23 ECT vs 32 ECT: side-by-side numbers
32 ECT board crushes at 32 lb per inch of edge against 23 for 23 ECT, so in C flute a 32 ECT box is estimated 39% stronger in compression at any size. Whether that is worth it depends on load, stack height and storage time.
Estimated compression at 10 sizes
| Inside, in | 23 ECT C | 32 ECT C | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 × 6 × 4 | 282 | 393 | +111 lbf |
| 10 × 8 × 6 | 320 | 446 | +125 lbf |
| 12 × 12 × 12 | 370 | 514 | +145 lbf |
| 14 × 10 × 8 | 370 | 514 | +145 lbf |
| 16 × 12 × 10 | 399 | 556 | +156 lbf |
| 18 × 12 × 12 | 413 | 575 | +162 lbf |
| 18 × 18 × 18 | 453 | 630 | +177 lbf |
| 20 × 16 × 14 | 453 | 630 | +177 lbf |
| 24 × 18 × 18 | 489 | 681 | +191 lbf |
| 24 × 24 × 24 | 523 | 728 | +205 lbf |
Boxes high at 30 lb per box
| Inside, in | 23 ECT | 32 ECT |
|---|---|---|
| 10 × 8 × 6 | 7 | 9 |
| 16 × 12 × 10 | 8 | 12 |
| 24 × 18 × 18 | 10 | 14 |
Column stacked for 30 days with Packgent's default 40% storage loss (an assumption): ⌊BCT × 0.6 ÷ 30⌋ + 1.
Choosing between them
Pick the lower grade when the stack is short, the load light or the box is used once. Move up when boxes sit in storage for weeks, see humid warehouses, are interlocked or overhang the pallet, because each of those cuts usable strength. The stacking calculator shows which grade your conditions need.
Sources
- Foster, G. (1997). "Boxes, Corrugated." In Brody & Marsh (eds.), The Wiley Encyclopedia of Packaging Technology, 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 0-471-06397-5 (table reproduced in Wikipedia, "Corrugated fiberboard")
- Packaging Corporation of America: Profiles with a purpose
- McKee, Gander & Wachuta (1963), Paperboard Packaging 48(8)
Last reviewed . See all sources and how Packgent computes.