compression test method and design information

HP COMPRESSION TEST METHOD A-5951-1742-1 Rev. A 1. SCOPE

Packaging Test Requirements

This Standard describes the methods and specifications for compression testing of shipping containers, both empty and filled with product. 2. PURPOSE The purpose of this testing is two fold: a. It can be used as a quality control check for corrugated shipping containers. Instead of specifying corrugated materials (specs which can rarely be tested), performance level specifications can be developed and placed onto drawings. Requiring vendors to conduct compression testing on shipping cartons will provide a method of judging the combined quality of materials and construction of a container. Recording test results over time should provide expected control limits for container strength and provide a good baseline for material or design modifications. b. The test method should provide an accurate way of assessing the overall strength of a filled container and determining if the product/package will survive the compression loads expected within distribution. This method can also be used to test loading points of unboxed products. This will be useful where the compression load is transmitted to the product via packaging. When the inherent strength characteristics of the product can be harnessed to survive the rigors of distribution, packaging costs can decrease. 3. DAMAGE When conducting compression testing, failure can be defined in a number of ways. The two quantitative factors being measured in compression testing are load (lb. or kg) and deflection (in or mm). Following are parameters of compression failure which should all be weighed during testing: a. The peak load (lb. or kg) and the amount of deflection (in or mm) at that peak load. b. The amount of load at 0.5 in (12.7 mm) deflection. c. If desired, the amount of deflection allowable may be calculated to be some percentage of the overall height of the test specimen. d. If the package becomes cosmetically unacceptable, or there is damage to the product or its accessories, prior to the peak load or deflection described above, it is

considered failure. 4. REFERENCED DOCUMENTS ASTM D 642 - 76 ASTM D 4169 - 86 5. SPECIFICATIONS All testing should continue until failure. To determine the amount of load carrying capacity of a shipping container, one should know the warehousing and vehicle stacking heights encountered in the distribution system. Usually there will be a higher stacking height in storage than in transit. For instance, HP commonly stacks 80 in (2032 mm) pallet loads two high. Unless the Packaging Engineer knows of another specific maximum stack height within their product's distribution system, it is recommended that a packaged product be able to support loads stacked to 160 in (4064 mm). Be sure to add the weight of the pallets in calculating the total load. This calculated dead load is the first step in determining the actual strength of the packaged product. The strength of a corrugated box can be altered drastically throughout distribution. Corrugated board cannot be considered an engineering material due to the fact that its strength characteristics are not predictable within its normal range of use. Humidity and temperature changes affect corrugated greatly. Drops, vibration, compression, and printing all reduce the strength of flute structure. Misalignment of vertical edges from one box on top of another can reduce carrying capacity up to 50%. Because of all these things, it is common to use a "safety factor" when calculating the needed compression strength of a corrugated box. The safety factor is a multiplier by which the calculated dead load is increased to makeup for the hazards of distribution which impair the strength of corrugated board. If the shipping container were made of a material whose strength was not compromised by its environment, such a safety factor would not be necessary. Likewise, if all the compression load were transmitted directly into the product (i.e., cans of pop in a corrugated tray), the safety factor would not be needed. But, if any amount of compression load is to be supported by the box, then a safety factor should be used. ASTM recommends safety factors ranging from 1.5 to 8.0, depending upon the value of the product and percentage of load supported by corrugated. Experience has shown that a safety factor of about five seems right for corrugated boxes and corrugated inserts supporting the majority of compression load. If the interior packaging is non-humidity sensitive and helps support load, along with the product, this safety factor can be minimized. 6. TEST EQUIPMENT (1) It is highly recommended to conduct compression testing in an environmentally controlled room of fixed air temperature and humidity. Ideally, corrugated samples will first be dried in a hot room, removing most of the moisture in the board. Then, for 24 hours, it should be exposed to 50.0 +/- 2.0% relative humidity and 73.0 +/-

2.0 degrees F (23.0 +/- 1.0 degrees C). Using these conditions will permit remote laboratory comparisons and consistency over time and seasons. (2) There are two common types of compression testers: fixed platen and floating platen. The fixed platen type has two metal platens which remain parallel to each other throughout the test. The floating platen variety has one platen rigidly restrained while the other platen is universally mounted and allowed to tilt freely. The floating platen machine has two parallel platens, flat to within 0.02 in (0.5 mm), one which is moveable in the vertical direction so as to compress the specimen between the platens. One is the load measuring platen, and both are of sufficient size so that the test container does not extend beyond the edges of the platens. One platen is fixed in the horizontal direction so as to have no lateral movement greater than 0.05 in (1.3 mm). The second platen is attached to the machine by a swivel or universal joint directly centered on the platen, thus allowing the platen to tilt freely. It is believed that floating platen testing identifies and measures the weakest part of a container while fixed platen testing measures the strongest aspect. Depending upon the design of the tester, as much as a 19% difference may exist between the results of a fixed platen compared to a floating platen. Since it is the weakest aspect of a box which will fail first in stacking, it is recommended that a floating platen tester be used. (3) Common Features of a Compression Test Machine a. Each machine should have a means of driving the moveable platen at a uniform speed of 0.5 +/- 0.10 in/min. (12.0 +/- 2.5 mm/min.). b. Each machine should have a means of recording or indicating the applied load to within +/- 0.5% of the scale capacity. NOTE: the tolerance is based upon the scale capacity, not the actual test reading. For example, a 2000 lb. scale capacity is used and a box tests to 670 lb. The actual strength of that box is 670 +/- 10 lb. c. Each machine should have a means of recording or indicating the resultant deformation within +/- 0.025 in (+/- 0.64 mm). 7. SAMPLING, TEST SPECIMENS, AND TEST UNITS Test specimens and sample quantities should be chosen to provide an adequate determination of representative performance. For large production runs, lot sampling is advised. It is recommended that five or more replicate tests be conducted to improve the statistical reliability of the data obtained. The test specimen should be closed and secured in the same manner as will be used in preparing them for shipment, unless otherwise specified. 8. PROCEDURE Center the specimen on the bottom platen of the testing machine. Lower the top platen until it comes in contact with the specimen. For single wall corrugated, apply an initial pressure, or preload, of 50 lbf (222 N) to ensure a definite contact between the specimen and the platens. For double wall, apply 100 lbf (445 N). At

this time, record the distance between the platens as zero deformation. Apply the load with a continuous motion of the moveable head of the testing machine at a speed of 0.5 +/- 0.1 in/min. (12.7 +/- 2.5 mm/min.), until failure, as defined above, has been reached. Usually, the greatest compression forces within distribution will be exerted while the product is in palletized form. Therefore, it is recommended that boxes be tested in their pallet orientation. NOTE: When testing full containers, and the load sensing device is located under the bottom platen, be sure to zero the test machine with the product on it, or subtract the container weight from peak load readings. Strength Calculation The determination of what amount of compression force a shipping container will have to endure in the warehouse and shipping environment is the basis of this guideline. This section will cover two methods for determining this. Safety Factors There are many elements that effect the structural strength of a corrugated container from raw material to used carton. The elements are humidity, temperature, printing, handling, storage conditions, and time. These factors reduce the strength of the material and must be taken into consideration when calculating the required strength needed when conducting compression tests. The term used to describe this is "safety factor". A safety factor is used as a multiplier in the calculation to makeup what the elements of the distribution environment take away. Methods for Determining Test Levels The first method can be seen in ASTM D-4169 section 11.4. The second method is more simplistic but obtains nearly the same results.

The third method is using Edge Crush Test (ECT) calculation. USING ECT Formula for Calculating Corrugated Box Compression Strength (developed by Institute of Paper Chemistry in 1963) COMPRESSION STRENGTH = (5.87)x(ECT) [Squareroot (Box Perimeter)x(Board Thickness)] Where ECT = Edgewise crush or short column test, pounds/inch Box perimeter = 2 x inside length + 2 x inside width, inches Board Thickness = overall thickness of linerboards and corrugated medium, inches and box shape is regular, ie. style ie. RSC, depth is at least 1/7 of box perimeter (2L + 2W), and no dimension is more than twice any other. Example How high can an RSC style corrugated box be safely stacked in a warehouse if it (not contents) must carry entire load? Given: Gross weight 32 pounds; inside dimensions18" x 12" x 10"; board "C" flute, 200 psi burst, 40 pounds/inch ECT, thickness of 0.160".

Use a design or safety factor of 4.5 since conditions are average Calculations

Compression Strength = (5.87)x(40) [Squareroot (60)x(.160)] Safe load on box = 728#/4.5 = 162 pounds Safe number of boxes to stack on bottom box = 162 / 32 = 5 Total stack height = Bottom 1 plus 5 on top = 6
HP Engineering - Packaging Programs Palo Alto, CA (650)857-7482 Copyright 1996 Hewlett-Packard Company August 1, 1996 Appendix B

BACK

FORWARD

Table of Contents

glossary
Acceptance Criteria

Packaging Test Requirements

The acceptable quality level that must be met after the shipping unit has been subjected to the test plan. (see Section 2). [ASTM 4169] Assurance Level The level of test intensity based on its probability of occurring in a typical distribution environment. [ASTM 4169] Attenuate To reduce the amplitude of an electronic control signal or vibration output such that the response is less than the input. [ASTM 4728] Broad-band Random Vibration Random vibration that covers a wide and continuous range of frequencies. Any frequencies that exceed the narrow-band limitations are considered broad-band. [ASTM 4728] CL Carload. [ASTM 4169] Closed-loop A condition of control where the input may be modified over time by the effect of the output of the system. [ASTM 4728] Coefficient of Restitution The ratio of the rebound velocity to the impact velocity. [ASTM 4169] Complex Vibration Vibration whose components are sinusoids not harmonically related to one another. [ASTM 4728] COFC Container on flatcar. [ASTM 4169] Critical Acceleration The greatest non-damaging maximum faired acceleration , expressed in G, using a trapezoidal shock pulse on a bare product. DC Distribution Center DP Distribution Provider Deterministic Vibration Vibration whose instantaneous value at any future time can be predicted by an exact mathematical expression. [ASTM 4728] Double Amplitude The maximum value of a sinusoidal quantity (peak-to-peak). [ASTM 999]

Drop Test: Process of determining the level of impact a packaged product experiences when dropped from a pre-determined height. The drop height is dependent on the weight of the unit.
Duration of Shock Pulse

The time required for the acceleration pulse to rise from 10 percent of the maximum amplitude and decay back to 10 percent of the maximum amplitude.

Edge Crush Test (ECT) (Also known as Edgewise Compression Test or Short Column Crush Test) - The measure of the edgewise compressive strength of a short column of corrugated fiberboard. This property, in combination with the caliper of the combined board and the perimeter of the container, relates to the top-tobottom compressive strength of corrugated fiberboard boxes.

Equalization Adjustment Correction of the amplitude characteristics of an electronic control signal throughout a desired frequency range to maintain a desired vibration output spectrum and level. [ASTM 4728] Equalizer Instrumentation used to conduct equalization. [ASTM 4728] ESD Electro Static Discharge. Faired Acceleration The smooth curve through the actual shock pulse. Filter A device capable of passing certain frequencies with little loss (pass band) but of causing large losses so that other frequencies (stop band) are attenuated. Filters may be classified as low-pass (high stop), high-pass (low stop) or bandpass (stopping frequencies below and above the pass band). [ASTM 4728] Filtered Signal Signal is said to be filtered when components have been removed by passing it through a filter. [ASTM 4728] Fixed Platen Testing Machine A testing machine equipped with two platens which are both restrained from tilting. [ASTM 642] Flat For the purposes of drop tests, tip tests, tipover tests, and rolling tests; no two points on the surface differing level by more than 0.080 in. (2 mm); however, where one of the dimensions of the test package in contact with the surface is greater than 40 in. (1000 mm), a maximum difference in surface level of 0.20 in. (5 mm) will be acceptable. [ASTM 1083] Floating Platen Testing Machine A testing machine equipped with two platens, one rigidly restrained from tilting while the other platen is universally mounted and allowed to tilt freely. [ASTM 642]

Free-fall Drop Height The calculated height of free fall in vacuum required for the dropping platen to attain a measured or given impact velocity.
G Symbol for the dimensionless ratio between an acceleration in length per time-squared units, and the acceleration of gravity in the same units. [ASTM D996]

g g rms The acceleration of gravity, equaling 9.81 meters per second2 (32.2 feet per second2).

The square root of the integral of power spectral density over the total frequency range [ASTM 4728]. Gross Mass The sum of the masses of the product, the package materials, and miscellaneous components shipped with the product (i.e., Operating Manual, power cord, etc.). Hertz (Hz) A measurement of frequency in which one hertz equals one cycle per second. Hysteresis The failure of a property, that has been changed by an external agent, to return to its original value when the cause of the change is removed.

Item 222-Series Provisions in the National Motor Freight Classification of the motor common carriers containing requirements for corrugated and solid fiberboard boxes.
LTL Less than truckload. [ASTM 4169] Modal Analysis The determination of modes of vibration of a structure.

Mode of Vibration The characteristic shape assumed by a structure when vibrating at one of its natural frequencies. Narrow-band Random Vibration Random vibration having frequency components only within a narrow band. It has the appearance of a sine wave whose amplitude varies in an unpredictable manner. A narrow band should be +/-10 % or +/-3 Hz whichever is greater, of the center frequency of interest. [ASTM 4728] Octave The interval between two frequencies having a ratio of two (2). [ASTM 999] Open-loop A condition of control where the input of a system is pre-established and is not affected by the output or response of the system [ASTM 4728] Periodic Vibration An oscillation whose waveform repeats at equal increments of time. (see also deterministic vibration) [ASTM 4728] Power Spectral Density (PSD) The limiting mean-square acceleration per unit bandwidth. Units are g2/Hz on the Y axis and Hz on the X axis. PSD is the industry accepted measurement to describe random vibration amplitude. Random Vibration Vibration whose instantaneous magnitude is not specified for any given instant of time. The instantaneous magnitude of a random vibration is specified only by probability distribution functions giving the probable fraction of the total time that the magnitude lies within a specified frequency range. Random vibration contains no periodic or quasi-periodic constituents. Repetitive Shock Impacts of a package on a test platform which occur cyclically from input vibration. [ASTM 999] Resonance A vibration of large amplitude in a mechanical system caused by a relatively small periodic stimulus of the same or nearly the same period as the natural vibration period of the system. [ASTM 999] Rigid For the purposes of drop tests, tip tests, tipover tests; a surface that will not be deformed by more than 0.0040 in. (0.1

mm) when any area of 0.16 in

(100 mm2) is loaded statically with 22 lb (10 kg) anywhere on the surface. [ASTM 1083]

Root-mean-square (rms) The square root of the mean-square value. In the exclusive case of a sine wave the rms value is 0.707 times peak value. [ASTM 4728]

Rule 41 A rule in the "Uniform Freight Classification" of the rail carrier containing requirements for corrugated and solid fiberboard boxes.

