Styro Shippers - Finally some data on their effectiveness

Message

#101 Post by **P Intag** » August 19th, 2016, 1:29 pm

Alan Rath wrote:
Al Osterheld wrote:Hard to be tell, but I'd score that a draw given the differences in ambient temperatures.
That was my reaction as well.

The higher magnitude of peaks and valleys seems to point to the pulp being a little worse at insulating.

#102 Post by **Alan Rath** » August 19th, 2016, 1:44 pm

Paul, I think Al and I are saying that an eyeball integration seems to suggest that they are pretty similar. At least, similar enough that you can probably conclude there isn't an meaningful advantage to one over the other. If you want to send me the raw data, I could throw it into my simulation, and from that extract an approximate insulation coefficient for each case.

Al Osterheld · #103 Post by **Al Osterheld** » August 19th, 2016, 3:03 pm

Pulp faced higher highs and higher lows until third day, at which point the temp dropped below the cardboard.

-Al

#104 Post by **P Intag** » August 19th, 2016, 9:54 pm

Alan Rath wrote:Paul, I think Al and I are saying that an eyeball integration seems to suggest that they are pretty similar. At least, similar enough that you can probably conclude there isn't an meaningful advantage to one over the other. If you want to send me the raw data, I could throw it into my simulation, and from that extract an approximate insulation coefficient for each case.

PM sent.

#105 Post by **Alan Rath** » August 22nd, 2016, 3:04 pm

Paul kindly sent me his data, and I took a stab at trying to model the two different cases (pulp vs. cardboard), but don't think I can really draw much of a conclusion from the results:

: bottlesim.JPG (17.37 KiB) Viewed 485 times

I suspect the temperature calibration for the two probes (ambient and in-bottle) may be a little different, and the heat transfer model is no doubt more complex than just a simple 1st-order differential, with a range of different pathways, convection of the liquid in the bottle, etc. Maybe I could draw a small conclusion that the cardboard performed just a little better than the pulp, but that's pretty handwaving.

#106 Post by **Jason L Jones** » October 16th, 2019, 8:57 am

Bumping this old thread that I've always found very enlightening.

Cameron, I searched and couldn't find any results posted of your experiment with bottles in the shipping network. Do you recall any findings?

#107 Post by **joeduncan** » October 16th, 2019, 9:48 am

I'm also interested in seeing external bottles vs internal in the cardboard shipper, unless I missed that. Great data though!

John Kight · #108 Post by **John Kight** » October 16th, 2019, 11:34 am

P Intag wrote: ↑
August 1st, 2016, 12:58 pm
I'm sure that temps in a truck with ambient 95-degree high temp would certainly be in the 120-130 range. But how random opening/closing of the cargo area affects the temp curve I haven't a clue.

My guess is that it's unlikely the truck cargo area would ever reach 120+. Keep in mind that (i) unlike the inside of a car, the truck cargo area has no windows, so there is no rapid warming from the "greenhouse effect", and (ii) the passenger cabin is air conditioned (which may have some small effect in slowing the warming of the cargo area), and (iv) the cargo area is likely opened at least every 30 minutes during the warm parts of the day, and likely much MORE frequently than that. Every time the cargo area is opened, the interior temp should effectively "reset" to the outside shaded temperature.

Perhaps the most useful data of all would be to track the temps inside the cargo area of several FedEx trucks over the course of several very warm (70-80 degree) days (on the assumption that no one ships at temps higher than that). That's probably more important than trying to assess the insulation value of the package. If the temps really reach 115+ degrees in the truck on a 74 degree sunny day, then the effectiveness of the styro becomes much more critical. But my guess is that on a 74 degree day the temps in the truck never exceed 85.

#109 Post by **Frank Drew** » October 18th, 2019, 8:47 am

Brown UPS trucks can absorb a lot of heat on a sunny day, and afaik there’s no a.c. anywhere in those trucks.

#110 Post by **D@vid Bu3ker** » October 18th, 2019, 8:53 am

First of all, anyone who is shipping when it's 95 degrees deserves what they get.

#111 Post by **Jason T** » October 18th, 2019, 10:47 am

D@vid Bu3ker wrote: ↑
October 18th, 2019, 8:53 am
First of all, anyone who is shipping when it's 95 degrees deserves what they get.

Agreed, except maybe for those shipping next day air.

#112 Post by **D@vid Bu3ker** » October 18th, 2019, 10:57 am

Jason T wrote: ↑
October 18th, 2019, 10:47 am

D@vid Bu3ker wrote: ↑
October 18th, 2019, 8:53 am
First of all, anyone who is shipping when it's 95 degrees deserves what they get.
Agreed, except maybe for those shipping next day air.

Not unless the plane is landing in their driveway.