subjects
who tested pizza with different temperatures (from 90 to 50 °C) determined the
palatability was between 65 °C and 80 °C. A critical temperature of 60 °C was

selected as a reference. Time to reach the critical consumption temperature is of

importance. They found that pizza in the new container stayed warm for more

46

than 10 minutes (more than the transport time). In the corrugated box, the crust
was cold within 4 minutes.
Sasaki and Kato (1999) studied a new insulated cardboard composed of a

corrugated foamed polystyrene core with paperboard liners on both side.

(F igure24).

U-shaped partition to protect
the movement of air
(10 cm interval)

Outer liner V /

 

 

 

Figure 24. Cross-sectional structure of new heat insulating cardboard

(Sasaki and Kato, 1999).

Sasaki and Kato tested calorific value, insulation ability, decorative
capacity, and recyclability. For heat transfer testing, cut flowers and a processed
marine product were used to test hot insulation and cold insulation. Roses were
preconditioned at the same temperature of shipment for transportation. The
temperature rise inside the package, the ratio of weight loss, the flowering

progression, and durability in storage were determined. For processed marine

47

products, young sardines at —50 °C. were placed at room temperature. The
temperature change versus time was recorded. They found that the new heat
insulated cardboard box could prevent heat gain and heat loss better than
common cardboard box. The inside temperatures were 1 to 2 °C higher than the
Styrofoam package.

The ice requirement procedure (Burgess, 1999) was conducted to
estimate the thermal resistance (R-value) of each package. Various packages
with sized ranges of 0.5 to 5 cubic feet in volume and various wall constructions
were tested in two storage temperatures: 72 °F and 104 °F. A known quantity of
preconditioned ice (at 32 °F uniformly) was put into a package. The package was
sealed and stored it on the shelf or other surface off the floor in a draught free
constant temperature chamber. At least once a day, the package was checked to
determine when most of the ice, but not all, had melted. Interior and exterior
temperatures were constant throughout the testing period. When the box was
opened, the water was weighed and the time was noted.

The length of time and the quantity of ice that had melted in each
package were determined and used to calculate the melt rate which was used in
Equation 9:

System R-value = (interior area) (temperature difference) ------( 10 )

 

(melt rate) (latent heat)

48

The latent heat was 144 Btu of heat energy to melt 1 lb of ice. Melt rate is the
proportion of water melt weight divided by period of time. The study concluded
that R-value depended on the wall construction.

Camus and Veaux (1984) studied “isothennic bags and boxes such as
multi-ply special paper bags, isothermal containers, and isolated bags in plastic
materials or transportable isotherrnic boxes for transport of frozen foods from
shops to households/restaurants”. They analyzed the temperature variation in
selected isothennic packages by placing thermocouples in boxes of ice cream at
locations 3 cm from the walls. Temperatures in cars from August to December
and selling places of frozen foods were recorded. Initial temperature of product

was -20 °C and Test cycles were 30 min at 20 °C and 15 min at 40 °C. Camus

and Veaux determined whether the package was suitable to use by placing a
certain quantity of ice cubes into a corrugated board box instead of ice cream.
The amount of melting water after a certain time was the measured parameter. If
the volume of the water was lower than a predetermined limit, the package was
approved.

Cambridge Refrigeration Technology (2000) did thermal testing on
refrigerated and insulated containers, trailers, and van bodies to determine heat
leakage in environmental chambers. The chamber temperature was maintained
in the range of 0 C to 10 C. The internal insulated test unit was held at a constant
temperature of at least 20 C by a metered electrical heater. Mean external and
mean internal temperatures were detected and calculated by twelve external

temperature sensors and twelve internal sensors when the steady state was

49

reached. External and internal dimension of the test unit determined the root
mean area. Equation 10 and 11 were used to calculate the thermal heat leakage

and overall heat transfer coefficient,

 

Thermal heat leakage = measured heat input ,w/k ( 11 )

 

Mean temperature difference

Overall heat transfer coefficient = thermal leakage ,Wlm.k --------( 12 )

 

Mean area 'A

50

3.0 DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Air is a good insulation and wall thickness as well as wall construction
affect insulating ability of packages. Therefore, double wall construction with a
core of air space was suggested for integration into two new thermal corrugated
packaging designs: 1) interlocking design and 2) folding design as shown in the

following sections.

Inspiration
Interlocking design
The idea for the interlocking design came from papercraft (Figure 25).

Single square patterns were used to create the modular structure (Figure 26).

 

Figure 25. Modular structure.

51

 

Figure 26. Single square patterns.

Folding Design
The idea for the folding design came from the ethnic Thai food package,

which is made by folding banana leaves (Figures 27 and 28).

 

Figure 27. Traditional Thai food packages.

52

 

Figure 28. Folding pattern.

53

Design Development
Interlocking Design

The interlocking design for the inner box was created directly from the
original papercraft. This concept could not be used with a thin corrugated board,

such as E-flute, since the thin panels could not interlock tightly together.

Folding design
The folding design was initially created with two same style-folding boxes:
an inner and outer box. An oval opening was cut into one flap of the outer box as

a handle (Figure 29).

An inner box

    

An outer box

Figure 29. Development of the folding design.

54

Final Design

lnterlockigglesigp

The interlocking design is shown in Figure 30 and 31.

Product chamber

A = Air space

Outer flap

  
 
 

       

SS\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\..

S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\S\\\\S '"nelflap

//

W/

S\\\\\\\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\‘ lnnerwall

/

Sidewall

/7/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
y
a
Z
/
a

WW
/"///////////////////////////////////,I’/////////////////////

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Figure 30. Side section elevation.

Product chambe

idewall

 
  

  
      

\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\S\S\\\\\\\\S

   

S S S S
S S S S
Sk S VS S lnnerwall
S S S S
S S S S
S S S S
S S S S
SS\\\\\\‘S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\S\\\\\\\\S
S S S S
S S S S
S S S S
S\

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\S

Figure 31. Top section elevation.

55

Assembly parts

Outer
RSC box

 

Figure 32. Assembly parts of the interlocking design.

56

Folding design

The drawings of the folding design are shown in Figure 32 and 33.