Shipping Unit The smallest complete unit that will be subjected to the distribution environment, for example, a shipping container and its contents. [ASTM 4169] Sinusoidal Discrete Frequency A periodic function having a sinusoidal waveform of only one frequency. [ASTM 4728] Spectrum A definition of the magnitude of the frequency components within a specified band width. [ASTM 4728] SRS Shock Response Spectrum. For any particular input pulse, the theoretical response of an undamped, single degree of freedom spring/mass system with a particular natural frequency can be calculated using Newton's laws of motion. STFI A test method to evaluate the short span compressive strength of paperboard. This method was developed by the Swedish Pulp and Paper Research Laboratory located in Stockholm in collaboration with Lorentzen & Wettre's instrument development resources. The letters STFI is the abbreviated acronym for Svenska Traforskininges Institute. This test method is also sometimes refered to as the SCT (short-span compression test). Test Plan A specific listing of the test sequence to be followed to simulate the hazards anticipated during the distribution of a shipping unit. Included will be the test intensity and number of sequential tests to be conducted. [ASTM 4169] TL Truckload. [ASTM 4169] TOFC Trailer on flatcar. [ASTM 4169] Transmissibility The non-dimensional ratio of the response amplitude of a system in steady-state forced vibration to the excitation amplitude. The ratio may be one of displacements, velocities, or accelerations. Velocity Change The sum of the impact and rebound velocities. [ASTM 4169]

test methods & limits

1.0 Scope

Packaging Test Requirements

The tests and limits described in this section are designed to evaluate a packaged product's ability to withstand specific levels of dynamic and static input it may experience in the distribution environment. However, it does not evaluate package performance relative to unusual and unexpected environmental conditions (i.e., long-term outdoor storage conditions, punctures from lift truck forks, accidental drop from the rear of a truck during transit, etc.). 2.0 Purpose The purpose of these tests is to simulate dynamic and static stresses which can occur in the distribution system. The objective of both product ruggedness and packaging are to provide acceptable levels of product protection and storage integrity. This section will provide the appropriate test methods and levels to evaluate those objectives, along with a brief rationale of each test. A more comprehensive rationale and purpose of these tests can be found in Section 3, Test Rationale & Meaning.

3.0 Reference Documents (information on where to obtain these documents can be found inAppendix C)
Random Vibration ASTM D-4728 procedure 10.1.1, or IEC 68-2-34 Sine Vibration ASTM D-999 (Method B or C for Type 3) or ISO 8318 Impact Test From Free Fall Type 1 - ASTM D-5276, or ISO 2248 Drops Type 2 & 3 - ASTM D-1083 section 10.1.1 Method A, ISO 10531 section 7.2.1, or IEC 68-2-31 section 3.2.1 Slip Sheeted Loads None available Compression Testing HP Compression Test Method A-5951-1742-1 (Appendix B) ASTM D-642 or ISO 12048 Stability Test Tipover Test Layover Test Strapping Test Rolling Impact Test Ramp Clearance Test Humidity/Temperature Storage Test Slip Sheet Tab Testing Field Shipment Testing Rain Test
4.0 Shipping Unit Classification The shipping unit is defined as the specific configuration of the product and package as a system. Generally, the shipping unit is the smallest complete unit that will be subjected to the distribution environment. The packaged product will fall into one of three classifications. These classifications are significant in understanding how transportation services are selected, what hazards will be acting on the product, how many times the packaged product will be handled, and determine which testing methods are appropriate. The severity of the distribution environment upon the product is dependent, in part, on the method of packaging used. For instance, unitized loads receive less severe drops than individual, small packaged products. The test procedures in this manual are designed to evaluate the effectiveness of various packaging methods. The shipping unit to be tested must be classified according to the following Type definitions. A product may have more than one classification if it is packaged for distribution in both single packs (Type 1) and bulk packs (Type 3),or palletized single packs vs. individual single packs. If a product does fall under more than one classification type, it will need to be tested in each of its configurations. Type 1 - Single or multiple product, boxed and non-palletized, which can be carried by one or two people. An individually packaged product which could be shipped as a single unit to an end user is defined as Type 1, even if the packaged product moves in pallet load quantities during a portion of its physical distribution. These products can be exposed to warehouse conditions where

ASTM D-1083 section 11 ASTM D-1083 section 12, ISO 8768, or IEC 68-2-31 section 3.2.3. None available None available None available None available ASTM D-4332 or ISO 2233 part II ASTM 1083 section 9.4.2 None available ASTM D-951, ISO 2875, or IEC 68-2-18 section 4.2 method Ra 1.

long term (up to 6 months) static compression can be encountered. These products are most frequently distributed by truck in LTL modes and express delivery services. Typical vehicles are trucks, container or truck trailer on rail car, and airplanes. This class also represents multiple, like units, combined in a single shipping container, typically non-palletized.

Figure 7.1 Examples of Type 1 Shipping Units Some packages may have an integral pallet for internal or customer handling convenience, but the size and weight would allow it to be carried by two people. This kind of package should be classified as Type 1, not Type 2. Occasionally, two or more individually boxed products will be bundled, strapped or palletized for shipment according to the specific system and options included in the order. In this case, the individually boxed products will be tested as a Type 1 shipping unit, as they could ultimately be unbundled and handled separately by a sales office, distributor or end user. The pallet load should be evaluated for container integrity under pallet loading and stacking to ensure that excessive container compression does not occur. Refer to Appendix B for more information on this subject. Type 2 - Single Product, Palletized. This class represents the individual product, packaged or prepared for shipment such that it would only be handled by mechanical equipment and could not normally be carried by two people. Type 2 shipping units could include individually palletized product (i.e., cushioned pallet) or a large cabinet type product shipped unpackaged which would not realistically be carried by two people. These products are most frequently distributed by truck in LTL modes, container or truck trailer on rail car, and air freighters.

Figure 7.2 Examples of Type 2 Shipping Units Type 3 - Multiple Products, Unitized on pallets or slip sheets. This class represents multiple products which are unitized and shipped only on pallets or slip sheets. This classification would include "bulk packed" products. "Bulk Pack" packaging refers to a design which hold and transport multiples of the same product, shipped as a whole unit, on slip sheets and/or pallets. Unlike a pallet load of boxed units, where an individual unit could be withdrawn from the unitized load and shipped by itself, a bulk packed unit cannot be shipped in any other configuration. In other words, protection from the distribution environment exists only in the conglomerate bulk pack, as opposed to individual protection around each product. Bulk pack designs require mechanical handling and are usually shipped in Full Truck/Sea Load container quantities. These palletized loads can be exposed to warehouse conditions where short to medium term (up to 3 months) exposure to static compression can be encountered. These products are most frequently distributed by truck, rail cars, sea freighters and air freighters.

Figure 7.3 Drawing of a Bulk Pack If the unitized load consists of individually boxed products that could ultimately be transported as single units, then the single boxed product must also be tested as a Type 1 shipping unit. Additionally, this product should also be tested as a Type 3 shipping unit. This is necessary due to the different kinds of stress and strain seen under one configuration versus another. For instance, in a bulk pack a product may support 100% of the compression load during storage, whereas, when the same unit is packaged, the outer container will support much of the compression load. Similarly, a drop test to a single product produces high acceleration forces, but a drop test of a unitized load from a lower drop height causes lower shock levels but produces higher dynamic compression forces. Testing only one of the possible shipping configurations will increase the risk of unforeseen damages in distribution. 5.0 Acceptance Criteria and Damage Acceptance criteria must be established prior to testing and should consider the required condition of the product and packaging at receipt to the final customer. See Section 2 "Acceptance Criteria & Test Levels" for more information. 5.1 Product Damage Product damage can be any condition which causes the product not to meet its performance test specifications or acceptance criteria. 5.2 Package Damage. The package's purpose is to absorb or modify damaging energy imparted by the distribution environment, to sustain ordinary degradation as a result, and to protect and preserve the product in its original or undamaged condition as defined by the acceptance criteria. Thus, some package degradation is expected and is acceptable. Unacceptable package damage can be defined as: (1) any change in package condition that results in product damage, (2) inability of the package to contain the product in its intended position, (3) cosmetic or structural damage requiring repackaging. 6.0 Sample Size

During final qualification testing, it is recommended that multiple like products be subjected to each test. The number of products to be tested should be based on the confidence level desired to expose a failure mode in a product. If every failure mechanism were present in every product, testing only one unit would be sufficient to detect and correct all of them. Unfortunately, because of component and manufacturing process variability, every product is not exactly like every other, and more than one must be tested to prove the absence of serious failure mechanisms. In real life tests, some products will fail while others won't. Assuming that the failure mechanism is present in only a small percentage of the units, testing with small sample sizes just doesn't cut it! Assuming a normal distribution, a sample

size of 2 produces only a 20% probability of detecting a defect that occurs in 10% of the products. Even testing 10 units only raises the probability to about 65%. The equation below shows how to estimate sample size.

Example: how many systems must be tested without failure to demonstrate that the probability of failure is less than 0.1 (10%) with 90% confidence?

Note: Sample size estimation equation from Introduction to Reliability Engineering by E.E. Lewis.
Figure 7.4, based on the binomial distribution, shows that a sample size of 22 is necessary to achieve 90% probability of detecting a defect that occurs in 10% of the population. If you are concerned with achieving very low defect densities, say 1% or less, the sample sizes become very

large.

Figure 7.4 Defect Detection vs. Sample Size The binomial probability f(y) of getting y failures in a sample of n units is

where p is the actual fraction of the population that is defective. [The value of the factorial of an integer n is calculated by multiplying the integer by each of the integers smaller than itself, until 1 is reached. For example, 3! =3x2x1=6. For numbers larger than about 20, most computers will overflow, so it is best to simplify the ratio first; i.e.,

6.1 Complications

Barring interaction, the failure rate of a complete product is the sum of the failure rates of its parts. A 5% failure rate product may be comprised of five subassemblies, each with a 1% failure rate. Failure rate is usually not constant with age; a newly-manufactured product may exhibit "infant mortality", a higher failure rate than one that has been in use for a year or more, while an old product may also have a higher failure rate, due to wearout. Another characteristic of a newlydesigned product is multiple failure mechanisms, with 20% of the mechanisms accounting for 80% of the total failures. (The Pareto principle) A mature design will usually have a more equal distribution of number of failures versus individual failure mechanisms . The obvious consequence of both of these characteristics is that you should expect a newly-designed, newly-manufactured product to have a high initial failure rate, with a variety of failure modes. To uncover and eliminate these will probably require several E-A-C-V (Evaluate-Analyze-Correct-Verify) cycles, and a variety of stresses.
Reference: Handbook of Reliability Engineering & Management, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996, pp. 12.8 & 26.14. 7.0 Documentation All tests should be documented using the test report forms contained in Appendix D. These forms are also available on the HP internet Web site, or from the HP entity you are working with (reference PPO Order part # 5964-8564). Any additional documentation is also encouraged such as test photos, data printout, package component drawings, material specifications, samples, and any other pertinent information. The test report will be created by or provided to the responsible Packaging Engineer of that product line or OEM product. The responsible Packaging Engineer should maintain all test documentation for the life or transfer of the product. It is important to maintain all test documentation in order to identify weaknesses at various test levels, comparisons with field damage, comparison with external test standards, provide customers and HP sales force with specific test information, and support any ISO 9000 requirements. 8.0 Test Procedures

8.0.1 Specimen Preparation

(1) Representative. The shipping unit (i.e., product and package) should be mechanically, cosmetically, and functionally representative of final production units. (2) Operating Mode. Product is powered off during all tests. (3) Configuration. Shipping unit should be configured as intended for shipment. The product should incorporate any hold-down or locking devices that will be used during shipment. The shipping unit should include all components (i.e., miscellaneous kits, manuals, etc.) representative of final shipping configuration. (Note: optional configuration would be without lock-down devices.)

(4) Systems Considerations. If the product will be shipped as an individual unit, as well as part of a larger product in which it is a subsystem, such as a bulk pack or a palletized load, then both configurations of shipping units should be tested. 8.0.2 Optional Tests (1) Recommended vs. Optional Tests. Recommended tests are encouraged to be used in the final validation of a package design. Optional tests can be used for additional validation of a package design at the discretion of the Packaging Engineer depending on the needs of the product or distribution system.

No. 8.1.1 8.1.2 8.2 8.3.1 8.3.2 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9 8.10. 8.11 8.12 8.13

Test Name Recommended/Optional Random Vibration Recommended Swept Sine Recommended Free Fall Impact Recommended Compression Recommended Pallet Marshaling Optional Stability Optional Tipover Optional Layover Optional Strapping Optional Rolling Impact Optional Ramp Clearance Optional Humidity/Temperature Storage Recommended Slip Sheet Tab Optional Field Shipment Optional Rain Optional

Table 7.1 Summary of Recommended & Optional Tests 8.0.3 Repeatability (1) A "good" test method is one which produces high repeatability, or precision, between test results obtained under similar conditions. Conducting many like tests in one laboratory, or between similarly equipped laboratories, will provide valuable information as to the kinds of variability to be expected. The difference between two test results will ideally be within 95% repeatability limits. The shipping unit, test conditions, criteria, and documentation, should be such that repeat tests will produce consistent results for the life of the product.

