Corrugated packaging is usually associated with boxes, trays and transit cases.

DS Smith and Schneider Electric are using it for something more mechanically demanding:

holding moving components in position inside heavy industrial switchgear during handling and transport.

The two companies have developed a universal packaging system for three different integrated electrical switchgear products.

The design uses multi-layer corrugated endcaps, folded inserts and an openable side tray to create a stable structure around products that are too heavy to be packed conventionally.

Because the switchgear units must be loaded from the side using an industrial manipulator, the package had to work around the handling process rather than force the factory to change how the equipment is moved.

That makes this more than a material-substitution story.

It is an example of packaging being engineered around production automation, occupational handling constraints and product geometry at the same time.

One Packaging Architecture Has to Handle Three Products

The phrase “universal packaging” deserves attention.

DS Smith says Schneider Electric required one solution capable of packaging three types of switchgear.

That creates a different design problem from developing a dedicated pack for one SKU.

The packaging has to accommodate differences between products while keeping the overall structural logic sufficiently standardized.

According to the WorldStar entry submitted by DS Smith Packaging Hungary, the three switchgear variants all contain moving parts that need to remain fixed in the correct position during transport.

The packaging therefore performs several functions at once.

It creates the transport enclosure.

It secures moving components.

It protects metal connectors.

It provides a stable loading base.

And it has to remain practical for production workers to assemble.

That is where standardization can become commercially useful.

If one basic packaging concept serves several products, manufacturers may potentially reduce the number of completely separate packaging designs they have to manage.

But DS Smith has not published before-and-after figures for packaging SKUs, tooling, inventory or procurement cost.

So the stronger conclusion is simply that the design standardizes the packaging approach across three products, not that it has proven a specific cost reduction.

Heavy Products Change the Packaging Design Sequence

For a conventional consumer product, packaging design often begins with the product dimensions.

For heavy industrial equipment, the handling method can become equally important.

DS Smith says the switchgear products can only be moved and loaded into the packaging from the side using an industrial manipulator because of their weight.

That means a conventional top-loading carton would not solve the problem.

The package instead uses an openable side tray that provides a stable base and allows the product to be brought into position from the side.

Once loaded, the product can be anchored within the packaging structure.

This illustrates an important rule in industrial packaging:

the package has to fit the factory process, not only the product.

A structurally excellent pack can still fail operationally if workers cannot load it safely or if it disrupts an automated line.

That is why side access is not a minor convenience in this project.

It is a core design requirement.

Moving Components Create a Different Transport Risk

A heavy industrial cabinet is not necessarily a single rigid object.

The switchgear contains components that can move relative to the cabinet and therefore need to be restrained before transport.

If those parts shift under:

vibration;

impact;

braking;

forklift handling;

or other transport forces,

damage can occur even if the outer cabinet remains intact.

DS Smith addressed this by integrating corrugated sheet elements into separate endcaps to hold the moving parts in position.

Metal connectors are protected using folded corrugated inserts, while the side elements and endcaps use several laminated layers of corrugated board to increase structural stability.

This is where corrugated packaging moves beyond simple cushioning.

The board is being used as a load-bearing positioning structure.

That is a more technically interesting application than simply replacing a foam block with paper.

Multi-Layer Corrugated Board Is Doing Structural Work

Corrugated board is lightweight relative to many conventional rigid packaging materials.

But its performance depends heavily on how it is engineered.

Several sheets can be laminated together to create thicker structural elements.

Flute direction influences compression performance.

Geometry can distribute load.

Folded sections can create stiffness without using solid blocks of material.

In the Schneider Electric design, DS Smith uses multiple glued layers in the side elements and multi-layered endcaps to create the stability required around heavy products.

The lesson is not that corrugated board can replace every timber, foam or plastic structure used in heavy-duty packaging.

It cannot.

The loads, moisture exposure, stacking requirements and transport environment determine what is technically possible.

The stronger lesson is that fibre-based packaging can move into heavier industrial applications when designers treat corrugated board as an engineered structure rather than simply a box material.

The Package Was Drop Tested

That distinction becomes more credible because the solution was not evaluated only on appearance or assembly.

DS Smith says the packaging underwent controlled drop testing to assess resistance to impact, shock and potential structural damage.

The WorldStar entry also describes the package as drop-test compliant and states that protection was validated through testing.

However, the publicly available information does not identify:

the exact test standard;

drop height;

number of drops;

product weight;

orientation;

acceptance criteria;

or post-test inspection results.

So it would be inappropriate to claim compliance with a specific ISTA, ASTM or other transport-testing protocol without further evidence.

The defensible statement is that DS Smith conducted drop testing as part of its validation process.

For professional packaging engineers, the missing test parameters are exactly the data worth requesting.

“Heavy-Duty” Still Needs Numbers

The source repeatedly describes the switchgear as heavy.

That is believable from the handling requirement.

But neither DS Smith’s public case material nor the WorldStar entry provides the actual weight range of the three products.

That matters because structural packaging performance is highly load-dependent.

A corrugated design carrying 150 kg faces a very different problem from one carrying 500 kg.

Likewise, pallet configuration, stacking height and transportation mode influence the required safety factor.