          

     

  
     

    
 
 

Outer flap
'//x/////////// // //////////A
///////////// ///////////§ //////// /////////// '"nerflap
%L '/
lnnerwall ZL Z g g
Fin 4, ¢ ¢ /
/ /, / /
%‘//// ///////// /////////,
Product chamber % ////////////////// ///,//j
Z
Figure 33. Side section elevation.
Sidewall
Product chamber
Fin

 

Figure 34. Top section elevation.

57

Assembly parts

Glue at the
fine of an
inner box and
the corners of
an outer box
(optional)

Outer
RSC box

 

Figure 35. Assembly parts of the folding design.

58

Die Cut Pattern
Interlocking design
The inner box consists of four square patterns with two slots that have a

length of half square length. Outer box consists of one RSC pattern (Figure 36).

For an
inner box

For an
outer box

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 36. Die cut pattern of the interlocking design.

59

Folding design

The inner box is made from one die cut pattern. The outer box consists of

 

 

 

 

 

one RSC (Figure 37).
_________ For an
inner box
For an """""""
outer box

:-’
, ., .. was-..

Figure 37. Die cut pattern of the folding design.

60

ArtiosCAD Software
Basic concept of ArtiosCAD

The purpose of using ArtiosCAD is to change creative thoughts into
business with high speed, efficiency, and accuracy. The steps of making boxes
such as folding cartons or corrugated containers begin from designing a box and
printing it on a desktop printer for review. At this point the design can be exported
to other applications. To make sure that all dimensions work together, Artios 30
can be applied to fold the box. The next process is to send a specification sheet
to customers for approval. After approval, samples are made. After approval

again, manufacturing tools for the box are made (BARCO Artios, 1999).

Artios work functions

 

The design window in ArtiosCAD consists of four elements: 1) Menubar,
2) Toolbar, 3) Status bar, and 4) Drawing area (Figure 38). Menubar, Toolbar,
and Toolrack provide all command buttons available (Figure 39). These buttons
are used to command drawing elements such as lines, shapes, or paints,
changing the view, such as zooming in or zooming out, and including

transforming such as moving, copying, or rotating design elements.

61

.\

 

 

E

E

Figure 38. ArtiosCAD window.

 

Figure 39. Toolbar.

62

Users can choose to draw their design by themselves or select some

designs from the Artios standard catalog (Figure 40).

Standard. l ululm)

. Corrugated
$23 twosome corrugated
em 2. FEFOO

$D 400 Series
rim-(El 500 Series
$0 SDDSeries
19c: 700.8968:

 

 

 

 

Figure 40. Standard catalog.

After selecting the box style from the standard catalog, the specification
from the dialog boxes of that box style are shown for users to proceed in step by
step such as inside dimensions (Figure 41), box details (Figure 42), allowances

(Figure 43).

63

 

 

 

 

Figure 41. The inside dimension box.

llI.’lI-1'u‘v’ III-LIII ,l»,|v:lum w [III HMJU rm!)

Slot styles

Sued

Squ map-u

Reid-d
Rounst «lap-v

Figure 42. The detail style box.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 43. The allowance box.

No matter what users choose, to draw their own design or select the
standard design, the single design setting dialog box is displayed automatically to

ask about the kind of paperboard to be used (Figure 44).

illnqll- l Haulqn in-llmqu

élElConu med
9 t:

1 n . .. t... o- .
. WNW“... mum

. I
am Folding Carton . 1.». muscw
.5." ' ' ,‘ as. °‘ - ‘ - - g». I-asnxacmn
...fir ' ' , '. ‘; ' ; fr—Il-SllflflBCKrell

 

Figure 44. Single design setting box.

65

Drawing a design in ArtiosCAD is different than in AutoCAD or other
drawing programs. Users specify which line is cut or creased by selecting a line
element and choosing the type of that line in the Properties dialog box (Figure

45).

 

Figure 45. The properties box.

While drawing a line, the Status bar displays its length, angle, and

direction (Figure 46).

 

 

Figure 46. Status bar with a drawing tool.

After finishing the work, the design has to be saved in a file of type .ARD
as a drawing prototype and saved in a file of type .ACM for a cutting table by
opening output command and selecting the mode of “sample cutting” to be

compatible with the sample-cutting machine.

66

Entering information into DataCenter
DataCenter is another database program used to store and find specific
information about ArtiosCAD. It consists of six main areas: design,

manufacturing, embedded design, company, person, and board (Figure 47).

Design
Embedded Design
Manufacturing

 

Figure 47. Six areas in Artios database.

To use the new corrugated board ‘S-flute', the new board information was

configured in DataCenter by clicking the Open button on the toolbar and

Delete

 

selecting the Board browser. The IE Add Record button and the
Current Record button on the toolbar (Figure 48) were used to add and remove

information in the Board browser.

67

; humrmulu

S, llrmnl lulmrnnlmn

17‘": \.| llulv

2m - B

l-125 U B Kraft
#12530 Krd!
L125 U E Kraft
l-175 N B Kraft

 

 

Figure 48. Board information in DataCenter.

68

4.0 MATERIALS AND METHOD

Partl Experiment
Test materials

Four materials used in this study were corrugated board with different
flutes and flute combinations, an Expanded Polystyrene container, ISC container
- a corrugated box with injected polyurethane foam and open cell foam as a
cover, and Therrnocor - a cored Polystyrene foam with two laminated paperboard

liners.

1. Corrugated boxes

The insulated corrugated boxes, one type with an interlocking design and
the other with the folding design, were developed and constructed of different
corrugated flute combinations. The flute types are shown in Table 19. The space
between the walls was 1.5 inches. The inside dimensions of the inner boxes

were 9 x 9 x 9 in. in Figure 49 and 50.

Table 19. Corrugated boards used in the experiment.

0.12
0.18
.07

0.264
0.215

 

69

Approximated length =
9 in + 3 in + (4 " board thickness)

A A
‘ r

   

 
     

 

      

 

 

 

     
  

’3 I WW
8 SWWS
c \ S
x S\ \S
.2 SS S
‘3 SSS-‘SSSSSSSSSSSSS‘S SS -
I. "' S\S~ SSW \\S Thickness
5 g SS\\\\S \\\\<S\\\S depends on the
E c S \SSSSSSSSSSS \S Lnner .
'§<' ; S\\ \ - \S ImenSIon
9 + SS\ S\\\SS\\\ S always is 9x9
gs SV/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////4S\ 9. h
(a, r SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS X "'0 es

 

  

 

 

 

Side section elevation

Figure 49. Dimensions of the folding design corrugated box.

