Analysis

CCSB DOCKET 2011-1
SECTION I
SUBJECT 1
Re: Item (Rule) 180, Performance Testing of Shipping Containers
Staff Contact: Erin N. Topper
Telephone — (703) 838-8856
topper@nmfta.org
Proponent: Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation’s Package Performance Test Lab, Inc.,
Carol Stream, Illinois
Proposed Classification Provisions
It is proposed to amend Item (Rule) 180, Performance Testing of Shipping Containers, as
follows:
ITEM 180
PERFORMANCE TESTING OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS
Introduction—No Change.
PERFORMANCE TEST REQUIREMENTS: All applicable shipping units must be tested as follows:
Section I. Conditioning
Except as provided in Note A-NEW, all specimens must be conditioned in an atmosphere
of 73°F (23°C) minimum and 50% RH minimum for at least 24 hours for paper-based packaging
and 12 hours for all others. Testing should be conducted in the same minimum atmosphere,
and conditions must be recorded for each test conducted. If testing cannot be conducted in
the minimum atmosphere, conduct the tests as soon as possible after the packaged products
have been stored for 24 hours in the testing environment.
NOTE A-NEW1—Alternatively, fiberboard packaging may be conditioned in an
atmosphere of 40°F (4°C) and 85% RH or 100°F (38°C) and 85% RH for at least 72 hours.
Section II. Compression/Vibration Test
Two alternate methods of testing are permissible, Methods (A) or (B). Either may be utilized,
depending on test capability or product characteristics. Unless the shipping container has a
skid or pallet outside base, or is marked with upright arrow symbols, the container must be
tested in all three planes. When tested in all three planes, length of time in vibration must be
20 minutes one hour in each of the three planes.
If the container is 6 ft (1.83 m) or taller in height, and has either a skid or pallet outside base
or is marked with upright arrows, the compressive load requirements in Methods (A) and (B)
may be omitted.
1
Subsequent Notes in Item 180 would be renumbered as necessary.
©2010 National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc.
Subject 1, Page 1 of 6
CCSB DOCKET 2011-1
SECTION I
SUBJECT 1
Proposed Classification Provisions — Continued
Method (A)
(1) Shipping units must be vibration tested under a stacked compressive load for one
hour using the procedures of ASTM D4169 Schedule D, Assurance Level II, for random vibration
on each of the three planes (regardless if the shipping container has upright arrows printed
on the package) for a total of three hours. If the shipping container has a skid or pallet outside
base then Face 3 should be vibrated down for a total length of time of three hours.
When conducting top load vibration tests, the size of the package changes with the
three planes of the package, so the dead load weights on the top of the package will
change accordingly:
Face 3 is the bottom of the package;
Face 4 is the length of the package (wide side); and
Face 6 is the width of the package (narrow side).
(2) Use a concentrated dead load (see description of load in section (3)(a) below) to
simulate miscellaneous freight loaded on top of a floor-stowed shipping unit in a trailer of 108
in (2.7 m) inside height. Determine the amount of load, rounded to the nearest pound (lb),
from the formulas in Table 1 or 2:
Table 1: Method (A) Load Calculation
Orientation — Face 3 Down:
10 x (108 – h) x (l x w)
LOAD =
1728
Orientation — Face 4 Down:
10 x (108 – w) x (l x h)
LOAD =
1728
Orientation — Face 6 Down:
10 x (108 – l) x (w x h)
LOAD =
1728
10 =
Where:
Subject 1, Page 2 of 6
108 =
1728 =
h=
l=
w=
average density of LTL freight
(pcf)
inside height of trailer (in), see
Note 1
conversion factor (in3/ft3)
height of shipping unit (in)
length of shipping unit (in)
width of shipping unit (in)
©2010 National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc.