Without those figures, this case should be viewed as evidence that corrugated board can handle this validated application, not as evidence that the same design can safely package any heavy switchgear product.

Industrial case studies become more useful when suppliers publish the load envelope.

Fast Assembly Was Part of the Brief

Another interesting engineering constraint is assembly time.

The WorldStar submission states that despite the complexity of the packaging, the design had to be assembled in less than one minute.

It also says minimal folding is required.

That matters because complex protective packaging can create a hidden labor penalty.

A packaging engineer may design an excellent structure with:

multiple inserts;

locking tabs;

reinforcements;

and positioning pieces.

But if workers need several minutes to assemble every pack, the solution may become a production bottleneck.

The design challenge is therefore not:

maximum structural complexity.

It is:

enough structural complexity to protect the product, packaged in the simplest possible assembly sequence.

That is especially important when packaging is integrated into an automated or semi-automated production line.

Automation Compatibility Changes What “Good Packaging” Means

DS Smith says the packaging was designed to fit modern automated production environments.

The importance here is not that the corrugated board itself is automated.

It is that the geometry and loading sequence have been designed so the package does not interfere with existing handling equipment.

The switchgear is moved with a manipulator.

The tray must allow lateral loading.

The product must then be secured without requiring difficult repositioning.

The packaging has to be assembled quickly enough to keep pace with production.

This is becoming an increasingly important part of industrial packaging design.

Manufacturers are automating:

material handling;

palletizing;

conveying;

storage;

and final assembly.

A package designed independently from those systems can create manual intervention exactly where the factory is trying to remove it.

So packaging engineers increasingly need to understand:

robot access;

gripper clearance;

loading orientation;

operator reach;

line speed;

and ergonomic constraints.

The box is becoming part of the manufacturing cell.

Universal Packaging Can Reduce Complexity Only If Variability Is Controlled

Using one design family for three products sounds efficient.

But universal packaging can also become overbuilt.

If the largest or heaviest product determines the specification, the smaller product may end up carrying more board than it really needs.

That is a common standardization trade-off.

One package design can reduce:

engineering complexity;

inventory;

training;

and setup differences.

But a highly optimized individual pack can sometimes use less material.

DS Smith says the Schneider design was also engineered to remove unused or void space and minimize material use.

What has not been published is a comparison between:

three individually optimized packs

and

the universal design.

That would be useful data.

A universal structure is most attractive when it reduces operational complexity without creating excessive material use on the smaller variants.

The Polyethylene Bag Is an Important Detail

Despite the strong fibre-based positioning, the package is not entirely paper.

A polyethylene bag is included to protect greased components from dust.

The WorldStar entry explains the reason directly: the greased product elements are sensitive to paper dust.

This is actually one of the more useful details in the case.

It shows where material substitution meets a technical boundary.

If direct contact with fibre particles can affect the product, removing plastic simply to achieve an all-paper claim would be poor engineering.

The PE bag performs a defined protective function.

That means the correct question is not:

“Why is there still plastic?”

It is:

“Is the plastic component necessary, and can it be minimized and separated appropriately after use?”

That is a more credible approach to industrial packaging sustainability.

“Fibre-Based” Does Not Mean “Plastic-Free”

Schneider Electric has been reducing single-use plastic in its packaging portfolio.

Industry reporting on the project says that by the final quarter of 2025, Schneider had increased the share of primary and secondary packaging using recycled cardboard and free from single-use plastic to 85% under its Schneider Sustainability Impact program.

The new switchgear package still contains a PE bag because of the dust-control requirement.

That demonstrates why company-level plastic-reduction targets do not necessarily translate into plastic elimination from every product.

For technically demanding equipment, performance comes first.

The sustainability objective should be to remove unnecessary materials, not necessary protection.

“Fully Recyclable” Needs Qualification

DS Smith and the WorldStar submission describe the package as fully recyclable.

The WorldStar page also states that the materials used are recyclable.

But WorldStar explicitly notes that the technical text on the winner page was supplied by the applicant and that the organization does not assume responsibility for its accuracy.

That means an independent trade article should be more precise.

The package is predominantly corrugated cardboard with a separate polyethylene bag.

Both material types can have recycling pathways.

But practical recyclability depends on:

whether the components can be separated;

local collection systems;

contamination;

the exact packaging configuration;

and the infrastructure available where the pack reaches end of life.

The public material does not provide an independent recyclability certification for the complete package.

Therefore I would write:

DS Smith describes the materials as recyclable

rather than independently declaring the entire system universally recyclable.

Industrial Packaging Sustainability Is Often About Avoided Material

One of the stronger claims in this case is that the design was created to minimize void space and use fewer materials.

The geometry is intended to remain compact, which DS Smith says can also support lower freight and storage costs.

That is an important sustainability principle for heavy industrial packaging.

The environmental discussion often focuses on whether a package contains plastic or paper.

For large products, volume can matter just as much.

An unnecessarily oversized transit package can consume:

more corrugated board;

more pallet area;

more warehouse space;

and more vehicle cube.

A compact structure can therefore influence both material use and logistics efficiency.