Approximated length =
9 in + 3 in + (4 * board thickness)

 
  

‘
y

  

SWWWW

S

SS
////////////,

S
S

   

I

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

//

  

A /

M
//

S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S

  

9 in + 3 in + (6 * board thickness)

 

Approximated depth

   

A
V

 

Side section elevation

Figure 50. Dimensions of the interlocking design corrugated box.

70

Due to a combination of two boxes in one design (i.e. outer box and inner

box), there were seven flute combinations for the interlocking design, designated

as:

39’9”?

. lb-Ob : inner box with B-flute and outer box with B-flute

Ic-Oce : inner box with C-flute and outer box with CE-flute
lc-Oc : inner box with C-flute and outer box with C-flute
lce-Oce : inner box with CE-flute and outer box with CE-flute
Ic-Os : inner box with C-flute and outer box with S-flute
ls-Os : inner box with S-flute and outer box with S-flute

lbc-Obc : inner box with BC-flute and outer box with BC-flute

Similarly, the nine flute combinations for the folding design were:

1.

2.

905199

Ice-Oce : inner box with CE—flute and outer box with CE-flute
Ie-Os : inner box with E-flute and outer box with S-flute
ls-Os : inner box with S-flute and outer box with S-flute
Ic-Os : inner box with C-flute and outer box with S-flute
le-Oce : inner box with C-flute and outer box with CE-flute
lc-Oc : inner box with C-flute and outer box with C-flute
lc-Oce : inner box with C-flute and outer box with CE-flute
le-Oe : inner box with E—flute and outer box with E-flute

lb-Ob : inner box with B-flute and outer box with B-flute

71

There were three replications of each type. For example, there were 3
interlocking corrugated boxes with a combination of an inner box with B-flute and

an outer box with S—flute (lb-Os).

2. EPS containers

The selected EPS containers (Figure 51) had inside dimensions of 11 1/8
x 8 ‘/2 x 9 1/8 in. with a wall thickness of 1 1/2 in. This was the closest fit to the
corrugated boxes that was commercially available. Replication was provided by

using three boxes.

 

Figure 51. EPS container.

3. ISC containers

An ISC container is shown in Figure 52. As was the case with the EPS

container (above), the dimensions of the ISC could not be matched exactly to the

72

corrugated boxes. The dimensions of the selected ISC boxes (Table 20) were

the closest match that was available.

 

Figure 52. ISC container.

Table 20. Dimensions of the ISC containers.

 

73

4. Thermocor containers
Thermocor boards were cut on the sample table and formed into boxes
with the same styles and similar dimension of the corrugated boxes (Figure 53

and 54). Again each design was replicated 3 times.

 

Figure 53. Thermocor container of the interlocking style.

 

Figure 54. Thermocor container of the folding style.

74

Conditioning

Conforming to the ‘lce Requirement’ method, the ice used in the
experiment was conditioned at standard conditions of 73 °F and 50% relative
humidity until the ice started to melt. That assured that the ice temperature was
at 32 °F. The environmental chamber was controlled at 72 °F and 50% RH.

Corrugated boxes were kept at room temperature before the experiment.

Test Method

The ice requirement procedure (Burgess, 1999) was conducted to
estimate the thermal resistance (R-value) of each package. Approximately 3
pounds of preconditioned ice (at 32 °F) was put into each package. The actual
weight was measured and recorded. The melt water was drained off and the ice
was packed in a plastic bag. The package was sealed with tape to exclude
airflow and stored on a shelf in a draught free constant 75 °F temperature room.
At least once a day, the package was checked to determine when most of the
ice, but not all, had melted. This assured that the interior and exterior
temperatures were constant throughout the testing period. The experiment would
have failed if the package had been opened after all of the ice had melted since
the interior temperature would not have been constant at 32 °F. When the box
was opened, the water was weighed and the time was noted.

The period of time for the ice to melt in each package was used to
calculate the melt rate which was substituted into Equation 9 to obtain the system

R-value,

75

 

System R-value = (interior area) (temperature difference) -------- -( 13 )

 

(melt rate) (latent heat)

Part II Simulation

Two computer simulation programs used in this study were GAMBIT and
Fluent 5.0. They were used for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis.
GAMBIT generates a designed drawing, creates a mesh, and assigns boundary
conditions: pressure, temperature, mass flux, etc. Fluent 5.0 solves heat transfer
problems. The programs” functions were to determine the R-values of the
insulated packages and expressing temperature distributions in 2 and 3-D form.
The simulation programs were not available in the School of Packaging so a

student expert from the College of Engineering operated the programs.

Part III Cost Estimation

 

The cost estimation process for the corrugated containers referred to “The
Yellow Sheet” as shown in Table 21 (Official Board Market, 2001). Price ranges
listed are per short ton (2000 lbs). The North Central Region was chosen. To
calculate the box cost, it was necessary to know the area of corrugated board to
be cut and assembled into a box. The Kraft linerboard had a basis weight of 42#
per msf. Therefore, when the total area used was known, its weight could be
determined and the cost could be calculated from the price per ton as shown in

Table 21. There were two linerboards for one corrugated board.

76

 

Table 21. Corrugated prices.

 

 

 

 

Type Northeast East Central Southeast! North west
South Central
Central .
afiflFourd- 425-435 430-440 435-445 430-440 445-455
ra
Linerboard
3909 400-410 410-420 410-420 410-420 415-425
ml
chemical
Medium

 

 

 

 

 

 

The medium was 26# per msf Kraft paperboard. The price per ton for 26#

per msf in the North Central Region was selected. The calculation of total

medium cost was the same as for Linerboard except, there was only one ply for

the medium and the area was multiplied by an expansion factor for that flute size.

Total cost was the material cost divided by 0.45 (45% of material and 55% of

labor and manufacture) (Hughes, 2001).

77

 

5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

R-value of all specimens from the experiment
There were 5 types of the R-value results depending on different designs
and materials. These samples were tested according to Ice requirement

procedure.

