601 design questions

[Bob-inVA]

Hi, (my first post!)

I am a customer needing to specify crate design. I like the 601 and have a few questions.

1) Is there a good description of the pros and cons, or a selection guide for the various box types? I was specifically interested in a comparison of A & B since they are so similar.

2) The craters I have interacted with thus far prefer to build a deck, strap the load to the deck, then use panels as a cover over the load rather than using a crate like you would a box completely filled with packing material. Is this style possible to specify under 601, or would this be under a different spec? I have two general types of cargo to crate. One type is electronic equipment racks of various sizes; one of which is too tall to crate vertically, and the other type is electronic modules and components in cardboard boxes of various sizes. These are for international shipment.

3) Related to the above, for the 601 design, are the crate bottoms identical in design to the other panels? In this case would the skids simply attach to the cleats on the bottom panel?

I have been watching lots of crates coming and going on our dock and I am not sure I have seen two that I would say are equivalent designs. I had assumed the 601 was very popular and once I became aware if it, that I would see lots of crates match that spec. This does not seem to be the case. Although some look very robust they still fall short of 601 requirements, am I missing something?

Thanks,

Bob-inVA

[Admin]

Hi Bob - welcome to the forums!

We have just switched servers and I'm seeing that multiple people have tried but are having difficulty replying to your post so I'm going to take a shot at it.

First, I think I should say that you're asking questions that are very core to the industry as a whole. I could talk all day (literally) about the history of crate design and how the 601a and b came to be.

Technically, the 601 is a box and as a box, and even though it's never calculated into drop tests (so far as I know) part of its job is to absorb shock from a drop. This is in contrast to a crate. Also, the general principle behind a box is the same as a corrugated container... It may have a stronger surface such as is created by vertical flutes, but generally, it has similar strength from any direction.

The 601b is the best example of this. Without skids, the box is essentially the same from any direction and that's its benefit over the 601a. But that's in a vacuum and in the real world, it really doesn't apply. The basis of the 601 styles come from the 1920s when labor to material cost ratio's were different. As well, back then, when a box was made, it was rarely known where it would go and what it would do.

Cutting to the chase, in modern times, the value of a 601b is indistinguishable from that of a 601a. This statement also considers that you can vary the size of materials used and that only you (not the person who wrote the standards for these boxes) know where it's going, what size it needs to be and what's going in it.

So far as what you're crating, nothing is too large to crate. I've seen single crates that can probably hold 100 computer cabinets. Usually this decision comes down to economics. What is the value of the item; how many are being designed/packed at one time; where is it going; and how will it get there? It's not uncommon to put a corrugated cap over a computer cabinet. When shipped, you could be near the limit of an airplane door height and nothing will likely be stacked on it if in a container. Unless it's top heavy, there isn't much to do with the cap (top 5 panels). Surface protection comes into consideration as does shock and vibration. I'm not qualified to speak on the effective differences of wood vs. corrugated on shock and vibration so that has to be considered.

What does sound odd is your mention of 'filling the crate with packing materials. Without knowing extensive details about the content but knowing about the different variations in computer cabinet designs, I would assume there are pressure points that may need to be dealt with. I can't imagine a situation where you would want to fill the box with packing materials when crating a cabinet.

The design of the base is highly dependent on the weight distribution. It's rare that a 'spec' base can be used. You may have requirements for a floater deck and/or a ramp. It may be rare that you would ever frame a base for a cabinet. The base would typically either be lumber or a thick plywood.

If you look at the styles in the main site here on WCO, you'll find that there are well over 100 variations to crate styles that are outside the realm of specs. The history of the mil. specs. make for a better party conversation than as a hard and fast rule for crating. They are a great starting point for new craters but personally I would say NEVER try to follow them too closely - a cursory understanding of them along with some common sense is helpful. As a good example, I would say that the specs make it clear that crate design is very different from building design (usually) but often, the quality of the education stops there.

