Reliable Ambient Temperature Profiles (ATPs) are critical for qualifying cold chain packaging systems under realistic conditions. In this study, we developed multiple ATPs using temperature data collected from nine distinct shipping lanes representing diverse geographic and seasonal variability. Following ISTA PCG-04 Best Practice Guidelines, profiles were constructed using statistical approaches such as the empirical rule and area-under-the-curve (AUC) methodology. These newly derived ATPs were benchmarked against industry standards and existing UPS ATPs to assess alignment and identify potential gaps. Comparative analysis highlights whether current ATPs require updates and demonstrates how data-driven ATP development can enhance confidence in packaging qualification, reduce risk of temperature excursions, and improve regulatory compliance. This work underscores the importance of leveraging real-world lane data to refine qualification protocols and optimize thermal packaging performance.

Containment force is widely used as a practical containment metric to judge stretch-wrap quality and, in many operations, as a primary go/no-go criterion for unit-load stability. While containment force is valuable, it does not always predict how a palletized load will behave under horizontal dynamic events typical of transport. In practice, loads can present “in-spec” containment force values yet still shift, deform or lose stability when subjected to horizontal acceleration and transient inputs—creating false confidence and inconsistent outcomes across sites. 

This presentation proposes an applied framework that keeps containment force as an important baseline indicator but avoids non-conclusive decisions by adding two critical elements. First, it emphasizes controlling film use through adequate pre-stretch and, when appropriate, operating beyond the film’s NDR region to reach a more stable, repeatable containment state. Second, it recommends confirming performance with horizontal dynamic tests representative of transport conditions, rather than relying on static containment force targets alone. 

The outcome is a more robust, transport-performance-oriented evaluation approach: clarifying when containment force is informative and when it becomes ambiguous, and showing how combining pre-stretch/NDR control with dynamic validation helps packaging teams reduce variability, improve repeatability, and avoid non-conclusive acceptance decisions based solely on containment force —ultimately reducing the risk of in-transit failures despite “passing” containment-force targets. 

Pass/fail testing is widely used as the final approval process for packaging. The outcome is binary and that simplicity hides what matters most: how much performance margin actually exists against reality, where a design is vulnerable, or how much material is present without purpose.

This blind spot cuts both ways. Packages can pass recognised test protocols and still fail in distribution when handling intensity, stacking behaviour, or logistics conditions differ from what is assumed. At the same time, laboratory tests can be more severe than real life, meaning additional safety margins are added simply to ensure a pass. A “PASS” tells us that survival was achieved in the lab but not how far from failure the system in reality is.

This session argues that the real issue is not testing intensity, but information loss. Impact response, deformation behaviour, performance under compression, and vibration sensitivity are measurable, repeatable signals that already exist and can be translated into meaningful test data. When ignored, they collapse into a single yes/no verdict; when used, they reveal margin‑to‑failure and true performance gradients. Rather than replacing existing protocols, this session challenges the comfort of pass/fail thinking. A controlled failure measurement that reveals margin, sensitivity, and design limits is more informative than a passing test result without numbers, which simply hides over‑engineering. The goal is not weaker packaging, but better‑informed packaging decisions, based on observed risk behaviour rather than assumption.

1. How inner cushioning, cell separation, and vent path geometry shape what happens at the package boundary when one cell fails
2. What package-level instrumentation actually captures during a runaway event, and what it misses
3. Where UN qualification ends and shipper-level performance evidence begins, in practical terms

• Pharma Growth update
• US Pharmacopeia (USP) Packaging and Distribution Expert Committee,  
• Parenteral Drug Association (PDA),
• Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC),
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO),
• International Air Transport Association (IATA),
• BioPhorum Operations Group (BPOG),
• Healthcare Distribution Alliance (HDA).

When the heating oven at Zoégas' coffee packing facility failed in April 2023, the company faced a choice: replace the equipment and continue with the established shrink-wrap process, or take the opportunity to redesign the wrapping step altogether. This presentation traces what happened when Zoégas, machinery specialist ITW Meurer, and paper producer Mondi chose the second path : jointly developing Tray Wrap, a fibre-based stretch wrap for the transport packaging of coffee bricks.

The case focuses on implementation : how a 70 gsm paper was engineered to the mechanical demands of an automated packing line; how stability was validated across handling, palletising, and distribution without changes to downstream processes; and how initial integration challenges were resolved through simultaneous, three-way problem-solving between material supplier, machine builder, and user.
Measured outcomes for this specific application include an approximately fivefold reduction in CO₂ emissions, lower energy use through elimination of the heating step, and reduced packing cost per tray, with the uncoated paper designed for recycling in existing streams in line with PPWR requirements. The central lesson: in transitions of this kind, the collaborative development model is the decisive success factor.

What if the empty space inside a shipping case is one of its most important structural design variables?

Headspace is usually treated as a dimensional allowance. In reality, it determines when the corrugated case begins to transfer compression load to the primary packs, and whether that support arrives early enough to prevent buckling, or too early and creates preload, deformation or product damage.

This case study examines rigid plastic bottles and cartonboard packs using primary-pack top-load tests, empty-and-filled, case compression tests, and load, deflection analysis. The findings reveal a critical design insight: the strength of the case and the strength of the primary packs cannot simply be added. Flap geometry, pack collation, dimensional variation and contact efficiency determine how much of the available primary-pack strength is actually mobilised.

The presentation introduces a practical method for identifying the headspace operating window where case deformation and primary pack response are aligned. It then tests that window against real distribution conditions, including humidity, compression creep, storage time, pallet pattern, misalignment and accumulated unit-load deflection.

Attendees will leave with a clear framework for deciding when primary-pack load sharing can safely enable corrugated reduction, and when the outer case must remain independently load-bearing. The goal is not zero gap. It is the right gap, at the right time, for the complete packaging system.