itia.

. 2...... v

7..

six
5.: .11:
. z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.. .7 :1 :1 .

 

 

 

 

.l. ‘6 I...
.v iii}? it. 1.1.3}
I E5233

 

v I:
1.5.???

. v.10
; :I

5......"
.1...

.n: .2 2....“ 1....
. .. g... 5
a... 31.3.. ‘.

1 u.

. a.
'Q
$5.3? wag“,
$51.???

‘3... ..,....z

1.5. .!.y\u...uu¥v 1-...
. 719.. . 9,,

.I
1‘ 2......-

33.499..."

A \-5 i

2:. n 21‘

5......

1-, it’lfiiul’u‘

. 3.1173... . . .

"no.3. .1360...”va
« ‘ V

‘Iv.

.:
welt}; 3 3
1.5.!‘0h:

‘ ,w .. . .. 1... 1.! i
t ‘ . 2 Ix (I I t:

:- 8:34. 1.. 23:. .26..

u. ‘1... 2..» it}! !,.535v..

1:33;}-

in
t

(.2 .
fizz-5..
.I 1,»: .1. 5...... w
(It t)... .120.
O. .

0.1. .1-
.{Kii/ v I

gan State

i

LIBRARY

Mich
University

~
\_‘_ _

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

COMPRESSION TESTING OF HONEYCOMB PAPER
PALLETS

presented by

Ravi Verma

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

MS degree in Packaging

 

Major ProfyS/or’s Signature
Mar/Z Z00)”

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

—.-.-.-.-o-

.-.--v-.-.--—-.-:-.--.—.-:--.-.-.--

I---.--a-.-—.-t--.-.-:--.-.-.-.--a----.-.-..—

IA

 

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 DATE DUE DATE DUE
J4
SEP

é’a £0059 ‘
o 1 2 5%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 c:/CIRC/DateDuo.indd-p.15

 

COMPRESSION TESTING OF HONEYCOMB PAPER PALLETS
By

Ravi Verma

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
SCHOOL OF PACKAGING

2005

ABSTRACT
COMPRESSION TESTING OF HONEYCOMB PAPER PALLETS
. By
Ravi Verma
106 Honeycomb paper pallets, nonreversible type, manufactured by EcoDuno
Inc. and L & F Inc. were compression tested in Distribution Dynamics Lab of
School of Packaging. 98 Pallets had footprint of 48” X 40”. Deck variable
were: Material (Basis weight 42 lbs, 69 lbs and 90 lbs). Cell sizes variation
was 7/16", 3/8”, and ‘/2”. Deck thickness tested was 7/8”, 1”, 1& 3/16”, and 1&
1/4”. Stringer variables included—Material (Brown colored form-board, white
colored chip-board, and tubes made from recycled Kraft paper that are
spirally wound). Thickness of stringer varied from 0.08”, 0.1”, 0.12”, 0.16” and
0.2”. Stringer stuffing’s varied from fully stuffed to 3 blocks stuffing, tubes,
wrapped blocks and tube blocks. Some of the pallets were conditioned at 90
% relative humidity and 90 degrees F for 24 hours. The testing followed a
modified ASTM D-1185, "Standard Test Methods for Pallets and related
structures employed in Materials handling and shipping", test protocol for
paper pallets. The pallets were evaluated with flexible and rigid load on
Lansmont Model 1SZ-30TI'C at room temperature. For half an inch deflection
the values for decks range from 1400 to 1800 lbs and for stringers between
14000 to 23000 lbs at 72 F and 50 % RH. Loss in strength of decks and
stringers is about 20 % and 24% respectively after conditioning at 90 F and

90 % RH for 24 hours period.

Copyright by
RAVI VERMA
2005

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express sincere appreciation to Professor Dr. Sher P. Singh for his
assistance and guidance throughout my days at School of Packaging. His
genuine interest in me and his unmatched expertise in the field of Packaging
Distribution Dynamics really added very much to my learning experience. I am
indebted to him for his help and patience during the days I dealt with this project
work. His encouragement and direction helped me in completing the mammoth
task in time and as per his exacting standards.

I thank John Burnsworth, President, EcoDuro Inc., for providing the financial
assistance for this project work.

I am grateful to Professor Dr. Garry J. Burgess, School of Packaging, and
Professor Dr Brian Feeny, Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of
Engineering, for the time and effort they put in helping with completion of this
project.

I am also in appreciation of all faculty and staff members of School of Packaging,
Michigan State University, for their contribution and readiness to help me in any
way possible.

Finally, I am highly thankful to friends and my family members for their continual

support throughout the completion of this project work.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. vi
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ ix
1. The Test Protocol .......................................................................................... 1
2. The Test ........................................................................................................ 3
2.1 Type of testing: ......................................................................................... 3
2.2 Pallet size tested: ..................................................................................... 3
2.3 Test Methods: ........................................................................................... 3
3. The Pallets ..................................................................................................... 6
Pallet 1 .............................................................................................................. 6
Pallet 2 .............................................................................................................. 8
Pallet 3 ............................................................................................................ 10
Pallet 4 ............................................................................................................ 12
Pallet 5 ................................................................ 14
Pallet 6 ............................................................................................................ 16
Pallet 7 ............................................................................................................ 18
Pallet 8 ............................................................................................................ 20
Pallet 9 ............................................................................................................ 22
Pallet 10 .......................................................................................................... 24
Pallet 11 .......................................................................................................... 26
Pallet 12 .......................................................................................................... 28
Pallet 14 .......................................................................................................... 3O
Pallet 15 .......................................................................................................... 32
Pallet 16 ............................................... 34
Pallet 17 .......................................................................................................... 36
Pallet 18 .......................................................................................................... 38
Pallet 19 .......................................................................................................... 40
Pallet 20 .......................................................................................................... 42
4. Results and Data Analysis ........................................................................... 44
5. Comparison ................................................................................................. 50
6. Conclusions ................................................................................................. 67
7. Photographs ................................................................................................ 7O
BIBLOGRAPHY .................................................................................................. 73

Table 1-1:
Table 2-1:
Table 3-1:
Table 3-2:
Table 3-3:
Table 3-4:
Table 3-5:
Table 3-6:
Table 3-7:
Table 3-8:

Table 3-9:

Table 3-10:
Table 3-11:
Table 3-12:
Table 3-13:
Table 3-14:
Table 3-15:
Table 3-16:
Table 3-17:
Table 3-18:

Table 3-19:

LIST OF TABLES

Testing protocol, School of Packaging. ................................................ 1
Lansmont Test Machine set up details ................................................. 4
Compressive strength of the stringers for Pallet 1. .............................. 7
Performance of the deck for the Pallet 1. ............................................. 7
Compressive strength of the stringers for Pallet 2. .............................. 9
Performance of the deck at first yield point of Pallet 2. ........................ 9
Compressive strength of the stringers for Pallet 3. ............................ 11
Measure of the load at first yield point for the deck for Pallet 3 .......... 11
Compressive strength of the stringers of Pallet 4. ............................. 13
Measure of the load for the deck of Pallet 4 ....................................... 13
Performance of the stringers of Pallet 5 ............................................. 15
Measure of the load for the deck of Pallet 5 ..................................... 15
Performance of the stringers of Pallet 6 ........................................... 16
Performance of the deck of Pallet 6. ................................................ 17
Compression strength of the stringers for Pallet 7. .......................... 18
Performance of the deck of Pallet 7. ................................................ 19
Performance of the stringer of Pallet 8 ............................................. 21
Performance of the deck of Pallet 8. ................................................ 21
Performance of the stringers of Pallet 9. .......................................... 23
Performance of deck up till first yield point of Pallet 9. ..................... 23
Performance of the stringers of Pallet 10. ........................................ 25

vi

Table 3-20: Measure of load for deck up till first yield point for Pallet 10. ........... 25
Table 3-21: Compressive strength of the wrapped block for Pallet 11. ............... 27
Table 3-22: Performance of the deck for Pallet 11 .............................................. 27
Table 3-23: Performance of the tube for Pallet 12. ............................................. 28
Table 3-24: Performance of the deck for Pallet 12 .............................................. 29
Table 3-25: Compressive strength of the stringer for Pallet 14. .......................... 31
Table 3-26: Performance of the deck - Pallet 14. .............................................. 31
Table 3-27: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 15 ........................................ 33
Table 3-28: Performance of the deck for Pallet 15 .............................................. 33
Table 3-29: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 16 ........................................ 35
Table 3-30: Performance of the deck for Pallet 16 .............................................. 35
Table 3-31: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 17 ........................................ 37
Table 3-32: Performance of the deck for Pallet 17 .............................................. 37
Table 3-33: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 18 ........................................ 39
Table 3-34: Performance of the deck for Pallet 18 .............................................. 39
Table 3-35: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 19. ........................................ 41
Table 3-36: Performance of the decks of Pallet 19. ............................................ 41
Table 3-37: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 20. ........................................ 43
Table 3-38 Performance of the decks of Pallet 20. ............................................ 43
Table 4-1: Performance of Decks. ...................................................................... 44
Table 4-2: Performance of Decks for 0.5” deflection. .......................................... 45
Table 4-3: Performance of Stringers. .................................................................. 46
Table 4-4: Performance of Stringers for 0.5” deflection. ..................................... 47

vii

Table 4-5: Loss of strength of decks. .................................................................. 48
Table 4-6: Loss in strength of stringers. .............................................................. 49
Table 5-1: Loss in strength of deck for Pallet 9 due to conditioning. ................... 54
Table 6-1: Portions of Table 1-1 .......................................................................... 68
Table 6-2: Portions of Table 4-2 .......................................................................... 68
Table 6-3: Portions of Table 1-1 .......................................................................... 69
Table 6-4: Portions of Table 4-2 .......................................................................... 69

