Returnable and reusable containers are utilized by manufacturers to ship a variety of different products to end users which are usually assembly plants. For example, in the automobile industry, an assembly plant assembling a particular automobile might utilize a number of different parts manufacturers. These manufacturers ship their respective parts to the assembly plant in reusable containers where the parts are then assembled together into a finished automobile. The reusable containers are then returned to the parts manufacturers for use in further shipments. The return and reuse of such containers results in a substantial savings in shipping and packaging costs for the manufacturer, as may be appreciated, because they reduce the number of new containers which must be purchased. Furthermore, the returned containers alleviate the assembly plant's task of having to store, destroy, or otherwise dispose of the containers, thus resulting in substantial cost savings to the plant.
While such returnable and reusable containers reduce shipping costs by eliminating the need to constantly purchase new containers, it is still relatively costly to provide for their return shipment. This is particularly so since the charge rate for return shipment is based upon the volume of the container and upon the number of containers which might be situated in a return vehicle, such as a truck. With conventional containers used in the past, there has been a one-to-one (1:1) return-to-shipment ratio because an empty container occupies the same shipping space as a full container. Therefore, there is essentially not much of a shipping cost savings when returning an empty reusable container even though the empty container weighs less because it does not contain product.
Furthermore, the cost of storing conventional reusable containers reduces the economic benefits they offer because empty containers require the same warehouse or storage space as full containers. Container storage may be necessary for the plant before return shipment can be arranged. Similarly, the manufacturer will often store the containers on site to have them on hand and ready for shipment. Such storage space is often limited and it is usually desirable to utilize the space for something other than bulky, empty containers waiting to be shipped or returned. Therefore, the economic benefits of currently available reusable containers is further reduced by the cost both to the end user assembly plant and manufacturer in storage space requirements.
Some currently available reusable containers have addressed such problems by being collapsible into a smaller size or volume to thereby require less space when returned or stored For example, some available reusable containers are collapsible into a volume essentially one-third (1/3) or one-fourth (1/4) of their volume when shipped full of product. This provides a three-to-one (3:1) or four-to-one (4:1) return-to-shipment ratio, and thus, provides a substantial savings in return shipment costs. That is, a truck returning the containers to the originating site can carry three or four times the number of empty, collapsed containers as full containers. Additionally, collapsed, stored containers require substantially less storage space. One such currently available collapsible container is produced by the Ropak Corporation of Georgetown, Kent., and can be reduced or collapsed to a size which is one-third (1/3) the size of a full, erected container. Another collapsible and reusable container is available from MONOFLO International, Inc. of Winchester, Va. and reduces to one-fourth (1/4) the size of the erected container.
While such containers address the issue of return shipment and storage costs, they still have certain drawbacks. For example, it may be necessary to utilize dunnage elements, such as partitions or separating structures, in the container during shipment for separating and protecting the products shipped in the container. The separate dunnage elements must be handled accordingly apart from the container during shipment and return. That is, when the container has been assembled into an erected form for shipment and dunnage elements are to be utilized, the dunnage must be separately inserted and secured within the container. Subsequently, prior to return shipment, any dunnage elements utilized within the container must be detached and removed therefrom before the container can be collapsed into the smaller, returnable shape. As may be appreciated, the dunnage elements are then discarded or otherwise disposed of by the assembly plant adding to the plant's overall cost for the shipment. Furthermore, the manufacturer must construct or acquire new dunnage elements each time the returned container is reused for shipment and thus must incur the necessary costs associated therewith. Additionally, the manufacturing labor associated with constructing and installing dunnage elements in a container, and then the plant labor for collapsing, removing and disposing of the dunnage elements after shipment, further increases the cost of shipping product utilizing conventional containers. Therefore, even with collapsible containers, high shipping costs are incurred on both ends, i.e., by the manufacturer who constantly acquires new dunnage elements and by the assembly plant which constantly must dispose of the old dunnage elements or pay to have those dunnage elements returned with the container.
The current prior art products have not recognized such a problem and certainly have not addressed the resulting high shipping costs. Accordingly, it is an objective of the present invention to reduce the overall shipping costs normally associated with shipping product. It is another objective to reduce such shipping costs associated with both original shipment and return shipment.
It is further an objective of the present invention to reduce the manufacturer's time and labor costs associated with erecting a container and constructing and securing dunnage elements therein to protect the shipped product.
It is still another objective to reduce the manufacturer's replacement costs of dunnage elements for returned, reusable containers.
It is an additional objective to reduce storage space requirements associated with reusable containers and/or dunnage materials.
It is still another objective of the present invention to reduce the time and labor costs to the assembly plant associated with removing, dismantling and discarding used dunnage elements prior to collapsing and returning empty containers.
It is further an objective of the present invention to provide a returnable and reusable container which adequately contains and protects product shipped therein and will occupy less space during return shipment than during original shipment.
These objectives and other objectives will become more readily apparent from the further description of the invention below.