Janet, 

Also consider using triangle-shaped tubes. I shipped a group of maps to UT-Austin in advance of teaching a workshop a couple of months ago and this worked well. I would say, from a preservation standpoint, use the largest diameter tube possible for the task, keeping in mind that shipping costs also are done by weight. 

Paige 

From: "Mark Walker" <[log in to unmask]> 
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]> 
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 1:17:10 PM 
Subject: Re: Choosing the diameter of map shipping tubes 

I have used 24 x 12 x 6 boxes to ship two rolls at a time (70 sheets per roll if I remember correctly) of the 7.5’ topos. Very easy to deal with an open box as far as protecting the maps. 

If you are dead set on using tubes check Yazoo Mills for price comparison. U-LINE is not known as the least expensive option. 

If you are shipping many sheets at a time palatize them and call a freight company or try [ https://www.freightquote.com/ | https://www.freightquote.com ] 






On Dec 14, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Janet Reyes < [ mailto:[log in to unmask] | [log in to unmask] ] > wrote: 

Hello, 
I’m seeking opinions on map tube diameters for shipping large quantities of maps. We want to order a set of uniform-sized tubes for ultimately shipping more than 10,000 maps. 
We’ll probably order Jumbo Kraft Tubes 48” in length from Uline. Diameter options are 5”, 6”, and 8”. 
Would the 8” diameter be too unwieldy? 
And, does anyone have ballpark figures for many maps (let’s say 7.5 minute topo sized) can fit in the various diameter tubes? 
Thanks, 
Janet Reyes 
Geospatial Information Librarian 
UCR | Library 
PO Box 5900 
Orbach Science Library, Room G59 
Riverside, CA 92517-5900 
Tel 951-827-6421 
[ mailto:[log in to unmask] | [log in to unmask] ] 
[ http://library.ucr.edu/ | library.ucr.edu ]