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: Pallet. Reference: http:l/www.ecoduro.coml ....................................... 2
Figure 1-2: Pallet. Reference: http://www.ecoduro.com/ ....................................... 2
Figure 2-1: Compression Test in progress ............................................................ 5
Figure 3-1: Top deck of the Pallet 1. ..................................................................... 6
Figure 3—2: Stringers of the Pallet 1. ..................................................................... 7
Figure 3-3: Top view of the Pallet 2. ..................................................................... 8
Figure 3-4: 3 Stringers, each with 2 holes of Pallet 2. .......................................... 8
Figure 3-5: Top view of the Pallet 3. ................................................................... 10
Figure 3-6: The 3 stringer construction of Pallet 3. ............................................. 10
Figure 3-7: Top view of the Pallet 4. ................................................................... 12
Figure 3-8: The 4-way stringer construction of Pallet 4. ...................................... 12
Figure 3-9: The tube in stringer view of the Pallet 5. ........................................... 14
Figure 3-10: Stringers with honeycomb stuffing of the Pallet 6. .......................... 16
Figure 3-11: Fully stuffed stringer of the Pallet 7. ............................................... 18
Figure 3-12: Stringer of the Pallet 8. ................................................................... 20
Figure 3-13: Pallet 8 ............................................................................................ 20
Figure 3-14: Pallet 9 ............................................................................................ 22
Figure 3-15: Three stringers of the Pallet 9 ......................................................... 22
Figure 3-16: Pallet 10 .......................................................................................... 24
Figure 3-17: Stringers of Pallet 10. ..................................................................... 24
Figure 3-18: Wrapped block on the Pallet 11. ..................................................... 26

ix

Figure 3-19: Tubes cut to sizes, on the Pallet 12. ............................................... 28
Figure 3-20: Bottom view of the deck and the stringers for Pallet 14. ................. 30
Figure 3-21: Bottom view of the Pallet 15. .......................................................... 32
Figure 3-22: Top view of the Pallet 15. ............................................................... 32
Figure 3-23: Stringer of the Pallet 16. ................................................................. 34
Figure 3-24: Deck of the Pallet 16 ....................................................................... 34
Figure 3-25: Stringer of the pallet 17 ................................................................... 36
Figure 3-26: Bottom view of the Pallet 17. .......................................................... 36
Figure 3-27: Stringers of the pallet 18. ................................................................ 38
Figure 3-28: The cross-laminated deck of Pallet 19. ........................................... 40
Figure 3-29: Stringers of 2-way Pallet19. ........................................................... 40
Figure 3-30: Cross-laminated deck of Pallet 20. ................................................. 42
Figure 3-31: Stringers of the Pallet 20. ............................................................... 42
Figure 5-1: Effect of humidity on deck’s deflection, reference Table 4.1 ............. 50
Figure 5-2: Effect of humidity on deck’s strength, reference Table 4.1 ............... 50

Figure 5-3: Effect of humidity on performance of decks for 0.5” deflection,

reference Table 4.2 ............................................................................................. 51

Figure 5-4: Effect of humidity on performance of stringers for 0.5” deflection,

reference Table 4.4 ............................................................................................. 51

Figure 5-5: Effect of humidity on stringers strength, reference Table 4.3 ............ 52

Figure 5-6: Effect of humidity on performance of stringers deflection, reference

Table 4.3 .....

........................................................................................................ 52

Figure 5-7: Comparison: Pallets-Deck thickness 1”; Cell Size V2”, liner 69 lbs....53

Figure 5-8: Comparison of loss in strength in decks due to conditioning. ........... 54
Figure 5-9: Cell Size effect .................................................................................. 55
Figure 5-10: Comparison of average strength of Pallets with cell sizes 3/8" and

1/2” ........................................................................................................................ 56
Figure 5-11: Comparison of cell size effect on Pallets 8, 10. .............................. 57

Figure 5-12: Comparison of Liner effect for Pallets 9 and 10 with decks 1 1A”. ...58

Figure 5—13: Performance of decks for Pallets 16, 12, 8 and 4. .......................... 59
Figure 5-14: Combined effect of Liner and Deck thickness ................................. 60
Figure 5-15: Stringer Comparison: 0.12” — Brown colored. ................................. 61
Figure 5-16: Stringer Comparison: 0.12" — White colored. .................................. 62
Figure 5-17: Stringer Comparison: 0.2” Thick brown and white colored. ............ 63
Figure 5-18: Stringers Comparison (EcoDuro Inc.): 0.16” — White color. ............ 64
Figure 5-19: Stringers Comparison (EcoDuro Inc.): 0.1” - White color. .............. 65
Figure 5-20: Comparison of Stringers, Tube and Wrapped Blocks. .................... 66
Figure 7-1: Pallet 1 .............................................................................................. 70
Figure 7-2: Pallet 8 .............................................................................................. 70
Figure 7-3: Pallet 19 ............................................................................................ 71
Figure 7-4: Stringer of 8. ..................................................................................... 71
Figure 7-5: Pallet 6 .............................................................................................. 72
Figure 7-6: Pallet 16 ............................................................................................ 72

xi

1.

The Test Protocol

Table 1-1: Testing protocol, School of Packaging.

 

Table 1-1: Paper Honeycomb Pallets Testing Protocol, School of Packaging, Michigan State University.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approxi
Pallet foot mate Cell Liner Description of the -
No Manufacturer . Deck . . Structure . Quantity
print . Size weight rails
Thicknes
S g
1 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 1/ ” 69 Single 0.12" rails ~ 4 way 6
2 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0.16" rails - 4 way 6
3 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 1/ " 69 Single 0.2“ rails - 4 way 6
4 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 3/8" 90 Single 0.12" rails — 4 way 6
5 EcoDuro Inc. 48 x 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0'12 ra‘ls “m“ “be 5
blocks - 4 way
6 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 7/8" 1/ " 69 Single 0.1" rails - 4 way 6
.. .. . 0.12 rails fully
7 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/ 69 Single stuffed _ 2 way 6
.. .. . 0.16 " tubes with
8 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4 3/8 90 Single stuffed ends _ 2 way 6
9 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 1/2" 69 Single 0.16" rails — 4 way 6
10 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 1/2” 90 Single 0.16" rails — 4 way 6
.. . 6" X 8" wrapped
11 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/2 69 Single blocks _ 4 way 6
.. .. . 5.5" X 8" Tube
12 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4 3/8 90 Single blocks _ 4 way 6
14 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0.1 " rails - 4 way 6
15 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0.08" rails - 4 way 6
16 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 3/8" 90 Single 0.12" rails - 4 way 6
17 L & F Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 7/16" 69 Single 0.2" rails — 4 way 6
18 EcoDuro Inc. 48 x 40 1 3/16 3/8" 69 Single 0'16 rams ' 4 way ‘ 3
unexpanded
19 EcoDuro Inc. 40 x35 1/2" X 2 1/2" 42 Double 0'12 “"3 12 way ' 4
cross laminated
20 EcoDuro Inc. 42 x 42 1/2" x 2 1/ " 42 Double 0'12 ra"s '.2 way ‘ 4
cross laminated
TOTAL PALLETS 106

 

 

 

 

 

 

1111mm

 

W
wood and plastlc. . -

 

 

 

 

W
100% top deck coverage.
h Clean, no nalls or
19 pounds I 48” X 40”. Slgnlflcant spllnters.
cost savings on alr, fall and LTL Safe for shipments and

 

 

handllng.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Log Fll’e Blgk
No rlsky chemlcals

 

 

 

Easler, more efflclent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ssooiiiz;e Catgaclty mm“ mm
48”'X 40.. Mass-machlned A varlety of available slzes.
Also, can be custom-made
to your specfflcatlon.

 

 

 

W
I Recyclable, re-pulp able. I

 

Figure 1-1: Pallet. Reference: http://www.ecoduro.com/

The above figure has been redrawn from the website.

 

Figure 1-2: Pallet. Reference: http://www.ecoduro.coml

2. The Test

2.1 Type of testing:

The pallets manufactured by EcoDuro inc. and L&F inc. were tested for basis

strength performance in constant deflection rate compression testing.

2.2 Pallet size tested:

- 48X40, nonreversible, 4 way EcoDuro pallets.
o 48X40, nonreversible, 4 way L&F pallets.

o 48X40, nonreversible, 2 way EcoDuro pallets.
o 4OX35, nonreversible, 4 way EcoDuro pallets.