CCSB DOCKET 2011-1
SECTION I
SUBJECT 1
Proposed Classification Provisions — Continued
Table 2: Method (A) Load Calculation (Metric)
Orientation — Face 3 Down:
LOAD = 162 x (2.7 – h) x (l x w)
Orientation — Face 4 Down:
LOAD = 162 x (2.7 – w) x (l x h)
Orientation — Face 6 Down:
LOAD = 162 x (2.7 – l) x (w x h)
162 =
Where:
2.7 =
h=
l=
w=
average density of LTL freight
(kg/m3)
inside height of trailer (m), see
Note 1
height of shipping unit (m)
length of shipping unit (m)
width of shipping unit (m)
NOTE 1—No Change.
(3)(a) No Change.
(3)(b) No Change.
Method (B)
Shipping units must be subjected to compression and vibration in separate tests. The
compression test is conducted first and then the same shipping unit is vibration tested.
(1) Conduct a compression test on the shipping unit, using either a machine compression
test (per ASTM D642) or a constant load (dead weight) test (per ASTM D4577). Remove the
force immediately after reaching the calculated value when conducting a machine
compression test per ASTM D642. When conducting a compression test per ASTM D4577,
maintain the constant load (dead weight) for one hour. Apply a force, rounded to the
nearest pound force (lbf), in the normal vertical shipping axis as calculated from the formula in
Table 3 or 4:
Table 3: No Change.
Table 4: No Change.
NOTE 2—No Change.
©2010 National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc.
Subject 1, Page 3 of 6
CCSB DOCKET 2011-1
SECTION I
SUBJECT 1
Proposed Classification Provisions — Concluded
Table 5: Design Factor
Shipping Unit Construction
(a) A corrugated fiberboard or plastic container that
may or may not have stress-bearing interior
packaging using these materials, and where the
product does not support any of the load. An
example is a plastic bottled product in a corrugated
box with a corrugated interior packing.
(b) A corrugated fiberboard or plastic container that
has stress-bearing interior packaging with rigid inserts
such as wood. An example is an appliance packed in
a corrugated box with wood-reinforced corner posts.
(c) A container constructed of materials other than
fiberboard or plastic that are not temperature or
humidity sensitive or where the product supports the
load directly. An example is a wood crate or box.
Design Factor
Machine
Dead Weight
Comp.
ASTM D642
ASTM D4577
7.0, see Note
B-NEW
5.3, see Note
B-NEW
4.5
3.4
3.0
2.3
(2) Using the same shipping unit, conduct a vibration test for a total of one hour on
each of the three planes (regardless if the shipping container has upright arrows printed on the
package) for a total of three hours. If the shipping container has a skid or pallet outside base
then Face 3 should be vibrated down for a total of three hours. Any of the three following
vibration methods may be used: random, ASTM D4169 Schedule E Level II; repetitive shock,
ASTM D4169 Schedule F (vertical-linear motion); repetitive shock, ASTM D4169 Schedule F
(rotary motion), see Note 3.
NOTE B-NEW—When testing fiberboard containers that have been conditioned to 40°F
(4°C) and 85% RH or 100°F (38°C) and 85% RH, the Design Factor should be reduced by 50%.
NOTE 3—No Change.
Sections III-VII—No Change.
Subject 1, Page 4 of 6
©2010 National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc.
CCSB DOCKET 2011-1
SECTION I
SUBJECT 1
Analysis
This proposal was submitted by Smurfit-Stone Container Enterprises, Inc., a CCSBregistered package testing laboratory. Based on experience and an understanding of the
dynamics of the motor carrier environment, the proponent has proposed to amend portions of
Sections I and II of Item (Rule) 180.
Section I, Conditioning, currently states that packages must be conditioned in ambient
conditions of 73 degrees Fahrenheit and 50% relative humidity (RH) for 12 hours or for paperbased packaging 24 hours. It is proposed to allow fiberboard packages to be conditioned at
varying temperatures for 72 hours prior to testing. These conditions are 40 degrees Fahrenheit
and 85% relative humidity or 100 degrees Fahrenheit and 85% relative humidity. This change
would make the conditioning requirements consistent with ASTM D4332, Standard Practice for
Conditioning Containers, Packages, or Packaging Components for Testing.
