stress engineering services

Design and Testing

Advancements in Design and Testing of Shrink-Wrapped Tray-Based Secondary Packaging

By Dale Knochenmuss

New techniques have been developed to test the increasingly common shrink-wrapped tray-based cases and unit loads. This type of secondary packaging is structurally very different from traditional corrugated cases with a corresponding need for new methods of testing and analysis. The characteristics of these cases will be discussed and new testing and analysis methods presented.
Stress Engineering Services has years of experience with the design, analysis and testing of packaging. A significant portion of this work has involved plastic containers for food and consumer primary packaging, typically bottles. We have helped clients design new packages as well as providing engineering assistance with changes to existing packages. The strong incentive to reduce costs and lessen the environmental burden of packaging often leads our clients to request help in implementing design changes, such as package weight reductions or lightweighting, which have the potential to affect the structural performance of the package. The trend toward use of shrink-wrapped trays instead of corrugate cases for secondary packaging (Figure 1) has increased the importance of a systematic approach to the overall packaging and transportation of a product. No one packaging element can be exclusively optimized (e.g. for cost, weight, environmental impact) without considering the broader goal of getting the product to market safely and efficiently.

Figure 1: Examples of Tray/Wrap Case Packaging

s t r e s s

e n g i n e e r i n g

s e r v i c e s

Tray/Wrap vs. Corrugate Cases

Tray packed cases with heat-shrink overwrap are fundamentally different from corrugated cases in that the mechanical integrity of the case is dependent upon the compressive force generated by the overwrap to hold the bottles and tray together. The intent is to produce a case with minimal packaging weight and cost which still has sufficient strength and rigidity to be handled easily, assemble into stable unit loads, and survive the distribution system intact and without cosmetic damage to the primary packages. With the increasing emphasis being placed on environmental issues, it should also be noted that tray/wrap packaging has the potential to make a valuable contribution to the overall environmental sustainability of a packaging system.

Shear Stiffness and Buckling1

An element of tray/wrap case design that is not commonly recognized is the importance of shear stiffness. Horizontal forces create shear loads that will tend to deform an individual case or a full unit load into a parallelogram (Figure 3). Horizontal forces are generated when a vehicle transporting a unit load accelerates or brakes quickly (e.g. rail car switching) or from the lateral swaying motions that result from road irregularities during trucking. The use of supplemental restraints, blocking or bracing can reduce horizontal motion and affect how it is transmitted to the product but dont eliminate it entirely.

Additional differences between corrugate and tray/wrap cases are apparent when they are used to build a unit load. The corrugate in full cases carries some or all of the top load that is transmitted down to the pallet. In tray/wrap cases this force must now be carried entirely by the primary package. Package designers and packaging engineers are well aware of the importance of top load strength and know it has to be considered. It has been our experience that case top load strength and stiffness may improve with tray/wrap cases since the bottles may be stiffer and stronger than the corrugate surrounding them (Figure 2 - Tray/Wrap and Corrugate Case Top Load Test Data).
Figure 3: Corrugated Box Deformation Due To Shear Loading

The large at side panels on corrugated cases, the product in the case, and the reinforcing effect of stacking cases close together in unit loads, all serve to create a stiff structure that effectively resists shear loads. It is relatively uncommon for corrugated cases to have problems with shear stiffness. This is not always true for tray/wrap cases. As with vertical top load, the bottles that are packed in shrinkwrapped trays constitute the primary structural element resisting the horizontal forces that cause shear. Each bottle acts as a small column that is often relatively slender and that can tilt sideways under the appropriate horizontal load conditions. Resistance to this tilting is provided by the contact areas at the base and cap of the bottle, friction with adjacent bottles, and the presence of the corrugated tray and shrink wrap. Bottle-to-bottle friction is inuenced by the location and number of contact points

