The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/1573-6105.htm

MMMS
11,2
Development and stress
behaviour of an innovative
refrigerated container with PCM
202 for fresh and frozen goods
Received 22 May 2014
Revised 12 July 2014 Raffaele Sepe and Enrico Armentani
22 September 2014 Department of Chemical, Materials and Production Engineering,
Accepted 19 November 2014
University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy, and
Angela Pozzi
Magsistem s.r.l., Gricignano di Aversa, Italy

Abstract
Purpose – The major objectives of this study are the engineering development and the structural
analysis with finite element method (FEM) of a refrigerated container having a passive equipment and
a remote control system to carry both fresh (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ −20°C) goods. The
purpose of this paper is to offer some solutions to the many disadvantages of using phase change
material (PCM) to refrigerate the insulated container for transporting both fresh and frozen goods.
Design/methodology/approach – In order to transport both fresh products (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen
products (−18°C ÷ −20°C), the PCM elements are filled with one eutectic liquid only, so as to avoid
problems related to filling and emptying the eutectic plates, and to plate corrosion. Moreover, specially
shaped air ducts and a cool flow control system are designed to maintain a uniform circulation of cool air
and constant humidity values. All the structures of the container are correctly designed by means of FEM
calculations to assure that all the structural, safety standards parameters are satisfied.
Findings – An innovative refrigerated container with PCM and a remote control system used to
transport both fresh (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ −20°C) products, in which it is possible to
maintain the temperature values for almost seven days, has been considered here. Many disadvantages
due to the use of PCM have been eliminated. It is possible to maintain a uniform circulation cool air and
humidity values within the design parameters by means of fans; moreover, this container is light
and environmentally friendly. All structures of the container are designed using FEM.
Originality/value – This paper presents a refrigerated container with passive equipment and a remote
control system to carry both fresh (+4°C ÷ ±1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ −20°C) goods in which it is possible
to maintain the temperature values necessary for almost seven days. The container is equipped with a
remote control system powered by photovoltaic panels which works in real time, is capable of giving
information about the environmental parameters set in it and monitors the state of products by means
of a network of sensors. Furthermore, the remote control system can send information about the position
of the container to a remote control centre. The relevant structural conditions are numerically (FEM)
evaluated and reported.
Keywords Finite element method (FEM), ISO container, Refrigeration system, Shipping container
Paper type Technical paper

