1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208 
Transport problems with cage pallets
Page 130
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THERE are long-term benefits in the use of specialised, purpose-built vehicles to handle the cage pallets which are now becoming a feature of the retail grocery trade, and about which hauliers have expressed concern.
This was the view of transport and planning consultant Mr J. Drury when he spoke at a seminar on "Cage Distribution" in London last week. The one-day conference, sponsored by Super Marketing and Materials Handling News, and organised by IPC Business and Industrial Training Ltd, heard speakers on the economics, the handling and display, the design and merchandising aspects of the cage pallet system.
Mr Drury pointed out that cages offered a real chance to reduce distribution costs and that, for too long, haulage contractors and manufacturers had "hedged their bets" with a jack of all trades vehicle, the flat truck. He suggested that if money was going to be invested in a new production line, and in new facilities at the retail point to exploit cages, it was sensible to spend some money on the purpose-built vehicles to form the critical transport link.
Transport concern about caged pallets embraced not only the specification of vehicles, but load security, suitability of loading facilities and mechanical handling and the loss of " cube."
Cage distribution was still in its infancy in the UK, and so evidence was still scarce, said Mr Drury. The first point was to establish how far cages would penetrate into the retail distribution system. Their big value was in the rapid handling of fast-selling lines, and once manufacturers had re-equipped with a new cage packing machine they would probably be reluctant to continue packaging conventionally in parallel. This implied that cages might be used as much as a distribution unit-load device as for display. Some 20 per cent of retail goods moved through cash and carry stores and the speaker thought that cages would certainly spread down to the 10,000sqft mark, probably through 8,000sqft and under cash and carries. He wondered whether manufacturers would then want to continue logically and deliver fast-moving lines to the 2/4,000sqft high street supermarket in cages.
One manufacturer had already stated that he would lose as much as 20 per cent of his vehicle cube by using cages ; another, more accurately, had calculated that he could achieve only 1,120 cases per vehicle with cages, against 1,632 on pallets. This was partly due to the stacking limitation for stability, of two-high in a vehicle, and partly because of the loss of cube experienced in a packing in cages as against stacking fibrites. A manufacturer had to hand pack diagonally to tight tolerances to achieve a full 14 cases of 24 cans in each cage.
Full-size cages fully laden with tins of food would impose a higher floor loading than fork-lifts or roll pallets. One trailer manufacturer had suggested that as long as the cages were always loaded the same way, chassis members could be positioned under the feet points —but what about part-loads and mixed traffic ? Operators with frameless vans would have to look hard at their floor loadings.
Mr Drury suggested that the ideal specification vehicle for handling cages would be capable of side loading, but with an end loading option ; would have load restraint gear ; would have a specially designed floor with lock points; be designed to minimise vehicle roll and shock loadings; and not rely on roping and sheeting for weather protection.