Figure 2: Tray/Wrap and Corrugate Case Top Load Test Data

s t r e s s

e n g i n e e r i n g

s e r v i c e s

between bottles and the contact stiffness of the bottle. The combined forces restraining lateral motion in a tray package provide much lower stiffness than the same product placed in a full case. The shear stiffness of product cases is important for survival during both transportation and while stacked in a warehouse. The ability of a unit load of shrink-wrapped tray cases to survive double- or triplestacking in a warehouse may seem to be entirely a function of top-load strength but shear stiffness plays a role here too. Collapse of stacked unit loads can occur by several mechanisms: 1. Vertical crushing of the case and/or the product under the top load. 2. Euler buckling A tall column can fall over even if there is no sideways load, due to structural instability induced by its own weight. Although a stack is not a tall, thin column it is prone to the same failure mechanism because, relative to its height, it is flexible in the lateral direction. Euler buckling is a function of stack height and weight. 3. Shear buckling This is a lesser known phenomenon, in which a single layer of a pallet shears sideways. This may sometime be observed in wood struts under compression. Unlike Euler buckling, shear buckling depends only on the weight and not on the height. It is proposed that stacked unit load performance can be estimated based on the strength and stiffness characteristics of the component parts. A more elemental approach would move down to the level of the individual bottles, interactions between them, and the shrink wrap, corrugate and other features of the case or tray. This requires more information about the properties of each component and more extensive treatment of their behaviors. Cases or trays are more easily tested in ways that can capture relevant performance characteristics that are useful and readily understood. Applying the techniques of classical mechanics, one approach to unit load stack stability analysis uses two values which can be measured experimentally, the vertical compression stiffness, expressed in lb/sq. in., and the shear stiffness in the same units. This stiffness quantity is equivalent to two fundamental material

properties, Youngs Modulus, E, and the shear modulus, G. The experimental values that are needed are the top load or compression stiffness and the lateral or shear stiffness. E and G are calculated from component stiffnesses by the equations,

where

E = k comph
wl

G = k shearh
wl

l = long side of container or tray w = short side of container or tray h = height k comp = compression stiffness k shear = shear stiffness Euler buckling of a column under its own weight is given by 2

Pcomp = 0.795 EI
2

where I = moment of inertia L = column height

The shear buckling load reduces to a very simple formula

Pshear
where,

GA unit

A unit = Plan area or footprint of the unit load

Other significant factors which have not been addressed here are the issues of time-dependent behavior. Being commonly made of plastic, bottles are almost certainly viscoelastic even at ambient temperatures, and will deform with time. Stacking patterns, temperature, pallet configuration, humidity and other factors will also influence the stability of tray cases in stacked storage conditions.3,4 The additional deformation accumulated in a period of weeks or months may be a factor of 2 to 10 times the initial deflection that is measured when a load is first applied, with a consequent reduction by the same factor in the stiffness and hence the buckling loads.

s t r e s s

e n g i n e e r i n g

s e r v i c e s

Testing Methods
The packaging and transportation industries have long recognized the importance of top load or vertical compression tests as well as horizontal impacts and forces. From an engineering perspective it is desirable to go beyond qualitative evaluation of whether a package, case, and unit load performed acceptably in a particular test and work to obtain more quantitative data regarding package performance. In working with our clients to develop tray-based packages and assess their performance, SES has performed several tests that we have found useful.

It is interesting to note that this advantage may be lost when more than one tray is stacked. Figures 5 and 6 show load vs. deflection data for compression tests of the same product when packaged in corrugate cases and trays. When a single case is tested, the tray is stiffer than the corrugate case. This relationship is reversed when double cases are tested.

Figure 5: Compression Test Data for Single and Double Shrink-Wrapped

Tray Cases

Figure 4: Compression Tests of Single and Double Shrink-Wrapped Trays

Top Load Compression Tests

Beyond indicating the load required to buckle or crush a case, compression tests also provide data regarding the vertical stiffness. This is the k comp value mentioned in the discussion of buckling modes. As noted previously in Figure 2, shrinkwrapped trays can be stiffer in compression than corrugate cases.

Figure 6: Compression Test Data for Single and Double Corrugated Cases

s t r e s s

e n g i n e e r i n g

s e r v i c e s

This test is relatively easy to perform and requires just a few cases of product. This is helpful during package development when only a few samples may be available.

Unit Load Dynamic Shear Stiffness Tests

A disadvantage of the static testing described above is that it doesnt capture many of the characteristics of a full unit load. Case stacking patterns, slip sheets to tie layers together, stretch wrap, corner posts and other construction features all contribute to unit load performance. It was not practical to scale up the static test for unit loads as the forces to cause lateral displacement become large and can cause localized damage unless distributed over a large area. An alternate test method was devised in which the unit load is placed on a platform or sled which rolls on metal tracks. The sled is driven forward a short distance and then brought to an abrupt stop. The motion of the sled and the palletized unit load on top of it is measured at several locations during the event. Pneumatic cylinders are currently used to drive the sled motion. Cable extension potentiometers measure the resulting displacements. When the sled stops, the unit load above it wants to continue moving and tends to sway forward before coming to a stop. Information regarding the stiffness of the cases and unit load can be derived from the recorded motion data.

