Consumer electronics packaging is the only category where the structure has to pass a physical test before anyone discusses the artwork. A device that arrives with a cracked screen costs more than the entire packaging budget, and no amount of soft-touch lamination fixes that.
The failures that show up again and again in this category — and where most of the engineering effort actually goes.
Devices fail at corners and screens. The rule that matters is clearance: at least 10 mm of cushioning between the device and every outer face, more for anything over 1 kg. A beautiful box with 4 mm clearance will pass the first drop and fail the third.
EPE is cheap and light, EVA is premium and flockable, moulded pulp is recyclable and heavy. Most brands pick one and inherit its weaknesses. The right answer is usually a paper shell with a moulded pulp cradle for the recyclable SKU and EVA for the hero SKU.
A retail box needs to stand, hang, or sit in a security case; an e-commerce box needs to survive a courier and be cheap enough to throw away. Making one box do both usually means it is mediocre at both.
Devices ship in an anti-static bag, and that bag has to sit inside the insert without creasing the screen protector. We design the cavity around the bagged device, not the bare device — a detail that only shows up on the first physical sample.
Treat these as anchors, not limits. Everything is adjustable; the point is to show what the budget buys at each level so the first conversation is about substance, not about price alone.
Accessories, cables, low-weight devices.
The recyclable unboxing — pulp instead of plastic foam.
Launch units, press samples, retail hero SKUs.
Electronics packaging requirements come from the retailer and the courier more often than from a regulator — but the documentation still has to exist.
| Requirement | What it demands | How we handle it |
|---|---|---|
| ISTA 1A / 3A | Parcel and retail distribution simulation | Pre-production sample tested with the actual device weight and centre of gravity |
| EU 94/62/EC + PPWR | Heavy metals, recyclability, reduction targets | Paper-first structures; plastic inserts declared and minimised |
| WEEE / battery marking | Symbols and disposal text where applicable | Panel area reserved on the outer; artwork checked against your compliance sheet |
| Retailer packaging scorecards | Cube efficiency, recycled content, plastic weight | Board and insert options quoted against the specific scorecard |
Drop-test failures are almost always a clearance problem, not a board problem. We would rather change the insert than upgrade the box and still fail.
We build the pre-production sample and have it tested at a third-party lab, or ship samples to your lab. What we will not do is claim a test result we did not run — ISTA reports are only meaningful for the exact structure, weight and insert combination.
For most devices under 1 kg, yes, if the cradle is designed with ribs and the clearance is right. Above that, pulp gets heavy and thick, and EVA often wins on protected volume per gram.
Inserts set the MOQ, not printing. A pulp mould needs 1,000+ pcs to be economical; an EVA cavity can run lower but tooling costs more. We quote both numbers so you can see where the volume threshold actually sits.
Send the product, the quantity and any compliance requirement you are working to. You will get a structure proposal and a cost band, not a brochure.