Experience Behind Packaging HQ

The Film Looked Right. The Ink on the Machine Told a Different Story.

How a reverse-printed high-barrier laminate stopped ink transfer, reduced cleaning downtime, and helped a packaged snack line run faster.

The situation

A packaged snack producer had a film that delivered the appearance and barrier they needed. It also created a recurring mess on the packaging line.

As the film moved through the horizontal packaging equipment, ink rubbed onto the belts and cutting components. It also accumulated on the sealing jaws. Operators had to stop throughout the day to clean the equipment, followed by approximately two additional hours of downtime each week for more extensive cleaning.

The cleanup had become part of running the product.

0115%

Approximate reduction in film cost

022 hours

Customer-reported weekly cleanup time recovered

03Faster

Customer-reported improvement in attainable line speed

Finding the source

The problem appeared on the machine. It started with the film design.

The existing package was a laminated barrier film with graphics printed on the outside surface. That construction had originally been selected as a way to control film cost. It provided the required appearance and barrier, but it left the ink exposed to friction, heat, and direct contact with machine components.

The film needed to be designed around the way it was actually being used.

The change

Move the ink away from the equipment.

The package was redesigned as a reverse-printed high-barrier laminate. Moving the ink inside the film structure protected the graphics from contact with the equipment while maintaining the required barrier and seal performance.

Supplier technical specifications were reviewed to confirm the barrier. The redesigned film then went through a full production trial and a scale-up order.

During the trial, the customer confirmed that the ink was no longer transferring onto the equipment. The sealing jaws remained cleaner, the seals performed as required, and the machine could run faster.

The result

Less cleanup. More time producing.

The new film cost approximately 15% less than the previous material.

The customer reported that approximately two hours of additional weekly cleanup were no longer required. The repeated cleaning stops during production were also reduced, giving the customer more running time from the existing equipment.

Let’s solve it together

What has your team learned to work around?

Recurring cleanup, rework, inspection, and line adjustments may point to a package that needs to be reconsidered around the real production process.