. 40X42, nonreversible, 4 way EcoDuro pallets.

2.3 Test Methods:

The testing followed a modified ASTM D-1185, Standard Test Methods for
Pallets and Related Structures employed in Materials handling and Shipping, test
protocol for paper pallets. Computer assisted, calibrated compression testing
machine, Lansmont Compression Testing Machine, Model 1SZ-3OTTC, was
used. This machine has sufficient load capacity to structurally fail the pallet and a
sufficient large bed to support the pallet. This machine has a floating head to
apply rigid or flexible loads. The pallets (deck and stringers) were evaluated with
flexible and rigid load. For the flexible load test and for full coverage, the load
was applied by placing an airbag between the floating head and the pallet on the
fixed bed. For the rigid load test, the load was applied without a rigid plate

(wooden plank) between the floating head and the pallet on the bed of the

machine. The load and deflection was measured by the computer and graphs for
every test were plotted by the computer. Machine set up was as follows: yield
point: 30%; Maximum deflection: 2”; Stop force: 30000 lbs; Preload: 500 lbs; Test
mode: constant rate; Test speed: 0.5” per minute.

Depending upon the type of deck and configuration of the stringers, the liner (top
and bottom facings) of EcoDuro Inc. Pallets were of basis weight 42, 69 or 90.
The core was of basis weight 32. The stringers, fabricated by cutting the paper
tubes of various thicknesses, had punched holes for 4 way entry configuration.
The stuffing's in stringers were of basis weight 69 and having core of basis
weight 32. Patented adhesive was used for manufacturing and assembly of
pallets. The liners for L & F pallets decks were of basis weight 69 and core of
basis weight 32. 18 different types of pallets manufactured EcoDuro were tested.
Only one type of pallet made by L & F with 6 replicates was tested. Total number
of pallets tested was 106. Refer to protocol for details. Some replicates were
conditioned for 24 hours at 90 F and 90% RH. All tests were carried out in room
temperature conditions.

Table 2-1: Lansmont Test Machine set up details

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Machine Set Up for tests
Yield Point 30%
Maximum Deflection 2"
Stop Force 30000 lbs
Preload 500 lbs
Test Mode Constant rate
Test Speed 0.5” per minute

 

 

 

Figure 2-1: Compression Test in progress

3. The Pallets

Pallet 1

 

This pallet manufactured by EcoDuro Inc. is single layer, 4-way with 3 stringers
and has a foot print of 48" X 40”. The top deck is 1” thick with cell size ‘/2” (core —
33 lbs basis) and liner of 69 lbs basis weight. The brown colored stringers are
made of “Formboard”, and are 0.12" thick. Each stringer is stuffed with 3
numbers of honeycomb blocks. The dimensions of each block are: Length - 8.5”,
Width: 3.25", Height: 3.25”. Each stringer has two punched holes of dimensions
8” X 2.75” along its wall and is at 9" from each end of the stringer. Figures 3-1

and 3-2 give two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-1: Top deck of the Pallet 1.

 

Figure 3-2: Stringers of the Pallet 1.

Table 3-1 gives the maximum compressive strength of the stringers for the pallet

and Table 3-2 gives the performance data for the deck respectively.

Table 3-1: Compressive strength of the stringers for Pallet 1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pallet . . . Force at Yield Daetflsiiatign
roams; Conditioning Sample point, Pounds point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 8775.1 0.3
1, 72 F, 50% RH 2 9157.6 0.27
48" X 40" Average: 8966.35 0.285
90F. 90% RH 1 6700.9 0.32

 

 

Table 3-2: Performance of the deck for the Pallet 1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pallet . . . Force at Yield Daiflsigign
[floliiiptiiiit‘ Conditioning Sample point, Pounds point.
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 1600 0.56
1, 72 FL50% RH 2 1700 0.58
48" X 40" Average 1650 0.57
90F, 90% RH 1 1400 0.5

 

 

 

Pjiltfl
This pallet has a footprint of 48" by 40” and is 4-way with 3 stringers. It is single
layer and the deck is 1" thick. The cell size is 3/8" (core —26 lbs basis) and the
top liner is 69 lbs basis weight. The stringers are 0.16” thick and made of
“Chipboard” with “EcoDuro” printed on it. EcuDuro Inc manufactures the pallet.
The stringers have two holes (8" by 2.75”) punched at 9” from each end. The
stringers are stuffed with honeycomb blocks, each of dimensions: 8.5” X 3.25" X

3.25”, cell size 1/z" and 69 lbs liner.

 

Figure 3-3: Top view of the Pallet 2.

 

Figure 3-4: 3 Stringers, each with 2 holes of Pallet 2.

 

 

performance of decks respectively.

Table 3-3 and Table 3-4 give the compressive strength of the stringers and

Table 3-3: Compressive strength of the stringers for Pallet 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pallet . Deflection at
Number, Conditioning Sample Foir'cte Siam: Yield point,
footprint po ’ inches

72 F, 50% RH 1 9520.6 0.32
2, 72 F, 50% RH 2 9234.1 0.31
48" X 40" Average 9377.35 0.315
90F, 90% RH 1 6818 0.38
Table 3-4: Performance of the deck at first yield point of Pallet 2.

Pallet . Deflection at
Number, Conditioning Sample “if: 32:3"; Yield point,
footprint . po ' inches

72 F, 50% RH 1 1450 0.42
2, 72 F, 50% RH 2 1800 0.61
48" X 40" Average 1625 0.515
90F, 90% RH 1 1400 0.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

m
The pallet has 1” thick deck and is single layered. EcoDuro manufactures this
type of 4-way pallet. The footprint is 48" X 40” and the cell Size is 1/2" (core -33
lbs basis). The top liner has a basis weight of 69 lbs. It has 3 stringers, each 0.2"
thick. They are white in color, 0.2” thick, and made from “Chipboard” with
“EcoDuro" printed on it. The stringers have holes (8.5" X 2.75") punched at 9”
from each end. Each stringer is stuffed with 3 honeycomb blocks of dimensions
8.5” X 3.25" X 3.25”; cell size 1/z" with 69 lbs liner. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 give two

views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-5: Top view of the Pallet 3.

”33446....

 

Figure 3-6: The 3 stringer construction of Pallet 3.

performance of deck respectively.

Table 3-5 and Table 36 give the compressive strength of the stringers and

Table 3-5: Compressive strength of the stringers for Pallet 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P II - '
Nuréntiir, Conditioning Sample F°f°° at we“ [)Yeigfiicggi‘nit
footprint point, Pounds inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 13181.8 0.3
3, 72 F, 50% RH 2 10910.3 0.32
48" X 40" Average 12046.05 0.31
90F, 90% RH 1 7848.8 0.3

 

Table 3-6: Measure of the load at first yield point for the deck for Pallet 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
#331133, Conditioning Sample F°I°e at Y'e'd Yield point,
footprint point, Pounds inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 1800 0.63
3, 72 F, 50% RH 2 1600 0.55
48" X 40" Avegge 1700 0.59
90F, 90% RH 1 1200 0.37

 

11

 

 

Pallet 4

EcoDuro Inc. manufactures this type of 4-way pallet with deck of thickness 1.25”.
It has a Single layer and 3 stringers of 0.12” thickness. The deck cell size is 3/8"
(core -26 lbs basis) and the liner is 90 lbs basis weight. The stringers have holes
(8” X 2.75") at 9” from each end. Stringers are stuffed with honeycomb blocks
each of dimensions 8.5" X 3.25" X 3.25" with cell size 1/2" and 69 lbs liner.
Stringers are made from “Chipboard" with “EcoDuro" printed on it. Figures 3-7

and 3-8 give the two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-7: Top view of the Pallet 4.

 

Figure 3-8: The 4-way stringer construction of Pallet 4.

12

performance of deck respectively.

Table 3-7 and Table 3-8 give the compressive strength of the stringers and

Table 3-7: Compressive strength of the stringers of Pallet 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pallet . Deflection at
Number, Conditioning Sample F°F°e at Y'eld Yield point.
footprint pornt, Pounds inches

72 F, 50% RH 1 6508.8 0.25

4, 72 F, 50% RH 2 6814.8 0.23
48" X 40" Averagg 6661.8 0.24
90F, 90% RH 1 5026.8 0.24

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-8: Measure of the load for the deck of Pallet 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Niirari'tfer, Conditioning Sample F°l°e at Y'e'd Yield point,
footprint paint, Pounds inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 3000 1.2
4, 72 F, 50% RH 2 3000 1.2
48" X 40" Average 3000 1.2
90F, 90% RH 1 2300 0.95

 

 

 

 

 

13

 

 

Pallet 5

This pallet, footprint 48" X 40", is a 4-way, with 3 stringers and has a single layer
deck of thickness 1”. The cell size of the deck is 3/8” (core -26 lbs basis) and
liner thickness is 69 lbs basis weight. The stringers are made of “Formboard” a
type of recycled Kraft paper. The thickness of stringers is 0.12”. Each stringer is
stuffed with 3 tube blocks. Each tube block is about 7" X 3.25” X 3.25" and 0.12"
thick. The stringers have 2 holes punched at 9” from the ends, and are of
dimensions 8" X 2.75". Pallet is manufactured by EcoDuro Inc. Figure 3-9 gives

the tube in stringer view of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-9: The tube in stringer view of the Pallet 5.
Table 3-9 and 3-10 give the compression strength of the stringers and the

measure of the load for the deck of Pallet 5.