Corrugated boxes: Interlocking design

Table 22. R-value of 'interlocking' corrugated box with various board

combinations.

lc-Oc 1.2 2.65
lc-Oc 1.3 2.77

 

78

Type

Ice-Oce 2.1

2.2
2.3
2.1
2.
.3

2.3
.1
.2

2.

.3
2.1
2.2
2.3

Ie-Oe 2.2
.3

I n .1

b-Ob n .2
nn

| nn

ISC containers

Corrugated boxes: Foldingdesiqg

Ice melt Wt,
lbs
2.77
2. 4

3.10

.04
2.87
2.70
2.39

Time, '

hr
13.93
1 . 7

14.80
14. 3
13.46
13.
1 .42
4.
14.63
13.92
14.64
14.7
14.
4.
14.56
14.
14.86
4.55
14.
1 .
14.98
15.
15.20
14.77

14.07

Table 24. R-value of # E - 46 ISC containers.

R-va ' ,
h.ft2.°FlBtu
4.8

4.

4.

4.6
4.5
4.5
4.7
5.4
4.8
4.6
4.6

4.
4.7

4.8
4.6
5.1
4.

4.5

4.4
4.6
5.3
5.

4.5

Verage

4.75

Table 23. R-value of 'folding' corrugated box with various board combinations.

 

 

 

 

 

Type ' Ice‘melt wt, Time, R-value, Average Stdev.
lbs hr h.ft2.°F/Btu

ISC 1 1.38 13.37 9.3 9.30 2.8

ISC 2 2.31 22.36 9.3

 

 

 

 

 

 

79

 

EPS coolers

Table 25. R-value of SL 10 - EPS coolers.

 

Thermocor boxes

Table 26. R-value of Thermocor containers.

Type melt wt,
lbs hr h.ft2.°F/Btu

THR 2-2** 2.19

 

* Interlocking design

“Folding design

The data from the preceding tables has been summarized in Figure 55.
R-value of the ISC containers was as high as the EPS containers. R-value of the
Thermocor containers was close to R-values of corrugated containers with a

combination of S-flute and a combination of BC-flute.

80

cmfiou 9:00:95 on...
568 9.6.2 9: E

905856 .650 can 29mm“... 58 5:5 o:_m>-m ho comthEoo .mm 059“.

22.3 355.80

 

noEEam =a no mean?”—

senlu-u

81

The R-values of the ISC container were as high as for the EPS containers.

The R-values of the Thermocor containers were close to R-values of corrugated

containers with Is-Os and Ibc-Obc.

Evaluating the computer simulation

To compare the R-values determined by the experiments and the R-

values from the computer simulation, the experimental conditions must be

provided to the computer model. However, there were limitations on using the

computer simulation.

1.

2.

The model structure of the box in the computer simulation had to be
idealized. The top and bottom of the box was drawn as two layers. Other
panels were drawn as a single layer. This conformed to the structure of a
square RSC which has two layers of flaps and single walls.

The simulation program cannot account for joints or holes causing heat

gain or heat loss in the actual box.

3. The program cannot simulate the shape of the ice cubes used in the

actual experiment. The approach used was to create an ice plank with the
same weight as the ice cubes. Although the actual ice volume of the ice
plank and ice cubes were still the same, the space volume inside the box
of the ice plank was less than the ice cubes. But there was an obvious
difference in the surface area of the cubes and the phank.

The program used experimentally determined thermal conductivity of
tested corrugated boards. It needed the velocity and pressure conditions

of the test environment but these could not be measured accurately.

82

 

5. The program could not simulate the three—dimensional objects in this case.
6. There appeared to be a flaw in the program code itself that did not allow

accurate representation of solid to liquid phase changes.

The effect of different flute combinations and insulating materials

VVIth assistance from Dow Chemical, the R-value of each tested
corrugated board was determined and is shown in Table 27. The result indicated
that the relationship between R-value and board thickness was linear as
illustrated in Figure 56. The higher board thickness produced higher R-values.
From the graph, the prediction model was determined to be (Equation 14)

y = 2.6103x + 0.032 with R2= 0.981 (14)

 

Table 27. R-value of each corrugated flute type.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—I5lute type R-value Thickness,
F*ft2*h/Btu in
B 0.3713 0.122
C 0.4809 0.177
6c 0.7618 0.264
CE 0.6079 0.215
E 0.1946 0.070
S 0.7558 0.294

 

 

 

 

 

83

R-value as a function of thickness

R-value, F'sqfi‘hIBtu

 

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.36
Thickness, inches

Figure 56. R-value as a function of board thickness.

For the interlocking design (Figure 57), corrugated boxes with an inside

box of BC-flute and an outside box of BC-flute had the highest R-value.

R-value of corrugated boxes with interlocking design

R-value

 

lB-OB lC-OCE IC-OC ICE-OCE IC-OS lS-OS IBC-OBC
Box types with different board combination

Figure 57. Graph showing R-values of corrugated boxes with interlocking design.

84

For the folding design (Figure 58), the corrugated boxes with a
combination of S-flute inside and S-flute outside provided the highest R-value.
Insulated boxes with BC-flute both inside and outside couldn’t be made since it
was too thick to fold and assemble. When the interlocking design and the folding
design were compared to each other (Figure 59), it was found that the
interlocking design provided higher R-values. However, both designs had a
limitations. The interlocking design was appropriate for materials with thick walls
while the folding design was more appropriate for materials, which were thin and

easy to fold.

R-value of Corrugated boxes with folding design

4.9-
4.8 .
4.7 -
4.6
4.5
4.4 35
4.3

R-value

   

    

lB-OB IC-OCE IC-OC ICE- lC-OS lS-OS IE-OCE IE-OS IE-OE

Board combination type

Figure 58. Graph showing R-values of corrugated boxes with folding design.

85

Comparison of R-value with two designs: Interlocking
and folding

R-value
oanuama":

  

5 l . J ‘
. . ,
v
,.... ...... j. ., ' ‘> _ .. . . ,
.. , . ,

IB-OB D-OCE DOC CE-OCE DOS B—OS BOOBC E-OCE E-OS EOE

 

Board combination type

I represents folding design I: represents interlocking design

Figure 59. Graph comparing R-values of both designs.

