11 ms·
Why cans of soup are shaped the way they are
- stansmith 12y agoThanks, I also liked reading the last article about ice cream. Your articles remind me how much calculus/math I have forgotten since leaving school and, sadly, how little use there is everyday to use calculus :(
- egypturnash 12y agoI feel like there are other efficiencies not considered in the article. Namely spoilage and portion size. I mean, you're not usually gonna need a bunch of tuna at once, so you don't want to have a huge can full of enough tuna for twenty people - but you also need it to be in a can big enough to manipulate. Also one with a big enough visible label space to actually put something legible on it.
- wging 12y agoAlso, what about ease of retrieval? If the can's cylindrical, instead of cuboid, it's easier to retrieve every bit of a thick soup that doesn't drop out of the can.
- mhb 12y agoMaybe that's why spoons have evolved with curved sides instead of right angles.
- thaumasiotes 12y agoI suspect a bigger influence on this was people's general desire not to stab themselves in the mouth with sharp corners.
- cmiller1 12y agoYou must have a hard time using forks
- thaumasiotes 12y agoIf the fork tines pointed up or down, instead of back, I would ;)
- grdvnl 12y agoThe h/r ratio does take care of portion size, though again portion size may directly impact spoilage parameters.
- e12e 12y agoYou only need enough tuna for one tiger. (couldn't resist ;)
- arethuza 12y agoOn a related point - I just finished reading "Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters" and the author specifically mentions how the "can of soup" shape is pretty dreadful for holding fissile materials: http://www.amazon.com/Atomic-Accidents-Meltdowns-Disasters-Mountains/dp/1605984922 http://www.amazon.com/Atomic-Accidents-Meltdowns-Disasters-M...
- curiousgeorgio 12y ago> If we wanted to use a shape that packed perfectly efficiently, we’d use some kind of cuboid... But we don’t see many cubes on shelves. Let's look at cylinders now... The only real reason the article gives against using cuboids is that "the edges would be stress points", but it goes on to imply that this is mostly solved with "filleted (rounded) edges to reduce stress concentrations and to make them easier to manufacture." I enjoyed the rest of the article relating to the optimal dimensions of the cylinder, but I still don't really understand why more products don't use cuboids (with or without filleted edges). Surely the space savings for shipping and shelving would be pretty significant, no?
- smackfu 12y agoFor shelves, maybe the packing density of randomly oriented cuboids isn't any better than cans. (There's a practical use of math for you.)
- curiousgeorgio 12y agoWho says they'd be randomly oriented? When I see examples of cuboid products on shelves (think boxes), they're usually stacked quite neatly and efficiently.
- sliverstorm 12y agoThat's because some poor sap has to organize them every night. (Source: was once that poor sap) Nothing exhibits the Second Law of Thermodynamics quite like grocery store shelves.
- VLM 12y agoRandom orientation is the key, "pretty good kinda aligned face out" is very fast and cheap both WRT labor and capital, and label alignment on the can is not a cost at all. On cuboids the label alignment is beyond critical (even just randomly off center 1/4 inch on the shelf would look awful) and the capital cost to align the cubioids perfectly in their box and on the shelf are expensive. (edited to add, I'm not saying our economic system would collapse if the cost of cuboid soup cans went up three cents a piece, but it would be an incredibly difficult corporate sell to convince one mfgr of many that he should accept a 1/3 of a million dollar loss compared to his round competitors on ten million units sold just to make them cube-ish, for, uh, fun) Also wear in the box. Cuboids would tend to wear off entire faces of the label while being tossed around the warehouse but cylinders at worst will end up with a vertical streak. Finally having worked retail as a starving student a quarter century ago there is a huge installed base of semi-standardized grocery store shelving that was never designed for the peculiar spacing cubiods would require. Or rephrased, cylindrical cans and rectangular prism boxes have evolved over decades to fit certain semi-standard discrete shelf configurations... If you want it on an American supermarket shelf, then a grid pattern of X by Y (preferably one shipping crate) will take up a certain discrete space. Not a quarter inch too big necessitating reconfiguration of the whole section, etc.