Table 3-9: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Ylerl'rirpgsint,
72 F, 50% RH 1 12097 0.46
5, 72 F, 50% RH 2 12023.8 0.43
48" X 40" Average 12060.4 0.445
90F, 90% RH 1 9034.2 0.42

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-10: Measure of the load for the deck of Pallet 5.

 

 

 

 

Pallet . Deflection at
Number, Conditioning Sample Fog? 32:5}: Yield point,
footprint po ’ inches

5, 72 FL50% RH 1 1600 0.5
48" X 40" 90F, 90% RH 1 1250 0.21

 

 

 

 

 

15

 

 

m
This type of pallet is manufactured by EcoDuro Inc. and is 4-way with single layer
deck of thickness 7/8”. The cell size of the deck is 1/2” (core —33 lbs basis) and
the liner is 69 lbs basis weight. The stringers are 0.1" thick, and made from white
colored “Chipboard”, with “EcoDuro" printed on it. Stringers are stuffed with
honeycomb blocks of dimensions 8.5” X 3.25" X 3.25” with V2” cell and 69 lbs
liner. Stringers have holes of dimensions 8" X 2.75” and are punched at 9" from

each end. Figure 6 shows the stringer with a honeycomb stuffing.

I“? ,1: [1:3 . .. .

 

Figure 3-10: Stringers with honeycomb stuffing of the Pallet 6.
Table 3-11 gives the performance of the stringers under compression load and
Table 3-12 gives the performance of the deck for the Pallet 6.

Table 3-11: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number . . . Force at Yield . .
. ' Conditioning Sample . Yield pomt,

footprint pomt. Pounds inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 10402.8 0.29
6, 72 F, 50% RH 2 11698.3 0.32

48" X 40" Average 11050.55 0.305
90F, 90% RH 1 7071.8 0.32

 

 

 

 

Table 3-12: Performance of the deck of Pallet 6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
PaIEJtignfe r, Conditioning Sample :35? 32:3: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 1800 0.6
6, 72 F, 50% RH 2 1800 0.6
48" X 40" Average 1800 0.6
90F, 90% RH 1 1300 0.45

 

 

 

 

 

17

 

mu
This type of pallet has a footprint of 48" X 40” and is 2-way with single layer of 1”
thick deck. The cell size of the deck is 1/2” (core —33 lbs basis) and liner is 69 lbs
basis weight. The 3 stringers are made from brown colored “Formboard” having
some recycled Kraft content. Stringers are fully stuffed with honey comb material
of dimension 48" X 3.25" X 3.25” with cell size V2” and 69 lbs liner. The thickness

of the liner is 0.12". Figure 3-11 gives the fully stuffed view of the stringer.

 

Figure 3-11: Fully stuffed stringer of the Pallet 7.
Table 3-13 gives the compression strength of the stringers and, Table 3-14 gives
the performance of the decks for Pallet 7.

Table 3-13: Compression strength of the stringers for Pallet 7.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Fatima?" Conditioning Sample :33»): SEES: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 17318.5 0.28
7' 72 F, 50% RH 2 18523.5 0.32
48" X 40" Average 17921 0.3
90F, 90% RH 1 14330.1 0.29

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-14: Performance of the deck of Pallet 7.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallatlpunrgtbe r, Conditioning Sample :35? 32:3: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 2350 0.7
7, 72 F, 50% RH 2 2250 0.65
48" X 40" Average 2300 0.675
90F, 90% RH 1 1700 0.5

 

 

 

 

 

19

 

Balm
This type of pallet is single layer, of footprint 48" X 40", with deck thickness 1.25"
having a liner of 90 lbs basis weight. The cell size is 3/8” (core —26 lbs basis).
The three stringers are tubes of dimensions 48" X 5.5” X 0.16”. They are stuffed
in the ends with honeycomb blocks of dimensions: 8" X 5.25” X 3.125" of cell size
1/2" with liner weight 69 lbs. The pallet is 2-way. The tubes are made of Kraft
paper with some recycle content and spirally wound. Figures 3-12 and 3-13 give

the two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-12: Stringer of the Pallet 8.

 

Figure 3—13: Pallet 8.

20

Table 3-15 gives the performance of the stringer under compressive load. Table

3-16 gives the performance of the deck under loading conditions up till first yield

point.

 

Table 3-15: Performance of the stringer of Pallet 8.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Palfito'tqpflmtb er, Conditioning Sample :85? 32:3: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 17209.2 0.56
8, 72 F, 50% RH 2 18482.1 0.57
48" X 40" Average 17845.65 0.565
90F, 90% RH 1 12553.5 0.59
Table 3-16: Performance of the deck of Pallet 8.
. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Yierlgrpgént,
72 F, 50% RH 1 6000 1.75
3, 72 F, 50% RH 2 6750 1.8
48" X 40" Average 6375 1.775
90F, 90% RH 1 5300 1.65

 

 

 

 

 

21

 

 

Fina?
This pallet is made by EcoDuro Inc. and is single layer, 4-way, having a deck
thickness 1.25” with cell size ‘/z”(core —33 lbs basis) and liner weight 69 lbs on
basis weight. There are 3 stringers each 0.16" thick and are made from white
color “Chipboard", with “EcoDuro" printed on it. They are stuffed with honeycomb
blocks of dimension 8.5” X 3.25" X 3.25" with cell size V2” and liner 69 lbs.
Stringers have a hole of dimension 8" X 2.75" punched in their wall at a distance

of 9” from each end. Figures 3-14 and 3-15 give the two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-14: Pallet 9.

 

Figure 3-15: Three stringers of the Pallet 9.

22

 

Table 3-17 gives the performance of the stringers under compressive load. Table

3-18 gives the deck performance under loading conditions up till first yield point.

Table 3-17: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 9.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pa'fig't‘gfli'gtber' Conditioning Sample 53.353213: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 11050.1 0.23
9, 72 F, 50% RH 2 10072.7 0.23
48" X 40" Average 10561.4 0.23
90F, 90% RH 1 7040.3 0.3
Table 3-18: Performance of deck up till first yield point of Pallet 9.
. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Yie'l‘g'pgnt,
72 F, 50% RH 1 , 2400 0.75
9, 72 F, 50% RH 2 2500 0.85
48" X 40" Average 2450 0.8
90F, 90% RH 1 2050 0.72

 

 

 

 

 

23

 

 

Pallet 10

This pallet has a liner of 90 lbs on basis weight and a single layer deck of
thickness 1.25”. The cell size is 1/2”(core —33 lbs basis) and the footprint is 48" X
40”. It is a 4-way pallet manufactured by EcoDuro Inc. The stringer is 0.16" thick
made of white color “Chipboard", with “EcoDuro” printed on it. It is stuffed with
honeycomb blocks of dimension 8.5" X 3.25” X 3.25” of cell size 1/2" and liner
weight 69 lbs. The stringers are punched with two holes of dimension 8" X 2.75",
at a distance of 9” from the ends. Figures 3-16 and 3-17 give the two views of the

pallet.

 

Figure 3-16: Pallet 10.

 

Figure 3-17: Stringers of Pallet 10.

Table 3-19 gives the performance of the stringers under the compressive load.

Table 3-20 gives the measure of load for deck up till first yield point.

24

Table 3-19: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

' . Deflection at
Palfitozflztb er, Conditioning Sample 3:: 32:23: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 10162 0.29
10, 72 F, 50% RH 2 10268.9 0.25
48" X 40" Average 10215.45 0.27
90F, 90% RH 1 7309.2 0.27

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-20: Measure of load for deck up till first yield point for Pallet 10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pa'fim‘flf‘e“ Conditioning Sample :85? 32:32:: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 2500 0.85
10, 72 F, 50% RH 2 2300 0.75
48" x 40" Average 2400 0.8
90F, 90% RH 1 1700 0.53

 

 

 

 

 

25

 

 

M
This type of pallet, manufactured by EcoDuro, has a footprint of 48” X 40". The
single layer top deck is 1" thick with cell size of 1/2"(core -33 lbs basis) and liner
weight is 69 lbs basis weight. It is a 4-way pallet and has 9 wrapped blocks
instead of stringers. Each wrapped blocks has dimensions of 8" X 8”x 3.25". The
wrapping is type “C", corrugated sheet that encloses honeycomb block of
dimension 8” X 8" X 3", cell size V2" and liner weight 69 lbs. Figure 3-18 shows

the view of the wrapped block on the pallet.

 

Figure 3-18: Wrapped block on the Pallet 11.
Table 3-21 gives the compressive strength of the wrapped block under fixed
platen test. Table 3-22 gives the performance of the deck up till first yield point as

per Airbag test.