The effect of structural design

Although boxes of the two designs had the same internal package
dimensions, wall thickness and air space, R-values for the two styles boxes were
not the same. As a result, it could be concluded that design played an important
role in preventing or reducing heat transfer. The interlocking design offered more
insulating ability than the folding design. As discussed in Chapter 2, there are
three heat transfer modes: conduction, convection, and radiation. In this
experiment, inner surface areas, the thicknesses, the dimensions, the same
material, the interior temperature and exterior temperature were controlled.
Therefore, heat transfer from outside of three modes were the same. Heat

transfer inside the package was different as shown in Figure 60.

86

Interlocking design Folding design

S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\

\\\W‘!

\\\\\\\\\\\\\SS\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\‘S\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\S\\\\\\

    

 
      
     

 
    

7///////////////////////////////////////////////////4

Side section ’/////////////////////////////////////////////////////,

7/////////////////////A
”/7////////////////,y

\

/////////////’/
\\\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\

”///////////////////////////
////////////////////
/////////////////////

Z/WWWW/fl/AZ

  
   
 

\\S\\\\

:S\\\\\S\\\

    
      
 

/’/////////////////¢
/////////////////////

 

\\\\\\\S\\\\\\S\\\\S\\\\\\\S\\\\\\\\\S\S
\\\\\\\\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\‘S\\\\\\\\S\S~\S

///////////////////////////////////////////////////
’//////////// ///////////////////// ////////////////////

/

Top section

   
  
    

///'/}”/////////////////////////////////////////// x,”

\\

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\‘S

   

V.

\\\\\\

47////////

S\\\\\ SS\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\S\\\\S:\:

f:W////////////////////

\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

     
    
        
 
   
 

 

 

W ///W/////////////////%’/;////////A://

W 7//7/////// "/////////// ///////////
W%WW%W%

\ 47/ //
/ //

’7’////%.4

//////4’¢;

///////////////////////////////////’////

:Wf

  

\:

////

/
/
/
Z

\\\‘SSS\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\S\S\\

     
 

Figure 60. Heat transfer through the interlocking design and the folding design.

There was heat leakage or heat gain from holes or voids at the joints of

flaps, side joints, and corners. The only way that heat could be conducted from
the outer side walls to the inner walls, was along the support structures, which
were made of corrugated boards. Convection could occur in the air spaces
between the inner and outer walls, inside corrugated flutes, and inside the
product chambers. Radiation could occur everywhere in the package. It could be
concluded that combinations of the three heat transfer modes produced different

R-values but it was not possible to be specific about how much and where they

87

were. It is likely that there was more obstruction to convection in the interlocking
design than the folding design since the interlocking design provided six large air

pockets around the inner box while the folding design provided only one pocket

(Figure 61).

Folding design /\
/ \

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interlocking design Six air
,.-- ' ' ” pockets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 61. Comparison between convection inside two different designs.

88

Cost Estimation

To compare the total cost of different packages, there were two alternative
shipping companies: UPS (United Parcel Service) and USPS (United State
Postal Service). Distribution costs depended on distance, package and product
weight, and package dimensions. If the box girth plus its length was less than 84
inches, the shipping cost depended only on weight and shipping distance. It was
assumed that the tested packages were sent from Haslett, Ml, 48840 to Tampe,
Arizona, 85280 by the ground service to a commercial address. Cost estimations
of two shipping companies and the material cost of various packages were

shown in Table 28, 29, 30, and 31 (UPS, 2002 and USPS, 2002).

Table 28. Cost estimation using the package weight only.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5utside dimension, Shipping cost 7 Material
Types in Wt. lbs. ups,$ usps,$ cost,$
Int. S-flute 13 X 13 X 13 2.89 5.85 4.81 0.95
IFOI. S-flute 13 X 13 X13 2.97 5.85 4.81 0.9
IISC 123/4X12’/4X12'/2 3.03 6.13 6 16.95
141/8x11‘/2x12
EPS 1/8 0.82 5.01 3.45 2.2
Ilnt. Ther 12.8 X 12.8 X 12.8 1.97 5.01 3.45 4.92
IFol.Ther 12.8 X128 X128 1.93 5.01 3.45 4.72

 

 

Int. S-flute = Interlocking design with a combination of S-flute
Fol. S-flute = Folding design with a combination of S-flute

Int. Ther = Interlocking design with Thermocor

Fol.Ther = Folding design with Thermocor

89

"‘.l ~."". .I’I 'i ll'f-m

Table 29. Cost estimation using the package weight plus 5 lbs of the product

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

inside.
' OUtside dimension, Shipping cost Material
Types in Wt. lbs. UPS,$ USPS,$ cost,$
nt. S-flute 13x13x13
7.89 6.07 10.74 0.95
ol. S-flute 13 x 13 x13
7.97 6.07 10.74 0.9
llSC 12 % x12 % x12 ‘/2 8.03 6.4 11.99 16.95
141/8x11‘/zx12
PS 1/8 5.82 5.57 8.25 2.2
llnt. Ther 12.8 x 12.8 x 12.8 6.97 5.79 9.49 4.92
L'olTher 12.8 x12.8 x12.8 6.93 5.79 9.49 4.72

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 30. Cost estimation using the package weight plus 10 lbs of the product

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

inside.
Outside dimension, Shipping cost fiaterial '
‘ Types in Wt. lbs. ups,$ usps,$ cost,$
Int. S-flute 13 x 13 x 13
12.89 8.34 16.1 0.95
Fol. S-flute 13 x 13 x13
12.97 8.34 16.1 0.9
[ISO 12 V. x 12 % x 12 ‘/2 13.03 8.84 17.05 16.95
141/8x11 1/zx12
PS 1/8 10.82 7.34 14.2 2.2
llnt. Ther 12.8 x 12.8 x 12.8 11.97 7.85 15.15 4.92
lFol.Ther 12.8 x12.8 x12.8 11.93 7.85 15.15 4.72

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 31. Cost estimation using the package weight plus 15 lbs of the product

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

inside.
[ Outside dimension, Shipping cost Material
Types in Wt.. lbs. ups,$ uspss cost,$
Int. S-flute 13 x 13 x 13
17.89 10.78 19.19 0.95
ol. S-flute 13 x 13 x13
17.97 10.78 19.19 0.9
lSC 12%x12%x12 ‘/2 18.03 11.26 19.66 16.95
14 1/8x 11 ‘/2x 12
EPS 1/8 15.82 9.81 18.2 2.2
lint. Ther 12.8 x 12.8 x 12.8 16.97 10.3 18.72 4.92
IFoI.Ther 12.8 x12.8 x12.8 16.93 10.3 18.72 4.72

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total cost included the shipping cost and the material cost. Calculation of
Thermocor boxes costs was based on the same principle of 45% for material
cost and 55% for manufacturing cost. Total cost comparison by UPS and USPS
for various types of the tested packages with different product weight were

shown in Figure 62.