8.1 Vibration The purpose of these tests is to ensure that the package will protect the product against mechanical vibration damage during normal worldwide distribution. The random vibration test is recommended for all shipping unit types. Random vibration testing is useful for causing high levels of stress to a product in a short period of time and allows for pass-fail criteria. The swept sine vibration test is also recommended for all shipping units. Swept sine testing can also act as a stress test, but is particularly useful in determining the resonance point, or natural frequency, of a packaged product or pallet load. The following outlines the test procedures for each. 8.1.1 Random Vibration Test - Recommended

Test rationale: Random vibration testing is performed in an attempt to mimic the combination of overlying vibration frequencies that occur simultaneously in transportation. Shaping the power spectral density (PSD) envelope allows for increased stress at the dominant forcing frequency ranges found within each mode of transport. This is an excellent stress test, allowing one to increase input levels until damage occurs. Ideally, each product Division will eventually discover the level

of random vibration best suited for its particular products and distribution system by replicating the vibration related damages found most often within distribution. Stepping above this minimum level of input then causes damages not usually found. This process of deciding the correct input establishes minimum base lines for all future products to survive. At the same time, it should be understood that as distribution systems change, so may the necessary input levels of vibration testing. Random vibration testing is a pass-fail test. Though it will indicate the weakest design link of a product relative to vibration input, the test will not provide specific information, such as the natural frequency of the failed component or package. Swept sine testing will be used for that purpose. Refer to Section 3 for more information.
(1) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-4728 procedure 10.1.1, or IEC 68-2-34. (2) Test Axes. Test all of the package's axes potentially subject to vertical transportation vibration. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product. A performance test of the product prior to testing is recommended. (4) Mounting. For Type 1 products attach the shipping unit to the vibration table in a manner that will prevent the specimen from leaving the test surface during vibration. For Types 2 and 3 shipping units, restrain horizontal motion without vertical hold-down. (5) Random Vibration Test. a. Deviation from the PSD test level should not exceed the following at any point:

+ 3dB for small units + 6 dB for large units

b. Deviation from the overall Grms level should not exceed + 5%. c. Test each shipping axis for 30 minutes. d. All tests should start at least 6dB below full test level and be gradually increased in one or more subsequent steps to the full test level. This process allows for electronic controllers to properly equalize prior to full force testing. Note: Total elapsed time to reach the full test level should not exceed 3 minutes and should not be considered part of the full test level time. e. Subject the shipping unit to the random vibration spectrum as specified below:

Hz

PSD, g2/Hz 2 0.01 7 0.01 11 0.001 12 0.005 20 0.005 54 0.001 55 0.0025 70 0.0025 200 0.0001 Area Under Log/Log Curve 0.29505 RMS G 0.543185 Peak G 1.6295

Table 7.2

Figure 7.5
(6) Monitor and Record. Note: although it is possible to identify the natural frequency of spring-mass systems by monitoring the system (i.e., product on a cushion) while conducting random vibration testing, some spring mass systems are better suited for this than others. It is recommended that sine sweep be used for identifying natural frequencies accurately. There is no need to monitor the product with an accelerometer during random vibration testing. Record data on Package Performance Report Form. (7) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product, and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. (8) Repeat steps (3) through (6) for each required test axis. 8.1.2 Swept Sine (Resonance Search and Dwell) - Recommended

Test rationale: Swept sine testing is an excellent method to establish resonance points of spring-mass systems. Comparing the natural frequencies of packages and products with the known dominant forcing frequencies found within each mode of transport allows the designer to know how much risk there is to exposure to resonance conditions. Dwelling upon a package resonance point for some period of time allows for intensive stress testing of that particular spring mass system. Of course, a complex product will probably have many different natural frequencies, so this type of test does not stress all the different components at the same time, the way random vibration testing does. Due to the focused vibration input causing resonance buildup, high levels of stress to the test subject can occur in a short period of time. Comparing the natural frequency of the package to the natural frequencies found within the product's components versus the dominant forcing frequencies found in trucks allows the designer to determine if a "stacked resonance" condition exists, where the input forcing frequencies match package and product natural frequencies. Such a condition, especially under 20 Hz, has been known to cause damages to a variety of products.
(1) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-999 (Method B or C for Type 3) or ISO 8318 (2) Test Axes. Test all axes potentially subject to vertical transportation vibration. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product. Conduct a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Mounting. For Type 1 & 2 products, attach the shipping unit to the vibration table in a manner that will prevent the specimen from leaving the test surface during vibration. For Type 3 shipping units, restrain horizontal motion without vertical hold-down. (5) Resonance Search. Sweep the frequency range from 3 to 100 to 3 Hz, using logarithmic sweep rate of 1.0 octave per minute, + 0.5 Hz. Note: This is a fast sweep rate and may cause disparate values when sweeping up vs. down due to hysteresis.

The resonance point is usually midway between the two values found. The resonance point of a package may change slightly during testing due to fatigue. The test operator should strive to adjust the input forcing frequency as needed to maintain maximum vibration response from the test specimen. Maintain constant acceleration of 0.5 g (zero to peak) throughout the frequency sweep. (6) Monitor and Record. Monitor the product for the maximum package/product system resonance. Use a stroboscope, sensors, visual or other means as applicable to determine this resonance. If necessary, the frequency sweep may be interrupted for short time periods to properly identify this resonance. Record the frequency and transmissibility of the major resonance (if accelerometers are used) on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. Note: For Types 1 and 2 shipping units, the major resonance is at the natural frequency of the cushion or packaging medium loaded by the product. Type 3 units may exhibit more than one resonance point due to layering of products, where the top layer of products may well have a different natural frequency than the bottom layer due to the differences in the mass to spring ratio for each layer. (7) Resonance Dwell. A dwell time of 15 minutes at 0.5 g (zero to peak) at each of the four lowest resonant frequencies found between 3 Hz to 100 Hz. (8) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Inspect and record any product and/or unacceptable package on the appropriate test report form inAppendix D. (9) Repeat steps (3) through (8) for each required test axis. Type 1 products must be tested in all three axes. Note: If there are significant differences between the cushioning or support on a pair of opposite faces, both directions should be tested. For example, there may be an accessory tray on the top but not on the bottom, so the product should be tested on both faces, not just one of them. 8.2 Free Fall Impact - Recommended Test rationale: The purpose of this test is to evaluate the ability of a packaged product to withstand a sudden shock similar to that which might be found from a free fall drop within the distribution system. Conducting the tests upon a steel covered, concrete mass is meant to assure that no shock is absorbed by the floor surface, thus assuring that the least height drop can be used to attain the highest possible shock load. Limitations of this type of test are two fold: 1.) it is difficult to perfectly repeat free fall drops, and 2.) it is not possible to measure the input shock force to the exterior package, only the response. Repeatability is questionable since the packaged product cannot be guided to hit perfectly flat (or on a corner or edge) on each successive drop. Although, attempting to measure response can be difficult. Monitoring shock response of a cushioned product provides valuable information to the designer. The most important point to remember is this: final package qualification is only dependent upon pass-fail criteria, not a specific G-level. Please refer to Section 3 for a more complete discussion on free fall drop testing rationale. Test Type 1 shipping units according to paragraph 8.2.1 and Type 2 and 3 units according to paragraph 8.2.2. 8.2.1 Type 1 Shipping Unit Impact Test. (1) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-5276, or ISO 2248. (2) Each package tested should be subjected to a series of drops. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product. Conduct a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Impact Test. a. Using a conventional drop test machine or other apparatus, perform the impacts from the following drop heights (Note: drop tests must be performed onto a non-yielding stiff surface with a mass not less than 50 times the mass of the load being tested): Recommended

Packaged Weight 0 < 10 lb. (0 < 4.536 kg) 10 < 25 lb. (4.536 < 11.34 kg) 25 < 60 lb. (11.34 < 27.216 kg) 60 < 90 lb. (27.216 < 40.824 kg) 90 < 150 lb. (40.824 < 68.04 kg)
Table 7.3

Drop Height 42" (107 cm) 36" (92 cm) 30" (76 cm) 24" (61 cm) 18" (46 cm)

The ranges of weights and drop heights stated above have changed in comparison to the past HP test specifications. These changes were made for a variety of reasons, including: the experience of damages to certain HP products in the distribution system; comparing HP's test specifications to those of competitors; and a review of research on the subject. Also, many more of HP's products are now being manufactured at high volumes and are destined for multiple handling of individual units through a retail distribution system that spans the globe. The highest volume products are often those in the most highly competitive markets, such as personal computers and printers. These competitive markets require HP to minimize packaging and logistics costs while at the same time minimizing damages. These new higher level standards are believed to be appropriate for assuring minimum overall cost to HP.

Note: 1. Shipping units over 150 lb. (68.0 kg) should be palletized/slip sheeted and tested in accordance to paragraph 8.2.2. 2. Products shipped through express and small package environments (for example, overnight air courier, etc.) may be subjected to shock levels that exceed this test. A drop height of 36" (91.4 cm) or greater is recommended in these cases. Optional - drop height may be increased or decreased based on known shipping environments. 3. Best practice note: Testing to failure allows the designer to understand the margin of safety and to define the weakest aspects of product and package design relative to mechanical shock. It is highly recommended to conduct this type of testing. b. Perform in the following sequence:

Recommended Minimum Recommended Best Practice

1 Product Bottom Face 2 Product Top Face 3 Product Front Face 4 Product Rear Face 5 Product Right Side 6 Product Left Side 7 Bottom Package Corner 1 8 Bottom Package Corner 2 9 Bottom Package Corner 3 10 Bottom Package Corner 4 11 Top Package Corner 5 12 Top Package Corner 6 13 Top Package Corner 7 14 Top Package Corner 8 All Faces All Corners All Edges

Note: Specific sequence of drops 7-14 is not critical as long as all four bottom and top package corners are tested. If six packages are tested then test all four bottom corners on the 1st, 3rd, & 5th packages and all four top corners on the 2nd, 4th, & 6th packages. Alternatively, all 6 faces (no corners) can be tested on the 1st, 3rd, and 5th packages, and all 8 corners (no faces) on the 2nd, 4th and 6th packages. Note: 1. A smaller package which can be individually handled and sent through the distribution system in non-unitized form probably has just as much chance to experience a drop on a top corner of the box as it does a bottom corner. Therefore, it would seem reasonable to test every face, edge and corner of a packaged product to understand how well it may be able to survive rough handling. 2. Experience has demonstrated the importance of using a random order dropping sequence, both within each of the three categories (faces, edges, corners), and in the order of the categories themselves. This random order drop sequencing has caught several problems which otherwise would not have been found. For example, 10 brand new products must survive 26 drops (every face, edge, and corner), from 36" (91.4 cm)with no damages. 3. Though it is recommended to test every face, edge and corner of a packaged product, it is understood that no product will ever receive this kind of abuse in distribution. Therefore, it is perfectly allowable to change out the cushioning and box some number of times through testing. At the engineer's discretion, the product may also want to be changed out. For instance, use four sets of cushioning per product: one set for faces, one set for corners, one set for the first six edges, and then one more set for the last six edges. Products packed in resilient foam may not need to use this many sets of new packaging, but non resilient packaging material, such as expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam cannot reasonably survive such abuse. (7) Monitor and Record (Optional). Monitor and record on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D, the approximate filtered acceleration and pulse duration that the product experienced during impacts. These quantities should be measured by an accelerometer located so as to measure shock transmitted by or through the package/cushion. Caution should be taken not to measure shock response caused by a compliant component or sub-assembly. Monitoring shock response is far more important during package development than in qualification testing. . Another approach would be to generate the shock response spectrum (SRS) for each drop and attach this information to the test report. Note: recorded shock pulse should not be the criteria for pass vs. fail for qualification testing. Product functionality and customer acceptance are the primary concerns. A customer does not care what the shock level through a package is, only whether or not the unit appears acceptable and functions as promised. (8) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical or visual evaluation of the shipping container and the product. It is recommended that a performance test of the product be conducted too. This can be done between each drop or at the conclusion of the drop series. Record the nature of any damage on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.2.2 Types 2 and 3 Shipping Unit Impact Test 8.2.2.1 Palletized and/or Crated Loads. Test rationale: Unitized loads and large crates experience a variety of shock inputs throughout the distribution system. Loading ocean containers onto ships and flat cars with overhead cranes often produces impact shocks, both flat and angular. Fork lift

drivers carrying loads quickly across docks and warehouses see impacts from rough concrete, expansion joints at dock doors, and crossing door thresholds. These kind of inputs are virtually impossible to control. These workers are usually measured by how fast they can complete tasks. Quality of the product is secondary, mostly because damages are hidden and will never be directly related to some kind of poor handling somewhere within distribution. If the damage is caught and blame can be placed upon a specific freight forwarder, the money recouped is often just a very small percentage of the actual value of the product (claims are paid on a per pound (kilo) basis...product value has little to do with remuneration). Through observation of the distribution system, and in concert with other shipping test standards, the following tests are appropriate to assure both pallet quality and product/package integrity. As is true for all the tests found in this test manual, more severe testing may be necessary for the specific distribution system that a particular product may experience. For instance, one product had a history of little or no damage during distribution. This product then began selling in Aisa and there was a dramatic increase in the level of damages. Similar stories can be found about products being newly introduced into a variety of developing countries, where roads are rough and material handling techniques unrefined. It is becoming apparent that a higher degree of packaging ruggedness may be necessary for such distribution. It will be incumbent upon each product line then to decide the degree of package protection and whether or not to pack all products for the very most difficult of circumstances, or to have different levels of packaging for the different final destinations of that product. (1) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-1083 section 10.1.1 Method A, ISO 10531 section 7.2.1, or IEC 68-2-31 section 3.2.1. (2) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (3) Impact Tests (Note: all of the following tests must be performed onto a non-yielding stiff surface with a mass not less than 50 times the mass of the load being tested): a. Rotational flat drop, one onto each of the four edges (recommended). Place the shipping unit in its upright position (i.e., pallet on floor). Using the tips of a fork lift truck, or some other type of lift mechanism, raise one edge of the load off the ground while the opposite edge remains on the ground. Raise the edge 9" (22.9 cm) off the ground, then release as quickly as possible to allow a free fall. Repeat the test on all four sides of the load. Apply proper safety precautions when performing this test. Please see paragraph 8.4 of this Section for further information.