26

Table 3-21: Compressive strength of the wrapped block for Pallet 11.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pa'EO'tqpunrsfe r, Conditioning Sample :girriite 321:3: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 17327.1 0.44
11, 72 F, 50% RH 2 17136.9 0.49
48" X 40" Avergge 17232 0.465
90F, 90% RH 1 12045.2 0.55

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-22: Performance of the deck for Pallet 11.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Palfiogurm? er, Conditioning Sample 53:3: 321:3: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 1550 0.4
11, 72 F, 50% RH 2 1600 0.53
48" X 40" Average 1575 0.465
90F, 90% RH 1 1600 0.53

 

 

 

 

 

27

 

 

Pallet 1 2

This pallet has a footprint of 48" X 40” and has a single layer deck of thickness
1.25" having a cell size of 3/8”(core —26 lbs basis) and a liner weight of 90 lbs on
basis weight. Instead of stringers there are 9 hollow tubes of dimensions 8” X
5.5"X 0.16" thickness. These tubes are made from Kraft paper with some
recycled content and have been spirally wound. The pallet is 4-way and is

manufactured by EcoDuro Inc. Figure 3-19 gives a view of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-19: Tubes cut to sizes, on the Pallet 12.
Table 3-23 gives the performance of the tube under compressive load. Table 3-
24 gives the performance of the deck under the Airbag test up till the first yield
point.

Table 3-23: Performance of the tube for Pallet 12.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Ylerlcétggsint,
72 F, 50% RH 1 8106 0.67
12, 72 F, 50% RH 2 6665.5 0.44
48" X 40" Average 7385.75 0.555
90F, 90% RH 1 5908.8 0.54

 

 

 

 

 

28

 

Table 3-24: Performance of the deck for Pallet 12.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallfetolt‘lpung‘ltbe r, Conditioning Sample :35? 32:33:: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 2800 1.05
12, 72 F, 50% RH 2 2700 0.97
48" X 40" Average 2750 1.01
90F, 90% RH 1 2300 0.95

 

 

 

 

 

29

 

Pallet 14
EcoDuro Inc manufactures this 4-way pallet. It has a footprint of 48" X 40” and
has a single layered deck of thickness 1” with cell size of 3/8"(core —26 lbs
basis). The liner material is 69 lbs on basis weight. It has 3 stringers made from
white color “Chipboard" with “EcoDuro” printed on it. The stringers are 0.1” thick
and are stuffed with honeycomb blocks of dimensions 8.5" X 3.25” X 3.25" with
cell size 1/2” and liner weight of 69 lbs. The stringers are punched holes of
dimensions 8” X 2.75”. These holes are at a distance of 9" from the ends. Figure

3-20 gives the view of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-20: Bottom view of the deck and the stringers for Pallet 14.
Table 3-25 gives the compressive strength of the stringer under fixed platen test.
Table 3-26 gives the performance of the deck under standard Airbag Test until

first yield point.

30

Table 3-25: Compressive strength of the stringer for Pallet 14.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Paiggfttlpunrgge r, Conditioning Sample :35? 3:32:32 Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 6103.4 0.24
14, 72 F, 50% RH 2 8062.1 0.26
48" X 40" Average 7082.75 0.25
90F, 90% RH 1 6594.1 0.3

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-26: Performance of the deck - Pallet 14.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pa'figgunm? er, Conditioning Sample :33? 32:5: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 1750 0.6
14, 72 F, 50% RH 2 1600 0.55
48" X 40" Average 1675 0.575
90F, 90% RH 1 1400 0.5

 

 

 

 

 

31

 

 

Pallet 15

This pallet with footprint of 48” X 40" has top single layer deck of thickness 1" and
cell Size of 3/8"(core —26 lbs basis). The liner weight is 69 lbs on basis weight.
EcoDuro Inc manufactures it. It is 4-way pallet with 3 stringers of 0.08” thickness.
The stringers are made from white colored “Chipboard" and has “EcoDuro”
printed on it. Stringers have holes punched into its wall of dimensions 8" X 2.75"
at a distance of 9" from each ends. Stringers are stuffed with honeycomb blocks
of dimensions 8.5” X 3.25" X 3.25", with cell size 1/2” and 69 lbs basis weight.

Figures 3-21 and 3-22 give two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-21: Bottom view of the Pallet 15.

 

Figure 3-22: Top view of the Pallet 15.

32

Table 3-27 gives the performance of the stringers under the compressive load.

Table 3-28 gives the performance of the deck under the Airbag test until the first

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yield point.
Table 3-27: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 15.
. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 8742.5 0.31
15, 72 F, 50% RH 2 8784.3 0.3
48" X 40" Average 8763.4 0.305
90F , 90% RH 1 5943.5 0.38
Table 3-28: Performance of the deck for Pallet 15.
. Deflection at
Pallet Number .. . Force at Yield . .
. ' Conditioning Sample . Yield point,
footprint pOlnt, Pounds inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 1750 0.6
15, 72 F, 50% RH 2 1800 0.61
48" X 40" Avergge 1775 0.605
90F, 90% RH 1 1250 0.35

 

33

 

 

Pallet 16

This pallet with footprint of 48" X 40” has a single layer deck of thickness 1.25"
with cell size 3/8”(core —26 lbs basis) and liner weight of 90 lbs on basis weight.
EcoDuro Inc manufactures it. The stringers are made from brown color recycled
Kraft paper. The stringers are stuffed with honeycomb blocks of Size 8.5” X 3.25”
X 3.25” with cell size ‘/2" and liner weight 69 lbs. The pallet is 4-way as stringers
have been punched with holes of size 8” X 2.75" at 9" from each ends. Figures 3-

23 and 3-24 give two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-23: Stringer of the Pallet 16.

 

Figure 3-24: Deck of the Pallet 16.

34

Table 3-29 gives the performance of the stringers during the fixed platen test.
Table 3-30 gives the performance of the deck under airbag test until the first yield

point is reached.

Table 3-29: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 16.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallfe’toittlpunmige r, Conditioning Sample Egg: 35mg Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 9042.5 0.3
16, 72 F, 50% RH 2 8843.7 0.27
48" X 40" Average 8943.1 0.285
90F , 90% RH 1 6739.2 0.24
Table 3-30: Performance of the deck for Pallet 16.
. Deflection at
Pa'go'rpunmfe“ Conditioning Sample 53:: 3:31:13: Yield point.
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 3100 1.05
15, 72 F, 50% RH 2 3250 1.1
48" X 40" Average 3175 1.055
90F, 90% RH 1 2450 0.85

 

 

 

 

 

35

 

 

Pallet 17

This pallet is manufactured by L & F Inc. The footprint is 48" X 40" and single
layer deck is 1.25” thick. The cell size is 7/16"(core —33 lbs basis) and the liner is
69 lbs on basis weight. Stringers are made from brown color recycled Kraft paper
and are stuffed with honeycomb blocks of dimensions 8.5" X 3.25" X 3.25" having
a cell size of ‘/2" with liner material of 42 lbs. Stringers are 0.2" thick and have
holes of dimensions 8" X 2.75” punched at 9" from each end. The pallet is 4-way.

Figures 3-25 and 3-26 give two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-25: Stringer of the pallet 17.

 

Figure 3-26: Bottom view of the Pallet 17.
Table 3-31 gives the performance of the stringers when fixed platen test is
performed. Table 3-32 gives the performance of the deck when airbag test is

performed. It is a measure of the load at first yield point.

36

Table 3-31: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 17.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pa'fig't‘gunfltbe“ Conditioning Sample 53%: 321:}: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 8715.9 0.31
17, 72 F, 50% RH 2 9312.1 0.3
48" X 40" Average 9014 0.305
90F, 90% RH 1 6661.7 0.34

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3-32: Performance of the deck for Pallet 17.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
PaILeDtoNpunngttle r, Conditioning Sample :33: 3:31:32 Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 2900 0.95
17, 72 F, 50% RH 2 2750 0.88
48" X 40" Average 2825 0.915
90F, 90% RH 1 2200 0.7

 

 

 

 

 

37

 

 

Pallet 18

This pallet has unexpanded honeycomb Single layer deck of approximate
thickness 19/16” with cell size of 3/8"(core -26 lbs basis) and liner weight of 69
lbs on basis weight. It is a 4-way pallet with footprint of 48" X 40”. The three
stringers are 0.16" thick and made of “Chipboard" with “EcoDuro" written on it.
Stringers are stuffed with honeycomb blocks of dimensions 8.5” X 3.25” X 3.25"
with cell size of ‘/2” and liner of 69 lbs. Each stringer has two holes of dimensions
8” X 2.75" punched at 9” from each end. Figure 3-27 gives the bottom view of the

pallet. EcuDuro Inc. manufactures this pallet.

 

Figure 3-27: Stringers of the pallet 18.

Table 3-33 gives the performance of the stringers during the fixed platen test.
Table 3-34 gives the performance of the deck during the airbag test, which is the

measure of the load till the first yield.

38

Table 3-33: Performance of the stringers for Pallet 18.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number . . . Force at Yield . .
. ' Conditioning Sample . Yield pomt,
footprint point, Pounds inches
18 72 F, 50% RH 1 10344.6 0.25
48" x40" 72 F, 50% RH 2 10348.5 0.24
Average 10346.55 0.245

 

 

 

 

Table 3-34: Performance of the deck for Pallet 18.