91

Total cost comparison by UPS and Total cost comparison by UPS and
USPS on usingonly the package USPS on using 5 lbs of the product
weight

Total cost, 5

Total cost, 5

   

Total cost comparison by UPS and
Total cost comparison by UPS and

USPS on using 10 lbs of the product USPS on using 15 lbs of the product

40 40

35

30

35
30

Total cost, 5
8
Total cost, S
n
o

   

o o o 9
9'99 as" 9" <39 ‘ ‘ of} gas \9 <3 4“" 4“

\5" 26. \6" «6"

Figure 62. Total cost comparison by UPS and USPS with various packages and

product weights.

92

According to the graphs, the relationship between the weight of the
product and the total cost were not linear. First, when shipping the package only,
the total cost by UPS was higher than the total cost by USPS. When the product
weight was increased, the total cost by UPS was lower than the total cost by
USPS. The difference between the total cost by UPS and USPS tended to be
stable when the product weight was increased.

R-values of various insulated packages with different product weights are
shown as a function of total cost to compare the insulating ability versus total
cost by UPS and USPS for the user to select (Figure 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, and 68).
These figures show that R-values of EPS boxes were as high as ISC containers

but EPS boxes were much less expensive than the ISC containers.

R-value vs Total cost by

UPS of 5 lbs of the product
Corru ated

R-value

 

0 10 20 30
Total cost, 5

Figure 63. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 5 lbs of product by

UPS.

93

R-vslue vs total cost by
UPS with 10 lbs of the
product

180

Corru ated

R-value '

 

0 10 20 30
Total cod, 5

 

Figure 64. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 10 lbs of product by

UPS.

R-value vs total cost by
UPS with 15 lbs of the
product | SC

R-valua I

 

0 10 20 30
Total cost, 8

Figure 65. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 15 lbs of product by

UPS.

94

R-vaiue vs total cost by
USPS with 5 lbs of the

 

Total cod, 5

Figure 66. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 5 lbs of product by
USPS.

R-value vs total cost by
USPS with 10 lbs of the
product ISC

 

Total cost. 3

Figure 67. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 10 lbs of product by

USPS.

95

 

R-vaiue vs total cost by
USPS with 15 lbs of the
product

      
 

 

10
Corrugated

R-valua
N

0 20 40
Total cost. 5

 

Figure 68. R-values and total costs of tested packages with 15 lbs of product by

USPS.

96

6.0 CONCLUSION

Unlike polymer materials, corrugated board cannot be made by molding
or injecting. So it was difficult to avoid holes at the comers of the corrugated
shipping containers. Corrugated containers made of S-flute had higher R-value
than boxes with lower flute sizes. The S-flute container costs were close to those
of EPS containers, but the corrugated board containers had lower R-value.
Therefore, it was concluded that S-flute containers are not the optimal choice for
insulated containers. However, corrugated containers are friendly to environment
and also both corrugated box designs can be knocked down for space saving
during distribution.

Two structural designs of insulating corrugated containers (i.e.,
interlocking and folding style) could improve the thermal protection provided by
conventional corrugated containers. It was likely that the same concept of double
wall with air space could be applied to solve heat loss or heat gain of insulating
containers with other materials even though the design details would have to be
modified to be compatible with other packaging materials.

The highest R-value was provided by the EPS containers, ISC cooler,
Thermocor boxes, corrugated boxes with interlocking design, and corrugated
boxes with folding style, respectively. Cost estimation, based on rates by UPS
and USPS, showed that the most expensive container to use was the ISC
container, even at had different dimensions and weights. In addition, when

comparing two structural designs with the same dimensions and flutes, it was

97

 

noted that the interlocking style enhanced insulating ability more than the folding
style.

Because of limitations, GAMBIT and Fluent 5.0 were unable to predict R-
values and temperature distributions for both 2 and 3-D forms. There was no way
to identify how heat from outside environment transported into the inside box and

how heat transfer was affected by the design structures.

98

 

7.0 FUTURE STUDY

The following future are suggested as topics for further study:

. Designs for insulated shipping containers or bulk containers made of other
materials should be created and evaluated by the simple ice requirement
method.

. Investigate new packaging structural designs (such as planes, surface
textures, forms, colors, wall constructions) affecting heat transfer modes:
conduction, convection and radiation.

. Change the condition of the simulation for testing such by using bulk
containers instead of small packages or by using dry ice instead of normal
ice.

. Create a computer simulation for insulating packages, including a database
for alternative materials, package weights, inside dimensions, outside
dimensions, distribution costs, material and manufacturing cost to evaluate
various insulated containers and to provide help in making a selection.

. Develop new ingredient paper fibers that can be used with other materials to
improve insulating ability.

. Develop a new process for making boxes with paper fibers such as spraying

the fibers into a box mold.

99

APPENDIX A

100

APPENDIX A

The results of experiments that were conducted by Smurfit since 1993
were shown in these tables.

Table 32. Evaluation of the combined boards (Smurfit,1993).

 

 

 

 

 

‘Board ‘ ”Flute ETC Flexural Thmpression ‘ Combined ‘ ” 'B'oard ’ "
Comb. lbs/in Stiffness Index Board Cost
Composite Weight $ / MSF
, #/ MSF
KmeKLgo C 80 198 2.04 231 44.05
”7436““ C 88 164 2.09 199 39.28
LX56-36-LX56 S 68 326 2.05 169 32.91

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 33. Analysis of Single/Double wall S-flute laminated bulk bins with 46-1/4x

38-1/4 x 41-1/2 inch dimensions (Smurfit, 1994).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification ' Value
Compression strength, lbs. 11,125; 12,125; 13,300; 13,025 and
12,500
Average deflection, in. 1.31
Combined board weight, #IMSF 492
SW board combination 69-36-69 S flute
D board combination 69-36—36-36-69 SC flute
Combining adhesive figular
Combined caliper 0.710
SW caliper, in. 0.284
Combined ECT, lbs/in. 169 (expected — 165)
SW board ECT, lbs/in. 64 (expected — 66)

 

 

101

 

 

Table 34. C-S flute double wall — compression estimate (Smurfit, 1995).