Section II, Compression/Vibration Test, provides the testing procedures for compression
and vibration testing, and there are two alternate methods available: Method A and Method
B.
The procedures in Method A run the vibration while the package is under compression
by testing in accordance with ASTM D4169 Schedule D, Assurance Level II, for a total of one
hour (20 minutes in each of the three planes). The planes are identified by the face of the
package. Face 3 is the bottom of the package; Face 4 is the length of the package (wide
side); and Face 6 is the width of the package (narrow side). Currently, the procedure requires
the same load to be used on all three faces during top load vibration tests, even though the
size of the package changes. Based on sample testing, the proponent found that if the load
formula was not changed to reflect the differences in the package’s size when conducting
testing on Faces 6 or 4, Face 6 would experience a 41% larger load and Face 4 would
experience a 24.6% larger load.
Method B subjects the package to compression and vibration in separate tests and
assigns design factors, based on the type of packaging. According to the proponent, when
conditioned at high humidity, the compression of the fiberboard is approximately 50% of the
compression under ambient conditions (73ºF and 50% RH). Therefore, it is proposed to reduce
the design factors by 50% when conducting machine or dead weight compression testing
under high humidity conditioning levels.
For Methods A and B, it is also proposed to amend the duration of the vibration testing
from a total of one hour (20 minutes per plane) to three hours (one hour per plane), in order to
be consistent with other truck-related vibration test procedures. Additionally, there is no
established rounding increments listed for the required load or force, and one should be
established to prevent any miscalculation. The rounding increment should be one pound (lb)
or pound force (lbf) for Method A or B, respectively.
©2010 National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc.
Subject 1, Page 5 of 6
CCSB DOCKET 2011-1
SECTION I
SUBJECT 1
History
Item (Rule) 180 first appeared in Supplement 10 to NMF 100-U, effective January 21,
1995, as a result of action taken on Subject 19 of Docket 945 (August, 1994), which was
approved as modified. This rule was developed by a committee of packaging professionals
consisting of representatives from NMFTA, ISTA and IoPP in order to establish a performance
testing procedure for shipping containers that will be subjected to the less-than-truckload (LTL)
environment. This procedure consists of compression, vibration, impact, handling and
environmental tests used to simulate the conditions shipping containers are exposed to.
Initially, this rule was put into effect for three years — it was set to expire on January 21, 1998 —
in order to determine if it was beneficial to shippers and carriers. Since then the rule has been
made permanent, and over the last 10 years, a number of amendments have been made in
order to incorporate updated standards and to clarify terminology or procedures.
Most recently, as a result of action taken on Docket 2009-3, Subject 15 (October, 2009),
the rule was updated in the interest of clarification and simplification, and that proposal was
approved as docketed. The changes became effective on January 9, 2010. As part of that
proposal, it was stated that, going forward, the CCSB would amend the rule, as needed, on a
case-by-case basis to ensure it continues to be representative of the motor carrier
environment.
Relationship to CCSB Policies and Guidelines
One of the best ways to determine if packaging is capable of sufficiently protecting the
commodities being shipped is through laboratory testing, which accounts for the dynamics of
the transportation environment. Package testing is continuously changing and improving
based on research from many different sources. The proponent is an active CCSB-registered
third party testing laboratory, and as such, has vast experience with numerous testing
protocols. CCSB policies state the Classification’s rules must be kept up-to-date. Based on
other truck-related testing procedures and the proponent’s knowledge and experience in the
industry, the proposed changes to Sections I and II of Item 180 will improve the procedure
while making it more consistent with other established testing procedures for the motor carrier
environment. For these reasons, the proposal, as docketed, is in keeping with CCSB policies.
Subject 1, Page 6 of 6
©2010 National Motor Freight Traffic Association, Inc.