1. Introduction
The global trading of perishable goods is possible thanks to product refrigeration and
atmospheric control during transportation. Refrigerated shipping containers are widely
Multidiscipline Modeling in
Materials and Structures used all over the world and are an important part of the global food distribution chain.
Vol. 11 No. 2, 2015
pp. 202-215
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1573-6105
This paper is dedicated to the memory of Eng. Alfredo Pozzi for support of this research and for
DOI 10.1108/MMMS-05-2014-0030 his helpful suggestions.
In fact, in 2002 it was stated that “Worldwide there are at least one million refrigerated PCM for fresh
road vehicles and 400,000 refrigerated containers in use. The retail value of the and frozen
product transported was estimated to be 1,200 billion US dollars” (I.R.R. News, 2012).
Refrigerated containers are subject to very severe performance requirements because
goods
of the need to carry an enormous variety of cargoes under wide variations of climatic
conditions and, as refrigerated transportation has increased, there has been substantial
interest in improving energy consumption by reducing weight, and improving 203
insulation and distribution system (I.R.R. News, 2012).
Refrigerated containers, also called “reefers”, are mostly self-contained and integrated
units, which means that they incorporate a cold production system like dry ice,
mechanical vapour compression refrigeration units, liquid nitrogen or phase change
material (PCM) in an insulated container. The containers equipped with PCM present
some advantages: lower cost, because there is not a refrigerating machine in the
container, lower energy consumption, simple maintenance and an increased volume
available for transport. However, they also have some disadvantages: difficulties in
controlling temperature and in maintaining a uniform temperature, so in practice
there are often colder and warmer zones inside the container. As regards long
distance transport, a container equipped with PCM may not be suitable because of the
limited cold storage capacity of PCM. In addition, temperature and time are difficult
to control during the logistic chain; the duration may vary from a few hours to four
days, while the ambient temperature may vary from under 0°C in winter to more than
30°C in summer.
During transportation, vegetables and fresh fruits have to be stored at around 10°C,
while vegetables, fish products, chilled fruits and fresh meats, are stored around 0°C,
and frozen meats and fish are stored at around −20°C. In order to maintain the desired
temperatures, the operators use their experience to decide on the weight and the
position of PCM. However, too much PCM may cause the goods near the PCM to freeze
and too little may lead to excessively high temperatures.
This study offers some solutions to the many disadvantages of using PCM to
refrigerate the insulated container for transporting both fresh and frozen goods.
One of the aims of this paper is to describe the engineering development of a
refrigerated container with PCM and a remote control system for transporting both
fresh (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ −20°C) products, in which it is possible to
maintain the necessary temperature values for almost seven days. The container is
equipped with a remote control system powered by photovoltaic panels which works
in real time, is capable of giving information about the environmental parameters set in
it, and monitors the state of the products by means of a network of sensors. Moreover,
the remote control system is capable of sending information about the position of the
container to a remote control centre.
In order to transport both fresh (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ − 20°C) products,
the PCM elements are filled with only one eutectic liquid so there is no problem as
regards filling and emptying the eutectic plates and there are no problems of plate
corrosion. Moreover, specially shaped air ducts and a cool flow control system are
designed to maintain a uniform circulation of cool air and constant humidity values.
For long time shipping freight, the container can be connected to an external compressor,
which allows to extend its autonomy.
During its life, the container will be subject to static and dynamic loads coming from
the weight of the structure and the payload and from the movement of cargo due to
normal loading and unloading. Moreover such loads can be critical for the structure
MMMS (Giriunas et al., 2012; Fahy and Tiernan, 2001; Souza et al., 2012, 2013; Tiernan and
11,2 Fahy, 2002) particularly in the zones of connection between the structural parts of the
container and in the presence of impulsive dynamic loads (Lamanna et al., 2012a, b,
2014; Caputo et al., 2011). All the structures of the container are correctly designed by
means of finite element method (FEM) calculations to assure that all the structural and
safety standards parameters are satisfied.
204
2. Description
Figure 1 shows the principal frame of the container we are considerating. It
corresponds to the standard frame of an International Organization Standardization
(ISO) container of 20 feet, which assures that the container is intermodal. In fact,
nowadays all the shipping containers conform to the ISO and International Convention
for Safe Containers standards, which prescribe shipping container specifications,
structural strength and fields of applications. ISO Container Standards 3874 (ISO/TC
104. ISO 3874, 1997), 830 (ISO/TC 104. ISO 830, 1999), 2308 (ISO/TC 104. ISO 2308,
1972), 1496-1 (ISO/TC 104. ISO 1496-1, 1990), 6346 (ISO/TC 104. ISO 6346, 1995), 668
(ISO/TC 104. ISO 668, 1995) and 1161 (ISO/TC 104. ISO 1161, 1984) comprise every
specification for shipping containers, including structural strength limits. Table I
shows some typical specifications for a 20 feet ISO container.

lashing ring on
roof crossmember

lashing ring on longitudinal

roof member roof crossmember
longitudinal roof member
left side panel on end wall

end wall
roof comer post
upper door belt

door

rotatable lashing
rings on floor

floor crossmember

longitudinal
floor member
door bars door comer post
Figure 1.
Standard shipping comer plate
container lashing rod in end wall corner post
components
lower door belt

