AN EXPERihlENT IN PACKTIJG OHIO APPLES by Chas. W• Hauck, 3\I.Sc. Department of Rural Economics Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station No. 68 December, 1933 CONTENTS Page Introduction •••••••••••••••••••.•••••••• 1 Weights and Capacities of Packages. ••••. 2 Displacement of Packages •••••••••••••••. 3 Hauling and Storage Rates •••••••••••••• 4 Package and Packing Costs •.•• •• ••.•••• •• •. 5 Condition of Fruit and Pa-ckages ............ 6 Sales and Returns •••••••••••••••••••••• 7 .Suliiir'...ary ••••••••••••· o •••••••••••••••••• • 8 AN EXPERIMENT IU PACKING OHIO APPLES by Chas. w. Hauck This study was undertaken in an effort to contri"bute information concerning certain types of containers in which apples are or may he packed, including their influence upon sales and returns to growers. The experiments reported herein covered a period of a little more than six months from October 1932 to early April, 1933. The project was entered into jointly by the Department of Rural Economics of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, the Arnold and Bailey Orchards at Orland, Ohio, the Paperboard Industries Association and two member companies, and the General Box Company of Cincinnati, Ohio. The Arnold and Bailey Orchards provided the fruit used in the experiments. Representatives of the Department of Rural Economics and the Paperboard Industries Association supervised and assisted in the packing and recorded the data. Containers were furnished by the Hummel and Downing Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the Ideal Corrugated Box Company of Parkersburg; West Virginia, the General Box Company of Cincinnati, Ohio, and the Arnold and Bailey Orchards. The supply of fruit available for the eA~eriments was limited to one variety of apples, Red Delicious. Grading and packing were dono at the orchard during the last week of September and the first week of October, and the filled containers were trucked each day to coniDlercial cold storage in Columbus, a distance of about 75 miles. The fruit was uniform in quality in all lots, being graded to u. s. uo. I specifications. ~uantities packed were as follows: Table I Lot :No. Container No. Packed 1 Wooden box (northwest type, western shook) 107 2 Wooden box (northwest type, southern shook) 100 3 Paperboard box ~Western style) 50 4 Paperboard Box cell pack 120 1 s) 49 5 Paperboard box cell pack 96's) 74 6 Paperboard box 10 consumer cartons) 24 7 'Bushel basket (tub ty:9e) 179 Total 583 -2- Fruit sizes in each lot are shown beloWt Size of Lot Numbers Fruit r---·-2 3 4 5 6 7 , ___ 56 ·1: 2 64 8 1 72 13 14 4 80 23 16 5 - 88 16 21 3 S6 18 13 74 - 100 9 17 113 3 7 4 120 49 - 125 7 6 11 138 3 1 15 150 3 2 5 163 3 2-1-11~ 3 2-f" 24/!. 96 3" 76 3-~-" 4 Total 107 100 50 49 74 24 179 '------------·-,---------- All wooden and paperboard boxes were labeled in storage before being offered for sale. Baskets were not labeled. \7ei~VJ.ts and.Capacj.ti~ of Packag~s Cubical content of the container has an important bearing upon returns. A few ounces or pounds extra in each package may reduce materially the number of packages available for sale, and unless accompanied by a premium for the extra quantity will correspondingly reduce gross retur~s. Five sample con­ tainers from each lot were weighed and averaged both before and after filling. /a Boxes containing 10 carto~s, each holding 12 apples (in cells) approximately 2-f" in diameter. -3- Table III Average Weight Lot No. Empty Container Filled Container Net Con- pet. o:f tents basket -----··contents 1 /c:c 7 Lbs. 6 oz. 48 lbs. 14 oz. 41 lbs. B oz. 93 2 /U 8 lbs. 2 oz. 50 lbs. 3 oz. 42 lbs. 1 oz. 93 3 7b 3 lbs.lO oz. 49 lbs. 45 1 bs. 6 oz. 101 4 /c 5 lbs.IO oz. 45 lbs. 9 oz. 39 lbs.l5 oz. 89 5 /C 5 lbs. 8 o:a. 48 lbs. 42 lbs. 8 oz. 94 6 /a 5 lbs.l2 oz. 46 lbs. 2 oz. 40 lbs. 6 oz. 90 7 /C 4 lbs. 5 oz. 49 lbs. 6 oz. 45 lbs. 1 oz. 100 Includes box, cleats, cover, 8 nails, 2 liners and 125 oiled wrappers 11 x 11 inches. Includes box, liner, 4 dividers and 125 oiled wrappers 11 x 11 inches. Includes box, liner, dividers and partitions. Includes shipping container, 10 cartons and partitions. Includes basket, liner, pad and cover. It will be noted that the smallest net weight, approximately 40 pounds of apples, was contained in the paperboard boxes, cell pack 120 1 s, in lot 4 and that the greatest net weight' more than 45 Jounds, was in the paperboard boxes, western style, in lot 3. It should also be said at this point that buyers objected to - this latter container because the fruit was not packed tightly enough and permitted some movement within the packages, a con­ dition