Figure 7.6 b. Rotational edge drop, one onto each of the four edges (optional). Place the shipping unit in its upright position (i.e., pallet on floor). Raise the edge opposite the impact edge onto a nominal 4 by 4 inch (10.4 by 10.4 cm) timber. Raise the impact edge to 6" (15.2 cm) above the floor, or a height achievable without tipping over (whichever is less), and release to fall freely on a hard, solid surface. Repeat for all four edges. Apply proper safety precautions when performing this test. Please see paragraph 8.4 of this Section for further information.

Figure 7.7 Note: For all shipping units, provisions must be made to prevent the shipping unit from tipping over after impact. (4) Monitor and Record - Optional. It is not recommended to attempt to load an accelerometer into Type 3 products for this testing since each individual product would exhibit a different shock load than the one next to it. Overall observation of the effects of the test must be recorded. For Type 2 products it is plausible to monitor and record on the appropriate test report form

in Appendix D, the approximate filtered acceleration and pulse duration of the shock that the product experienced during impacts. These quantities should be measured by an accelerometer located so as to measure shock transmitted by or through the package/cushion. Caution should be taken not to measure shock response caused by a compliant component or sub-assembly. The accelerometer location might be an internal rigid edge or corner position of the product housing, or the product chassis if rigid relative to the housing. Another approach would be to generate the shock response spectrum (SRS) for each drop and attach this information to the test report. Note: G level should not be the criteria for whether or not the product is considered to have passed or failed. Rather, the criteria should be acceptability to the final customer: does the product look and function as it was intended?. (5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product, and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.2.2.2 Slip Sheeted Loads. Test rationale: Many of the reasons for conducting the following tests are the same as those stated above in the test rationale for palletized and crated products, paragraph 8.2.2.1. However, some additional tests needed to be added here due to the unique characteristics of slip sheets and the loads placed upon them. (1) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product, and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (2) Impact Tests (note: all of the following tests must be performed onto a non-yielding stiff surface with a mass not less than 50 times the mass of the load being tested). a. Drop Tests (recommended): Place the slip sheeted shipping unit on to a pallet and conduct tests for pallet loads. Refer to 8.2.2.1., a. and b. (3) Flexure Test. (recommended) Perform one flexure test for each side of a load that has a slip sheet tab protruding from it. This test is meant to verify the stability and appropriateness of the unitization methodology of the load when on a slip sheet. It will also provide some information on the strength of the slip sheet material and the tab design, through test 8.11 tab testing determines functional slip sheet strength. a. With a properly equipped slip sheet push/pull lift truck, have the front of the platen(s) touching the floor and the rear of the platen(s) raised 5 inches (12.7 cm). Load and unload the slip sheeted shipping unit completely onto the platens and then pick the load up off the floor. Again place the platen tips down to the floor, with the rear of the platens raised 5" (12.7 cm) off the floor and push the load onto the floor. Repeat this test for each side of the load that is liable to be handled by a push/pull truck.

Figure 7.8 (4) Material tests for the actual slip sheet. It is recommended that drawings of slip sheets state specific minimum physical characteristics beyond geometry and size tolerances. Characteristics such as machine and cross machine direction, tensile strength, caliper, and specific information as to the material to be used (i.e., amount of recycled content, the number of plies, the type of glue to be used between plies, the basis weight of each paper ply, and whether or not an anti-slip coating is applied) should all be included on the drawing. (5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product, and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. For bulk pack designs, pay particular attention to the capability of the bulk pack trays to retain products fully as the load undulates in the flexure test. 8.3 Compression The purpose of this test is to ensure the packaged product will endure compressive loading during normal world-wide warehousing and distribution. The static compression test is recommended for all shipping unit types. It must be determined if only the packaging or the package/product combination are to support the compressive load. It is highly recommended that purchased boxes be assigned a minimum compression strength performance level specification. All test units must always exhibit at least this minimum level of strength. Providing performance level specifications for an entire box (as opposed to the material used to make the box) allows for a quick method to verify both the material strength and manufacturing quality. Please refer to Appendix B "HP Compression Test Method and Design Information". The following outlines the test procedures. 8.3.1 Compression Test - Recommended (1) Perform in accordance with HP Compression Test Method A-5951-1742-1 (Appendix B), or ASTM D642 or ISO 12048. (2) Floating platen compression test equipment is recommended for all testing. Floating platen machines find the weakest vertical edge of a box, while fixed platen testing measures the strongest

edge. Be aware that many corrugated manufacturers only test with a fixed platen, thereby providing a false image of when boxes might actually start collapsing under load. If there are no alternatives to using a fixed platen machine, the test level should be increased by 10 - 20 % over the floating platen level. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Test Requirements a. Proper testing methodology requires the boxes to first be completely dried out and then allowed to regain the optimum amount of moisture content (about 8%) by exposing them to laboratory conditions of 72F (23C) and 50% relative humidity for 24 hours. Large corrugated manufacturers, along with independent testing labs, often have the proper facilities to conduct these tests. It is recommended that the box maker be required to provide on-going documentation that boxes are being made to specification. b. Compressive forces to be taken to container failure. Failure can be defined in a number of ways. The two quantitative factors being measured in compression testing are load (lb. or kg) and deflection (in or mm). Following are parameters of compression failure which should all be weighed during testing:

The peak load (lb. or kg) and the amount of deflection (in or mm) at that peak load. The amount of load at 0.5 in (12.7 mm) deflection. If desired, the amount of deflection allowable may be calculated to be some percentage of the overall height of the test specimen. If the package becomes cosmetically unacceptable, or there is damage to the product or its accessories, prior to the peak load or deflection described above, it is considered failure.
c. Compressive load versus deflection should be recorded on an X-Y plot. d. Test ten replicate boxes. These boxes should be production run samples since hand made boxes commonly exhibit greater compression strength. e. Pre-load the package under test to the following loads. These preloads are needed to crush the flap scorelines and allow the body of the box to support the load. The zero point begins after the preload. Be sure that outside laboratories conduct the test accordingly and report the results correctly. 50 pounds force (222 N) - Single wall 100 pounds force (445 N) - Double wall 500 pounds force (2,225 N) - Triple wall (5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. Note: Compression testing can also be done to unitized loads or bare and packaged products. 8.3.2 Pallet Marshaling- Optional

Test rationale: Unitized loads and large containerized products experience horizontal impacts during staging operations before and after trailer unloading. This staging operation is generally called marshaling. This activity occurs by fork truck and powered pallet jack operators who are positioning freight prior to loading trucks or just arranging freight in storage positions in the warehouse. Marshaling impacts may cause damage to the product or package. A study (see note) measured impact shock duration's for fork truck marshaling at 5 ms and impact velocity ranges averaging 1 ft/s (.3 m/s) levels to severe conditions of up to 4 ft/s (1.2 m/s). Impact velocity varies with the type of equipment from walking hand trucks to seated drive fork trucks.
(1) All Type 2 and Type 3 products should be tested (2) Perform in accordance with ASTM 4003 (3) Physical Evaluation: Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping packaging and the product(s) and a performance test of the product prior to the marshaling test. (4) Record the weight of the test specimen. Calculate the ratio (R) of weight between the test specimen (TS) and 5,000 lb. (2,268 kg) the average weight of a fork truck. The peak acceleration (Gp) will be determined by dividing 1 + R into the value 48.

Gp =

48 ---------------1+R

R=

TS --------5000

(5) Impact Tests: Place the test specimen on the test carriage at the center position of the specimen mounting surface with the

face or edge that is to receive the impact firmly positioned against the bulkhead. The test carriage should be impacted with a peak acceleration determined in step 4 above at a duration of 5 ms. Test each axis and vertical edge. (6) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping packaging and the product(s) and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. Note: Taken from Rodriquez, Singh, Burgess, "Study of Lateral Shocks Observed During Fork Truck and Pallet Jack Operations for the Handling of Palletized Loads." Packaging Technology and Science, Vol 7-1994, pp 205-211. 8.4 Stability Test - Optional (1) All Type 2 and Type 3 products should be tested in their shipping orientation. (2) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-1083 section 11. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Test Requirements a. The packaged product must have a center of gravity such that the unit can be tipped 22.5 degrees from the normal shipping orientation, onto each of the four bottom edges. The unit should not want to tipover on its own from this point.

Figure 7.9 b. If the package cannot meet this requirement, the product should be subjected to a Tip Over Test (paragraph 8.5) in any orientation in which it does not meet this requirement Note: Apply proper safety precautions when conducting this test. Large, heavy units can become unmanageable when they exceed their stable center of gravity alignment. Loose chains, slings, or other similar restraints may be positioned around the load to prevent a complete tipover and impact that could result in personal injury. Such restraints should not be used as an alternative to conducting the test in an area large enough to ensure operator safety. (5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.5 Tipover Test - Optional (1) Packages which do not meet the stability requirements (paragraph 8.4) should be subjected to this test. This test may also be used to investigate the performance of packages which are tall in relation to their base dimensions. It is also applicable to any Type 2 package which may realistically be shipped or stored on its ends or sides. (2) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-1083 section 12, ISO 8768, or IEC 68-2-31 section 3.2.3. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Test Requirements a. The package shall be subjected to one (1) rotational flat drop, from the equilibrium point, on each flat side of the container which did not meet the Stability Test requirements. (5) On completion of the test sequence, open the case or crate and examine the condition of the contents. (6) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.6 Layover Test - Optional (1) This test is designed to determine if a container and the contained product can be laid on their side without damage resulting to the product or to the package. This test is not intended to determine if the package can be dropped or shipped in the non base down orientations. (2) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (3) Test Requirements a. The package shall be laid down onto a flat surface one time on each of the normally vertical surfaces of the package. The package must remain intact, and there can be no damage to the product after thirty minutes. (4) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.7 Strapping Test - Optional (1) This test is designed to determine whether the product and/or package will withstand the strapping forces that are expected in transportation. Strapping is typically used to secure product within a truck during shipment. (2) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (3) Test Requirements

a. The product as packaged for shipment must withstand, without any permanent mechanical deformation, the application of the following strapping conditions: - Strap width: 2 inches (51 mm) - Strap tension: 250 pounds (1,112 N) - Test Duration: 1 hour - Strap Configuration: encircle product - Quantity of straps: two per product - Strap Locations:

for products over 58 inches (147 cm) tall: one strap 18 one 54 inches inches (46 cm) from the floor (137 cm) from the floor from the floor of the unit

for products under 58 (147 cm) inches tall: one strap 18 (46 cm) inches one strap 4 inches (10 cm) down from the top

Figure 7.10 (4) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.8 Rolling Impact Test - Optional (1) This test is conducted to determine castered or wheeled product's ability to withstand horizontal impacts against typical obstacles in distribution. (2) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product, and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (3) Test Requirements a. The product as packaged for shipment must withstand, without any permanent mechanical product deformation, the following specified threshold impacts: Threshold: product. Material: steel Impact Surface: vertical Impacts: Three impacts each vertical edge Three impacts each vertical face Impact rate of 3.28 feet/second (1 m/s) Height: 4 inches (10.2 cm) Length: at least as long as the longest impact surface of the

Figure 7.11 (4) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.9 Ramp Clearance Test - Optional (1) This test is designed to determine whether a non-palletized, castered or wheeled product or transit case (crate on wheels) can be rolled up a typical ramp in the distribution and customer facilities without bottoming out or being damaged. (2) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation and performance test of the product prior to testing. (3) Test Requirements a. The product must be capable of being rolled up a ramp with a 17 degree incline, from, and onto a flat, level surface. The bottom of the unit or package shall not contact the ramp or floor at any point. The ramp must be as long or longer than the distance between the casters or wheels.

Figure 7.12 (4) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.10 Humidity/Temperature Storage Test - Recommended (1) This test is designed to determine whether the packaged product can survive extreme humidity and temperature distribution environments without being damaged. This test should be used when environmental extremes are expected to affect the reliability of the product and/or package. In addition, this test can be used to condition the product and packaging material prior to other tests called out in this section. For instance, conducting random vibration testing immediately upon removal from the super soak test have sometimes replicated damages found within distribution. (2) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-4332 or ISO 2233 part II (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Test Requirements a. At least three (packaged) products, Types 1, 2 or 3, should be exposed to atmosphere in table 7.4.

Environment (24 hour test) Low temperature storage High temperature storage Super soak
Table 7.4

Temperature (+/-1) -40F (40C) 140F (60C)

Relative Humidity (+/-5%)

Begin test by drying out chamber at 86F(30C), 5% RH until stable, then reduce temp to -40F (-40C), uncontrolled RH 5% RH or uncontrolled

140F (60C)

90% RH

(5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.11 Slip Sheet Tab Testing - Optional (1) This test is designed to determine whether the slip sheet tabs can survive repeated handling throughout the distribution system without being damaged. (2) Perform in accordance with ASTM 1083 section 9.4.2 with an experienced push/pull operator. (3) Test Requirements a. The slip sheet tabs must be capable of being handled 10 distinct times while the slip sheet is fully loaded with product. A dummy load is allowable if it is the same weight and horizontal surface area as the product load. b. Each handling sequence requires the slip sheet tab to be gripped by the gripper, load to be pulled completely onto the push-pull platens, platens lifted off the ground, gripper released from the tab, platens lowered to the ground, and the load pushed onto the floor. This needs to be repeated 10 times to each tab. Slip sheet damage must be limited to the extent that an operator must still be able to grab the tab and move the load onto the platens on final handling. (4) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the slip sheet. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.12 Field Shipment Testing - Optional (1) This test is designed to determine whether a new packaged product can survive in the distribution environment without being damaged. (Caution: The results obtained from limited field shipment testing may not be statistically significant in assuring damage free distribution of products in full production.) (2) This test should supplement, not supersede, the other recommended tests in this section. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Test Requirements a. Ship several samples of the package design (single, palletized, and/or bulk) to other locations, using various transportation modes, and have the local Packaging Engineer evaluate (or go see for yourself) and document the condition of the packaged product upon arrival. b. Have remote locations repack the product in its original packaging (you should provide repacking instructions or procedures) and return via the desired transportation mode. (5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D. 8.13 Rain Test - Optional (1) This test is designed to determine whether the packaged product can withstand rain without being damaged. This test should be used when environmental extremes are expected to affect the reliability of the product and/or package. It is hoped that no product will be left out in the rain. Unfortunately, many instances of such occurrences have been reported in the past, especially in developing countries. The following test is meant to aid in the assessment of packaging designs to withstand such harsh conditions. (2) Perform in accordance with ASTM D-951, ISO 2875, or IEC 68-2-18 section 4.2 method Ra 1. (3) Physical Evaluation. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product prior to testing. (4) Test Requirements a. Test at least three containers, closed and sealed as for shipment. For the purposes of checking leakage alone, the containers may be tested empty. b. Spray the containers, in normal stacking position, for 1 hour at one of the following intensities:

- High Intensity, 4 + 1 in./hr (100 + 25 mm/h) This intensity is useful to simulate tropical or subtropical conditions. - Medium Intensity, 2 + 1/2 in./hr (50 + 10 mm/h) This intensity is useful to simulate temperate zone or protected storage conditions. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) uses this intensity for package testing.

