this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
114 points (96.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43755 readers
1325 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zeet 85 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

618ml equates exactly to 600ml + 3% - maybe manufacturers add 3% on top because that's the maximum allowable variance in quantities?

From a quick search, 412ml and 515ml both seem pretty common too.

[–] ILikeBasil 47 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I think you're on the right track. My guess would be that they have a 3% tolerance (uncertainty, idk) with filling so they fill 600 ml but statistically it might be as much as 618. Putting 618 on the packaging lowers the price per liter a little, compared to 600.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 11 months ago (3 children)

This seems backwards from what a manufacturer would want to do. The concern with variances isn’t really having too much but having too little in the bottle. If you aimed to put exactly 600 in the bottle, you will sometimes end up below 600. It would make more sense to label it 600, aim for 618, and be confident that you’ll always fill it to at least the advertised 600.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

That all depends on what they're optimizing for. Underfilling is more profitable, but runs the risk of customer complaints and regulators stepping in.

[–] rbhfd 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Exactly. In Europe for example, you see the stylized "e" symbol on packaging very often. It means that a negligible amount are below the advertised volume/weight.

So if the package says 600ml, they might have to set the machine to 610ml to ensure they satisfy this condition.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Isn't that e for net weight. So it doesn't include the container. At least that's what I've been led to believe, so now I'll be googling!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they have one machine set up to fill the bottles. In one market they are required to deliver a safety margin of 3%. So they put 618 in a 600 bottle. In the other market there is no such requirement. So they write 618 on the bottle.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

If by law they need to never be under the written volume, then writing 618 means they need to put 618 * 1.03 in the bottle to make sure they hit the 618ml written on the bottle.

In your example, they would write 600ml on the bottle and fill it with 618 ml to account for the machine tolerance.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

This is pretty compelling. I vote "solved".

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This doesn’t make sense. If there’s 3% variance in their manufacturing, they should be advertising it as 97% of their target amount because overpromising in advertising is a major legal liability. Telling people you’re giving them 618 ml when you actually given te 582 ml is basis for some kind of lawsuit I would wager.

Giving people less than you say you’re giving them is more of a crime than giving them more than you say you’re giving them.

[–] dzervas 1 points 11 months ago

I'd be stunned if today's machinery has more than 0.1% error rate.

I'd expect 3% variance to be the legally allowed but their machines are much, much more accurate