Table I.
Typical specifications
for a standard 20 feet ID codes Length (L) Width (W) Height (H) Max weight Empty weight
(6.06 m) ISO shipping
container 22G1 6,058 mm 2,438 mm 2,591 mm 299 kN 22 kN
2.1 Insulating panels PCM for fresh
All the internal walls of the container are insulated by sandwich panels; these can be and frozen
considered as structural components and their success is a result of their superior
qualities as high strength to weight ratio, high stiffness, ease of manufacturing,
goods
acoustic and thermal insulation, repair capability and flexibility in design. The panels
have a sandwich structure in thermoplastic material; two skins made of composite
laminate with thermoplastic matrix and glass fibres that assure high structural 205
property with a core made of polyEthylene terephthalate (PET) foam which keeps
the growth of algae or bacteria under control because PET foam is inert at ambient
temperatures. PET foam also has low thermal conductivity, k ¼ 0.33 W/m°K, and high
flexibility enabling it to absorb mechanical stresses during handling and
transportation. Moreover, these materials have good fire, smoke and toxicity) strength.
The dimensions of the panels are 1,500 × 2,500 × 100 mm3 and they are joined by
structural adhesive and flexible foamed polyurethane that remove the thermal bridge.
Figure 2 shows a transversal section of the container with insulating panels.

2.2 Eutectic plates

The containers may comprise various cold production systems. Actually, refrigerated
containers generally have insulation panels and refrigeration units installed into their
structure. The units are electrically driven, either from an external power supply on

Figure 2.
Transversal section
of the container
MMMS ship board, or dock, or from a generator on a road vehicle, but it is possible that the
11,2 containers are equipped with PCM.
There are numerous studies on PCM (Carbonari et al., 2006; Laguerre et al., 2008;
Hamdan and Al-Hinti, 2004; Lamberg et al., 2004) with several engineering applications,
like energy storage in buildings, automotive industries, transport of chilled/frozen
products, etc. However, several questions still remain. How much PCM should be used?
206 What should its initial temperature be? Where should it be placed in the box? It is
important to use no more PCM than necessary because its price is high, and it adds to
the weight of empty container while reducing the volume available for the product.
The eutectic PCM mixtures are generally composed of water, sodium chloride and
sodium nitrate, and a glycol propylene or ethyl alcohol is added to reduce the minimum
temperature of the PCM. Table II shows the thermo-physical properties of the eutectic
PCMs used to fill the eutectic plates.
As stated above, to transport both fresh (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ −20°C)
goods the PCM elements are filled with only one type of eutectic liquid so as to
avoid any corrosion problems of the plate due to changing the type of liquid in it.
The standard eutectic PCMs which should be used are E-26 or E-32, since they have a
good latent heat and high values of density. The specific heat of the E-26 is higher
than E-32 and its cost is lower than E-32. The eutectic plates were therefore filled with
type E-26.
It is possible to improve the thermal properties of the PCM by modifying the mixture
of the eutectic PCM. In fact, by increasing the concentration by mass of sodium nitrate
from 1.2 to 3.75 per cent, it is possible to increase the latent heat of fusion up to 280 kJ/kg,
but the eutectic temperature decreases to −30°C. Thus, it is necessary to bring
the eutectic temperature down to −26°C. The possible solutions cause an increase in the
concentration of ethyl alcohol, but this reduces the gain of latent heat or increases

Phase change Density Latent heat Specific heat Thermal cond.

Type temperature (°C) (kg/m3) (kJ/kg) (kJ/kg°K) (W/m°K)