- Low Intensity, 1 + 1/2 in./hr (25 + 10 mm/h) This intensity is useful to simulate protected storage conditions where incidental exposure to weather may occur during loading and unloading from covered transport into the covered storage.
c. The packaged product should be examined to determine if water leakage occurred resulting in damage and/or if it is still capable of providing physical protection. (5) Evaluate and Record. Conduct a physical evaluation of the shipping container and the product and a performance test of the product. Record the nature of any damage that occurs on the appropriate test report form in Appendix D.

test rationale & meaning

1.0 Introduction

Packaging Test Requirements

This section will explain the rationale for the tests and limits called out in section 4. Each test type will have the following items: Rationale for the test What happens in the real world What the test is trying to simulate Why the test should be conducted Test compared to real events

Are the test levels higher Are the tests accelerated

Comparison of test results to real events - history

2.0 Rationale for Tests 2.1 Random Vibration - Recommended Rationale for the test: All packaged products will encounter some kind of transportation and handling, and therefore will be exposed to some levels of random vibration. Products may become damaged due to resonant frequency vibration excitation of spring/mass components, fatigue of velocity dependent components, and damage to surface parts because of abrasion. Vibration may also separate stacked loads, and cause units to shift and possibly fall off stacks. Most, if not all, vibration experienced in transportation does not consist of perfect sine waves, but of some "random" mixture of frequencies and amplitudes. Random vibration testing can be used to observe the interaction of the internal and external product components, and the packaged product. What happens in the real world: Products shipped by truck, air or rail will experience vibration from several sources, including motors, tires, road surfaces, etc. As the product moves through the distribution channel, the package/product will be exposed to vibration of many different frequencies. This phenomena is evident from a quick survey of transportation environments. The major sources of vibration from truck transport include the suspension, the truck bed frame, tires, and road surface profile. For air, the engines and tires provide the major vibration inputs. Rail cars experience vibration due to suspension, track layouts, and conditions. Generally, all initial sources of vibration are excited at the same time, in

a specified order, based on the source of input (driving over a pothole, for example). Even though the sources and frequencies of vibration are somewhat predictable and known, their combined effect produces a "random" signal, compared to a pure sine wave. It is important to note, however, that there will almost always be several dominant forcing frequency ranges that underlie the random signal, which are always present. In the case of trucks, because of the suspension, wheels and structure, inspection of the random signal will show dominant amplitudes for frequencies in the ranges of 2-7 Hz, 12-20 Hz and 55-70 Hz. Most vibration related damage is caused by these dominant frequencies. What the test is trying to simulate: Random vibration tests attempt to expose the product/package to the same vibration energy envelop that would be found in a truck trailer bed. Power Spectral Density (PSD) plots input frequency and acceleration data into controllers, which drive the base of the vibration table. By testing the packaged product on the vibration table, it is hoped the same inputs found in real world situations are transmitted to the package in the lab. Why the test should be conducted: All products experience vibration during shipping, and therefore the test is necessary. Despite some serious limitations (described later), this is perhaps one of the most useful package tests to perform. Since most transportation vibration occurs randomly, albeit overlaid on top of the dominant frequencies present for the particular mode of transport (see above). The test is useful for uncovering potential weak points in the product, and/or package design, and gives pass/fail feedback for anticipating performance in the distribution channel. Test compared to real events: Random vibration, defined by a PSD plot, is an accelerated test. Since PSD plots are generally constructed from some kind of collected data, the signals inherently have some level of validity; namely, the frequencies and amplitudes for that particular shipment. The PSD plot used to drive the vibration table should reflect higher G2/Hz values near the dominant frequencies for a particular transport mode. However, it is important to keep in mind the following limitations: 1. Exclusion of spikes. PSD plots are calculated using RMS Gs (Root Mean Squared) data, therefore acceleration peaks are averaged out of the signal (such as the shock due to a pothole). Some RV controllers are able to add these spikes, if so desired. 2. Editing the original signal. Since random vibration testing is an accelerated test, the quiet parts of the original captured signal are removed. This leaves only the more severe levels of shock, which is different than what was actually experienced. It is difficult to decide what to keep and what to remove, since if you keep quiet parts with lower G levels, the PD (Power Density) decreases in intensity. 3. Random mixing of sine waves. Random vibration controllers do not mix the frequencies in the order they naturally occur. This is because the PSD plot is only an "ingredient list" that tells the controller what frequencies and what amplitudes to include. It does not tell the controller in what order to mix them, it is done

randomly. This is important, because there is a natural order, the various sources of vibration are all excited at the same time (the suspension of a truck, the tires, and the structure are all excited at the same time as they move over a pothole). Since they are excited at the same time, they are all mixed in-phase, not out-of-phase, as the controller mixes them. 4. Test time in the lab versus actual road time. There is no correlation for how much lab testing recreates actual road time. The very nature of how PSD plots are generated excludes any direct or indirect correlation. A common way to overcome this is to allow testing for as long as needed until damage similar to that found in the field is recreated. Based on this, the lab can begin to set minimum pass/fail test parameters for future products. Again, it is up to the Package Engineer to understand that the damage recreated may be coincidental (see item above). Ideally one wants to recreate the same damage with the same inputs. 5. PSD plots have been driven from particular vehicles, roads, and seasons. All three introduce wide variations depending on many variables. A truck traveling in Detroit during the spring time, for example, will experience quite different levels of vibration than a truck traveling over Texas roads in the summer. Standardization therefore appears to be impractical. Picking a "worst-case" PSD plot is necessary when deciding on a common, standardized test method. 2.2 Sine Sweep Vibration (see Container Resonance & Vertical Stack Resonance; ASTM D-999) - Recommended Rationale for the test: Container Resonance: Resonance at a particular frequency may occur for significant periods of time in transport modes, particularly trucks over highways, due to the underlying dominant forcing frequencies from the tires, suspension and truck bed. This test may also be useful to predict scuffing problems on external carton graphics, and other problems related to vibration induced friction. It is difficult to use this test for monitoring the response of internal product components, as some test specifications recommend. (ASTM D-999 does not recommend this test be used for internal component analysis. This test is meant to evaluate the package performance only. Monitoring cushion response is encouraged). Vertical Stack Resonance: This test is useful for determining the presence and effects of resonance in multiple unit stacked loads, and whether or not the strength of containers is sufficient to withstand dynamic loads when stacked. This test can be performed with the stacked loads secured together (stretch wrap, banding, etc.), or loose-load, to simulate LTL (Less than Truck Load) conditions. What happens in the real world & What the test is trying to simulate: Container Resonance: As the vehicle travels, the packaged product also may experience resonance from different vibration sources. Almost always, more than one frequency will be present, which may excite more than one component inside

the product, as well as, or in addition to, the package/product system. The package may experience scuffing and external carton damage, as well as internal packing piece damage due to this vibration. It is very important for the Packaging Engineer to know what data he or she is trying to collect with the container resonance test. If one is trying to monitor components inside the product, a different approach must be taken than if the goal is only to monitor the product/package system, since the product/package may be excited into resonance, while the internal components are not, (or vice versa). It is also very difficult to monitor internal components, since they tend to be small, lightweight, and easily influenced by the weight of an accelerometer. Visual inspection may also be difficult while the product is packaged. Depending on the failure mode, different dwell times are appropriate. Vertical Stack Resonance: Resonance of stacks will almost always occur to some degree, especially in truck trailer beds. It is possible for whole stacks of product to tip over, some may fall off the top of the load, or packages may bounce and bump into each other. Stretch wrapping, banding or loose load configurations will contribute to the propensity of the stack to resonate at some particular frequency, as well as product/package weight and material combination. The resonance stack test is useful to predict performance. Why the test should be conducted: These two tests should be used to uncover any potential product/package weaknesses. The vertical stack resonance test is also useful for monitoring stacked product behavior for resonance and/or stability problems. Finally, the tests can be useful for assessing potential damage from vibration induced abrasion. Test compared to real events: The fundamental problem with dwelling at a particular frequency is that it does not account for real life variations found in vibration inputs. In other words, real vibration inputs are made up of more than one frequency input at the same time. This means dwelling at one particular frequency can be too harsh physically, or too weak, qualitatively. The test can be too harsh physically, because the product/package may not dwell on one particular frequency for any appreciable time. Recall that most real vibration inputs are not pure sine waves, they are a combination of frequencies. On the other hand, if the natural frequency of a package system falls within one of the three dominant ranges for trucks, the package may in fact be excited for a significant period of time. This could be critical for understanding whether the package/product system could be vulnerable to these frequencies. In some ways, this test can also be considered qualitatively weak. This can happen because dwelling at one frequency will only excite components with the same frequency. In reality, many frequencies and their respective components are excited simultaneously. These separate components (with different natural frequencies) may bang into each other, if in close proximity. This is known as "simultaneous resonance". Dwelling at one frequency may not uncover this "interference" damage potential. Relying on the container resonance test for determining product component damage poses another potential problem. Note that the ASTM D-999 recommends

that the sine dwell test not be used for product component damage. Since it is very difficult to monitor internal product components while the product is packaged. Generally speaking these tests are useful for uncovering frequencies that may induce damage from unsecured stacks, and for assessing the potential damage from vibration-induced friction. In particular, the sine sweep is essential to verify the package/product system does or does not have a natural frequency that matches the dominant frequency ranges found in the trucking or rail, and to a lesser degree air and ship, transport modes. 2.3 Impact Test From Free Fall Drops (ASTM D-775, D-5276, D-1083) Recommended Rationale for the test: a) Type 1 Packages: Manually handled products may be dropped anywhere in the distribution chain. Overnight delivery services handle huge numbers of packages each day, exposing products to shock hazard. Packaging Engineers need a reproducible test to evaluate cushion design changes. The impact test is also necessary to evaluate and qualify product and/or package design changes. Generally speaking, shock poses the greatest threat to product/package integrity. b) Type 2 and 3 Packages: Products in these categories are heavy and usually bulky, requiring mechanical handling. The threat of shock due to free fall is very small, so different testing must be used. These type of packages are usually handled by pushing, sliding, dragging, or tipping when handled manually. Automated movement may drop the product from low heights, or onto one corner or edge as it is set down. In some cases (less than truck load shipments), free fall is a possibility, so some testing may be included. The impact test is also necessary to evaluate and qualify product and/or package design changes. Generally speaking, shock poses a threat to product/package integrity, though for these categories of products or pallet loads, vibration may be the greatest potential enemy. What happens in the real world: a) Type 1 Packages: Manual handling introduces the potential for free fall drops from a variety of heights. Generally, products are carried waist-high as they are transported from one location to another, or as they are pulled off a retail shelf (sometimes products are placed high on retail shelves). Automated machinery used by overnight delivery services use conveyor lines to move products through hubs. Mechanical arms shove the product into different bins, shocking the package and product. The typical conveyor height is about 36 inches (91.4 cm) from the ground, and packages have been known to fall off while being moved along the conveyor. Extreme handling is also common at break-bulk shipment sites, where packages are handled individually to fit into transportation vehicle spaces. Packages shipped by air are notoriously handled roughly, including tosses and tumbles, as well as compression, to fit the awkward cargo area in the airplane's belly. Several studies

have been conducted in recent years to quantify drop heights and frequency of drops in the distribution channels. While conclusions from the studies can be debated, they do suggest individual packages have the potential to be handled roughly, including free fall drops. Packages can also be dropped onto other packages, soft surfaces, and other surface areas that result in non-flat impacts (corner, edges, etc.). As the parameters in the drop environment change, so do the equivalent deceleration levels. Therefore, drop testing conducted in a controlled lab environment (hard surface, flat drops, etc.) may not necessary be experienced in the real world distribution environment. By observation, packages are almost never dropped completely flat on any one face. This is due to a variety of factors, including center of gravity, and friction. This becomes important when setting up tests and interpreting test data, since flat drops usually represent the worst shock to a product, in terms of deceleration values. Real life drops almost always will have rotation, meaning the product will hit the surface on an edge or corner. In this case, damage to the product may occur to outer skins, or plastic parts, and not internal components. Drops for this type of packaged product are random, and so the packaging should protect the product on all faces, edges and corners. Packages may fall onto other packages, the ground, and any number of a variety of surfaces, affecting coefficient of restitution, friction, and hence deceleration and velocity change values. b) Type 2 and 3 Packages: These products are much heavier than Type 1 products, and so require mechanical machinery to be moved. The products are moved in a controlled fashion, so the potential for free-fall drop is minimized. Typically these products cannot, or will not, be unpalletized before reaching the customer. They move through the distribution environment handled by pallet jacks, fork trucks, and other mechanical machinery. There may be shock to the product if, for instance, the forks are set down too quickly on the ground. Sometimes physical structures, such as poles, walls or other products, are used to buttress against while moving and stacking these products. Lateral shocks will be encountered, especially as the fork truck driver loads the vehicle. Even if the product or pallet load is raised to a high height (for pallet stacking, as an example), the product will not generally be in danger of falling off in a free-fall. Extreme damage may result from special situations, such as spearing from forks, hydraulic failure while the product or pallet is suspended in the air, or a broken pallet. As a matter of practicality, packaging cannot be expected to protect against such "disasters", unless previously agreed to by the product line management, for special classes of products. What the test is trying to simulate: Free-fall testing attempts to replicate worse case impacts encountered during normal handling in the distribution channel. Why the test should be conducted: Drop testing, though theoretically repeatable, is not always practically repeatable. Even with mechanical drop test machines there is no assurance of achieving a true flat drop, due in part to package placement on the drop device, friction, etc. The use of nets and other hoisting devices also introduce conditions that are not always repeatable. Despite these limitations, changes to

