UPS switching to dimensional weight on all Ground packages

[calvis]

I say we are on the right track, but just hit a fork in the road.

You seek a quick fix solution, but we are thinking about something more long term.

[Katie]

I'm not trying to look for some quick fix solution. I am just trying to be realistic about what you are proposing. The issue with UPS and Fedex can be solved without too much trouble, for either the merchants or Able. However, trying to create a box packaging algorithm which must try to figure out how many different possible ways some products can be arranged in a box is difficult at best. Plus, there are variables, like is the item fragile which might require more packing material, are there other items it can't be shipped with (eg. food and cleaners), etc. If we get to the checkout and calculate that there will be 3 shipments, do you want your customers to pick shipping for each? And what about fulfillment...do we have to generate some packing instructions so the people packing the boxes will know how it was calculated for them?

All of this is difficult and would probably require some kind of math genius. It is not something new either. You can read more about the Knapsack problem here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knapsack_problem

"The knapsack problem has been studied for more than a century, with early works dating as far back as 1897."

I also know that one time a few years back, we DID try to calculate an algorithm that would determine the number of packages. It just became too complex, and the project was dropped.

So please don't think that I'm trying to cut corners or discount your idea in any way. That was not my intention. We have a real issue with UPS and FedEx and we need to have a working solution in place by Sept. That doesn't give us much time.

[jguengerich]

If they are going to require size, I guess another quick fix would be to simply submit a small package size that creates a dimensional weight less than 1 pound, so the actual weight will always be chosen as the billable weight. We merchants would just have to keep in mind that the actual billing amount may be different once UPS or FedEx gets the real package size. That would be the same as what is happening now with air shipment quotes. We are submitting just a weight and getting a quote, but UPS and FedEx are considering the dimensional weight when they bill us.

[Katie]

Jay,

That seems like a reasonable solution for a fail-safe.

Katie

[Katie]

Ok, so I tried contacting UPS today with these questions:

What is your question or comment? This is concerning your new dimensional requirements that begin Dec. 29, 2014. I represent several of your customers through our shopping cart software, AbleCommerce. We have a few questions that are unclear in your integration guide.
1) Will package dimensions be required for all UPS shipments, or only Air, or only Ground?
2) If dimensions are required to obtain a rate quote, and the shipment has multiple items, then will you require dimensions of the entire package (containing multiple items)? I ask because we do not send the dimensions for a quote in this particular case.
3) If dimensions are sent, then do you compare the dimensional weight and package weight on your side to determine which will be used for the rate quote?
4) What will happen if the dimensions are not in the XML request for rate quote? There will likely be merchants who are going to forget to add this information to their products.
I hope that this covers the questions that our community is asking. Thanks!

This is what I got back.

Thank you for your inquiry. I apologize for the confusion about the billable weight. The answers to your questions can be found by clicking on the following link:

http://www.ups.com/content/us/en/resour ... ble+weight+

Seriously?

[jguengerich]

Katie,
This page http://www.ups.com/content/us/en/resour ... svl=SubNav has a phone number.

You might want to clarify right away in question 1 that you are referring to retrieving rate quotes using the Developer API.

[Katie]

Yes, I found that page and they wanted the question submitted via the email form. I already replied stating that the link did not help. If I can't get anywhere, then I'll call again.

[abradley]

Jay's fail-safe proposal was the same as mine except one thing. My proposal gives a bit more flexibility in giving the merchant the choice of what the default dimensional weight will be.

I think the easiest way to handle it if they REQUIRE a dimension is to have a "default dimension" setting for the store or even on the warehouse level. Then if the product doesn't have a dimension set, we get a rate quote with the default dimension and the actual weight. I understand this isn't perfect, but this default setting could be in addition to whatever scheme is decided upon here.

[Katie]

Well, lucky for us they are not going to require dimensions...

I received a real response to my previous questions.

Thank you for your response. The answers to your questions are as follows:

1. Dimensions will not be a required field effective December 29, 2014 but it is recommended to enter them to receive the most accurate quote.

2. When processing a multiple-package shipment, it is recommended to enter dimensions for each package to receive the most accurate rate.

3. To determine the billable weight we compare the package's actual weight to its dimensional weight. The greater of the two is the billable weight and should be used to calculate the rate.

For multiple-package shipments, total the billable weight of all packages in the shipment.

4. If the dimensions are not entered, the rate you were quoted may be adjusted when the package is weighed and measured when it enters our facility.

[jguengerich]

Katie,

Thanks. Sorry to cause everyone anxiety over the past few days! As I mentioned in my initial post, their XML documentation does seem to say the size fields are required, but I must be interpreting it wrong.

[Katie]

No worries Jay. I'm just glad we got this all sorted out!

[eileen]

Katie,

Currently, AbleCommerce will send available product dimensions in two cases:
1) When the Shippable setting is set to "Calculate separately"
2) When the product is the only item in the shipment.
If there happens to be multiple items with dimensions in the shipment, then we only send the total weight

.