But again, no quantified freight, material or CO₂ savings have been published for this project.

The design logic is credible.

The actual savings remain company claims without a disclosed baseline.

Eight Packs per Industrial Pallet Adds Another Efficiency Layer

The WorldStar application says eight packs are placed on one industrial pallet for transport.

That detail matters because secondary packaging should not be optimized independently from tertiary logistics.

A technically compact individual pack can allow:

better pallet utilization;

more predictable load geometry;

and simpler warehouse handling.

For industrial packaging engineers, the useful unit is often not one box.

It is the entire palletized load.

The better design question is:

How many safely protected products can we move per pallet position, truck or container?

That shifts packaging optimization toward total supply-chain efficiency.

Product Protection Still Has the Highest Environmental Value

A heavy electrical switchgear product contains far more material, manufacturing energy and economic value than its corrugated packaging.

That changes the sustainability hierarchy.

Saving several kilograms of packaging is useful.

Damaging the switchgear because the protection was downgraded would be much worse.

This is why product protection has to remain the first boundary condition.

The pack should then be optimized within that boundary.

DS Smith’s use of:

multi-layer endcaps;

dedicated connector protection;

component restraints;

a stable tray;

and the PE dust barrier

shows that the design was built around failure modes rather than around a material headline.

That is the correct sequence.

This Is Also a Standardization Story

The most transferable lesson may ultimately be the universal design.

Manufacturers with multiple related products often accumulate packaging specifications over many years.

Product A gets one insert.

Product B gets another box.

Product C uses a legacy foam pack.

Each design may work.

Together, they create complexity.

Purchasing manages more SKUs.

Warehouses hold more packaging materials.

Operators need more instructions.

Changes take longer to implement.

A universal structural platform can potentially reduce some of that complexity.

The Schneider Electric case shows how corrugated design can help standardize packaging while still accommodating different product configurations.

The commercial value of that standardization has not been quantified.

But the principle is worth examining.

Where Corrugated Packaging Can Move Next

Heavy industrial equipment is an interesting growth area for fibre-based transit packaging because many applications still rely on combinations of:

wood;

EPS or EPE foams;

plastic fixtures;

and custom fabricated supports.

Corrugated board will not replace all of them.

Moisture exposure, very high loads and repeated-use requirements can favor other materials.

But engineered paper structures may be competitive where the package can be:

die-cut;

laminated;

folded;

and structurally reinforced

without compromising protection.

For converters, that shifts the sales conversation away from cost per square metre of board.

The value sits in engineering.

If a corrugated design can eliminate a fabricated foam component, simplify assembly or consolidate several packaging specifications, the customer is buying more than board.

It is buying a manufacturing solution.

The WorldStar Award Confirms Industry Recognition, Not Every Performance Claim

The packaging won the Electronics category at the 2026 WorldStar Global Packaging Awards under DS Smith Packaging Hungary.

That is useful third-party confirmation that the project received international packaging recognition.

But the award page itself makes clear that the detailed technical descriptions and sustainability claims were provided by the applicant.

So the award should be reported accurately:

WorldStar recognized the packaging in the Electronics category.

It should not be used as independent proof that every applicant claim—such as “100% sustainable”—has been technically verified.

That distinction is important for E-E-A-T.

What Should Heavy-Industry Packaging Teams Test?

For manufacturers considering fibre-based replacements for heavy-duty packaging, the Schneider Electric project suggests a more useful sequence than simply asking whether corrugated board is strong enough.

Start with the product and process.

Define:

product weight and centre of gravity;

which parts can move;

which components are vulnerable to dust or abrasion;

how the product is lifted;

which direction it enters the package;

drop and vibration exposure;

stacking and pallet requirements;

assembly-time target;

and which materials genuinely need to remain non-paper.

Then build the corrugated structure around those constraints.

Afterward, validate it.

Drop test it.

Run it through the actual manipulator process.

Transport it.

Inspect the moving components after shipment.

Measure assembly time with normal operators.

And compare the total bill of materials with the existing pack.

Before Replacing Foam or Plastic, Follow the Load Path

For industrial packaging engineers, there is one particularly useful lesson from the DS Smith and Schneider Electric project.

Do not begin by asking:

“How can we make this package from corrugated board?”

Begin by asking:

“Where do the forces go when this product is lifted, dropped, restrained and transported?”

Then identify which packaging element carries each load.

At Schneider Electric:

the side tray supports lateral loading;

multi-layer endcaps anchor the products;

corrugated restraints control moving parts;

folded inserts protect connectors;

and the PE bag performs a specific dust-protection role.

That is why the project is more interesting than a simple paper-for-plastic substitution.

It demonstrates that fibre-based packaging becomes much more valuable when it is designed around mechanical function, factory handling and standardization.

The next question for other manufacturers is not whether their heavy product can fit inside a cardboard box.

It is whether corrugated engineering can take over functions currently performed by several separate packaging materials without reducing safety or production efficiency.

If it can, the business case can extend well beyond recyclability.

The strongest fibre-based industrial package is not the one that uses the most paper. It is the one that makes the whole handling system simpler while still protecting the equipment.

Last Updated on 08/09/2026 by Jota Machinery