packaging, even minor, can be evaluated quickly and easily. Drop testing also provides the Engineer with data about cushion performance, as well as the ruggedness of the overall product design. Shock is usually the most severe event occurring, so drop testing provides a means for evaluating package design. While all packages may not experience free-fall drops, this test represents a real-world "worst-case" scenario to which packaging can offer a solution. Test compared to real events: Drop testing is perhaps the most useful, directly correlated, package test that can be performed. Flat drops, although not usually encountered in real-life situations, are fairly reproducible and serve as worst-case scenarios in the lab for acceleration inputs. Corner and edge drops may represent worst case inputs for velocity change damage, such as breaking plastic housing pieces. Useful data can be collected for evaluating package performance, including cushion performance and product shock. Electronic data collection may not always be convenient, or easy to interpret, but visual and functional tests of the unit are simple and straight forward. Drop heights and drop frequency are not easily determined or applied uniformly for different products, so thoughtful consideration must be taken when planning drop testing. Drop testing should be patterned after the Engineer's understanding of the distribution environment, and the expected hazard to be encountered. Some drop test specifications demand limiting deceleration values to 30 G's (or some other G level) or less in order to pass. Although the intention is to limit the shock to the unit, this is not the criteria that should be used. The 30 G limit says nothing about the duration or shape of the input shock pulse. For instance, a 30 G trapezoidal input, with a duration of 20 milliseconds is much more damaging (imparts more energy) than a 30 G sinusoidal input with a duration of 20 milliseconds (see figure 6.1). The criteria that should be used is whether or not there is damage to the unit that makes the unit nonfunctional, or cosmetically unacceptable. Also, when a product does survive drop testing, an effort should be made to then quantify the margin of safety the package provides. For instance, would a product that survived a set of 30 inch (76.2 cm) drops actually be able to survive 48 inch (121.9 cm) drops too? The answer to this question would indicate the amount of possible over packaging being used, assuming the test standard is reasonable to begin with.

Figure 6.1

Finally, there has been much conjecture that free fall drop tests could be simulated on a shock machine by generating the same velocity change on the shock table as the impact velocity for a specific drop height. The perceived advantages are enticing: one could measure the exact input shock to the test specimen, and flat impacts would be absolutely repeatable. However, there can be radically different results between the two tests. The conjecture is that the shock table exhibits a tremendous amount of rebound energy and it couples with the packaged product's cushion system. If a net weren't held over the package, it would be propelled several feet up from the table. In other words, the energy imparted, in this test, to the product is different than during the drop test, where the floor does not shoot upward and cause the unit to rebound several feet. Until more study is done on the efficiency of matching free fall drops to shock machine testing of cushioned products, we would not recommend using the shock machine in place of free fall drop tests. 2.4 Slip Sheeted Loads - Recommended Rationale for the test: Many of the same reasons for conducting tests on slip sheeted loads are the same as for those stated in the rationale for palletized and crated products (Type 2). There are also some additional tests and evaluations due to the unique dynamic conditions slip sheeted loads encounter. What happens in the real world: Slip sheeted loads are handled much the same way as pallet loads, in terms of handling frequency, load stacking, etc. A major difference exists in the dynamic stresses that may be imparted to products on slip sheets, especially products on the top and bottom layer during loading and unloading from the platen. Slip sheet attachment equipment generally requires that the platen be angled from the ground as the slip sheet load is grabbed and pulled onto the platen, causing flexure to the units. The slip sheet loads are also tilted from the horizontal during this movement, much more so than when pallets are handled. Another obvious difference is that there is no solid physical barrier between the ground, or vehicle bed, and the products with slip sheets. This may have implications in areas that have standing water, or some other hazard that a pallet affords some protection against. What the test is trying to simulate: The test uses actual slip sheet equipment, so real dynamic slip sheet handling conditions are expected to be reproduced. Why the test should be conducted: Any product that will be handled on slip sheets should undergo this testing, especially products that may be susceptible to stress and/or flexural damage. Bulk packs shipped on slip sheets should also be tested, to evaluate the physical integrity of the bulk pack material (i.e., foam, corrugated, etc.). Tests compared to real events: Normal handling procedures can be readily reproduced with this test. The test does not necessarily uncover potential damage from unusually rough handling. Specific conditions, such as a combination of high humidity combined with some other factor, may not be readily reproduced, unless the conditions are purposefully tested for.

2.5 Compression Testing - Recommended Rationale for the test: The purpose of this test is to ensure the paper combination and flute type chosen for a specific box will endure compressive loading during normal world-wide warehousing and distribution. What happens in the real world: Boxes are stacked in a variety of ways, in a variety of environmental conditions. The most common ways for boxes to be handled are in pallet loads, and as individual units. Packages must be able to withstand abuse found as the bottom box in a stack in storage or back of a truck, and to a lesser degree the compression forces found in less than truck load shipments. There are four main factors affecting compression strength of a box, in addition to paper selection and flute type: humidity, time, box style, and stacking pattern. Humidity has been shown to be a critical consideration for specifying box strength, simply because paper is a hydroscopic (water absorbing) material. Generally speaking, humid conditions above 50% begin to rapidly deteriorate the compression strength of the box. Cycling humidity and temperatures has also proven to be detrimental to box strength. High humidity may also cause the facings and/or flutes to de-laminate, causing severe problems. Time is also very important, with longer periods of time requiring the box to bear "dead loads", which cause the box to relax and lose strength. Relaxation is the tendency for an object under fixed compression to internally deform to relieve the load on it. Stacking pattern is the third significant factor contributing to box compression strength. A stack of identical boxes aligned perfectly in a vertical column can be stacked much higher than if the boxes are somewhat staggered (out of alignment). Whenever the compression load on a box is not supported by its strongest members, the vertical edges, the strength of the box is compromised. A stack of different sized boxes has the same effect as staggering identical boxes: the compression strength is reduced because the vertical edges are not aligned. Other factors to consider include "localization doors" that may be cut or perforated into sidewalls; kind of printing; added substrates to liners; internal support (such as divider walls or foam), and closure method (tape, staples, glue, etc.). Dynamic compression is also common during distribution, especially for package systems that have a natural frequency falling within one of the three dominant forcing frequency ranges found in the trucking environment. What the test is trying to simulate: The purpose of this test is two-fold. First, it can be used as a quality control check for corrugated shipping containers. In addition, instead of specifying corrugated materials (specs which can be difficult to test), compression strength specifications can be developed and placed onto drawings. Requiring suppliers to conduct compression testing on shipping cartons will provide a method of judging the combined quality of materials and construction of a container. The second purpose of this test is to provide an accurate way of assessing the overall strength of a filled container and determining if the product/package will survive the compression loads expected within distribution. This method can also be used to test loading points of unboxed products, where the

compression load is transmitted to the product via packaging. When the inherent strength characteristics of the product can be harnessed to survive the rigors of distribution, packaging costs can decrease (an example would be some bulk packs). Why the test should be conducted: Almost all products are delivered in corrugated shipping containers, which are expected to not only contain the product, but provide a structure that allows for stacking and storage over a certain period of time. Test compared to real events: There are two important limitations that should be mentioned. The first is deciding whether to use a fixed platen or floating platen during testing. For fixed platen compression testers, the platen remains horizontal and parallel to the base of the box during compression. If the corners of the box have different heights, then the platen will contact the highest corner of the box first. This corner then takes the bulk of the load until the platen contacts the next highest corner, and so on. If the platen contacts all four corners before the box fails, then the compression strength so obtained represents a reasonable estimate of the actual dead load it could support from other boxes on top of it. One way to overcome this limitation is to use the floating platen, which swivels to automatically adjust its position until it contacts at least three points on the box before it applies any load. This simulates actual loading by other boxes much more accurately because it is testing the weakest vertical edges. This test does not propose to simulate dynamic compression environments. 2.6 Pallet Marshaling - Optional Rationale for the test: Unitized loads and large containerized products experience horizontal impacts from typical mechanical handling, such as fork trucks and pallet jacks. Loads must keep their structural integrity, and pallets must remain functional after such impacts. What happens in the real world: Typical activity during loading/unloading of trailers and warehouse operations include moving loads with motorized and non-motorized fork trucks and pallet jacks. Operators must handle and arrange these loads for storage, staging, loading and unloading from vehicles. As the fork truck or pallet jack contacts the load, horizontal impacts are imparted, which may cause damage to the product(s) and/or the pallet. Typically the fork truck or pallet jack is traveling at some speed as it makes contact with the load. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to simulate warehouse handling conditions for unitized and large containerized products, specifically the impacts encountered as material handling equipment contacts the loads. Why the test should be conducted: Unitized loads and large containerized products will be handled with mechanical material handling equipment, and will be subject to horizontal impacts.

Test compared to real events: In general this test simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter, but results will generally be accurate for the environments tested. 2.7 Stability Test - Optional Rationale for the test: Some Type 2 and Type 3 products and pallet loads may be awkward in size and weight when transported, or moved when in small corridors. This test is used to evaluate the tendency for these kind of products to tip over. What happens in the real world: Typical handling procedures, including transport up and down ramps, slip sheet handling, and mechanical handling, may tilt the product to such a degree that the unit becomes unstable. Stacking heights in warehouses may also reach points where the loads become unstable, with box strength, time and humidity playing roles in stability. Some products may also be subjected to manual handling forces, such as a worker trying to push or pull the product to a new location. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to simulate the propensity of a package to tip over in normal handling conditions used for heavy and/or awkward sized products. Why the test should be conducted: Large, heavy units can become unmanageable when they exceed their stable center of gravity alignment. Units that are easily tipped can become hazards that may result in personal injury. All packages with a weight equal to or exceeding 100 pounds (45.4 Kg), or any package taller than 36 inches (91.4 cm) in its shipping orientation should be subjected to this test. This test is particularly relevant for products having large center of gravity ratios (height of center of gravity to smallest dimension of the base), or a high height ratio (ratio of the height to the smallest dimension of the base). General ratios for these scenarios, above which there may be a problem, are .25 and .5, respectively. Test compared to real events: Generally this test is realistic in its attempt to simulate real world events. Dynamic forces causing tip over should also be considered during testing, to have a more complete representation of field conditions. 2.8 Tipover Test - Optional Rationale for the test: Any package which does not meet the requirements in the stability test should be tested with this specification. Units that do not exhibit stability in normal handling may be susceptible to tipping over onto their sides or ends. What happens in the real world: Unstable products may tip over, such as a unit on a pallet jack that is being moved up or down a ramp from a truck. Units are sometimes stacked quite high at warehouses, resulting in unstable loads that may fall. Large, tall products may be manually maneuvered by the customer, to fit through doorways or other tight spots in their environment. Units shipped by truck may also topple over from forces due to sudden starts and stops within a truck.

What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to simulate real world handling scenarios for unstable products. Why the test should be conducted: Large, heavy units can become unmanageable when they exceed their stable center of gravity alignment. Units that are easily tipped can become hazards that may result in personal injury. All packages with a weight equal to or exceeding 100 pounds (45.5 Kg), or any package taller than 36 inches (91.4 cm) in its shipping orientation that do not meet the stability test, should be subjected to this test. This test is particularly relevant for products having large center of gravity ratios (height of center of gravity to smaller dimension of the base), or a high height ratio (ratio of the height to the smaller dimension of the base). General ratios for these scenarios, above which there may be a problem, are .25 and .5, respectively. Test compared to real events: This test in general simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter, but results will generally be accurate for the environments tested. 2.9 Layover Test - Optional Rationale for the test: This test is designed to determine if a container and the contained product can be laid on their side without damage resulting to the product or to the package. This test is not intended to determine if the package can be dropped or shipped in the non-base orientations. What happens in the real world: Large bulky units may be laid on their sides to gain easier access through doorways, hallways, elevators, etc. Mechanical advantage may also be gained when moving the product in tight corridors when laid on its side. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to simulate real world handling conditions for large and/or heavy items. Why the test should be conducted: Packages weighing more than 100 pounds (45.4 Kg) should be subjected to this test. This test is designed to determine if a container and the contained product can be laid on their side without damage resulting to the product or to the package. This test is not intended to determine if the package can be dropped or shipped in the non-base orientations. Test compared to real events: This test in general simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter, but results will generally be accurate for the environments tested. 2.10 Strapping Test - Optional Rationale for the test: This test is designed to determine whether the product and/or package will withstand the strapping forces that are expected in transportation. Strapping is typically used to secure product within a truck during shipment. This test may also be adapted to include

strapping for pallet loads and Type 2 products that require boxes to be secured to unit pallets. What happens in the real world: For large units, trucking companies may deliver the product by "padded van", which means the product is not part of a larger pallet load sized shipment. The unit is sometimes secured to the wall of a truck to prevent the unit from shifting and falling over during shipment. Straps may be made of fiber (like belts), or rope. For Type 2 products, strapping may also be used to secure a cover box to a unit pallet, often with a polyester, nylon or polypropylene strapping material. The strapping can in some cases, depending on box style and strap tension, dig into the corrugate, causing unacceptable damage. Strapping may also be used for securing stacked loads, causing the same box and/or product damage. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to recreate the tension forces applied by strapping materials to packages found in real world situations. Why the test should be conducted: Strapping is generally narrow in width compared to the box and/or product it is securing, which may cause permanent mechanical deformation, or unacceptable cosmetic damage. Test compared to real events: This test in general simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter, but results will generally be accurate for the environments tested. 2.11 Rolling Impact Test - Optional Rationale for the test: This test is designed to ensure that packages designed to be rolled or pushed along the ground can withstand normal impacts encountered during such handling. What happens in the real world: Packages with castors are designed to be rolled may encounter hazards during movement. Typically products that are rolled or pushed by the customer must move over ramps between trucks and docks, carpet hold downs, door jams, and other normal hazards found in everyday situations. The product must be protected from these impacts, even if it tips over. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to simulate the impacts encountered when rolling or sliding products over typical structural hazards found at customer sites. Why the test should be conducted: Large, bulky packages, especially those with castors, can be awkward to handle and move, and often must pass over obstructions on the floor or ground. The package must protect the unit while impacting these hazards. Test compared to real events: This test in general simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter. However, the result of this test will generally indicate the ability of the package/product to protect against normal