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Yield pomt,
inches
18, 48" X 40" 90F, 90% RH 1 2450 0.95

 

 

 

 

 

39

 

 

Pallet 19

EcoDuro Inc manufactures this pallet. It has two layers of deck made by cross-
Iaminating two 1/2" thick decks of cell size 1/2"(Core —33 lbs basis) with liner
material of 42 lbs basis weight. The footprint is 40” X 40" and is 2-way. The
stringers are made from white colored “Chipboard" that is fully stuffed with
honeycomb rails of dimension 40" X 3.25" X 3.25” with cell size 1/2” and liner

material 69 lbs basis weight. Figures 3-28 and 3-29 gives two views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3-28: The cross-laminated deck of Pallet 19.

 

Figure 3-29: Stringers of 2-way Pallet 19.
Table 3-35 gives the performance of the stringers during fixed platen test.
Table 3-36 gives the performance of the decks during the airbag test, which is a

measure of the load until first yield point.

40

Table 3-35: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 19.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Yield point,
inches
19 72 F, 50% RH 1 13382.9 0.43
48" x40" 72 F, 50% RH 12531 0.46
Avmjge 12956.95 0.445

 

 

 

Table 3-36: Performance of the decks of Pallet 19.

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number, . . . Force at Yield . .
footprint Conditioning Sample point, Pounds Yield point,
inches
19, 72 F, 50% RH 1 2400 1.08
48" X 40" 90 F, 90% RH 1200 0.43

 

 

 

 

 

41

 

 

Pallet 20

EcoDuro Inc. manufactures this pallet. The footprint is 43" X 43". It has two layers
of deck made by cross laminating two 1/2" thick decks of cell size 1/2”(Core —33 lbs
basis) and liner material of 42 lbs on basis weight. This is a 2-way pallet. The
stringers are 0.12" thick and made from white “Chipboard" material that is fully
stuffed with honeycomb of dimension 43” X 3.25" X 3.25” with cell size 1/2" and

liner material 69 lbs. Figures 3-30 and 3-31 gives the views of the pallet.

 

Figure 3—30: Cross-laminated deck of Pallet 20.

 

Figure 3-31: Stringers of the Pallet 20.

42

Table 3-37 gives the performance of the stringers during the fixed platen test.
Table 3-38 gives the performance of the decks during the airbag test, which is a

measure of the load until first yield point is reached.

Table 3-37: Performance of the stringers of Pallet 20.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pal::g:"p‘:li:tl)e r, Conditioning Sample :85: 32:3: Yield point,
inches
72 F, 50% RH 1 13295.7 0.3
20, 72 F, 50% RH 13505.9 0.28
48" X 40" Average 13400.8 0.29
90F, 90% RH I 1 10219.4 0.37

 

 

 

 

Table 3-38: Performance of the decks of Pallet 20.

 

 

 

. Deflection at
Pallet Number . . . Force at Yield . .
. ’ Conditioning Sample . Yield pornt,
footprint . p0lnt, Pounds inches
20, 48" X 40" 72 F, 50% RH 1 2000 0.7

 

 

 

 

 

43

 

 

4. Results and Data Analysis

Table 4-1: Performance of Decks.

 

Table 4-1: Performance of Deck

 

ConditioninL

 

72 F & 50% RH

90 F & 90% RH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pallet No

Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection,

Pounds inches Pounds inches
1 1650 0.57 1400 0.5
2 1625 0.52 1400 0.5
3 1700 0.59 1200 0.37
4 3000 1 .2 2300 0.95
5 1600 0.5 1250 0.21
6 1800 0.6 1300 0.45
7 2300 0.68 1700 0.5
8 6375 1 .78 5300 1 .65
9 2450 0.8 2050 0.72
10 2400 0.8 1700 0.58
11 1575 0.47 1600 0.53
12 2750 1.01 2300 0.95
14 1675 0.58 1400 0.5
15 1775 0.61 1250 0.35
16 3175 1.06 2450 0.85
17 2825 0.92 2200 0.7
18 2450 0.95
19 2400 1.08 1200 0.43
20 2000 0.7

 

 

 

 

44

 

Table 4-2: Performance of Decks for 0.5” deflection.

 

Table 4-2: Performance of Deck for 0.5 inch deflection

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditioning
Pallet 72 F & 50% RH 90 F 8 90% RH
No Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection,
Pounds inches Pounds inches
1 1447.37 0.5 1400.00 0.5
2 1562.50 0.5 1400.00 0.5
3 1440.68 0.5 1621.62 0.5
4 1250.00 0.5 1210.53 0.5
5 1600.00 0.5 2976.19 0.5
6 1500.00 0.5 1444.44 0.5
7 1691.18 0.5 1700.00 0.5
8 1790.73 0.5 1606.06 0.5
9 1531.25 0.5 1423.61 0.5
10 1500.00 0.5 1465.52 0.5
11 1675.53 0.5 1509.43 0.5
12 1361.39 0.5 1210.53 0.5
14 1443.97 0.5 1400.00 0.5
15 1454.92 0.5 1785.71 0.5
16 1497.64 0.5 1441.18 0.5
17 1535.33 0.5 1571.43 0.5
18 1289.47 0.5
19 1111.11 0.5 1395.35 0.5
20 1428.57 0.5

 

 

 

 

 

45

 

Table 4-3: Performance of Stringers.

 

Table 4-3: Performance of Stringers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditioning
72F&50% RH 90F&90% RH
Pallet Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection,
NO Pounds inches Pounds inches
1 8966.35 0.29 6700.9 0.32
2 9377.35 0.32 6818 0.38
3 12046.05 0.31 7848.8 0.3
4 6661.8 0.24 5026.8 0.24
5 12060.4 0.45 9034.2 0.42
6 11050.55 0.31 7071.8 0.32
7 17921 0.3 14330.1 0.29
8 17845.65 0.57 12553.5 0.59
9 10561.4 0.23 7040.3 0.3
10 10215.45 0.27 7309.2 0.27
11 17232 0.47 12045 0.55
12 7385.75 0.56 5908.8 0.54
14 7082.75 0.25 6594.1 0.3
15 8763.4 0.31 5943.5 0.38
16 8943.1 0.29 ' 6739.2 0.24
17 9014 0.31 6661.7 0.34
18 10346.55 0.25
19 12956.95 0.45
20 13400.8 0.29 10219.4 0.87

 

 

 

 

 

46

 

Table 4-4: Performance of Stringers for 0.5” deflection.

 

Table 4-4: Performance of Striggers for 0.5 inch deflection

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditioning
Pallet No 72 F & 50% RH 90 F & 90% RH
Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection,
Pounds inches Pounds inches

1 15459.22 0.5 10470.16 0.5
2 14652.11 0.5 8971.05 0.5
3 19429.11 0.5 13081.33 0.5
4 13878.75 0.5 10472.50 0.5
5 13400.44 0.5 10755.00 0.5
6 17823.47 0.5 11049.69 0.5
7 29868.33 0.5 24707.07 0.5
8 15654.08 0.5 10638.56 0.5
9 22959.57 0.5 11733.83 0.5
10 18917.50 0.5 13535.56 0.5
11 18331.91 0.5 10950.00 0.5
12 6594.42 0.5 5471.11 0.5
14 14165.50 0.5 10990.17 0.5
15 14134.52 0.5 7820.39 0.5
16 15419.14 0.5 14040.00 0.5
17 14538.71 0.5 9796.62 0.5
18 20693.10 0.5
19 14396.61 0.5
20 23104.83 0.5 5873.22 0.5

 

 

 

 

 

47

 

Table 4-5: Loss of strength of decks.

 

Table 4-5: Loss in strenmof Decks

 

Conditionigq

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

72 F & 50% RH 90 F & 90% RH Loss in
Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection, Strength.
Pallet NO Pounds inches Pounds inches %

1 1650 0.57 1400 0.5 15.2
2 1625 0.52 1400 0.5 13.8
3 1700 0.59 1200 0.37 29.4
4 3000 1.2 2300 0.95 23.3
5 1600 0.5 1250 0.21 21.9
6 1800 0.6 1300 0.45 27.8
7 2300 0.68 1700 0.5 26.1
8 6375 1.78 5300 1.65 16.9
9 2450 0.8 2050 0.72 16.3
10 2400 0.8 1700 0.58 29.2
11 1575 0.47 1600 0.53 -1.6
12 2750 1.01 2300 0.95 16.4
14 1675 0.58 1400 0.5 16.4
15 1775 0.61 1250 0.35 29.6
16 3175 1.06 2450 0.85 22.8
17 2825 0.92 2200 0.7 22.1
18 2450 0.95

19 2400 1.08 1200 0.43 50
20 2000 0.7

Average Loss in strength, after neglecting the high
value of 50% and the Egative value 21.8

 

48

 

Table 4-6: Loss in strength of stringers.