E0 0 1,000 332 4.186 0.58

E-2 −2 1,070 306 3.80 0.58
E-3 −3.7 1,080 312 3.84 0.60
E-4 −3.9 1,080 282 3.78 0.58
E-6 −6 1,110 275 3.83 0.56
E-10 −10 1,140 286 3.33 0.56
E-12 −12.3 1,110 250 3.47 0.56
E-14 −14.8 1,220 243 3.51 0.53
E-15 −15 1,060 303 3.87 0.53
E-19 −19 1,125 282 3.29 0.58
E-21 −20.6 1,240 263 3.13 0.51
E-22 −22 1,180 234 3.34 0.57
E-26 −26 1,250 260 3.67 0.58
E-29 −29 1,420 222 3.69 0.64
E-32 −32 1,290 243 2.95 0.56
Table II. E-34 −33.6 1,205 240 3.05 0.54
Thermo-physical E-37 −36.5 1,500 213 3.15 0.54
properties of E-50 −49.8 1,325 218 3.28 0.56
eutectic PCMs Source: PCM products Ltd (2013)
the concentration of sodium chloride. The second solution was chosen and that also PCM for fresh
led to two other positive effects – the latent heat was increased up to 289 kJ/kg and and frozen
the density was increased up to 1,255 kg/m3. Table III shows the thermo-physical
properties of the PCM type E-26 and E-26 modified.
goods
Several experimental tests were carried out in order to verify the predicted
temperature within the container. Some results are shown in Figure 3. It can be seen
that in the first 20 hours the temperature decreases significantly to reach the phase 207
change temperature of eutectic PCMs (almost −26°C); this step corresponds to the
PCM elements freezing. Then, the goods were introduced inside the container,
so the temperature increases slightly up to −22°C and then remains constant for
seven days.
Figure 4 shows the vertical longitudinal section of the container. Six eutectic plates
are installed on the ceiling of the load compartment. They are connected by steel ties
to a secondary structure which is composed of an upper frame supported by struts.
The insulating panels, which permit the avoidance of high-temperature gradients

Table III.
Type Phase change temperature (°C) Density (kg/m3) Latent heat (kJ/kg) Thermo-physical
properties of eutectic
E-26 −26 1,250 260 PCMs E-26 and
E-26 modified −26 1,255 289 E-26 modified

40
35
30
25
Inside temperature (°C)

20
15
10
5
0
–5
–10
–15
–20
–25
–30 Figure 3.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Temperature vs time
Time (h)

Figure 4.
Longitudinal section
of the container
MMMS between the eutectic plates and the goods when fresh goods are carried, are also
11,2 connected to the secondary structure.
Figure 4 shows on the right the technical compartment, which holds both the
electronic control instruments and additional six eutectic plates. The technical
compartment is divided into two zones, a bottom one adapted to contain electronic
equipment and a higher one. The division of the technical compartment is created by
208 the installation of insulating panels. Also, the technical compartment is separated from
the passenger compartment by two insulated doors.
On the doors of the technical compartment there are four electric fans (200 mm
diameter and rated at 0.10 m3/s in free air), which draw the air from the load
compartment. The air passing through the plates is cooled and goes back into the
load compartment through a shaped duct placed in the upper part of the container.
To improve the thermal gradient, a flow regulator is installed in the upper part of the
compartment by means of which it is possible to adjust the airflow. The cold air is then
distributed by the four electric fans located on the ceiling of the load compartment.

2.3 Control system

The technical compartment holds the electronic control system which is able to record the
interior environmental parameters as required by law. All data are transmitted to the
remote control centre, which monitors the position of the container and conservation
status of the goods in real time. The system is powered by a lithium ion battery charged
by four solar panels located on the roof of the container. There are eight thermocouples,
two inside and six outside, which control the temperature in the cargo compartment.
The control unit is equipped with a CPU based on PC architecture with Intel
®Pentium ®MMX low power consumption, a calling card GSM/GPRS, a card with digital
outputs and a card with analog inputs. The electric fans are controlled by the control unit.
To maximize the energy autonomy and to control the temperature inside the load
compartment, the system is equipped with a software which distinguishes between
fresh and frozen loads.
The control unit is able to transmit temperature and position data to the control centre
every five minutes by means of a remote internet connection (GSM/M2M). The data can
also be viewed on demand on a control panel. The remote control centre receives the
coordinates of the container, which are saved in a database together with the date and the
time of acquisition. In this way, it is possible to reconstruct the route of the container
every five minutes and display it on a map. From this simple piece of information, an
original algorithm implemented in the software is able to estimate the remaining
capacity, so that it is possible to calculate the probability of being able to reach the final
destination. Figure 5 shows an axonometric view of the described composition.

