{"id":64932,"date":"2020-12-28T15:46:25","date_gmt":"2020-12-28T20:46:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lantechweb.wpengine.com\/blog\/what-are-the-alternatives-to-stretch-wrap\/"},"modified":"2020-12-28T15:46:25","modified_gmt":"2020-12-28T20:46:25","slug":"what-are-the-alternatives-to-stretch-wrap","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lantech.com\/r2\/blog\/what-are-the-alternatives-to-stretch-wrap\/","title":{"rendered":"What are the alternatives to stretch wrap?"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
That’s the goal of companies that put product on pallets (or slip sheets, or floor loaded) for shipment.<\/p>\n
Pretty simple, right? Except it’s not.<\/p>\n
Loads are subject to a lot of stresses and forces during shipment. Temperature extremes; vibration over hundreds or thousands of miles of rail and truck movement; loading, unloading and shuttling around at depots and distribution centers; and the product itself which can be very heavy, quite light, slippery (not easy to keep stacked) or even sharp or odd shaped.<\/p>\n
Delivering product in the same condition that it’s made\u00a0is often just assumed as it is wheeled off the loading dock – but that’s not a safe assumption. In fact, as sustainability scorecards challenge companies to reduce packaging materials, in some cases there’s a negative impact as more product is damage \/ unsalable\u00a0and destined for landfill<\/a>.<\/p>\n So what options do companies have? Actually a number.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Looking at the challenge realistically the first question is whether unitizing loads is even feasible \/ desirable. Small parcel shipment volumes are growing as distribution is accomplished with direct shipments to consumers. In those cases there’s no need for load unitization as one or a couple product units are packed in a case for home or office delivery. (The great Cerasis blog has some good information on small package shipping audits<\/a> and 13 best practices<\/a>.)<\/p>\n In other cases it’s advantageous to direct load product. For instance some ocean containers may be floor loaded for maximum density and minimum product shipment. Restaurant food distribution is another example. Product in reefers is often delivered as a “case of this and case of that” wheeled by hand-truck onto lift-gates and into restaurants which aren’t equipped to receive pallet loads.<\/p>\n Don’t just assume that product is most efficiently stacked on pallets or slip sheets.<\/p>\n Stretch wrapping is the dominant “go to”\u00a0solution for pallet wrapping. Stretch wrap film is readily available and inexpensive. Proven solutions exist for stretch wrapping by hand, for machine wrapping in low-medium volume environments as well as high speed pallet wrapping for operations which produce >80 loads\/shift. (See an entire range of machine solutions laid out in one place here<\/a>.)<\/p>\n While most everyone knows about stretch wrapping equipment, and potential labor and film cost savings, sometimes people ask “What alternatives do I have to stretch wrapping?”<\/p>\n It’s a reasonable question – and there are several.<\/p>\n The most common alternatives are:<\/p>\n Let’s take a quick look at each.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Because it’s most commonly used in Europe, most of the manufacturers are European companies. Some have US operations.<\/p>\n These machines are typically used for high volume applications as the capital expense (especially considering exchange rates) is not insignificant.<\/p>\n Notable manufacturers of pallet stretch hood equipment include Polychem, MSK Covertech, Lachenmeier and Beumer.<\/p>\n In addition to cost, complexity and US service parts availability, buyers should research materials supply. Unlike typical stretch film<\/a> which is made by a number of manufacturers\u00a0in various standard widths and gauges, stretch hood material is a more specialized product and available from fewer manufacturers through a more limited distribution channel.<\/p>\n The nature of the application also requires thicker film. Typical thicknesses range from 40-200 micron (1.6 to 8 mil.) Compared to 65 or 80 gauge (.65-.8mil) stretch film, which is often pre-stretched 2.5 to 3X (down to .2 to .32mil), that’s a substantial potential increase in material use\/load. Of course there are film overlaps in the stretch wrapping process so it’s not necessarily a direct comparison of .2 to 8 mil!<\/p>\nTo unitize or not?<\/h2>\n
But if unitization is appropriate…<\/h2>\n
\n
Pallet stretch hood<\/h3>\nMore common in Europe, stretch hooding typically uses gussetted film from a continuous roll. The machine essentially takes a sleeve the height of the pallet, seals the top (making a bag), stretches it to fit around the pallet, slides it down over the pallet and then releases the stretch. The sleeve then returns to it’s normal dimensions, tightening around the pallet. (as illustrated in the .gif from Lachenmeier<\/a>)<\/p>\n
Pallet shrink hood<\/h3>\n