environment hazards associated with rolling impacts. The four inch height in this test is a typical height for a street curb. 2.12 Ramp Clearance Test - Optional Rationale for the test: This test is designed to determine whether a non-palletized, product with castors or transit case (crate on wheels) can be rolled up a typical ramp in the distribution and customer facilities without bottoming out, tipping over, or being damaged. What happens in the real world: Many distribution and customer sites have ramps that are used to move products. Products with castors are generally designed to be rolled up or down these ramps because of their awkward size or weight. If wheel size or wheel base is not large enough, the package may tip over, bottom out, or in some other way become damaged. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to recreate the forces and handling motions found in real world situations. Why the test should be conducted: All castored products or transit cases should be subjected to this test, since the intent of including castors is that they will be used for these kinds of circumstances. Test compared to real events: This test in general simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter, but results will generally be accurate for the environments tested. 2.13 Humidity/Temperature Storage Test - Recommended Rationale for the test: This test is designed to determine whether the packaged product can survive the extreme humidity/temperature distribution environments without being damaged. This test should be used when environmental extremes are expected to affect the reliability of the product and/or package. In addition, this test can be used to condition the product and packaging material prior to other tests called out in this section. For example, conducting random vibration testing immediately upon removal from high humidity testing may simulate damages found in a trucking environment in a country with high humidity. What happens in the real world: Many materials from which containers and packages are made, especially paper based materials, undergo changes in physical properties as the temperature and the relative humidity (RH) to which they are exposed are varied. Many Asian and Latin American countries, for example, exhibit climate patterns that dramatically affect the performance of corrugated. Arctic and desert temperature extremes can also be experienced in some shipping environments. Combining temperature and humidity with shock and vibration can yield unexpected results, as well as accentuate existing problems. What the test is trying to simulate: Depending on the temperatures and humidities chosen, and the duration or cycling of the them, many different climates can be simulated. Examples are desert, tropical, winter and temperate climates.

Why the test should be conducted: Any package that will be exposed to known humidity and/or temperature extremes should use this test, especially combined with other appropriate handling tests. Real world environments may not be similar to a laboratory's controlled atmosphere of 70 F (21.1 C) and 50% relative humidity. Test compared to real events: The conditions called out in this test are representative of their respective climates, but do not necessarily duplicate actual field conditions. However, these conditions do tend to simulate real world conditions and have similar effects on the packages and materials, and at least point out potential problems. 2.14 Slip Sheet Tab Testing - Optional Rationale for the test: This test is designed to determine whether the slip sheet tabs can survive repeated handling throughout the distribution system without being damaged. What happens in the real world: Slip sheets are handled several times throughout distribution, so tabs must withstand repeated pushing, pulling and grabbing forces. Environmental conditions not seen during testing, such as high humidity or standing water, may effect the performance of paperboard slip sheets. Tab tearing may occur, which can make the slip sheet practically useless on some sides. What the test is trying to simulate: The test attempts to simulate the forces applied to slip sheet tabs during normal slip sheet handling procedures. Why the test should be conducted: Any product using slip sheets for the first time should undergo this testing to ensure the slip sheet material and specifications meet the handling requirements. Unusually heavy products should also use this test to ensure tab strength is appropriate. Test compared to real events: This test in general simulates real world events accurately, for specific scenarios tested. It would be impossible to test every conceivable scenario the product may encounter, but results will generally be accurate for the environments tested. 2.15 Field Shipment Testing - Optional Rationale for the test: Using the same distribution channel, or a similar transportation leg, that a product typically goes through for testing seems intuitive to collect actual field data. Field shipping conditions are, after all, what laboratory testing attempts to simulate. What happens in the real world: Products are handled by many different transportation modes, and are exposed to several different environmental conditions. Knowing how the product is distributed, and through which channels, gives an opportunity to monitor and evaluate packaging in that environment. Limited field shipments may not, however, uncover all of the potential hazards faced in a distribution environment, especially for other specific channels.

What the test is trying to simulate: The test is used to determine if a package can survive in a particular distribution environment. Why the test should be conducted: This is a useful test to gather real field data, but because each product may reach its destination in a slightly different way each time, the results may not be conclusive. This test should supplement, not supersede, the other recommended tests in this section. Test compared to real events: The results obtained from limited field shipment testing may not be statistically significant in assuring damage free distribution of products in full production. However, if enough products are tested in this way, field shipment testing is the most useful source of data for package integrity within a distribution environment, especially in light of other laboratory testing that attempts to simulate the same environment. 2.16 Rain Test - Optional Rationale for the test: This test is designed to determine whether the packaged product can withstand rain without being damaged. This test should be used when environmental extremes are expected to affect the reliability of the product and/or package. Many investigations have shown product can be exposed to rain while left unattended on docks, in open bed trucks, or on air tarmacs. This is especially true in developing countries, where distribution channels may not be as sophisticated as in developed countries. What happens in the real world: HP products in a variety of locations sometimes are exposed to rain. Facility limitations are usually to blame, such as open air docks, open truck beds, or cargo that sits on an air runway waiting for loading/unloading. These conditions are particularly prevalent in Latin American and Asian countries, where weather patterns often include rainy seasons or months with particularly high rainfall. What the test is trying to simulate: The test is designed to simulate rainfall of different intensities, depending on local conditions. Why the test should be conducted: Any product expected to be shipped into a country with a less developed distribution channel could be exposed to harsh weather conditions, including rain. Rain will obviously affect paper-based packaging materials, especially in combination with other shock and vibration. Test compared to real events: Depending on the duration of testing, this test simulates rainfall conditions fairly accurately. Combining this test with other environmental factors, such as wind and temperature, would increase the simulation, although it may be arbitrary what those factors would be. Also, combining this test with other shock and vibration testing can give valuable insight into package performance.

acceptance criteria & test levels

Packaging Test Requirements

1.0 Scope The product and packaging system must provide acceptable levels of product protection and storage integrity. The scope of this section is to provide the packaging engineer and the product development team a basis for determining what constitutes damage or failure of the package and/or product, and guide them in establishing a test level. 2.0 Purpose The acceptance criteria and test levels described in this section are intended to guide the product development team through the process of establishing package performance criteria. To ensure that packaged products can survive the rough handling they may experience in the normal distribution environment without damage, an appropriate test level is required to keep product damage to a minimum. Since Hewlett-Packard manufactures a variety of products which range in weight and price, the determination of the appropriate test levels can be a complicated business decision. This section is aimed at identifying some of the key factors that must be considered when developing the package performance acceptance criteria and test levels. Product development teams designing for specialized markets or distribution channels may want to modify the list below to include additional factors which are particularly important for their products. 3.0 Acceptance Criteria The responsible engineering organization must establish acceptance criteria prior to testing. The acceptance criteria must be suitable for their purpose, considering the required condition of the product and package upon receipt to the final customer. It is advisable to compare the type and quantity of damage that occurrs during package testing with the damage that occurs during actual distribution and handling of products whose shipping history is known or with test results of similar containers. Examples of some general acceptance criteria are as follows: Criterion 1 - Product is damage-free and functions to specification. Criterion 2 - Package continues to maintain product position. Criterion 3 - Cosmetic areas are not degraded. Generally, the appropriate acceptance criteria means the container's contents are suitable for normal sale and use at the completion of testing. Detailed acceptance criteria may allow for accepting specified damage to a product or its package. The form and content of acceptance criteria may vary widely in accordance with the particular situation. Methods may range from simple pass-fail judgment to highly quantitative scoring or analysis systems. 3.1 Damage 3.1.1 Product Damage Product damage can be any condition which causes the product not to meet its performance test specifications and/or cosmetic damage

which makes the product unacceptable for sale to the customer. It is recommended the same standards for final inspection during manufacturing be used to determine cosmetic damage. Cosmetic damage caused by test preparation such as mechanical fixturing, instrumentation, and prior handling should not be considered a failure. Structural damage can be defined as any part which is detached, loose, fractured or deformed beyond manufacturing tolerances. No conductive particles should be present due to abrasion. In summary, the product should be able to meet all data sheet and manufacturing specifications and tolerances after testing. 3.1.2 Package Damage. The package's purpose is to absorb or modify the energy imparted by the environment, to sustain ordinary degradation as a result, and to protect and preserve the product in its original or undamaged condition as defined by the acceptance criteria. Thus, some package degradation is expected and is acceptable. Unacceptable package damage can be defined as, but is not limited to: (1) any change in package condition that results in product damage, (2) inability of the package to contain the product in its intended position, (3) cosmetic or structural damage requiring repackaging at a distributor's location. Refer to Table 2.1 for examples. Table 2.1 Examples of Acceptance Criteria for Containment Type Damage
SHIPPING DAMAGE UNACCEPTABLE EXAMPLE ACCEPTABLE PACKAGE DAMAGE - Glue joint breaks - Localized open and exposes ruptures of internal contents. edges from impacted - Crushed cartons corners. leading to an unstable pallet - Compression load which creates damage from a a safety issue palletized load, during storage or but the pallet handling. load remains stable. - Tape, snap-lock, or fastener failure - Localized compromising failures in containment. closure in area of impact (carton is still effectively - Delamination, closed.). discoloration, or illegible product graphics. - Dents, dirt, small punctures from handling - Hand hole or impacts. handle failure . EXAMPLE - Edges or corners have small localized cracks/ruptures . - Minor compression which is supported by internal package or product support, or corner pads and stretch wrap. - The tape splits across bottom edge. - Dented corners, dirty flat panels, small partial UNIT TYPE LOCATION PACKAGE DAMAGE Type 1 (Small boxed Product) Container - Any rupture to the extent that it can (External) no longer contain or support the product. - Compression damage from a palletized load that creates unstable pallet loads. - Failure of closure such that one or more flaps are free to open or cannot support the weight of the product. - Serious cosmetic or aesthetic deterioration. - Carton carrying device failure that creates a safety

hazard.

- Carton carrying device which tears or cracks, but maintains structural integrity. - Laminated material separation. - Cushioning deteriorated to a point that the product is no longer held in its intended position or it can not continue its protective funtion. - Topcase texture worn and contaminated with foam powder. - Fracture or permanent deformation that still permits internal packaging to maintain product position. - Product contamination from cushioning not resulting in cosmetic or functional defects.

carton punctures. - Handle corner tearing.

Cushioning - Failure of bonded joints or surfaces (Internal) which results in internal packaging to lose original configuration. - Fractured or deformed material which no longer maintains product position. - Product contamination or abrasion from cushioning resulting in cosmetic or functional defects. Type 2 (Large Single Product Palletized) External - Non-functional pallet. - Ruptured wraps, bands, clips, or strapping. - Fractured bolts, fastening systems, or other hardware used in pallet construction which are beyond their usable function or create a human hazard. Internal Type 3 (Multiple Product Unitized) External - Same as Type 1 internal. - Same as Type 2 external. - Unitization method (i.e., straps, stretch wrapping) allows

- Cracked and crushed ribbing. - Loose foam beads or pulp fiber on the product.

- Protruding nails or bolts, or sharp wood sections.

- Splits, cracks or breaks in wood members that do not degrade its function. - Loose stretch wrap, banding, or fasteners.

- Cracked stringers or blocks.

- Immovable slip sheet due to torn tab, product shifting.

- Same as Type 1 internal. - Carton or load shift, where carton edges are no longer aligned but load configuration is stable for

individual products to leave the load. - Unusable slip sheets.

transport. - Torn slip sheets, bent or curled but usable. - Same as Type 1 internal.

Internal

- Same as Type 1 internal.

Note: Accumulative testing of one container may result in unacceptable damage. Please keep in mind that it is extremely unlikely that any one container will experience all the distribution elements tested for in this series. Therefore, at the engineer's discretion, it is acceptable to change out the packaging materials some number of times during testing; the product may also be changed. 4.0 Test Levels The recommended level of test intensity is based on the probability of distribution hazards. A higher or lower assurance level may be chosen if the recommended levels are too mild or severe for the product's known distribution channel. Please note that a more severe test level can be used to lower probability of damage occurrence but usually means higher packaging and logistics costs. Levels specified in each test of section 4 are based on HP experience and industry/competitors' practices. The authors of this guideline, along with many other electronic companies, have tried to set realistic test levels which would protect the product during normal shipping, storage, and handling. Depending on the distribution system used for any product, it may be prudent to increase or decrease the test level for any test. Examples are: 1) Overnight express shipping environments. There is evidence that 70 lb. (31.75 kg) packages may experience drops of 36 inches (91.44cm). Therefore, drop levels should be increased for heavier products which will be traveling through this type of environment. Expect exposure to climatic conditions for up to several hours at any time (including outside the airplane during unloading and reloading and during the delivery truck activities). 2) Third world countries. Due to the lack of good roads and sophisticated handling equipment means products may be transported in any orientation, even on animals or pull cart. Therefore, all test levels should be increased and the packaged product should be tested in all orientations. 3) Unitized/Palletized loads. No individual handling of products occurs and there is low probability of single drops. Therefore, drop levels may be decreased. 5.0 Example Test Report Form (Note: This form does not display well in HTML)
Cover Sheet Date: 4/26/96 Number of Units: 5

Product: SkyJet III Serial Number: xxxx-xxxxx Entity Name & #: OEM for XXXX Division - site XXXX Phase: Production Prototype Conducted by: Betty Lothian Test Requester: San Diego Site - Rod De Gesero Product Mass: 13 lb. (net) 17 lb. packaged (Check one) x Type II - Will be single, palletized product. Type III - Will be multiple products, palletized. Tests Performed Random Vib. Sine Vib. Compression Stability Tipover Layover Strapping Test Purpose (Why are these tests being conducted?) To test the present packaging design with the XXX products. These tests will validate the packaging to procure tooling. Failure Definition (How is success or failure measured?) Product Failures External The unit has cosmetic or structural damage to end caps, door, rear and front panels. The input paper trays (packaged separately) are cosmetic or structural damaged. The output tray is dislodged or cosmetic or structural damaged. Internal Carriage has lost containment in service station. Pen cable damaged (cut or dented). Slider rod height out of specification. (Contact John Smith). Paper Detect sensor dislocated from position. Starwheels and springs loose, missing, dented. Paper feed tray springs bent or broken. The Print Mech (PM) straps must maintain straightness. Power supply, speaker, torroid must maintain positions. Functionality - Unit must function (scan, copy, and print) equal to baseline samples from pretesting. Rolling Impact Ramp Clearance Slip Sheet Tab Field Shipment Rain Other Other Type I - Product will be boxes, not palletized. Extension: ( 6kg/8kg ) XXXX Mfg: Lab:

Impact x Humidity/Temp.