- peterwwillis 12y agoCans of soup are definitely not spherical for space-efficiency. They're spherical because from the assembly line to shipping to the customer, they simply work better. They handle dents well, they roll along assembly lines fluidly, they keep the orientation of the product labels, they're easy to inspect for quality, and they pack and unpack well. Obviously they also stay put on a shelf... In terms of dimensions there's several factors to consider: label size, stacking efficiency and directional integrity. If you want a nice big color photo of your product, a taller, slimmer container will allow for a large color background and plenty of text for both the front and rear labels. Depending on if it's skinny or wide will determine how other products can be stacked around or on top/below it. And some foods (like tuna) keep their shape/consistency better when laid horizontally to prevent from breaking up while being transported. Similar foods hold together better when the pieces are larger, so larger portions of canned fish have the typical vertical orientation. And of course there's only so much horizontal space that can be allocated per unit before the shelves burst at the seams. For sealable cuboid containers, more and more containers are being modified with grippable edges to make it easier to handle, since the customer doesn't use the entirety of the product at once (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81W3JCB8tHL._SL1500_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81W3JCB8tHL._SL1500_.j...). Resealable bagged containers are also becoming more popular, as they reduce the amount of air in the container, pack more efficiently, save weight, and are easier recycled. (http://www.gofoodindustry.com/uploads/members/comp-1509/files/TROOTS-BLENDS-IN-RESEALABLE-BAGS---1308818370-DJW24678.jpg http://www.gofoodindustry.com/uploads/members/comp-1509/file...)
- jessaustin 12y agos/spherical/cylindrical/g
- 001sky 12y agoYes, the article is interesting but not convincing. The shape is a compromise for volumetric efficiency, stackability, ease of manufacture, and field-toughness. Spheres are highly impractical on all dimensions. Caulk and pepesi (pardon my pun) don't come in spheres, squares, or rectangles either...probably for similar reasons.
- danielweber 12y agoMy first day of calculus in high school, Mr Haskell told us that in a few months we would be able to prove the ideal size for a soup can. And we did!
- ethomson 12y agoThe "So why not for everyone?" section is interesting, but misses the reason the tuna can is actually the worst shape on the list: it's optimized for surface area of the top and bottom of the can! Tuna is actually cooked in the can (retort cooking) and the high surface area is beneficial to this process. Maybe not the most useful thing I learned in Calc 1, but the thing I remember best.
- raverbashing 12y agoExactly Also, you won't be able to use a can opener if the diameter is too small, since can openers work in a straight line, if the diameter is too small it won't fit in the curvature
- ufmace 12y agoThat's what I figured. Consider that the volume of a tuna can is probably limited to roughly 1 meal worth. If you made it with optimal dimensions, based on material usage, then the diameter might be too small for a normal can opener, and it might be too narrow to get all of the tuna out easily.
- bdamm 12y agoThe tomato paste can disproves your theory.
- bsilvereagle 12y agoThere are lots of other really good articles on that blog: http://www.datagenetics.com/blog.html http://www.datagenetics.com/blog.html
- rwmj 12y agoHow about the cost of the food? Tuna is expensive, condensed milk is cheap. That matters relative to the cost of the can because it's more important to make the condensed milk can cheap to store a cheap ingredient, than to worry about the minor cost of aluminium compared to expensive ingredients like tuna.
- treerock 12y agoTuna £0.67/kg [1] Condensed Milk £2.67/kg [2] Not that it negates your point. Just struck me as interesting that tinned tuna would be seen as expensive in some places in the world. I guess it depends on the quality of the tuna[3]. [1] http://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=256557156 http://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=256557156 [2] http://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details http://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details /?id=265540922 [3] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tesco-accused-of-selling-dirty-tuna-by-top-chef-hugh-fearnleywhittingstall-9162928.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tesco-accused...
- kbart 12y agoThat's £0.67 per 100 gr., so it's actually £6.7/kg -- 2.5 times of condensed milk.
- unreal37 12y agoThe article fails to mention the main reason food is shaped "inefficiently": serving size. Besides being cooked in the can (as egypturnash points out), a can of tuna contains two sandwiches of tuna. A jar of tomato sauce contains two servings of tomato sauce. A can of soup contains two servings of soup. Yes, you have to be able to hold it in your hand, and stack it on a shelf. But you can't make a smaller can because that would be "less soup". No one wants to buy smaller cans of soup, and the manufacturers certainly don't want to sell less soup per purchase either. Economics trumps material efficiency.
