The tariffs imposed in 2018 are causing shippers to look at money-saving options for reducing costs. Usage of steel drums continues to defy contenders as being the most reliable packaging for the shipment of dangerous goods. However, while the popularity is sustained, there are some manufacturers who are reducing metal thickness in order to postpone price increases. Less steel equals less cost, right? No, this could not be more wrong! The result is that while these thin gauge steel drums are able to qualify for the minimal requirements of the DOT and UN certification, they do not perform as well in-field and the cost of in-transit and warehouse incidents will increase. Gone are the days of drum failures due to seam leaks — today’s most common incidents are related to fork-lift puncture and material handling. This change in the type of incidents, and the reduction of metal thickness leads one to conclude that these thin walled drums might be paving the way for a new set of in-transit occurrences. Furthermore, most shippers of steel drums fail to realize the g-forces associated with in-transit steel drum shipments and often ignore or underestimate adequate blocking and bracing preparation. CFR49 173.28(4)(i) states that for steel drums intended for reuse, 0.92mm is the minimum allowable steel gauge or a 0.82 body is allowed if the heads are 1.11mm. Even at these minimum levels, we recommend that thicker options are justified by the reduced risk of the transport package. Be smart. Don’t be penny-wise and pound-foolish by choosing to reduce steel thickness and thereby increasing in-transit risks.
Industry News Skolnik Newsletter