journal article·2021-05-01

Assessing variation in package modeling

BENJAMIN FRANK, KYLE KRUGER

TAPPI Journal· Volume 20· Issue 4
Publisher page

Abstract

Predictions from empirical models are affected by variability in the input parameters for the data set used to build the models. For corrugated boxes, the difference between actual and modeled compression strength creates a real cost associated with box production, often resulting in boxes that may need to be over-designed to compensate for a lack of model precision. No work to date has attempted to assess the limitation in these compression estimates due to input parameter testing variability. In this paper we approach that problem, initially for the McKee equation and then conceptually for other box models. For our industry to do a better job at meeting the needs of our corrugated packaging customers, we need to reduce the variation in the tests we all rely on, particularly for evaluating material strength (edge crush test [ECT]) and package compression performance (box compression test [BCT]).
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Material Properties and Processing · Music Technology and Sound Studies · Music and Audio Processing

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (20)

Show source-provided references
1. Urbanik, T.J. and Frank, B., Wood Fiber Sci. 38(3): 399(2006).
2. Kellicut, K.Q. and Landt, E.F. “Basic design data for use of fiber-board in shipping containers,” FPL Report 1911, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI, USA, September 1958. Available [Online] https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplmisc/rpt1911.pdf <26March2021>.
3. McKee, R.C., Gander, J.W., and Wachuta, J.R., Paperboard Packag. 48(8): 149(1963). Reprinted in Performance and Evaluation of Shipping Containers (G.G. Maltenfort, Ed.), Jelmar Publishing Co., Plainview, NY, USA, 1989, Chap. 3.
4. Westpak, “Calculator: Box compression test,” Westpak Inc., San Jose, CA, USA. Available [Online] https://www.westpak.com/page/resources/calculator/bct-calculator <26March2021>.
5. Wolf, M., Package Eng. 19(2): 44(1974).10.1037/0012390 ↗
6. Batelka, J.J. and Smith, C.N., “Package compression model,” IPST Project 3746, Final Report, Institute of Paper Science and Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA, 1993. Available [Online] https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/532 <26March2021>.
7. Challas, J., Schaepe, M., and Smith, C.N., “Predicting package compression strength: geometry effect,” IPST Project 3806, Final Report, Atlanta, 1994. Available [Online] https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/1102 <26March2021>.
8. Jakubiszyn, M. and Czechowski, J., Przegl. Papier. 58(5): 287(2002).
9. Coffin, D., TAPPI J. 14(8): 537(2015). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ14.8.537.10.32964/TJ14.8.537 ↗
10. Frank, B., Packag. Technol. Sci. 27(2): 105(2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.2019.10.1002/pts.2019 ↗
11. Miles, J.G., Mater. Res. Stand. 6(3): 142(1966).
12. Carlson, D.A., Corrugating Int. 4(2): 7(2002).
13. Ku, H.H., J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand., Sect. C 70C(4): 263(1966).10.6028/jres.070C.025 ↗
14. CTS, “Containerboard,” Collaborative Testing Services Inc., Sterling, VA, USA. Available [Online] https://collaborative-testing. com/program-3.php <26March2021>.
15. Anon., “Meeting minutes,” TAPPI Fiscotec Committee Meeting, TAPPI Press, Atlanta, GA, USA, 6 April 2011.
16. Urbanik, T.J., Catlin, A.H., Friedman, D.R., et al., J. Test. Eval. 21(1): 62(1993). https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE11743J.10.1520/JTE11743J ↗
17. Loza, J., Cash, D., and Frank, B., TAPPI J. 17(4): 219(2018). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ17.04.219.10.32964/TJ17.04.219 ↗
18. Eriksson, L., Boxboard Containers, March 1979.
19. Schrampfer, K.E., Whitsitt, W.J., and Baum, G.A., “Combined board edge crush technology,” IPC Project 2695-24, Institute of Paper Chemistry, Appleton, WI, USA, 1987. Available [Online] https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/686 <26March2021>.
20. Garbowski, T. and Grabski, J.K., Materials 13(20): 4578(2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13204578.10.3390/ma13204578 ↗