Associated Topics || Dr. Math Home || Search Dr. Math

### Maximizing Volume of a Cereal Box

```
Date: 07/08/99 at 23:10:43
From: Phil Baker
Subject: Maximizing volume of a box

I have a follow-on question to a standard max/min problem. The problem
is the one where one has to find the maximum volume of a box, given a
certain-sized piece of cardboard (i.e., how big a square should be cut
from each corner before folding the cardboard into a box?)

I can show the calculus for how to find the maximum volume. My
question is, does anybody have any insights about why (for instance)
cereal boxes are the size they are? Is it due exclusively to
maximizing volume, or are there other considerations - manufacturing,
marketing, ergonomics, etc?

Thanks for any insight you can provide.
```

```
Date: 07/09/99 at 17:14:42
From: Doctor Peterson
Subject: Re: Maximizing volume of a box

Hi, Phil.

I have no professional knowledge of this, but I can imagine lots of
things besides maximizing the volume that would go into this decision:

Manufacturing:

try to maximize volume, within various constraints
size of blank cardboard available - make box fit
size of cutting and printing machines
size of shipping cartons and pallets
ease of making bag inserts to fit (harder if square bottomed)

Marketing:

try to maximize AREA for printing logos, ads, and required text
tradition - don't make boxes too different from old boxes

Ergonomics:

can't be thicker than a small person's hand, so it can be held
box should be reasonably sturdy when open

Etc:

realities of manufacturing: overlaps and waste modify the
constraints

I tried some sample constraints to see what they would do. If we just
try to minimize material for a given volume, with the assumption that
the entire top and bottom and one side overlap, so that the area of
material is

A = 2hw + 3hd + 4wd

then the optimum ratio is h:w:d = 4:3:2, not surprisingly, since that
makes the three terms equal. That's not too far from the typical box
- at least better than the optimum for a closed box without overlaps,
which is a cube.

Then I tried including waste for a box cut this way:

+---+-----------+---+-----------+---+
d|xxx|           |xxx|:::::::::::|xxx|
+---+-----------+---+-----------+---+
|   |           |   |           |:::|
|   |           |   |           |:::|
|   |           |   |           |:::|
h|   |           |   |           |:::|
|   |           |   |           |:::|
|   |           |   |           |:::|
|   |           |   |           |:::|
|   |           |   |           |:::|
+---+-----------+---+-----------+---+
d|xxx|           |xxx|:::::::::::|xxx|
+---+-----------+---+-----------+---+
d       w       d       w       d

(xxx = discarded parts or flaps, ::: = overlapped ends for gluing) so
that the area to be minimized is

A = (h + 2d)(2w + 3d) = 2hw + 3hd + 4wd + 6d^2

This gives h:w:d = 4:3:1, if I did it right, which is even closer to
what a cereal box is; this makes sense, since minimizing waste would
make us want d to be smaller than in the other case. This almost
entirely explains the shape, which surprises me. But I suspect
tradition is the main influence on box shape today, unless government
regulations play a role too.

- Doctor Peterson, The Math Forum
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/
```
Associated Topics:
High School Geometry
High School Polyhedra
High School Practical Geometry

Search the Dr. Math Library:

 Find items containing (put spaces between keywords):   Click only once for faster results: [ Choose "whole words" when searching for a word like age.] all keywords, in any order at least one, that exact phrase parts of words whole words

Submit your own question to Dr. Math
Math Forum Home || Math Library || Quick Reference || Math Forum Search