August 7, 2017
Here’s an interesting thought: The management of RISI, publishers of Pulp & Paper Week, have begun a pilot program to gauge whether a performance-based containerboard price index will work in our industry. What does this mean? It means that if this new index were put in place, your customers would be looking at an index that reports “transaction prices” for both virgin and recycled containerboard meeting a minimum ring crush value of 70 for linerboard and 35 for corrugating medium. If this pilot proves successful—meaning enough data points are secured to make it statistically reliable—then this index will likely replace the current “Price Watch” parameters of 42# (basis weight) linerboard and 26# semi-chem corrugating medium. In a way, this move makes sense, because performance-based packaging has been with us for 23 years, since the adoption of alternate Rule 41 and Item 222 back in 1994.
Those of you who have been around long enough will remember when the alternate rule changed the industry. Reacting to changes in the distribution system and the growing recycled fiber base, the industry moved in a relatively short time from a material specification, that is, a Mullen specification dependent on the combined basis weights of the constituent liners, to a combined board specification—the edge crush (ECT) value of combined board. We moved from knowing a given parameter of the raw material (its basis weight) to the variation inherent in the combination of those raw materials. This shifted the responsibility from mills to the box plant, which had to learn fast how its procedures, processes, and quality control affected the quality of the finished box delivered to the customer. I think this experience better prepares us for what might lie ahead in the RISI experiment, because I don’t think we as an industry did a good enough job back then in educating our members about the alternate rule and how it affected boxmakers and their customers.
If you’ve read enough of Ralph Young’s articles, you know that he is a proponent of the ring crush value and ECT as better predictors of box performance than basis weight. Ralph, our AICC technical advisor, insists that variations in the ECT values of combined board coming off a given corrugator can vary widely—as much as 44 percent, according to studies he’s done—and so, relying on a more stable parameter such as ring crush makes more sense, in his view. In a way, it’s a return to a material spec such as basis weight, which puts the onus back onto the mills to deliver the quality stated on the roll tag.
Regardless of the way the RISI index thing plays out, good design resulting in proper raw material selection and application will always be the most important factor in achieving results for the customer. Take advantage of all of AICC’s many resources in this area—especially Ralph Young’s writings and blog posts on it. Our Ask the Experts blog is a good place to start, or send an email to Ralph at ryoung@aiccbox.org. Be prepared for the design challenges ahead.
Steve Young
President, AICC
