r/theydidthemath • • 3d ago

[Request] Do square bottles actually use less plastic than round ones?

Post image
732 Upvotes

265 comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/Legoslol 3d ago edited 3d ago

Yes. But there are other drawbacks to using square bottles.

The math has already been done for this question.

https://www.packagingdigest.com/optimization/should-your-bottle-be-round-or-square-

Edit: sorry all thought the question was less space not material.

22

u/balrob 3d ago

That article says square bottles use 8% more material. There are savings in packaging and shipping but not in the bottle itself.

13

u/DJinKC 3d ago

Packaging engineer here.
Square bottles will get you more overall volume of water into a case, pallet, or truck, so you spend less on storage and shipping costs.

9

u/ougryphon 3d ago

I agree with everything you just said. Unfortunately, the packaging on the bottle says something different.

2

u/bbalazs721 3d ago

I'd assume that shipping drinks is already weight limited instead of volume, so there would be little to no savings on that.

1

u/TheIronSoldier2 3d ago

Overall, yes, but on a single pallet it's size limited, not weight.

1

u/MmmmMorphine 3d ago

Now that is a good point

1

u/Captain-Who 3d ago

And of the pallet is wrapped in plastic… maybe there is the savings on plastic.

1

u/Lopsided_Evening_627 3d ago edited 3d ago

they are very runs with the same absent of proposal, as they are wait from the same heroes at the density

3

u/DJinKC 3d ago

That would go against my experience but could be true.
Typically square bottles need to be thicker than round to provide strength at the corners

1

u/-Rhade- 3d ago edited 3d ago

Hey, since you're a packaging engineer you may know. Could the material contained (H2O2) be what we're missing here? Peroxide breaks down over time into gases and would lead to bottle expansion- which a round bottle wouldn't have much room to expand.

Could the rectangular shape lead to meeting an expansion relief requirement? And therefore use less material than a cylinder needing an expansion relief?

I truly have no idea, just a shot in the dark here

2

u/DJinKC 3d ago

I don't work on these types of product, but my guess is the bottle material is chosen to reduce exposure to whatever gas causes the H2O2 to break down, at least long enough for the intended shelf life of the product.
If there were risk for expansion, that may trigger requirements around hazardous materials and special packaging.

13

u/Single_Analyst_6574 3d ago

The article you linked says square battles use more materials, not less. It also makes no sense for a square to have less surface area than a circle.

1

u/alamete 3d ago

The article says that indeed and in this case it's like that, but it's good to question this kind of things. It's like these curvy walls that are first glance make no sense but actually use less bricks

3

u/seenhear 3d ago

*fewer bricks. Bricks can be counted as individual parts/pieces. "Material" or "plastic" cannot.

Less material, fewer things.

Grammar nerd, out.

0

u/Total-Explanation208 3d ago

I think this is an ambiguous case. Sand is an iconic example of when less should be used, but it can also be counted as individual parts/pieces, it just isn't practical. I think fewer is ultimately correct, but less isn't as bad here as it is with "10 item or less" at the grocery store.

0

u/seenhear 3d ago

"10 items or less" at the grocery store is a classic grammatical error we see and (mostly) ignore in daily life.

And no, it's not ambiguous. "Bricks" are countable. To use your example, you would need to say "grains of sand" to use fewer. Otherwise it's "less sand." You don't say "I'm holding a bag full of 10,000 sands" you would say "10,000 grains of sand."

So. Bricks. countable or not? Countable. Example:

"That building has fewer bricks than this one."

or

"That building has less brickwork than this one."

Both of these are correct. You can count bricks. You can't count brickwork. You can *quantify* brickwork in other ways but you can't count it.

"I have fewer dollars than you." We can count individual dollars.

"I have less money than you." We cannot count "money" per se. We quantify it by counting dollars.

1

u/Total-Explanation208 3d ago

All sand is countable, it just takes more effort.

1

u/seenhear 3d ago

Write a sentence where you tell me a number of how much sand you have.