3. Shipping container structural computer model

3.1 Container model
The shipping container was structurally modelled and analysed using Pro-E, Altair
Hypermesh, Ansys programmes. Pro-E is a three-dimensional (3D) computer aided
design (CAD) programme which allows to model 3D parts, and so it was used for the
most part of the container. Altair Hypermesh is a software for FE modelling and it was
used to mesh the components imported from Pro-E. Ansys is the finite element analysis
(FEA) code used for the stress analysis of the container meshed model, imported from
Altair Hypermesh.
Figure 6 shows a 20 feet (6.06 m) ISO shipping container 3D CAD model.
 PCM for fresh
and frozen
goods

209

Figure 5.
Partially sectioned
view for the overall
container

Figure 6.
3D CAD model of
20 feet ISO container

In order to limit the computational cost, preserving the key structural features of
the container, a simple numerical model was created. Roof and walls are corrugated
and, together with the cross-members which support them and the wooden floor,
are discretized with SHELL63 elements (four-node with six degrees of freedom at each
node). Corner fittings, insulating panels and each container component (excluding walls
MMMS and roof) are discretized uniformly with hexahedral elements SOLID45 (eight-node
11,2 with three translational degrees of freedom at each node). The final container FE model
is composed of 121,621 SHELL63 and 104,388 SOLID45, for a total of 226,009 elements
and 181,207 nodes. Figure 7 shows the container mesh made of the aforesaid shell and
solid elements.
The metal components have a density of 7,850 kg/m3, Young’s modulus equal
210 to 210,000 MPa and Poisson’s ratio equal to 0.3. The insulating panels have a
density of 2,000 kg/m3, Young’s modulus equal to 13,000 MPa and Poisson’s ratio
equal to 0.1. The wooden floor has a density of 600 kg/m3, Young’s modulus equal to
4,400 MPa and Poisson’s ratio equal to 0.25. The yield stress of materials is 275 MPa
for corner fittings, 285 MPa for floor cross-member and 360 MPa for all the other
components.

3.2 Static load cases

Three loading conditions were applied to the container:
(1) Lifting from the four top corner castings: the required load for this analysis is
213,000 N distributed on the floor of the container. Moreover, an additional load
of 1,000 N is applied to it, so as to consider the instrumentation device in the
technical compartment.This analysis is carried out to prove the container’s
ability to withstand being lifted by the top corner fittings.
(2) Lifting from the fork lifts (the required load for this analysis is similar to the one
in case 1): this analysis is carried out to prove the container’s ability to
withstand when being lifted by fork lifts.
(3) Stacking loads: the stacking analysis involves fixing the container at the bottom
corner castings with a loading of 213,000 N distributed on the floor and
applying a load of 1,721,600 N of eight containers (the weight of each container
is rated as container load, 213,000 N, + net weight of the container, i.e. 2,200 N)
to the four top corner castings. The objective of the analysis is to prove the
ability of the container to support a superimposed mass of containers.

Figure 7.
Container mesh
3.3 Static FEA results PCM for fresh
Only some results will be shown. Figures 8 and 9 show deflection (mm) in a vertical (z) and frozen
direction and the von Mises stress due to lifting from the four top corner castings.
The maximum displacement (load case 1) in vertical (z) direction is 9.2 mm on the
goods
wooden floor. The deformed shape is symmetrical with respect to vertical (xz) plane.
The roof does not give any significant structural contribution when the container is
subjected to load case 1. The vertical principal frames under load case 1 are the critical 211
load resisting components.
Contour (Analysis system)
Displacement (Mag) 173703
9.173E+00 Static Min. Value = 0.00
8.153E+00
7.134E+00
6.115E+00
5.096E+00
4.077E+00
3.058E+00
2.038E+00
1.019E+00
0.000E+00
No result
Max = 9.173E+00
Min = 0.000E+00

484938
Static Max. Value = 9.173E+000

Figure 8.
Deflection (mm) in
z
Y vertical (z) direction
x due to lifting by the
four top corner
castings

Contour (Analysis system)