- selectodude 12y agoA can of tuna is enough tuna for two sandwiches? Yikes, I must be getting big.
- blt 12y agoIt's not! unreal37 must be a little kid :)
- jimktrains2 12y agoIt probably contains 2 servings of tuna, just like a can of soup contains two servings of soup. Most/Many people will use it as a single portion. Pop, chip, candy makers used to label their products as multiple servings when it was normally used as a single portion and have since been forced to stop.
- vsbuffalo 12y agoGreat post, but "data genetics"? It would be nice if they didn't misuse the word genetics — this site has nothing to do with genetics.
- squeakynick 12y agoThanks, but it's just a name. Just like you are not really a buffalo :) Joking aside. DataGenetics is the consultancy company I set up when I was doing that line of work. It was all about spotting trends/patterns/explanations in data (sort of like the DNA), and the term described the work I did. A lot of the work I did was related to video games, and what the characteristics (chromosomes) were about games and how they performed. When selecting a business name, you can chose to attempt to describe your business function in the name "GreatPokerHands", "DataGenetics", "CheapTickets" or you can try an obscure reference "Amazon", "King", "Zynga" and then spend additional money educating people on that brand and what it represents. (Amazon sell things online, and has nothing to do with the river. If we listen to Jeff, he says the name was selected because it started with the letter "A", so will appear first on lists). I continue to blog under DataGenetics as I own the domain, and have followers there. It's a hobby. Not every post is about data, either, it's just a place I put my thoughts. It's my hobby. http://datagenetics.com/blog/may52014/index.html http://datagenetics.com/blog/may52014/index.html
- serf 12y agoWhile I ultimately understand your point, I don't believe the name explains your business in the least bit, I believe you found a middle road which is neither self-descriptive or abstract in the way the name 'Zynga' is. The name you chose is not obscure or esoteric, but rather uses two words associated to information and relies on the reader to make the connection that your business has something to do with information. The problem, however, is that 'Genetics' refers to a specific domain of information -- this leads the reader to believe that the 'Data' (an ambiguous term for unordered knowledge) refers to datums regarding 'Genetics' (the specific form of data which biology/inheritance are so concerned). The first thing that popped into my mind when reading the name was "Must be a biotech/bioinformatics group.". I don't want to sound critical; i'm not trying to. I've been linked a few articles on that blog and enjoy the content -- just trying to give you some (probably) useless data on how John Q. Public may encounter the site.
- jscheel 12y agoMy grandpa designed the bottom of modern beverage cans. The reason for that shape is two-fold. First, the bulge is for pressure resistance. Second, the rest of the design was created specifically for the optimal application of the epoxy spray that prevents your drink from developing a metallic taste. Unfortunately, he didn't patent his work and Anheuser Busch ultimately took his idea for themselves. Never prevented them from being his client though, for other seamless can tooling work.
- lifeisstillgood 12y agoIf your grandfather is still with us, please can you persuade him to share his story with the world "the man who designed the beer can" has got to be one of my must reads :-) Edit: of course if he no longer is, my condolences, but please tell us what you can remember.
- squeakynick 12y ago+1
- TeMPOraL 12y agoSeconded; please share the story, or if your grandfather feels like it, maybe do an AMA on Reddit. That will be one hell of an amazing read! :).
- jscheel 12y agoI'll ask him and see if he's up for it.
- jscheel 12y agoI'm in the process of recording my grandpa talking about his life. He actually doesn't say much about the bottom of the can. Basically that he went back to his shop and sketched out some ideas based on the technical specs he knew they needed, and just kept building prototypes until it worked. I'm going to try and get him to tell me more about it this weekend. Here's a short recording of him talking about a fix he did for the military: https://soundcloud.com/jscheel/frank-scheel-ammunition-work https://soundcloud.com/jscheel/frank-scheel-ammunition-work
- hackuser 12y ago> The purpose of a food can is to store food. Absolutely not. The purpose is to maximize profit. The can improves profit via sales (being appealing on the shelf and in the kitchen cabinet; perhaps a familiar shape sells better), marketing (the image of the brand and the product, including environmental issues), distribution (the obvious costs and the value of being appealing to the sales channel (e.g., oversized products might be unappealing to the supermarket)), manufacturing costs, functionality for the consumer (food stays fresh, fits standard can-openers, etc.) etc etc.