 

Identification

Value

 

Dimension, in.

21x21x33

 

Board combination

69 - 360 — 69 —368 - 69

 

Board Index

4.02

 

 

Predicted compression

4,200 lbs 1 10%

 

 

Table 35. Calculations for expected compression strength of 40 x 40 x 41 box

(Smurfit, 1995).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification Compression Flexural stiffness

Strength, lbs ”factor”

400# AA-flute double wall 15,800 11,400

(42-40-69-40-69)

AAC-flute triple wall 15,800 1 1,400

(69-33-42-33-42-33-69)

SC-flute 15,800 13,400

(69-33-69-36-69)

A trilaminate with 69-36-42 C-flute and 20,000 35,000

42-36-42-36-42 SC-flute

 

 

 

102

 

 

Table 36. Tested results for CL-flute (Smurfit, 1997).

 

Identification ‘ ‘ Value

 

Combined board Weight, lbs/MSF 249

 

Board combination (actual weights), 60.0-34.1-34.9-43.8-33.8 CL-flute
lbs/MSF

 

 

 

 

 

Combined board caliper, in 0.44

ECT, lbs./in 70.5 (expected 80-90)
Flute height, in 0.2488

Distance between flute tips, in 0.49 (so 24.4 flutes/ft.)

 

 

 

 

Table 37. K-flute advertising from Montebello Container (Smurfit, 1997).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification 200 DNV 200 K-flute 275 DAN 250 K-flute ”
ECT, 42 42 ' ' 48 ' 49
Lbs.per inch
Bursting 200 230 275 320
Board 33-26-33-26- 42-3342 42-25-33-26—42 69-33-42
Combination 33

 

103

Table 38. Comparison between BC-flute and K-flute (Smurfit, 1997).

 

Table 39. Comparison between two-box parameters with the same CS/SC board

(Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

Dimension ' ' ' COmpreSSion' strength, lbs. "
'51-3/4 x 42 x 41 inch 15,500
51-3/4 x 42 x 28 inch 16,000

 

 

 

 

104

Table 40. Evaluation of single wall S-flute (Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification ’ Value
Take-up factor 2 2 I 1.52
Flexural stiffness or bending resistance 2.4 to 2.6 factor
Flat crush, psi 30.5
Mullen and puncture numbers, psi 286
A compression strength index 1.87

 

 

Table 41. Test data for an unprinted regular bulk style with

46-1/4 x 38-1/4 x 41-1/2 inch dimensions (Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

Identification ‘ ‘ Value
Compression strength, lbs. 11,125;212,125; 13,300; 13,025; and 12,500 .
Average deflection, in. 1.31

 

Combined board weight, # I MSF 492

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SW board combination 69-36-69 for S-flute

DW board combination 69-36-36-36-69 for SC-flute
Combining adhesive Regular

Combined caliper, in. 0.710

SW caliper, in. 0.284

Combined EC'T', lbs.lin. 169 (expected 165)

SW board ECT, lbsfin. 64 (expected 66)

 

 

105

 

 

Table 42. Evaluation of S-flute (Smurlit, 1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

identification vaer
Caliper 286.80
mil
CD-ECT 58.95
lbs.lin J
MD-ECT 28.98
lbs./in
Bending MD inch-lb. 525.00
Stiffness CD incfib. 217.74

GEOMEAN inch-lb. 338.10

Flat crush, psi 30.54
Mullen Burst, psi 285.60
Puncture, units 286.00
COMB BD, lbs/MSF 165.68
Liner DB 68.49
lbs/MSF
Medium S 36.52
lbs/MSF
Liner SF 42.58
lbs/MSF

 

Table 43. Flute profiles and combined board characteristics (Smurfit,1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flute Flute per Flute per Take up Flat crush 50mpression
Designation foot height factor, 26-lb fluting '3nkm9v %

g . FpF h,in. TuF _ ,
Jumbo K/L 25 0.271 1.59 25 235%
S-flute 24 0.25 1.59 15 131%
A-flute 36 0.185 1.59 28 1 13%
C-flute 39 0.142 1 .42 34 100%
C-flute extra 39 0.156 1.51 32 105%
B-flute 48 0.099 1 .35 41 86%
E-fl ute 90/96 0.049 1 .26 86 68%
D-flute 62 0.079 1 .3 57 79%
F-flute 126 0.027 1.19 125 59%
N-flute 134 0.02 1.27 134 57%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

106

 

 

Table 44. Tested results for S-flute (Smurfit,1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification Reference Units Identification
. _ _ Method . , , . .
Board Caliper Tappi T411 mils 252.06
__ Om89
ECT Tappi T839 lbs.lin. 63.6
_ Pm-95
Flexural Stiffness Tappi 820 lbs. in. 207.07 ‘
MD cm-85
—Flexural Stiffness Tappi 820 lbs. in. 156.57
__C_3D cm-85
Flexural Stiffness Tappi 820 lbs. in. 180.06
GEO. MEAN cm-85
Flat crush Tappi T825 psi No end point
Pm-86 _
Comb. BD. Basis Tappi T410 Lb.lMSF 222.1
weight om-93 fi
Basis weight Tappi T410 Lb.lMSF 79.2
Double Back Om-93
Basis weight Tappi T410 Lb.lMSF 42.3
Medium (S-flute) gm-93_ ;
Basis weight Tappi T410 Lb.lMSF 78.4
_SL_ngle Face Om-93
Table 45. C-S flute bins with board combination:
69-36C-42-36S-42/69-36S-42-3SC-69 (Smurfit, 1998).
identification Bulk bin Outer double wall
, (41-1/2 x 32-1l2 x 35)
Compression strength, lbs. 12,658 -
Deflection, in. 1.53 -
Caliper, mils 876.4 441.8
ECT, lbs.lin. 186.8 90.6
Bending stiffness - 1149.31
MD
Bending stiffness - 579.71