Figure 7: Buckling Observed During Case Compression Test

Static Shear Stiffness Tests

To understand the horizontal stiffness of shrink-wrapped trays, a test can be performed in which several trays are stacked vertically and then subjected to a quasi-static lateral force. A computerized data acquisition system is used to continuously record the load applied and the resulting horizontal deflection. The test is typically repeated with the load applied parallel to the short axis and the long axis of the case. In the example represented by the data in the table below, the goal of the project was to replace an existing corrugated case with trays so the testing was performed on the original cases as well as trays. Shear stiffness values are calculated from the test data in a fashion similar to that used for the vertical top load compression. The order of magnitude reduction in shear stiffness in this instance was dramatic. Case Conguration Corrugate Tray Loading Direction Long Axis Short Axis Long Axis Short Axis Static Shear Stiffness 722.4 lbf/in 230.5 lbf/in 60.5 lbf/in 16.4 lbf/in

Table 1: Static Shear Stiffness Data

Figure 8: Unit Load Dynamic Shear Testing Equipment

s t r e s s

e n g i n e e r i n g

s e r v i c e s

Package Type

Case Type

Displacement After Stop (in) 1.44 2.42 2.27

Natural Frequency (Hz) 1.8 1.0 1.1

Effective Stiffness (lbf/in) 672 172 236

Stiffness Relative to Full Case 100% -74% -65%

A A B

Full Case Tray Tray

Table 2: Dynamic Shear Stiffness Test Results

The data generated from these tests is not, by itself, sufciently predictive of real world performance for it to be used as a stand-alone design guideline. More data and experience is needed to help calibrate the test results.

The Transportation Environment and Vibration

Figure 9: Dynamic Shear Stiffness Test for Full Corrugated Cases

Since many of the performance issues associated with shrinkwrapped trays are of greatest concern in single-product unitized loads, there has been interest in collecting transportation environment data specic to this type of packaging. To allow testing of a full unit load with minimal disturbance to the product, it is desirable to have a data acquisition system that does not require a case of product be removed from the pallet to accommodate a recording device. Furthermore the sensor suite should be as exible as possible and allow the collection of data from multiple sensors of mixed types for extended periods of time. To achieve this, a special instrumented pallet has been constructed. The pallet is based on a standard 48 x 40 footprint and deck board pattern. The electronic components are installed in metal enclosures located where the wood blocks are normally positioned between the upper and lower deck. The data acquisition system can accommodate up to 16 data channels consisting of load cells, accelerometers, pressure transducers, temperature sensors and other devices.

Figure 10: Dynamic Shear Stiffness Test for Shrink-Wrapped Tray Cases

Figure 9 shows the results of a test of a product in full corrugated cases. The results when the same product was tested in shrinkwrapped trays are shown in Figure 10. Notice that the product does not stop moving as quickly as the sled and sways briey before coming to rest. This effect is much more pronounced with the trays - the oversway has a larger amplitude and oscillates back and forth several times before coming to rest. Table 2 shows sample data values extracted from dynamic shear stiffness test results. The larger displacement is indicative of the lower stiffness of the tray cases.

Figure 11: Instrumented Pallet with Computer Compartment Open

s t r e s s

e n g i n e e r i n g

s e r v i c e s

Figure 14: Acceleration Power Spectral Density Data

Figure 12: Instrumented Pallet Loaded with Trays of Product

Figure 12 shows sample data from the rst three days of a week-long transit test. The periods when the shipment was actively being transported are apparent from the level of activity in the data. This test used load cells and accelerometers. Power spectral density data from the accelerometers is shown in Figure 14.

A further area in which shrink-wrapped trays can differ from corrugated cases is in their sensitivity to horizontal vibration. This is primarily the case for unit load shipments because the sensitivity to horizontal vibration increases when the vertical loads are larger. Vibration testing in the transportation packaging industry has long emphasized vertical axis vibration since the magnitudes experienced in this direction during transportation are so much greater and lateral stiffness has usually not been a problem for most corrugated packages. Horizontal vibration test capability is also less commonly available than vertical shake tables. Multi-axis equipment is even harder to nd, and more expensive. Further work will be needed to understand whether it is appropriate to consider adding horizontal vibration to the test protocols for shrink-wrapped tray packages.

References
1. The technical content of this section was developed by Douglas Marriott, PhD, Stress Engineering Services, www.stress.com 2. Roarks Formulas for Stress and Strain, W. Young, 6th ed., McGraw-Hill, 1989 3. Fibre Box Handbook, Fibre Box Association, 2850 Golf Road, Rolling Meadows, IL 60008, www.brebox.org 4. ISTA Project 4 AB: Behind the Scenes of Alpha Release, W. Kipp, D. Root, Dimensions.04 Proceedings, International Safe Transit Association, 1400 Abbott Road, Suite 160, East Lansing, MI 48823, www.ista.org

Figure 13: Load Cell Data from the First 3 Days of a Week-Long Transit Test

#371 2007 Stress Engineering Services, Inc.