Transit test failures are more common than most engineers would guess. Nearly 30% of packaging systems fail transit studies. It’s important to remember that a package failure doesn’t necessarily mean your design is fundamentally flawed; it simply means the current configuration didn’t withstand the simulated distribution environment. A structured approach to the challenge is key to identifying what went wrong and finding the best path to fix it.
Real-World Scenario
Experiencing a transit failure is unpleasant but ultimately helpful. It reinforces why we do many of the checks and cross-checks we do as packaging engineers.
In this example, the project was a small orthopedic implant. The packaging system was completed, and everything seemed good to go. After transit testing, there were punctures observed in the pouches.
The implant had some pointed/sharp features. But since it was small, not heavy or bulky, the pouch design didn’t seem at risk of punctures. For those reasons and others, additional packaging like backer cards or tip protectors were not considered. After experiencing a transit failure, it was observed that the small size of the product placed alone in a larger pouch had simply left too much room for the implant to move around. In the end, the simple backer card and tip protection that was originally deemed unnecessary fixed the failure. Together, they reduced internal movement and increased protection of the implant within the pouch.
This everyday example shows that failures are common and can happen even when you think all risks have been considered and addressed. Experiencing a failure and learning the process of fixing it serves your future.
Evaluating Transit Testing Failures: Step-by-Step
STEP 1: Start with a Structured Failure Review
Make sure you understand what actually failed; not all failures point to the same root cause. Some failures can also lead to more than one conclusion. It is also possible that multiple factors contributed to the root cause. Whatever the case, thorough deconstruction of the outcome is the way to go.
Common failure modes include:
- Seal breaches
- Punctures or abrasions
- Crushed or deformed trays/cartons
- Dunnage shifting, causing device contact
- Label damage or illegibility
- Device damage (if applicable)
Once you understand the specific failure, you’re ready to determine the next steps. For example, if a puncture occurred from sharp device features inside the sterile barrier, explore options to shield the packaging from any protruding features. Maybe the failure was caused by excessive movement of the pouch within the carton.
STEP 2. Evaluate the Entire Packaging System
As mentioned, transit failures are often system-level issues, not single-component problems. As such, it makes sense to evaluate the entire system. How did the sterile barrier, device, dunnage, and carton all perform together? What were the intended interactions between components vs. what really happened? This is an important piece in understanding your failure and leading you to an appropriate root cause and subsequent action.
STEP 3. Conduct a Root Cause Analysis
Use structured analysis tools to pinpoint the cause, taking what you’ve found and narrowing it down until you have the actual source of the failure. There are simple failures that only need a simple fix, but overall there may be more to it. You are dependent on the visible symptoms to a degree. The goal is to zero in on the actual source or sources of the failure—going beyond what the eye can see.
Keeping in mind that failures can vary in complexity is where analysis tools can help you
avoid “band-aid” fixes. Examples are:
- 5 Whys
- Fishbone diagram
- Fault tree analysis
- Packaging SME review
“Personally, I like the 5 Whys and fishbone diagram because they really outline the pieces and parts of a system and consider how they react with each other,” says Devon Buckley, Engineering Manager at PCL.
STEP 4. Develop Targeted Corrective Actions
With the root cause and contributing factors confirmed, you are ready to implement a solution to mitigate the failure. Be sure to document all changes clearly and in alignment with ISO 11607 standards for packaging system performance.
Based on the root cause, corrective actions may include:
- Increasing material thickness
- Adjusting or adding dunnage
- Choosing a stronger shipper board strength (ECT/BST)
- Modifying sealing parameters
- Changing fit or internal clearance
- Addition of internal protection (etc. Tip protection)
STEP 5. Run Feasibility Testing Before Re-testing the Full Transit Profile
Once the packaging system is reworked to mitigate the failure, resist the urge to jump straight back into a full Distribution Validation—this is costly and may not give you the insight you need. It’s recommended to run feasibility tests to identify which product–package configurations provide the best protection through the distribution cycle. This allows you to build confidence that the new system is on the right track. Go for smaller, focused feasibility tests to evaluate specific concerns:
- Drop tests
- Vibration-only sequences
- Seal strength checks at revised parameters
These quick evaluations provide rapid feedback and reduce cost before committing to a full transit test.
Key Takeaways
Diligence, attention to detail, collaboration and staying on top of industry standards, updates, and guidance minimize the likelihood of a transit failure in your packaging design. If a failure occurs, apply your approaches with a fresh eye and know that the issue can be corrected. Transit test failures happen to even the most seasoned engineers. Having an established plan to implement is the best and fastest path to success.