which they have alvmys associated with underfilling and short weight. Only 4 of these boxes could be sold as originally packed,. and on December 15th the remaining 46 were repacked and consol. ida ted into 41. After repacking the gross weight averaged 54 pounds and the net weight 50 pounds and 6 ounces. The apparent slackness in the western style paperboard box ·was due to the flexibility of the container. Rigidity necessary to hold the fruit firmly in position and :prevent disarrangement was lacking both in the container and in the dividers between layers. Even after repacking, buyers still evidenced a prejudice against Lot No. 3 and no sales v1ere made. In order to move this lot tho fruit eventually was unwrapped and transferred to tub type bushel baskets, filling 43 of these baskets. Di s:olac~ent of Packag-es Space occupied by filled containers is of importance in warehousing and transportation. Each lot was measured after stacking in storage in the usual manner, and the dimensions have been converted in the follow·ing table into terms of space occupied by 500 packages. -4- Table IV uisplace- pct.of Lot No. packages 10 long X 10 wide mont 500 basket X 5 high packages displace· ......-------.(..,_,H,.....e..... i -.cr (Cu • f -·--··--- --n:;-ength) (Vlidth) 0 h'"""'t,_,).----'· t.) ment. 1 16 ft. 4 in. 10 ft. 4 in. 5 ft. 4 in./a 900 65 2 16 ft. 4 in. 10 ft. 4 in. 5 ft. 4 in.ja 900 65 3 16 ft. 4 in. 10 ft.lO in. 5 ft. 7 in./o 988 72 4 15 ft. 6 in. 13 ft. 5 ft. 9 in./f.i 1159 84 5 16 ft.ll in. 11 ft. 6 in. 6 ft. 3 in./'b 1216 88 6 15 ft. 6 in. 10 ft. 8 in. 6 ft. /b 992 72 7 15 ft. 3 in. 15 ft. 3 in. 5 ft .11 in /0 1376 100 /~ Includes 2 x 2 in. strip on floor and 2 layers of builders lath in each stack. IE.. Includes 2 x 2 in. strip on floor and 4 layers of builders lath in each stack. These displacements have been converted in the following table into terms of cubic feet per package and cubic feet per 1000 lbs. of fruit. This latter figure is also expressed in the last column in terms of :percentages of the displacement per 1000 lbs. of fruit packed in standard bushel baskets, giving a read.y comparison botv;eon them and the rectangular containers. 'l'ablc V Lot- Displacement No. Po..ckages ;BISPlacern~~er lOOO lbs. fruit No. ~er Package ?er 1000 lbs. Cubic feet pet. of·basket fruit ::li snl ac em en t -·--- -Tc-u-.---=-ft.,.--,.)-_;;;;._;·-·- ·---·-- ·---- ·-··-··--"'---·~--- 1 1.8 24.096 43.37 71 2 1.8 23.'774 4~2. 79 70 3 1.976 22.038 43.55 71 4 2.318 25.039 58.04 95 5 2.432 23.529 57.22 94 6 1.974 24.768 48.89 80 7 2.752 22.191 61.07 100 ----- Expense of transportation from packing house to storage vro.s less for tho rectangular packages than for the bushel b~skcts. ~.1 were move::l by motor truck, under contract with the oyrner-opern tor. ]3askcts vrore hauled for 10 cents each and all others for 8 cents each. storage costs vrere e:.:~actly the srune for every type of cont2.incr used. The storage company chc.rged 5 cents per package por month or 20 cents per :package for the season. They stated th~::.t. had the quantity boon ln.rc;er the rates vlOuld have been lower on the rectangular packages. -5- P~~~e and Packin~ Cost~ Wide variations existed in costs of containers de1ivered to t:i1e packing house. Paperboard boxes holding 10 small cartons were the most expensive and bushel baskets the cheapest. The wooden boxes used in Lot No. 1 ·Nere purchased in 1931 but were charged at 1932 quotations. All other containers were secured just prior to harvest time in 1932, and all quotations in the following table are of that date • . Table VI -·------- ~uotation Sept.- Cost ·per Pct.of ·Lot Container 1932 delivered pkg. de­ basket No. at Orland, Ohio livered cost ----- rnollars) {"Doll_a_r_s..,.) ___ 1 7ooden box (N. w. typo, -v-rostern shook) 16'7 .50 per 1000) .22?? 153 i3ox liners 1.80 per 1000) Oiled ap')?le wraP:pers-ll"xl1" .4525 per 1000) 2 Wooden box (H. w. type, 13'7.50 per 1000) .197'7 133 :Jouthcrn shook) :Sox liners 1.80 per 1000) Oiled apple vr.rappers,ll 11 xl1 11 .4525 per 1000) 3 Paperboard box (western style c ompl etc) 130 .oo per 1000) .1866 125 Oil od a:ppl e v~rappers-11 "xll" .4525 per 1000) 4 Paperboard box (cell pack 120's) 222.50 per 1000 .2225 150 Panerboard box (cell pack 96t s) 212.50 per 1000 .2125 143 6 Paperboard box (carton holding 12 ap')?lcs) 45.50 per 1000) .5263 354 Paperboard box (shipping container for 10 cartons) 71.35 per 1000) '7 ~)ushel basket (tub typo) 1.525 per doz •j Basket liners 15.00 per 1000 .1486 100 19 11 caps 6.50 per 1000 ~:looden boxes v;cro received in the form of shook, and papor­ bo&x~d boxes were rocei vecl collapsed.