Packaging Failures External - Box containment compromised. Box flaps or glue tab failures. Internal - Foam broken, and unable to hold product and be re-packaged after testing. components (pens, cable, trays, LIU ) not held in position. Scanner contaminated with packaging debris.

Deviations & Notes Impact testing was as follows: 1. Each unit was dropped on 6 faces. The foam was replaced. 2. Each unit was dropped on 8 corners. The foam was replaced. 3. Each unit was dropped on 12 edges. The foam was replaced.
Summary and Conclusions (Was the Test Purpose met? / What's next?) The units and packaging did survive the impact testing. There were no defects at 36". Product XXX was dropped from 42" and unit received structural damage to PM chassis, creating a failure. The unit will be further tested in shock testing to uncover the true weakness of the PM (print mech.). Based upon this testing foam tooling will be initiated for the June build.

introduction
1.0 Purpose

Packaging Test Requirements

The purpose of this manual is to provide sufficient data and guidelines for determining, executing, and evaluating tests on packaged products. These tests will help determine the package's ability to provide the desired amount of protection to the product during shipment to customers. The information contained within this document was derived through extensive research and contributions by many individuals within Hewlett-Packard Company. It is understood that many times packaging requirements and specifications need to be shared with external sources, suppliers, and Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM). Therefore, this document has been developed with that express purpose in mind. 2.0 Deviations and Validation The HP entity you are working with can determine/modify which tests, levels, and acceptance criteria will be used in the final validation of a package design. It is the responsibility of the Supplier and/or Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) to confirm what tests must be run, at what levels, and the acceptance criteria to be used. Good communication and understanding of desired results is highly encouraged prior to any package testing. 3.0 More Information

Any questions or concerns about this document, tests to be conducted, and/or test levels should be directed to the HP entity you are working with, or Corporate Packaging Programs at (650) 857-7482.

Shipping carton drop/impact test

The electronic industry grows quickly. Each vendor takes responsible to his own component only to make it good and low cost. Take a flashlight manufacturer as example. There are bulb, wires, switch, spring, and plastic or metal housing make up the flashlight. The manufacturer buys all the sub-components from each supplier and assembles them together to fabricate the flashlight then sell to end-user. All the sub-components are delivery by air, ocean, or truck to destination. It is important to prevent the delivery parts without damage during transferring. Most of the packaging uses corrugated paper carton and cardboard to hold inside components and prevent it from damage by falling or throwing down by porter or carrier. There are vibration test and impact test to prove the packaging design meet requirement to protect inside components without damage during transferring. This article refers to HP-762 document and introduce the drop/impact test method for the shipping carton. Specification Apply to Single or multiple product, boxed, nonpalletized. An individually packaged product in a shipping container, which could be shipped as a single unit to an end-user. Package definitions

Edge Corner Face Gross weigh, m: The sum of masses of the product. It include all the accessories (include power pack, power cord, accessories, miscellaneous components, etc), operating manual, package material shipped with the product. Acceptable/Unacceptable package: ACCEPTABLE PACKAGE DAMAGE UNACCEPTABLE PACKAGE DAMAGE

Product and accessorie s:

Product performance, function , and cosmetic meet product shipping criteria. It is suggested that the same standards that are used at manufacturing product final inspection.
edges from impacts on those areas. Localized rupture of edges near impacted corner if not from pallet loading. Localized failures in closure in area of impact (carton is still effectively closed)

Container: Dented corners and

Cushion/in ner cardboard

Small fracture or permanent deformation that still permits internal packaging to maintain product position.

Product function fail, any abnormal rattle inside the product, screw loose, or mechanical damage are not acceptable.The cosmetic cant pass the standard shipping requirement is rejected too. Edge ruptures to extend that it can no longer contain the product or support the products weight. Compression damage from palletized load. Failure of closure such that one or more flaps are free to open or can't support the weight of product Failure of bonded joints or surfaces witch result in internal packaging to loose original configuration. Fractured or deformed material which no longer maintains product position.

Package drop/impact Test Specification 10 vertical impacts: 6 faces and 4 bottom package corners. The drop test equipment shall permit the shipping carton to be placed in a position, prior to release, that will assume correct orientation within 2 degrees for flat-face drops and within 10 degrees for edge and corner drops upon impact.

The drop height defines as below table. Gross weight, m Kg (lbs) 0.0 (0) m 9.1 (20) 9.1 (20) m 18.2 (40) 18.2 (40) m 27.2 (60) 27.2 (60) m Drop height cm (in) 91 (36) 76 (30 61 (24) 46 (18)

All About Boxes

The Basics
We have included this section to help you select the proper style and type of box to meet your packaging and shipping needs.

Measurements Box sizes are measured by using inner dimensions unless otherwise specified. The size of your contents actually determine the inner box dimensions. Domestically (within the United States), those dimensions are listed in the following sequence: Length (L) x Width (W) x Depth (D)*. Internationally, the dimensions are stated as Length (L) x Breadth (B) x Height (H). Dimensions are based on the opening of an assembled box. Looking at the opening, the longer of the two sides is considered the "length." The shorter of the two sides is the "width." The side perpendicular to the length and width is the "depth" of the box. *Exceptions are bookfolds, bin boxes & divider bins where "width" precedes "length" & "depth" of the measurement sequence.
Back to Top

How To Measure A Box - The Quick Way

Looking at the opening of the box, measure the longest or length panel first. Using a tape measure, place it in the bottom of the box approximately one inch from the back wall and measure from left to right. Repeat the process for the shorter width panel. Then, folding a side flap inward until it is perpendicular to its vertical side wall, place the tape measure at the end of the flap and extend it downward until it rests on the inner flap at the bottom of the box (see illustration). This exercise will give you the depth dimension of the box. One-piece, die-cut boxes, such as the "mailer-style" with a tuck-in top, do not have flaps when assembled, but the measuring procedure is basically the same. For the box depth, use the inside back panel as it has a visible score line (crease separating back panel from lid). For the width of a die cut box, measure between the score lines found on the inside of the top or lid. And, of course, for the length of the box, place your measuring rule on the bottom of the box approximately one-inch from the back panel. Measure from left to right. Back to Top

Box Construction - What you need to know

The "Manufacturer's Joint" is where the two ends of the side panels meet to form the box. At that point, the panels are fastened together with tape, staples or glue. This description applies to regular slotted shipping cartons (RSCs). The side panel thickness and content weight determine the type of seal used for the manufacturer's joint. For example, glue is used for most single wall boxes, but staples are found in some double wall and in most triple wall boxes. In contrast, die-cut boxes are one-piece panels scored and folded together. They do not have a manufacturer's joint. Back to Top

Box Strength
The strength of a corrugated box starts with its material. A corrugated sheet consists of two major components - linerboard and medium. Linerboard is the flat paper that covers both sides of the sheet and the medium is the "fluted" or arched paper found between both liners. The flute, when anchored to the linerboards with a starched-based adhesive, resists bending and pressure from all directions. When placed vertically on its ends, the flutes form vertical columns, capable of supporting considerable amounts of weight. Flutes come in five basic heights and shapes - the most common are "B-Flute"(used for die-cut boxes) and "C-Flute (used for RSCs). B-flute is compressed and appears thinner, but don't be fooled. It is made with more paper to provide stronger side wall protection from blows and punctures. C-flute is taller, with more air space, but offers enhanced stacking strength. For excellent graphic reproduction, consider E-flute. The amount of virgin pulp fibers and the length of those fibers in a corrugated sheet substantially contribute to box strength. For

MULLEN

Box Performance

Box strength is measured in two different ways. The mullen test measures resistance to rupture in pounds per square inch (psi). Linerboard constitutes the bulk of the bursting strength of a corrugated sheet. The basis weight of the paper as measured in lbs/1000 sq. ft. directly impacts paper strength. Some of the standard basis weights of mullen grades include:
LINERS MEDIUM

26#/msf 33# 42# 69# 90#

23#/msf 26# 33# 40#

When the corrugated box industry was new, most shipments were made by rail. Classification committees had control over all conditions related to shipping, including packaging. Rules regarding packaging in corrugated were incorporated in Rule 41 of the Uniform Freight Classification. When motor carriers evolved, similar rules were established in the National Motor Freight Classification Item 222 patterned after the rail classification. Rule 41 and Item 222 state minimum mullen requirements for packages based on size and weight. Although there are other rules in the Classifications that relate to corrugated boxes most shipments are made in single wall corrugated boxes and the below table illustrates the minimum requirements for single wall.
MAX. OUTSIDE DIM. MIN. (1L,1W, &1D BURSTING ADDED TEST TOGETHER)

MAX.WT. (BOX & CONTENTS)

MIN. COMBINED WT. OF FACINGS

20 35 50 65 80 95 120

40 50 60 75 85 95 105

125 150 175 200 250 275 350

52 66 75 84 111 138 180

As far as Classification rules go, Rule 41/Item 222 is fairly easy to understand and easy to administer. However, the mullen test is thought to correlate poorly with another important box characteristic, stacking strength. In 1990 the trade associations for the corrugated industry sponsored proposals to revise Rule 41/Item 222 thus paving the way for an alternative rule for measuring box strength, ECT .

ECT

The Edge Crush Test (ECT) measures the ability of combined board to sustain a top-to-bottom load. The strength is directly related to the compression strength of both the liners and medium. There are two gages of strength. Box compression strength (BCT) is the maximum load a given box can stand for a moment. Stacking strength is the maximum load a box can stand throughout the distribution cycle. This means that the bottom box must support the top load over a period of time in which it may be exposed to fluctuations in temperature and humidity as well as other factors that impact performance such as handling, pallet patterns, pallet deck board spacing, and overhang. All these factors weaken the stacking strength of the box. Therefore the stacking strength of a box is almost always much lower than its compression strength. The most commonly used box style is the Regular Slotted Container (RSC) . TheMcKee formula is a formula that can estimate the compression strength of a given box. This is useful information when designing a package. By knowing the compression

strength and carefully considering all the potential detractors encountered throughout the distribution cycle the designer may better determine the ECT test required to achieve the desired stacking strength. The table below illustrates the minimum carrier requirements for single wall ECT grades.
MAX. WT. (BOX & CONTENTS) MAX. OUTSIDE MIN. MIN. DIM COMBINED BURSTING .(1L,1W, &1D WT. OF TEST FACINGS ADDED TOGETHER) FACINGS

20 35 50 65 80 95 120

40 50 60 75 85 95 105

125 150 175 200 250 275 350

52 66 75 84 111 138 180

It is important to understand that whichever measurement you prefer to use to measure box strength, basis weight and flute caliper are the 2 most important performance indicators of raw material quality. Below is a table of target basis weights p/msf and flute calipers for various grades of single wall and double wall grades prior to converting operations.
SINGLE WALL

Flute Caliper
MULLEN

125 150 175 200 250 275 350

COMBINATION

26/26/26 33/26/33 42/26/33 42/26/42 69/26/42 69/26/69 90/26/90

WT/MSF

92 106 115 124 151 178 220

0.112 0.116 0.118 0.12 0.127 0.134 0.146

0.152 0.156 0.158 0.16 0.167 0.174 0.186

0.065 0.069 0.071 0.073 0.08 0.087 0.099

Flute Caliper
ECT

32 ECT 40 ECT 44 ECT

COMBINATION

35/26/35 35/26/55 55/26/55

WT/MSF

110 130 150

0.114 0.159 0.117 0.162 0.124 0.168

DOUBLE WALL

Flute Caliper
MULLEN

200 275 350 400 500 600

COMBINATION

33/26/26/26/33 42/26/26/26/42 42/26/42/26/42 69/26/42/26/69 90/26/42/26/90 90/26/90/26/90

WT/MSF

172 190 206 260 302 350

BC

0.26 0.264 0.268 0.282 0.294 0.307

Flute Caliper
ECT

42 ECT 48 ECT 51 ECT 61 ECT

COMBINATION

33/26/33/26/33 42/26/33/26/33 42/26/35/26/35 55/26/35/26/55

WT/MSF

179 188 192 225

BC

0.261 0.263 0.265 0.273

There is a take up factor for medium. For C flute the take up is 1.44 and for B flute it is 1.35. The Wt/msf contains 2.5 lbs/msf of starch adhesive for single wall and 5 lbs/msf for double wall. There is a certain amount of caliper degradation throughout the converting process. This affects ECT values, box compression strength, and stacking strength. The best converters using the best raw materials have the least amount of degradation. The crush allowance ranges from .001-.006 on single wall flutes. Heavier grades are more resistant to crush. Newer machinery also helps protect against crush. The above table illustrates basis weights and calipers for combinations that all use 26# medium. However, the days of 26# medium are fading fast and most corrugators have

switched to 23# medium. This affects the basis weights by approximately 4 lbs/msf for single wall and 8 lbs/msf for double wall. When designing a packaging solution, the best designers begin with the end in mind. Every packaged product has its own unique set of problems to solve. These include physical characteristics of the product, the mode in which the package will be shipped or stored, and the functions the package will be asked to perform. Burst strength is more relevant when product containment or puncture resistance is the main concern. ECT is more relevant when stacking strength is the main concern.