UPS is returning dimensional weights now, and the way this is handled by Able when there are multiple items is a problem.
- If I put a large 9 lb item in the shopping cart that is not set to calculate separately, and if this is the only item in the cart, UPS returns an oversize rate of $50 for domestic shipping, which is correct. If I put a 2nd item in the cart that weighs only 0.5 lbs and it is an item of small dimension, UPS returns a total rate of $20 for both items based upon combined weight of both items. The large dimensional size of the 1st item is ignored and we lose $30+ on the transaction because shipping charges are below cost.
- If I use the "calculate separately" setting for the large item in the above case, shipping is overcharged (UPS returns a $60 rate) because the small item which could have been combined with the large item is instead treated as a separate shipment. The overcharges become exponential if the customer purchases multiples of the "calculate separately" large item, because in fact it could be combined and need not ship separately.

Here's what I recommend:
- "Calculate separately" is OK as it is, but should only be used in cases where items cannot be combined with other items in the shipment.
- In multiple-item shipments where "calculate separately" is not specified, Able should assume that the items can be combined in the same box and the dimensions of the largest item should be sent to UPS as a minimum size default for the combined shipment. Ignoring dimensions is never OK ... even now. This would not be a perfect solution, but would be more accurate than what we now have. It would eliminate the overcharges and the undercharges would be less frequent and less large.
- Add a calculation that kicks in when the actual weight exceeds the dimensional weight and reaches a certain max weight. At this point the shipment should be broken up into multiple shipments, with multiple items in each box within the limits set by the max combined weight allowed, with each separate shipment using the dimensions of the largest item for the first box, the next largest item for the 2nd box, and so on.

I honestly don't think it possible for Able to implement a perfect algorithm for calculating the dimensions of combined shipments. There are too many variables that affect packing decisions in the warehouse. But we certainly can do better than we are doing now.

[eileen]

If there happens to be multiple items with dimensions in the shipment, then we only send the total weight

We get hammered when multiple items from the same warehouse ship together because many of our items are large items and weigh little. In a recent case, a large, low-weight item (a foam bed wedge) that costs $50 to ship alone, was combined with another item from the same warehouse. This caused the UPS shipping calculation to drop from $50 to $22 because Able does not send dimensions when there are multiple items. We ate a $28 loss on shipping on that order.

We considered setting larger items to "Ships Separately," but this causes shipping to be outrageously high when customers order multiples of the same item that could actually ship in the same box. This would negatively impact our business.

When there are multiple items from the same warehouse in the cart, we suggest that Able send the dimensions of the largest item in the shipment. While not perfect, this would protect us from the kind of losses we are seeing now, and would be more accurate than the current UPS shipping calculations.

[Katie]

When you use the 'Calculate Separately' option, it is sending the weight and dimensions for each item in the basket and this will get you an accurate shipping rate. If you don't want to use that option, then you could also calculate the dimensional weight for items that are large in size but not heavy. By entering the actual dimensional weight instead of using the dimensions, you should get accurate shipping rates as well.

[sfeher]

My site is running Gold R5 -- and dimensional shipping issues with UPS are killing us.

We're selling lumber -- and the customer can often choose lengths of their wood from 1 to 8 feet in length. We have each of our products set to a standard weight, width, height (thickness), and then the option choice for length amends the proper price, weight and length to the final product selection.
An oak board can be 3 ft long, have a weight of 2.31 lbs and a price of $4.68.
The same oak that's 2 feet long, with a weight of 1.54 lbs has a price of $3.24.
If that same oak is 8 ft long, the weight is 6.16 and the price is $12.96.

So -- some items are longer (8ft), and some are heavy. I'm unable to get consistently good rates returned from UPS on these products. A recent order for 154 lbs ended up losing about $200 on shipping! I've changed some of our minimum shipping factors to try and break the larger shipments into 'max' package sizes of 50 lbs (Matching what WorldShip gives us) and we still are not close to charging the correct fees. I SUSPECT that if we merely force all product to "Ship Separately" that we might get an accurate shipping rate for this order, but this would also over charge the customer if they purchase smaller length items.

Anyone else really struggling with correcting this issue? I realize we're on Gold R5 and perhaps an upgrade would be suggested -- is an upgrade going to really fix this issue though?

Thanks!

[Katie]

Our next version will support dimensions for variants, but you can always calculate the dimensional weight and enter that for each option. I see no reason why this wouldn't get your shipping rates more precise.

Divide the cubic size in inches by 166 to determine dimensional weight in pounds.

[sfeher]

OK ---

Well, this begs the question: Where are we supposed to include 'dimensional weight' in the admin of product?
Our weight is a variant (along with the length) so it changes all the time.

If the variant will be support dimensions in the next version -- when can test that version?

Thanks!

[Katie]

Just use the calculation to enter the dimensional weight for each option, and enter that value in the weight field. We don't calculate dimensional weight or have a field for it because this varies depending on the shipping provider, destinations (US/International) and sometimes the method that is being used (USPS). That is why we send in the dimensions for a rate quote.

The next version (R10) will be out this week.