 

Table 4-6: Loss in Strength of Stringrs

 

Conditionigq

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pane, NO 72 F & 50% RH 90 F & 90% RH Loss in
Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection, Strength.
Pounds inches Pounds inches %
1 8966.35 0.29 6700.9 0.32 25.3
2 9377.35 0.32 6818 0.38 27.3
3 12046.05 0.31 7848.8 0.3 34.8
4 6661.8 0.24 5026.8 0.24 24.5
5 12060.4 0.45 9034.2 0.42 25.1
6 11050.55 0.31 7071.8 0.32 36
7 17921 0.3 14330.1 0.29 20
8 17845.65 0.57 12553.5 0.59 29.7
9 10561.4 0.23 7040.3 0.3 33.3
10 10215.45 0.27 7309.2 0.27 28.4
11 17232 0.47 12045 0.55 30.1
12 7385.75 0.56 5908.8 0.54 20
14 7082.75 0.25 6594.1 0.3 6.9
15 8763.4 0.31 5943.5 0.38 32.2
16 8943.1 0.29 6739.2 0.24 24.6
17 9014 0.31 6661.7 0.34 26.1
18 10346.55 0.25
19 12956.95 0.45
20 13400.8 0.29 10219.4 0.87 23.7
Average reduction in streggth 24.9

 

 

49

 

5. Comparison

 

 

 

 

 

 

A;
Elect of humidity on deck's deflection, reference Teble 4.1 I 72 F, 50% no 5001001
C
O
8
u
.5
r5
.2
3
a
O
D
1: a 4 a e 1 a 010111214151011101020
Pelete
Figure 5-1: Effect of humidity on deck's deflection, reference Table 4.1
Electof humidity on dech'e strength, reference Table 4.1 I 12 F. 0078" I00 F.0011Rl'l

7ooo

sooo

5000

E 4000
e-

3 3000
..l

2000
1000

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15
Pellte

16 17 18 19 20

 

Figure 5-2: Effect of humidity on deck’s strength, reference Table 4.1

50

 

 

 

Elect of humidity on performance of deck: for 0.5" deflection, reference Table 4.2 I 72 F, 50% RH I 00 F. 9011er
3500 » ,

deflection

.egtze

Loed,lbe at 0.5"

 

12345678910111214151617181920
Pellets

 

 

Figure 5—3: Effect of humidity on performance of decks for 0.5” deflection,

reference Table 4.2

 

Elect of humidity on perfonnence of wingers for 0.5" deflection, reference Table 4.4 I 72 F, 501001 I90 F, 901.1!"
35000

Loed, Ihe et 0.5'l deflection

 

1112141510171810 fl

9 10
Pallets

 

 

 

Figure 5-4: Effect of humidity on performance of stringers for 0.5” deflection,

reference Table 4.4

51

 

 

[Effect of humidity on stringers mngtii , reignite. Table 4.3 I In F.507Ri-l mam

 

 

 

 

5

1;

3

.—l

12 34 56 7 8910111214151617181920
Palet
Figure 5-5: Effect of humidity on stringers strength, reference Table 4.3

Effect of humidity on performance of Irlngere, deflection, reference Table 4.3 I 72F. 50%RH I92F, 90%RH
u:

E

E

3

'o'

n

 

12345678910111214151017101920

 

 

 

Figure 5-6: Effect of humidity on performance of stringers deflection, reference

Table 4.3

52

 

F?

 

Deck Thickness 1", Cell 1] ", Liner 69 lbs

 

I72F, 50RH
I90F, 90RH

 

 

 

 

Pallet Number

 

 

 

Average load at 72 F, 50 RH — 1900 lbs
Average load at 90 F, 90 RH -1400 lbs
Average reduction is 23.55 %

Figure 57: Comparison: Pallets-Deck thickness 1"; Cell Size 1/z", liner 69 lbs.

53

If!I

Table 5-1: Loss in strength of deck for Pallet 9 due to conditioning.

Pallet No. Loss in

Load, Deflecfion, Load, Deflecfion, Shengfln
%

 

 

Deck 7/8"; 1"; 1 1/4"; Cell Size 1/2"; Liner 69 lbs

 

lie 72 F 50%RH I 90 F 963/591

 

3000
2500
2000
1 500
1 000

500

Loadatiirstyield

 

9; 1 1/4" Average 1,3,7; 6; 7/8"
1"
Pallets

 

 

 

Figure 5-8: Comparison of loss in strength in decks due to conditioning.

Comparison of loss in strength in decks due to conditioning at 90 % RH and at 90
F for 24 hours, for Pallets of different deck thickness — Pallet 6 ( 7/8” thick), Pallet
9 ( 1 1/4" thick) and average of Pallets 1,3 and 7 with deck thickness 1". Pallet 11

with deck thickness 1” is not included in this chart.

54

III

 

 

 

 

 

Cell Size effect in 72 F 50%RH I 90 F 90%RH
2000
2
0
E‘ 1500
2 H
r: -§ 1000
*5 a.
E 500
.J
0
2 5 14 15
Pallet

 

 

Figure 5-9: Cell Size effect.
Pallets 2, 5, 14 and 15 have cell sizes 3/8”, deck thickness of 1" and 69 lbs Liner.
Average 72 F, 50 RH — 1700 lbs

Average 90 F, 90 RH — 1325 lbs

55

 

 

Cellsize comparison I 72 F, 50%RH I 90 F, 90%RH

Load at first

 

1/2"

 

Cell Size

 

 

Figure 5-10: Comparison of average strength of Pallets with cell sizes 3/8” and

V2”.

56

lEF

 

 

 

 

Cell size effect. I Pallet 8, 3/8" I Pallet 10, 1/2"

8000
E 6000
‘5 2
N 2 4000
3 >.
3 2000

o .
72 F, 50%RH 90 F, 90%RH
Pallet Conditioning

 

 

Figure 5-11: Comparison of cell size effect on Pallets 8, 10.

For pallet 8 and 10, the deck is 1 V4” thick and the liner is 90 lbs. The cell size is
3/8" and 1/2” respectively.

57

 

Liner effect I Pallet 9, 69 lbs liner I Pallet 10, 90 lbs Uri—er]
3000
2500
2000

'U

E 1500

>‘ 1000

500
0

 

Load at first

 

72 F, 50%RH _ _90 F, 90%RH
Conditioning

 

 

Figure 5-12: Comparison of Liner effect for Pallets 9 and 10 with decks 1 V4”.

58

 

 

Performance of1 1I4" deck 72 F, 50%RH I 90 F, 90%RH

 

7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000

0

Load at first
yield

 

16 12 8 4

Pallet number and conditioning

 

 

Figure 5-13: Performance of decks for Pallets 16, 12, 8 and 4.

Average 72 F, 50 RH — 2975 lbs Average 90 F, 90 RH — 2350.

59

 

 

Effect of Liner and Deck Thickness

l Liner 90 lbs, Deck 1 1/ ", Average of Pallet 16, 12,4.
l Liner 69 lbs, Deck 1", Average of Pallet 2,5,14,15

 

 

 

      

4000
E 3000
E 2000
g 1000
g 0 72F 50%RH 90 F, 90%RH

Conditioning

 

 

 

Figure 5-14: Combined effect of Liner and Deck thickness.

Average values being compared for cell size 3/8”.

60

ET

 

lBrown Stringers - Comparison LI Pallet 1 I Pallet 16

10000
8000
6000
4000
2000

0

 

Load

 

72 F, 50%RH 90 F, 90%RH
Conditioning

 

 

 

Figure 5-15: Stringer Comparison: 0.12” — Brown colored.

012" Brown colored, Form Board, 4-way- Stuffed with 3 Honeycomb Blocks 8.5”
X 3.25”, 3.25”; 69 lbs liner with core 33 lbs.

61

 

Comparison of Brown and White Stringers
EPallet 4 IAverage of Pallet 1, 1g

 

 

10000
8000
6000 ,
4000.?
2000

0

Load

 

72 F, 50%RH 90 F, 90%RH

Conditioning

 

 

 

Figure 5-16: Stringer Comparison: 0.12" - White colored.

0.12" - White colored, Chip Board, and Brown colored — Form Board 4-way-
Stuffed with 3 Honeycomb Blocks 8.5" X 3.25", 3.25"; 69 lbs liner with core 32
lbs.

62

 

l0.2" Thick Brown and White Colored Strigers

l I Pallet 3, White I Pallet 17, Brown ‘

1 5000

Load

10000

  

5000 —

0

72 F, 50%RH 90 F, 90%RH

 

Conditioning

 

 

Figure 5-17: Stringer Comparison: 0.2” Thick brown and white colored.

63

l9

 

 

0.16" Thick, 4 Way 9 72 F, 50%RH e 90 F, 90%RH
12000 _'__'7 F
10000

8000
6000
4000
2000

o

 

Load

 

Pallet 2 Pallet 9 Pallet 10

Pallet

 

 

 

Figure 5-18: Stringers Comparison (EcoDuro Inc.): 0.16" — White color.

0.16” - White color, Chip Board, 4-way- Stuffed with 3 Honeycomb Blocks 8.5” X
3.25”, 3.25"; 69 lbs liner with core 33 lbs.

Average Value 72 F, 50 RH - 10051.4 lbs 90 F, 90 RH - 7055.8 lbs.

