Industry: Fresh-produce processing & sorting
Location: Suzhou, China
Product used: HDPE totes
Deployment scale: approx. 320 sets (30L / 60L / 90L)
Implementation: 2-week pilot + 3 weeks line-by-line replacement
Why we changed containers
I am the operations manager at a fresh-produce processing center in Suzhou, responsible for washing and picking ready-to-cook vegetables. We previously used old rotation crates and thin-wall bins, and three issues kept recurring:
- Prone to cracking and burrs: rim burrs scratched leafy greens and workers’ hands.
- Low cleaning efficiency: many dirt traps and heavy residue; prolonged soaking at shift end was needed to clean thoroughly.
- Unstable stacking: wet floors caused slippage; skewed stacks compressed produce and reduced yield.
We decided to switch high-frequency steps to open-top, thick-wall, nestable models, prioritizing strength, cleanability, storage, and handling.
Selection criteria & solution
- Structure: wide open top with rounded interior corners (no dead zones); reinforced top rim for even load; anti-slip texture on the base.
- Materials: HDPE / LLDPE, resistant to low temperatures and cleaning agents; no embrittlement during routine cold-chain transfers.
- Storage: empties nest to save backhaul and space; loaded units stack stably.
- Size mix: 30L (picking), 60L (rinsing), 90L capacities to reduce cross-use.
- Color coding: blue for washing stations, gray for temporary storage, yellow for discarded leaves to avoid cross-contamination.
Implementation & on-site changes
- Weeks 1–2: A/B pilot with 40 sets; recorded cleaning and yield metrics.
- Weeks 3–5: phased line-by-line switch; trained the “one line · one color · one capacity” rules for placement and return.
- In parallel, replaced anti-slip floor mats and bench edges to reduce tipping on wet surfaces.
Three-month results (averages)
| Metric | Before | After | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Per-capita picking efficiency (totes/hour) | 52 | 61 | +17% |
| Cleaning time (per shift) | 78 minutes | 58 minutes | -26% |
| Vegetable mechanical loss rate | 3.8% | 2.5% | -1.3 pp |
| Monthly container breakage rate | 7.2% | 2.1% | -5.1 pp |
| Backhaul load capacity | Baseline | +23% | Nested backhaul |
Single-site estimate: saves about 92 labor-hours per month (picking + cleaning); container scrappage cost down 68%; at peak season, 12–15% more stock within the same storage footprint.
On-site feedback (excerpt)
“The open top and rounded corners make the most immediate difference. Leaves no longer snag during washing, and staff can leave on time. Nesting cuts trips, and stacks stay stable even in rain. Working without lids is easier and speeds handovers between teams.”
— Wang Moumou · Operations Manager, fresh-produce processing center
Three takeaways
- The larger the opening, the smoother the flow: faster loading/unloading, visual checks, and rinsing.
- Color equals rule: fix workstations and uses by color—management cost drops markedly.
- Nestable ≠ flimsy: with a reinforced rim and anti-slip base, loaded stacks remain stable (we set a three-tier limit).
Conclusion & next steps
- Open, lidless containers fit our fast-throughput vegetable processing.
- Plan to standardize temporary storage before/after weighing to the 60L model to reduce shuttling.
- Discuss low-temperature formulations and deeper anti-slip textures with the supplier for winter night transfers.
Authorization: This article is the customer’s own account, published with permission; data are from on-site records and statistics from April–June 2025.
Contact: For capacity recommendations and rim/base structure comparisons for similar scenarios, please contact our sales or technical support.