Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
ASTM D5487 – 16 (Reapproved 2022), developed under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D10 and Subcommittee D10.21 on Shipping Containers and Systems, outlines standard procedures for using shock machines to simulate the vertical drops of loaded shipping containers, cylindrical containers, bags, and sacks. The test method provides a controlled shock input for evaluating the ability of shipping containers, interior packaging materials, and their contents to withstand the shock hazards of handling, transportation, and storage.
Unlike traditional free‑fall drop testing (D5276), which often understresses the specimen, controlled shock input offers a more repeatable impact. As noted in the standard, non‑perpendicular drops of just 2° off perpendicularity can result in 8% lower acceleration into the test specimen because impact energy disperses in several axes. This method specifically addresses the need for precise replication of shock events for package systems that contain critical elements.
This test method uses shock machines to replicate the effects of vertical drops. A shock pulse programmer controls the parameters and shape of the shock pulse generated by the machine. The shock test machine drop height defines the distance through which the carriage free falls before striking the programmer. Accurate definition of terms is essential for uniform testing across laboratories.
| 🎯 Term (Section 3) | 📖 Definition |
|---|---|
| Critical Element | The most fragile component of the test specimen (3.2.1). |
| Shock Pulse Programmer | A device used to control the parameters and shape of the shock pulse (3.2.2). |
| Shock Test Machine Drop Height | The distance the carriage free falls before striking the shock pulse programmer (3.2.3). |
| Velocity | Rate of change of position in a specified direction (in./s or m/s; 3.2.4). |
Values stated in inch‑pound units are regarded as the standard. SI units provided in parentheses are mathematical conversions for information only and are not considered standard (Section 1.2). Proper conditioning of test specimens in accordance with Practice D4332 is recommended prior to testing to ensure consistent results. The standard references key companion documents for a comprehensive packaging evaluation program.
| 🟦 Referenced Standard | 📐 Description |
|---|---|
| D996 | Terminology of Packaging and Distribution Environments |
| D999 | Vibration Testing of Shipping Containers |
| D3332 | Mechanical‑Shock Fragility of Products, Using Shock Machines |
| D4332 | Conditioning Containers, Packages, or Packaging Components for Testing |
| D5276 | Drop Test of Loaded Containers by Free Fall |
| E122 | Practice for Calculating Sample Size to Estimate, With Specified Precision, the Average for a Characteristic of a Lot or Process |
🔍 What types of containers does D5487‑16 cover?
The standard covers general procedures for using shock machines to replicate the effects of vertical drops of loaded shipping containers, cylindrical containers, and bags and sacks (Section 1.1).
💡 Why is a shock machine preferred over a free‑fall drop test in some cases?
Free‑fall drop testing often understresses the specimen. According to the standard, a drop just 2° off perpendicularity can result in 8% lower acceleration into the test specimen because energy disperses in several axes. Shock machines provide a more controlled and reproducible shock input for accurate fragility assessment.
⚡ What is a “critical element” in the context of this test method?
A critical element is defined in Section 3.2.1 as the most fragile component of the test specimen. Simulated drop testing of package systems containing critical elements has produced good results using this shock machine method.
📌 What are the original approval year and the current edition status of D5487?
The standard was originally approved in 1998. The current edition was approved on April 15, 2022, and is designated D5487 – 16 (Reapproved 2022), confirming its continued technical validity under the ASTM five‑year review cycle.