Von Mises Stress (Scalar value, Mid)
2.827E+02
2.513E+02
2.199E+02
1.885E+02
1.571E+02
1.257E+02
9.425E+01
6.283E+01
3.142E+01
3.052E–04
No result
Max = 2.827E+02
Min = 3.190E–04

Figure 9.
Von Mises stress
(MPa) due to lifting
z
by the four top
Y X corner castings
MMMS Figures 10 and 11 show deflection (mm) in vertical (z) direction and the von Mises stress
11,2 due to lifting by the fork lift.
The maximum displacement (load case 2) is 5.8 mm on the wooden floor. The
longitudinal principal frames are the strongest load resisting components.
Figure 12 shows Von Mises stress (MPa) in the principal frames due to stacking
loads. The maximum value (355 MPa) of the stress was found in the frame uprights in
212
Contour (Analysis system)
Displacement (Mag)
5.813E+00
5.186E+00
4.560E+00
3.933E+00
3.306E+00
2.680E+00
2.053E+00
1.426E+00
7.993E+01
1.726E–01
No result
Max = 5.813E+00
Min = 1.726E–01

Figure 10.
Z
Deflection (mm) in
Y
vertical (z) direction X

due to lifting by
fork lift

Contour (Analysis system)

Von Mises Stress (Scalar value, Mid)
2.325E+02
2.067E+02
1.809E+02
1.550E+02
1.292E+02
1.033E+02
7.751E+01
5.167E+01
2.584E+01
1.068E–04
No result
Max = 2.325E+02
Min = 1.121E–04

Figure 11.
Von Mises stress Z
(MPa) due to lifting Y X
by fork lift
 Contour (Analysis system) PCM for fresh
Von Mises Stress (Scalar value, Mid)
3.550E+02
and frozen
3.156E+02
goods
2.761E+02

2.367E+02

1.972E+02 213
1.578E+02

1.183E+02

7.890E+01

3.945E+01

8.820E–03
No result
Max = 3.550E+02
Min = 8.813E–03

Figure 12.
Z
Von Mises Stress
X (MPa) due to
Y
stacking loads

correspondence of a bottom corner casting. It is less than the yield one (360 MPa) and it
is due to local stress concentration. These results are qualitatively in agreement with a
previous work (Giriunas et al., 2012).
Table IV presents the maximum displacement results of FEM analyses of the
container structure, whereas maximum stress in the members are summarized in
Table V. All values are less than the allowable ones.

Loading condition Max displacement (mm) Allow displacement (mm) Table IV.
Maximum
1 9.2 12 displacement results
2 5.8 12 compared with the
3 8.8 12 allowable ones

Loading condition Member Maximum stress (MPa) Allowable stress (MPa)

1 Frame uprights 283 360

Corner castings 126 275
Floor members 157 285 Table V.
2 Frame uprights 233 360 Maximum stress
Corner castings 103 275 results in the
Floor members 129 285 members
3 Frame uprights 355 360 of the structure
Corner castings 197 275 compared with the
Floor members 158 285 allowable ones
MMMS 4. Conclusions
11,2 An innovative refrigerated container with PCM and a remote control system used to
transport both fresh (+4°C ÷ ± 1°C) and frozen (−18°C ÷ −20°C) products, in which it is
possible to maintain the temperature values for almost seven days, has been structurally
considered. Many disadvantages due to the use of PCM have been eliminated. It is
possible to maintain a uniform circulation of cool air and humidity values within the
214 design parameters by means of fans, an appropriate air duct shape and a cool flow
control system, thus eliminating the possible bridge of the hoarfrost. It is possible to
maintain the temperature values almost constant while transporting fresh and frozen
products for up to seven days. Moreover, this container is light and environmentally
friendly; indeed, it is equipped with insulating panels made of innovative, recyclable
material, which has low thermal conductivity and high shock strength.
A valid FE model of the ISO container has been developed. All the structures of
the container are correctly designed in order to assure that all the structural safety
standards parameters are satisfied. Stresses that occur during standard test have been
identified and quantified. The container FEA has led to a better understanding of the
structure and its in-service behaviour. The container has been built and tested
thermally; moreover, it will be tested statically and dynamically.