- victorquinn 12y agoNo mention of can openers, and how they work their way around the cylindrically shaped can? Think of how a can opener would work with a cube, hexagonal, or other shaped can. Cool article, but seems it builds a lot of assumptions into its analysis.
- johngalt 12y agoSquarish cans are used today for some items (sardine cans come to mind). They usually open with a tab or key along a seam. A hexagonal or octagonal shape could use a tab with seam approach. Like a large soda can.
- Luyt 12y agoThe article asserts: "Aesthetically, a slightly taller can looks nicer. The Golden ratio is approx 1.6, so a can with a height of approx 1.6x it's diameter (3.2x the radius) would be very appealing." However, it is a myth that the Golden Ratio is the most appealing ratio. Many things, from the Parthenon to paper sizes, don't have a golden ratio and that doesn't make them less attractive[1]. Also, the supermarket in my neighbourhood sells soup in a variety of containers (cans, tetrabriks, plastic bags) and if only the standard soup can would sell well, I wouldn't see the other packages. [1] http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4325 http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4325 "Perhaps the best known pseudoscientific claim about the golden ratio is that the Greek Parthenon, the famous columned temple atop the Acropolis in Athens, is designed around this ratio. Many are the amateurs who have superimposed golden rectangles all over images of the Parthenon, claiming to have found a match. But if you've ever studied such images, you've seen that it never quite fits, at least not any better than any other rectangle you might try. That's because there's no credible historical or documentary evidence that the Parthenon's designers, who worked more than a century before Euclid was even born, ever used the golden ratio in any way, or even knew of its existence."
- autokad 12y agoi think most importantly, its stating that the golden ratio is appealing, which is somewhat unquestionable. that contrasts with what you said it said, which is that its the MOST appealing ratio. obviously there are many considerations that go into a soup cans dimensions, the author was only offering a LIST of other possible reasons other than volume/surface area efficiencies. 2ndly, theres a difference between not having golden ratios and not being based off the golden ratios.
- tripzilch 12y agoThere really is nothing particularly more appealing about the ratio 1:1.618.. (the golden ratio) than there is about ratios of 1:1.5, 1:1.666.. or even 1:1.333.., for that matter. It has a bunch of interesting properties, but aesthetics is not one of them.
- lnanek2 12y agoWe do have a lot of cubes. Juice boxes. Cereal boxes. Wine boxes. Cylinders are pretty much only used when you need to fake larger capacity for consumer preference (cardboard nut containers in super markets vs. plastic cubes of them at Costco) or you need to use metal for some reason (e.g. tanks of pressurized gas, holding liquids with the top off, etc.). I think he kind of misses the point that cubes are superior in terms of space usage then goes and analyzes how space efficient something we are only forced to use for other reasons is.
- bdamm 12y agoI was dismayed to find that they did not dive into the ribbed shapes as well.
- qntmfred 12y agothey need to start optimizing the shape of nacho cheese jars so that i stop getting rim cheese all over my knuckles every time i dip a chip
- bnolsen 12y agoThe M&M shape is the most efficient for minimizing empty space in shipping containers. They missed that one.
- coryking 12y agoCans of soup could also be shaped the way they are due to the fact that it might be easier to pasteurize a cylindrical can than a cube. The heat can be more evenly applied to a cylinder than a cube.
- fencepost 12y agoThis leaves out or glosses over some very important areas, namely the use to which the can is being put. Soup cans are taller than ideal for minimum material use in part because it's easier to pour from them, while on the other hand a tall skinny tuna can would be hated. For a more extreme example, consider the guava paste can - an inch high and 6-7 inches across because of how the product inside is used. Think about trying to pour your soup out of that.
- lafar6502 12y agoI think the authors overlooked the most obvious reason for cans being cylindrical: a cylinder is very resistant to vertical compression, so you can stack cans very high on pallets without worrying about bottom layer deformation.