Economic and Social Council: United Nations
Economic and Social Council: United Nations
Economic and Social Council: United Nations
NATIONS E
Economic and Social Distr.
Council GENERAL
TRADE/WP.7/GE.1/2002/6
20 March 2002
ENGLISH ONLY
Note by the secretariat : The following document contains proposals from New Zealand concerning
weight sizing and amendments to the list of varieties.
GE.02-
TRADE/WP.7/GE.1/2002/6
page 2
Recent surveys in New Zealand show that there is not a robust predictive relationship
between fruit diameter and fruit weight. Relying on fruit diameter to achieve all sizing
objectives is therefore extremely difficult in the current commercial environment.
Applying fruit diameter using a fruit weight packing process also introduces a range of
practical limitations in packing a consistently sized fruit.
New Zealand industry data shows that by ensuring individual fruit weight is within a
defined weight range a consistent fruit size is produced.
New Zealand supports the introduction of the weight sizing option as an alternative to
the diameter sizing in the UN/ECE apple standard, and provides recommendations for
minimum weights and tolerances.
2. Introduction
The validity of basing the sizing standard on fruit diameter rather than fruit weight has
been raised at the UN/ECE level on several occasions over the past 15 years. The fruit
sizing methodology adopted by industry during this period has also progressed
significantly to a point where sizing methodology and equipment are increasingly
accurate and automated.
During this timeframe the New Zealand pip fruit industry has met a changing customer
expectation regarding:
New Zealand welcomes the decision taken at the 47th Session of the UN/ECE Specialized
Section on Standardization of Fresh Fruit & Vegetables to include the option of sizing by
weight. The following paper discusses the implications of sizing by diameter and weight
and provides data to support proposals for minimum weights and tolerances to ensure
uniformity of fruit size.
3. Background
Customer requirements and availability of technology are the key drivers of change in
the sizing methodology during recent years.
Most retailers now specify a minimum fruit weight within each package.
If the supplier does not deliver to a minimum package weight, the retailer will
implement penalties against the supplier.
Package weights of fruit packed in rows and layers transpose directly to
individual fruit weights.
Basing fruit size on the equatorial diameter was consistent with sizing practices at the
time the UN/ECE sizing standard was initially developed. Early sizing machines, (using
large screw mechanisms), allowed fruit of different diameter to drop at successive drops.
The basis of size has now progressed and, commercially, fruit diameter is only one of the
parameters defining size.
Today the great majority of commercially traded fruit, especially that sold through retail
outlets, is sized electronically. Most measure size by electronic load cells (example New
Zealand 95%, Washington State 85%) although a small number use photosizers that sort
on defined geometric parameters (e.g. diameter, diameter plus length, or volume).
It is recognized that sizing methods vary by country in relation to the level of technology
available. In recognition of this variation, diameter sizing, methods are still considered
relevant in certain situations.
New Zealand industry experience and data supports a view that by ensuring individual
fruit weight is within a defined weight range, uniformity of pack presentation (in
relation to sizing) is produced.
While it is easy for a human to orientate an apple and establish the equatorial diameter
with a sizing ring, it is in practice very difficult to achieve this with electronic optical
sorting methods available today.
To measure equatorial diameter it is necessary to first establish the orientation of the fruit
and the location of the stem and calyx axis. Although, a camera can provide accurate
measurements, (+/- 0.8mm), there are currently limitations in determining which
measured diameter is the equatorial diameter.
The most commonly used packaging type in the New Zealand export apple industry is
the telescopic, multi layer tray carton, which relies on each layer of fruit to support some
of the weight of the carton and the cartons above in a pallet. Any oversized apples in a
tray will receive more pressure and any undersized fruit will not carry their share of the
weight thereby causing bruising of fruit in the tray.
With the commercial shift to individual fruit weight, the New Zealand industry
recognized the importance of measuring the relationship between fruit diameter and
weight.
