| Discussion Forum: Thread 313274 |
|
 |
| | | Author: | cosmicray  | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 12:50 | | Subject: | IC and maximum Volume | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| Shipping Methods currently have the ability specify a maximum volume.
In the USA, that might be used to trap orders that require dimensional shipping
(i.e. greater than 1728 cubic-inches). Some orders contain multiple items, and
the cumulative weight is less important than the fact that dimensional will require
a higher dimensional weight (and corresponding rate).
I suspect, that I can put a maximum volume on a shipping method (to satisfy those
with non-dimensional requirements) and implement a fall-back shipping method
with the same group number.
The problem that arises is, there is no way (that I can see) to specify the conversion
from volume (in cubic inches) divided by 166 to arrive at a dimensional weight
(in pounds), which could then be sorted out by the weight bands. Nor can I use
a volume band to directly apply the volume calculation,
Any thoughts ?
Nita Rae
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Teup | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 13:00 | | Subject: | Re: IC and maximum Volume | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, cosmicray writes:
| | Shipping Methods currently have the ability specify a maximum volume.
In the USA, that might be used to trap orders that require dimensional shipping
(i.e. greater than 1728 cubic-inches). Some orders contain multiple items, and
the cumulative weight is less important than the fact that dimensional will require
a higher dimensional weight (and corresponding rate).
I suspect, that I can put a maximum volume on a shipping method (to satisfy those
with non-dimensional requirements) and implement a fall-back shipping method
with the same group number.
The problem that arises is, there is no way (that I can see) to specify the conversion
from volume (in cubic inches) divided by 166 to arrive at a dimensional weight
(in pounds), which could then be sorted out by the weight bands. Nor can I use
a volume band to directly apply the volume calculation,
Any thoughts ?
Nita Rae
|
How many "volume bands" do you need? You could consider making a separate shipping
method for each one and put them in the same group.
When you work with volumes, keep in mind "Bricklink volume" is some 50-70% of
real-life volume. I had to reduce the volume of the method by about half to get
orders that just fit.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | cosmicray | | Posted: | Nov 25, 2021 13:45 | | Subject: | Re: IC and maximum Volume | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Shipping | |
|
| In Shipping, Teup writes:
| | In Shipping, cosmicray writes:
| | Shipping Methods currently have the ability specify a maximum volume.
In the USA, that might be used to trap orders that require dimensional shipping
(i.e. greater than 1728 cubic-inches). Some orders contain multiple items, and
the cumulative weight is less important than the fact that dimensional will require
a higher dimensional weight (and corresponding rate).
I suspect, that I can put a maximum volume on a shipping method (to satisfy those
with non-dimensional requirements) and implement a fall-back shipping method
with the same group number.
The problem that arises is, there is no way (that I can see) to specify the conversion
from volume (in cubic inches) divided by 166 to arrive at a dimensional weight
(in pounds), which could then be sorted out by the weight bands. Nor can I use
a volume band to directly apply the volume calculation,
Any thoughts ?
Nita Rae
|
How many "volume bands" do you need? You could consider making a separate shipping
method for each one and put them in the same group.
When you work with volumes, keep in mind "Bricklink volume" is some 50-70% of
real-life volume. I had to reduce the volume of the method by about half to get
orders that just fit.
|
The answer is tricky ... The smallest volume, that requires a dimensional weight
calculation, is 1729 cubic-in. That works out to 11-lbs dimensional. Priority
Mail is quoted in per-pound bands up to 70 lbs. The DMM says any dimensional
calculation that exceeds 70 lbs, goes at the 70 lb rate. But when you get into
those very large physical packages, there is a physical limit of 108-inches (length+girth),
for Parcel Select it is 130-inches (length+girth).
The theoretical maximum number of bands for dimensional is 60 (11-lbs thru 70
lbs).
The practical limit might be whatever the largest physical set that LEGO has
ever shipped in a box. Titanic is certainly going to be up there. But the problem
is more of one where multiple sets are being included in a single order, and
what dimensions they would require. Even if BL can calculate it correctly, the
seller has to have a box large enough to handle all of them, and stay within
the 108-inches (length+girth). The dimensional weight to be used, has to be based
on the box required to hold the items being ordered.
Nita Rae
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Florida
Netherlands, Utrecht