64

l3?

 

|o.1" White Colored stringers Pallet 6 e Pallet 14

12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000

72 F, 50%RH 90 F, 90%RH
Conditioning

Load

    

 

 

 

Figure 5-19: Stringers Comparison (EcoDuro Inc.): 0.1" — White color.
0.1” — White color. Chip Board, 4-way- Stuffed with 3 Honeycomb Blocks 8.5" X
3.25”, 3.25”; 69 lbs liner with core 33 lb.

Average Value 72 F, 50 RH — 9066.65 lbs 90 F, 90 RH — 6833 lbs.

65

 

Peak Load

 

I72F,50RH l90F,90RH

 

20000.00
18000.00
16000.00
14000.00
12000.00
10000.00
8000.00
6000.00
4000.00
2000.00
0.00

 

«f ,9“
«9° '3

Different stringers and conditioning

 

Figure 5-20: Comparison of Stringers, Tube and Wrapped Blocks.

66

 

6. Conclusions

Cell size 7/16” gives the best results as compared to 3/8” and 1/z”.
However, there is a fall in the performance of the decks as cell size
approaches 1/2". Refer to Figure 5-10. Cell size 1/2” gives better
performance than 3/8”. Therefore, in order of performance the cell size
can be ranked as 7l16” > V2” > 3/8”.
Liner thickness 69 lbs is better than 90 lbs. The reasons can be:

0 Fiber contents and their directions.

0 Adhesion of fibers with one another.

0 The “glue”, applied forjoining liners (top and bottom) to honeycomb

structure.

0 The effect of this “polymeric glue” on the fibers of the liners.
Deck thickness affects the load capacity of the pallet. 1 1/4” gives higher
values than 1” and 7/8”.
As relative humidity goes up there is a fall in the strength of the pallets.
After conditioning for 24 hrs at 90% relative humidity and at 90 degrees F,
the fall in strength for decks and stringers is 20% and 24% respectively.
Laminated Decks may give better results but depends upon the variables
like thickness of laminating decks and cell size.
It is difficult to predict the performance of Stringers with 100 "/0
confidentiality. The variation in tested values is from: 8000 lbs to 17000 lbs
and depends upon the type of stuffing’s used.

Chipboard stringers perform better than Form-board stringers.

67

0 Fully stuffed stringers for 2—way entry pallets fail at 18000 lbs.
0 The bearing surface offered by the honeycomb stuffing blocks in a typical 4 way pallets is
about: 8.5” X 3.25” X 9 X 2 X 0.8 = 397.8 sq inch or about

400 sq inches. Refer to Table 6—1 and 6—2 that gives portions of Table 1—1 and Table 4-2.

Table 6—1: Portions of Table 1-1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1-1: Paper Honeycomb Pallets Testing Protocol, School of Packaging, Michigan State University.
Approxi
Pallet foot mate Cell Liner Description of the ft
No Manufacturer . Deck . . Structure 1 Quan | y
print . Size weight r61! 8
Thicknes
s ._
1 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 1/2" 69 Single 0.12" rails - 4 way 6 ¥
2 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0.16" rails — 4 way 6 _h
3 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 1/ " 69 Single 0.2" rails — 4 way 6 5
14 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0.1" rails - 4 way 6 ,‘
15 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1" 3/8" 69 Single 0.08" rails — 4 way 6 ,_
Table 6—2: Portions of Table 4-2
Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection,
Average compressive force for 0.5” deflection for decks of pallet 1, 2, 3, 14 and 15 is

1400 pounds for 72 F and 50%RH. Therefore, failure stress can be stated as:

“Failure Stress” = CompressrveLoad : 1400

_ = 3.5 pounds per square inch.
BearmgArea 400

68

 

 

 

Similarly, refer to Table 6-3 and 6-4 that shows portions of table 1—1 and Table 4—2.

Table 6-3: Portions of Table 1-1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table A: Paper Honeycomb Pallets Testing Protocol, School of Packaging, Michigan State University.
Approxi
Pallet foot mate Cell Liner Description of the .
No Manufacturer . Deck . . Structure . Quantity
print . Size weight rails
Thicknes
s
4 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 3/8" 90 Single 0.12” rails - 4 way 6__
9 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 1/2” 69 Single 0.16” rails - 4 way 6“
10 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 1/2“ 90 Single 0.16" rails - 4 way 6_
16 EcoDuro Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 3/8" 90 Single 0.12" rails - 4 way 6,_
17 L & F Inc. 48 X 40 1 1/4" 7/16" 69 Single 0.2" rails - 4 way 6‘

 

Table 6—4: Portions of Table 4-2.

Load, Deflection, Load, Deflection,

 

Average compressive force for 0.5” deflection for decks of pallet 4, 9, 10, 16 and 17 is
1462 pounds for 72 F and 50%RH. Therefore, failure stress can be stated as:

CompressiveLoad _ 1462
BearingArea — 400

“Failure Stress” = = 3.65 pounds per square inch.

69

 

7. Photographs

 

Figure 7-1: Pallet 1.

 

Figure 7-2: Pallet 8.

70

 

: Pallet 19.

Figure 7-3

 

inger of 8.

Str

Figure 7-4

71

 

Figure 7-6: Pallet 16.

72

BIBLOGRAPHY
Cliff, Stafford. (1999). 50 Trage Secrets of GrflDgign Packaging. Quintet
Book, Massachusetts, Rockport Publishers, Inc.

Wybenga, George L. and Roth, Laszlo. (2000). The Packaging Designer's Book
of Patterns Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

 

Calver, Giles. (2004). What is Packaging Design. A RotoVision Book, RotoVision
SA, Switzerland.

Lauzon, Cathy and Wood, Greg. Editors. (1995). Envirjonmentgllv Responsible
Packaging — a guide to development selection and design. Pira International, UK.

Cross, Nigel. (2000). Engineering Design Methoc_ls - Strategies for Product
Design. Third edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Kahn, Kenneth B., Editor. (2000). PDMA Handbook of New Product
Development. Product Development and management Association, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc.

Otto, Kevin and Wood, Kristin. (2001). Product Design — Technigues in Reverse

Engineering and New Product Development. Prentice Hall Inc. New Jersey
07485.

Stewart, Bill. (2004). Packaging Design Strategies. Second Edition; Pira
International Ltd., UK.

Ulrich, Karl T. and Eppinger, Steven D. (2004). Product Design and
Development. Third Edition; McGraw Hill I Irvin, New York, 10020.

Pira international Conference Proceedings; 20th and 21“t March 2002;

Leatherhead Food RA. Packaging design and Innovation. Pira lntemationai,
Surrey, UK.

Palekar US. and Pandit, R.; Editors. Planning and Control of Materials Handling
Systems. ASME, New York, NY. 10017, The Winter Annual Meeting of The

73

American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Atlanta, Georgia, December 1-6,
1991, MHD-Vol. 1.

Hoefkens, L.J. (1954). Material Handling in Works Stores-The Egrk-Iift Truck and
Ballet System. Published by ILIFFE & SONS LTD.; London, SE1.

Frazelle, Edward.(2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling.
McGraw Hill, New York.

White, John. A and Pence, Ira W; Editors. (1989). Progress in Materials Handling
and Logistics - Volpme 1. Springer-Veflag, UK.

White, John. A and Pence, Ira W; Editors. (1991). Progress in Materials Handling
and Logistics - Volume II. Springer-Verlag, UK.

Heulett, Malcom. (1970). Unit Load Handling. Gower Press, London, W1N 5TA.

Resse, Charise. (2000). Material Handling Systems — Designing for Safety and
Health. Taylor and Francis, New York, NY 10020.

Leblanc, Rick and Richardson, Stewart. (2003). PALLETS: A North American
Perspective. PACTS Management inc., Ontario, CANADA, K9A 5K3.

Allegri Sr., Theodore H. (1984). Materials Handling - Principles and Practice.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, NY 10020.

Hammond, Gary. (1986). AGVS at Work - Agtomated Guided Vehicle Systems.
IFS (Publications) Ltd.; UK.

Leatherhead Food RA. (2000). Packaging Design & Innovation. Pira
International, Leatherhead, Surrey, KT22 7RU; Exhibitor profiles; 20, 21, March
2000. '

Louis, Pierre J. Returnable Transport Packaging and Recyclable / Returnable
Cushioning Systems. Published by The European packaging Newsletter and
World Report, 669 South Washington Street, Alexandria, VA 22314, 1994.

Economic Commission For Asia and the Far East, Bangkok, Thailand;

Introgpction to Transport Planning. Published by United Nations, New York,
1967.

74

McKinlay, Alfred H. (2004). Transport Packaging. Second Edition, Institute of
Packaging Professional, Naperville, Illinois.

International Trade Center UNCTAD IWI'O. Packaging for Exporting, Packaging
Design — A Practicner’s Manual. Geneva, ITC 2000.

Twede, Diana and Selke, E. M. Susan. (2005). Cartons, Crates and Corrugated

Board — Handbook of Paper and Wood and Packaging Technology. DEStech
Publications, Inc. Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601.

75