 

CD

 

 

 

107

 

 

 

Table 46. Comparison between SISC and CAIAC combinations for a 40 x 34 x 36

inch bin (Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

identification 69—40-42/42-40-69-40—69 90-40-42-40-42/42-4042—40—90 ,
SISC combination CAIAC combination
Compression 9450 12,195
strength, lbs.
Bending 4550 6230
resistance, in.lbs.
ECT, lbs.lin 174 220
Combined 471 586
weight, lbs/MSF
Caliper, inch 0.724 0.744

 

 

 

Table 47. The strength properties of suggested 69-40-69/69-40-69-40-90 SISC

combinations (Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ldentifiCation Value
Compression strength, lbs 11,740
Bending resistance, in.lbs. 7207
ECT, ibsfin 199
Combined weight, lbs/MSF 546
Caliper, inch 0.744

 

 

108

 

 

Table 48. Predicted compression strength of a tri-laminate bulk (Smurfit, 1998).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Identification Value
Box dimension, in. 46 x 38 x 39
Outer 69-36S-69
Board
combination Middle 69-368-69-360-69
Inner 69-36S-69-360-69
Predicted compression, lbs. 28,050

 

 

109

 

 

APPENDIX B

110

APPENDIX B

The samples of other alternative designs created were shown in Figure 69

and 70.

 

The inner
box

 

 

 

 

 

nnnnnnnnnn

 

 

----------

----------

’EK

 

 

 

 

 

 

"""" : - - RSC outer

box

 

 

 

 

 

 

L------

 

 

 

£—

———————————

 

 

 

 

 

 

Die cut
pattern of
theinner
box

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 69. One example of alternative designs.

111

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The inner
box

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Die cut
pattern

box

 

of

theinner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RSC outer
box

 

 

+—

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 70. The other example of alternative designs.

112

 

 

 

APPENDIX C

113

APPENDIX C

The photographs of the interlocking design and the folding design were

shown in Figure 71 .

 

Figure 71. The photographs of the interlocking design and the folding design.

114

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ASTM. (1994). Selected ASTM Standards on Packqung. PA: ASTM.

ASHRAE, (1997). 1997 ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals. GA: American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

ASHRAE, (1994). 1994 ASHRAE Handbook: Refrigeration Systems and
Applications. GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

BARCO Artios. (1999). Artios CAD: User’s Guide. CA: Barco Artios.

Burgess, G. (1999, March-April). Practical Thermal Resistance and ice
Requirement Calculations for Insulating Packages. Packaging Technology
and Science, 75-80.

Camus, P. and Veaux, M. (1984, September 19-21 th). Feasibility Study of a
Testing Method for Isotherrnics Bags and Boxes used for Transport of
Frozen Foods from the Shop to Households/Restaurants. Vienna: EURO
FOOD PACK lntemational Conference on Food Packaging.

Cambridge Refrigeration Technology. (2001). Thermal Testipq. Cambridge:
www.crtech.co.uk/crtinfo/datain2.asp.

Cengel, Y. A. (1998). Heat Transfer: a Practical Amach. NJ: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Cleland, A. C. and Earle, R. L. (1976). A New Method for Prediction of Surface
Heat Transfer Coefficients in Freezing. Refrigeration Science and

Technology, 361-368.

115

Curley, J. (1993, March). Developing New Products that the Customer Wants
Means $$$$$. Board ConvertinLNews: The White Sheet, 9-20.

Fava, P., Piergiovanni, L. and Pagliarini E. (1999, vol 12). Design of a Functional
Box for Take-away Pizza. Packaging Technology and Science, 57-65.

FedEx. (2001). www.FedEx.com.

FedEx. (2001). www.fedex.com/us/services/PkLPrshblShpmntvathS.pdf.

Fibre Box Association (1994). Fibre Box Handbook. Chicago: Fibre Box
Association.

Hughes, H. A. (2002). Personal communication. East Lansing, MI.

International Safe Transit Association. (1999). ISTA 1998-1999 Resource flack.
MI: ISTA.

levans, U. (2000). Personal Interview. Illinois.

Jefferson Smurfit World Research Center. (1993-1997). lnteroffice Document.
Illinois.

Krebs, Paul H. (1993-1994, December-January). The lnsulative Effect of
Packaging on Products in Trailers. Packaging Technology & Engineering,
26-28.

Krieth, F. (1973). Principles of Heat Transfer. NY: intext Educational Publishers.

Musgrave, Dwight S. (2001). Design-The Key to Vacuum Insulation Value. OH:
www.dow.comlinstallfiac%20pdf.

Muldoon, T. J. (1984, vol 29). Industrial and Shipping Supplies. W

Encyiapedia, 183-186.

116

Official Board Market. (2001, October). Transected Containerboard Prices. The
Yellow Sheet, 1.

Ogawa, H. (1971). The Art of Papercraft. London: B.T. Bastsford Ltd.

Ramaker, T.J. (1974, June 4-6 th). Thermal Resistance of Corrgqated

Fiberboard. Louisiana: Spring Corrugated Containers Conference.

Sasaki, H. and Kato, E. (1999,vol 12) Heat Insulating Cardboard Composed of
Corrugated Foamed Polystyrene Layer, Packaging Technology and
§_c_ipn_cp, 151-157.

Soroka, W. (1995). Fundamentals of Packaging Technology. Virginia: Institute of
Packaging Professionals.

Thompson, Bilge F., Roberson Torn R. and Cleland Andrew C. (1998). Modeling
the Heat Transfer Resistance of Corrugated Paperboard. New Zealand:
Original copy from Smurfit Research.

Thompson, Bilge F., Roberson Tom R. and Cleland Andrew C. (1998, August).
Measuring Thermal Resistance of Corrugated Made. Packaging
Technology & Engineering. 48-50.

United Parcel Service. (2002). www.ups.com.

 

United State Postal Service. (2002). www.usps.gov.
Wright, P.G., McKinlay, PR. and Shaw, E.Y.N. (1991). Corrugated Fibre Board

Boxes. ViczAmcor Fibre Packaging.

117

III