Many companies decide how to design their boxes, cases and crates based on economics, personal beliefs and the market that they typically support. For example, how End Intermediate Support Cleats (left and right sides of the box) should be oriented is interpreted differently by different people. Some say that they should always be horizontal while others say they should only be vertical, and others feel that it's based on the dimension of the panel. My feeling is that you first have to consider what you know about how the box will be transported and its dimensions. If it's going in a container from point a to b, and it's 3'6" x 3'6" x 7' high then then there's probably no need for verticals because nothing will ever be stacked on it. However if that same box is 2' high, that rule can easily change. The question is, where between 2' high and 7' high do you change this rule? It's really descressionary. As well, you could want horizontal cleats to provide crush support. An aggresive forklift driver could slam the crate into another while loading the container, so having horizontals provide front-to-aft crush protection. But again, if the crate is 2' high, they're probably useless and are nothing more than dead weight.

I just answered another post where the question was about what someone should charge for their crates and the bottom line answer here is really similar to his answer... It requires communication. I would ask your crater(s) why he feels his design is a good one. You may get 2 or 3 craters that give you a very good but very different answer, then you'll need to decide which one is better.

I hope that helps. I'ld like to hear your feeling about this and if it helps. Please post back and let us know.

Thanks.

[Bob-inVA]

Jeff,

Thanks for your very thoughtful reply. I had suspected much of what you said based on my introductory experience, but it is good to have it confirmed by an insider. We are shipping custom built, one-of-a-kind instrumentation that has taken a long time to build and now is under tremendous schedule pressure to get it in the field. I can't afford to take any chances on not understanding what I need to specify. I am obviously not interested in saving on material at the expense of increasing risk of damage; "collecting insurance is not a viable option"!

The comment about using a 601 as a box and filling it with packing material (as case one) was in contrast with building a strong lumber deck, then attaching panels that look very much like the 601 design (as case two). In both cases, this was meant for corrugated boxes as the cargo, not equipment racks. In case one, the boxes are placed in the crates and cushioned with fill on all sides to float it from the wooden box walls. In case two, the boxes are film wrapped and banded to the pallet, then panels are built over the cargo with no packing or contact to the box/crate panels, the cargo protected by air space alone. The question was: Is the deck and panel method possible to specify under the 601 design style, or is the 601 *strictly* to be used as a box, with all six sides identical in construction and runners attached only for use of pallet jacks and such.

For the large equipment racks, it seems the best way to ship is to lag bolt the racks to a pallet, then build the panels using the 601 construction style as a guideline. The question: is this design style that uses a lumber deck with panels still considered to be within the 601 standard, or is it something else? If this type of package is covered by a different standard, which one is it?

You mentioned not following the standard too closely, so I need to understand where the point of departure is so I can be sure that any extension or deviation from the standard is clearly communicated in my requirements document. You did make the distinction that the 601 is a box, in contrast to a crate. Is a crate then, the deck and panel style?

-Bob

[Marcel]

The first thing to consider when deciding what type of crate to build for your "one of a kind instrumentation" is what country is it going to? Since this is an "international" shipment you will have to comply with ISPM#15 as to the type of material you build the crate with. Then will it go by way of sea or air? If by sea then you want to have a strong wooden crate with high density foam protection to absorb shock from impact. If your parts are extremely sensitive the I suggest a complete cavity including a cushion floor.
The next thing of importance is the weight of the product which would then determine the type of base & the walls that you need. The crate should be designed as close to the size of the product as possible allowing for the thickness of the foam or "packing material". Less empty space less chance of damage. Going by sea the weight of the crate is not as high importance as by air, the crate can be built with heavier/stronger types of wood. Going by air the weight of the crate is extremely important as well as the size because the price to fly it is determined by both. Therefore the crate needs to be designed using light weight materials like thinner plywood beefed up with wood framing(cleats). The other extremely important thing you must consider is moisture damage especially when shipping by sea. Vacuum sealing with a foil barrier & desiccant is the most common form of moisture prevention.
Even by air you must consider moisture prevention as the temperature which cargo flies can change drastically while in the air as well as by the temperature of the country to which it arrives. Also your crate could sit out on a tarmac for a number of days while customs clear it... So a better designed crate should be able to withstand all of the elements that it could possibly meet & the result will be that your product arrives to your customer undamaged. I know Jeff answered your questions regarding the 601 but I just want to add the other part of shipping a lot of people forget to consider.

[nighthitcher]

built crates with various structure would save shipments while loading.