Dimensional Weight Charges:
When It Comes To Packaging, Size Does Matter

By Bill Armstrong, Technical Development Manager for Sealed Air Corporation

The recent announcements from UPS, FedEx, DHL and the USPS regarding dimensional weight-based charges seem to me to be in response to three basic issues - rapidly increasing fuel costs, lower density packages and more expensive routes - all of which combine to create substantial pressure on these carriers’ bottom lines.

Dimensional weight charges insure the shipper pays their fair share of the vehicle capacity their packages occupy during shipment by requiring a premium for light weight, high volume packages. Until recently, these low-density packages have been billed at the same levels as smaller packages of the same weight, while occupying significantly more space. It should be noted that dimensional weight requirements vary slightly for each carrier and for different classifications within each carrier’s costing structures. More specific details and information are available on the individual carrier Web sites.

When considering the factors driving the parcel business over the last few years, perhaps the largest single influence might be the rising cost of fuel. Each trip has become considerably more expensive for carriers.

Now consider that many shipping companies have significantly increased shipments from distribution centers directly to consumers’ residences. That is one pack per delivery - a much more expensive proposition than business-to-business shipments which typically have several packs delivered to the same receiver at the same time. Delivering single packages to unique addresses is an expensive proposition in time, fuel and labor.

One of the by-products of the trend of shipping individual products directly to consumer residences is that each order is most often placed in a corrugated container to facilitate safe shipment. These containers are typically larger than necessary to ship the specific order because making a custom shipping container for each order would be extremely inefficient and costly. Shippers therefore usually work with a small number of standard container sizes and fill any extra interior space with void-fill material. These low-density packages create low-density loads in the carriers’ vehicles.

Each type of vehicle (typically a trailer for truck shipments) is restricted in both the volume of freight it can contain and the maximum weight it can safely and legally carry. Traditionally, the cost of shipping a package has been based primarily on the total weight of the packaged item. The carrier receives the greatest revenue possible for shipments which reach maximum weight limits.

On the other hand, if the volume of the trailer is filled before maximum weight is achieved, the carrier receives less revenue for that shipment but the costs of transport remain the same. In these cases, the carriers’ revenues and profits are lessened.

The logical thing for carriers to do is charge customers for the space a low-density package occupies - leading us to dimensional weight-based charges. For several types of UPS, FedEx and DHL shipments, if the package exceeds more than 3 cubic feet in volume (more than 1 cubic foot for USPS), the customer will have to pay shipping based on the dimensional weight of the package instead of the actual weight of the package.

Using the new dimensional weight standards adopted this year, if a package measures 2.9 cubic feet and weighs 15 pounds, the customer will pay based on weight. By increasing any dimension of the box by as little as an inch or two, the package can increase to more than 3 cubic feet. Once the package volume exceeds the 3 cubic feet threshold, the customer must pay the dimensional weight.

According to the UPS Web site, the dimensional weight is calculated by dividing the volume (in cubic inches) of the package by 194 (166 for standard service to Canada). A package measuring 3.2 cubic feet (5,530 cubic inches) would yield a dimensional weight of 28.8 pounds. Rounded up, the dimensional weight of this package is 29 pounds - almost twice the cost of the 15 pound package measuring less than 3 cubic feet.

These new standards should lead companies to consider new packaging solutions that take up less space in carriers’ vehicles. There are numerous packaging materials that can protect shipments while occupying minimal space inside the package.

Air cellular products, such as Bubble Wrap® cushioning, provide better protection using less packaging material compared to loose fill or paper. Inflatable packaging systems allow users to create air-filled cushions - reducing shipping costs due to lightweight and potentially smaller packages.

Instapak® foam-in-place systems also provide unique, high efficiency foams with superior cushioning properties to protect products during shipment using less material. Interior packaging designs can be created for a variety of void fill, cushioning, and blocking and bracing applications.

Suspension and retention packaging is another highly efficient protective packaging alternative. Designs are based on strong, highly resilient low-slip film that surrounds products, protecting them from shock and vibration. Suspension packaging suspends products in the airspace of the package between two layers of film, while retention packaging uses elastomeric film to safely entrap the product and hold it securely within a retention frame.

With the new dimensional weight-based pricing, companies will need to consider alternate packaging solutions focusing on greater cube efficiencies that will vary depending on the needs of individual companies and their carriers - or they will pay the price in increased shipping costs.