Surveys (400 fruit per size for each variety and region) conducted in New Zealand by
ENZA during 1999-2000 provides a basis for understanding the relationship between
fruit weight and diameter.
The survey results for Royal Gala and Braeburn (Hawkes Bay) are summarized in
Appendix 1.
Addressing either fruit diameter or fruit weight individually has a similar outcome in
achieving a consistent fruit size in any package. The limitations in fruit sizing become
apparent when an attempt is made at trying to achieve both weights and diameter sizing
at the same time.
The practical impacts of using minimum diameters when the commercial focus is on
individual fruit weight include:
Current package types and configurations have been designed on the basis of package
weight and fruit fit. A specific fruit diameter requirement can consequently impact
on individual fruit fit in the pack and consequently fruit quality.
To accurately meet a minimum fruit diameter, using weight sizing equipment, each
grower line of fruit needs to be corrected for fruit density and shape changes prior to
packing.
Practical implications of meeting a minimum pack weight but also a minimum
diameter has resulted in up to 50% of fruit suitable for weight being rejected for
diameter.
Packing to a specified diameter requirement has produced the example depicted
below where it has effectively created an in between size. Often the minimum sizes
defined don’t align to commercial size definition. The added influence of fruit
density changes between grower lines makes this a complex equation.
TRADE/WP.7/GE.1/2002/6
page 6
“New” size
6. Recommendations
New Zealand strongly supports the proposed changes to the UN/ECE Apple Standard to
provide for recognition of individual fruit weight as the basis for sizing. New Zealand
supports the proposal to provide an option to measure fruit size by using either fruit
weight or fruit diameter. This enables those who wish to continue sizing fruit by
traditional methods to do so while also allowing larger commercial suppliers to use
modern technology and size by weight.
Extra I II
Large fruit
110g 90g 90g
varieties
Other varieties 90g 80g 70g
The minimum fruit weight recommendations are supported by the studies undertaken in
New Zealand. These studies, show a reasonable comparison between current minimum
diameters and the minimum weights depicted above. Due to the limitations in the
relationship between diameter and fruit weight, a tolerance should be considered for any
absolute minimum that is set.
6.2 Tolerances for weight range in the pack
The acceptable fruit weight range within a package is dependant on the size of the fruit.
The proposed tolerance accounts for this by applying an allowable percentage range.
“To ensure there is uniformity of size within a package, the difference in diameter or
individual fruit weight between the fruit in the same package shall be limited to:
Appendix 1: Fruit weight and diameter survey results for Royal Gala
and Braeburn
Figure 1:
350
y = 14.587e 0.0355x
300
y = 11.899e 0.0356x
Fruit Weight (g)
250
y = 9.2352e0.0357x
200
150
100
50
0
55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
Fruit Diam eter (m m )
Table 1: Royal Gala weight and weight range for a given fruit diameter
Figure 2 and Table 2 show the relationship between fruit diameter and weight for
Hawkes Bay Braeburn (1999 season).
Figure 2:
500
y = 15.288e 0.0348x
400
y = 12.919e 0.0344x
Fruit Weight (g)
300 y = 10.531e0.0338x
200
100
0
55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Fruit Diam eter (m m )
Table 2: Braeburn weight and weight range for a given fruit diameter
New Zealand comments of draft List of Varieties tabled at the 47th Session of the
UNECE Specialized Section on Fresh Fruit & Vegetables.
1. Additional varieties
The following varieties are recommended additions to the proposed list including
updated trade names, recommended colour group and sizing classification.
2. Deleted varieties
The following deleted varieties are still commercially grown in New Zealand and are
part of the export mix of varieties. It is recommended they remain on the list of varieties:
Apples: Orin
Pears: Concord, Conference, Winter Cole, and Winter Nellis
Baigent Brookfield TM
Joburn Red Braeburn™, Aurora TM,
Southern Rose TM
Mariri Red Eve TM, Red Braeburn™ Southern
Rose TM
Scired Pacific Queen™
Sciglo Southern Snap TM
Sciros Pacific Rose TM