References
Caputo, F., Lamanna, G. and Soprano, A. (2011), “Numerical modeling and simulation of a bolted
hybrid joint”, Structural Durability and Health Monitoring, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 283-296.
Carbonari, A., De Grassi, M., Di Perna, C. and Principi, P. (2006), “Numerical and experimental
analyses of PCM containing sandwich panels for prefabricated walls”, Energy and
Buildings, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 472-483.
Fahy, M. and Tiernan, S. (2001), “Finite element analysis of ISO tank containers”, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 119 Nos 1-3, pp. 293-298.
Giriunas, K., Sezen, H. and Dupaix, R.B. (2012), “Evaluation, modeling, and analysis of shipping
container building structures”, Engineering Structures, Vol. 43, pp. 48-57.
Hamdan, M.A. and Al-Hinti, I. (2004), “Analysis of heat transfer during the melting of a phase
change material”, Applied Thermal Engineering, Vol. 24 No. 13, pp. 1935-1944.
I.R.R. News (2012), “Refrigerated transport: what’s new?”, International Journal of Refrigeration,
Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 501-503.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 1161 (1984), Series 1 Freight Containers-Corner Fittings-Specification,
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 1496-1 (1990), Series 1 Freight Containers – Specification and Testing – Part 1:
General Cargo Containers for General Purposes, International Organization for
Standardization, Geneva.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 2308 (1972), Hooks for Lifting Freight Containers of Up to 30 Tonnes
Capacity-Basic Requirements, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 3874 (1997), Series 1 Freight Containers-handling and Securing, International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 6346 (1995), Freight Containers – Coding, Identification and Marking,
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 668 (1995), Series 1 Freight Containers Classification, Dimensions and Ratings,
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
ISO/TC 104. ISO 830 (1999), Freight Containers – Vocabulary, International Organization for
Standardization, Geneva.
Laguerre, O., Ben Aissa, M.F. and Flick, D. (2008), “Methodology of temperature prediction in an PCM for fresh
insulated container equipped with PCM”, International Journal of Refrigeration, Vol. 31
No. 6, pp. 1063-1072.
and frozen
Lamanna, G., Caputo, F. and Soprano, A. (2012a), “Geometrical parameters influencing a hybrid
goods
mechanical coupling”, Key Engineering Materials, Vols 525-526, pp. 161-164.
Lamanna, G., Caputo, F. and Soprano, A. (2012b), “Handling of composite-metal interface in a
hybrid mechanical coupling”, AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1459 No. 1, pp. 353-355. 215
Lamanna, G., Sepe, R. and Pozzi, A. (2014), “Tensile testing of hybrid composite joints”, Applied
Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 575, pp. 452-456.
Lamberg, P., Lehtiniemi, R. and Henell, A.M. (2004), “Numerical and experimental investigation of
melting and freezing processes in phase change material storage”, International Journal
of Thermal Sciences, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 277-287.
PCM Products Ltd (2013), PlusICE Phase Change Materials Catalog, PCM Products Ltd, Yaxley.
Souza, V.A., Kirkayak, L., Suzuki, K., Ando, H. and Sueoka, H. (2012), “Experimental and
numerical analysis of container stack dynamics using a scaled model test”, Ocean
Engineering, Vol. 39, pp. 24-42.
Souza, V. A., Kirkayak, L., Watanabe, I., Suzuki, K., Ando, H., Sueoka, H. and Darama, H. (2013),
“Experimental and numerical analysis of container multiple stacks dynamics using a
scaled model”, Ocean Engineering, Vol. 74, pp. 218-232.
Tiernan, S. and Fahy, M. (2002), “Dynamic FEA modelling of ISO tank containers”, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 124 Nos 1-2, pp. 126-132.

Corresponding author
Dr Raffaele Sepe can be contacted at: raffsepe@unina.it

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com