Pre-press Workflow Automation for packola
Conclusion: Automated pre-press cut make-ready by 41 min/run and lifted FPY to 97.6% (P95) at 150–170 m/min, yielding a 7.8‑month payback (N=126 lots, 8 weeks).
Value: Before→After at 165 m/min; ΔE2000 P95 2.3→1.7 on [InkSystem]=UV‑LED low‑migration FR ink; registration 0.22→0.14 mm on [Substrate]=BOPP 40 µm + SBS 300 g/m²; sample: [Sample] SKU‑12, SKU‑19, SKU‑27 (N=3 families).
Methods: centerlining plate/cylinder-to-cylinder; UV‑LED dose tune 1.30–1.50 J/cm² with 0.9–1.0 s dwell; SMED convert 7 internal tasks to parallel external; enable e‑sign recipe lock with audit trail.
Evidence anchors: ΔE2000 P95 −0.6 (2.3→1.7) and false reject −0.9 pp (1.3%→0.4%) with G7 Conformance Report ID G7‑23‑118; SAT‑PP‑045 / OQ‑UV‑033 records filed under Annex 11 §9 audit trail.
Low-Migration Validation Under UV-LED
Key conclusion: Outcome-first: Food-contact migration stayed within legal limits while holding ΔE2000 P95 ≤1.8 at 160 m/min, so color and safety targets coexisted without derating speed.
Data: Overall migration ≤10 mg/dm² (40 °C/10 d, food simulant D2), specific photoinitiators <50 µg/kg each; ΔE2000 P95 1.7 @ 160 m/min; kWh/pack 0.0062→0.0057 (−8.1%) after dose trim to 1.35 J/cm²; FPY 95.9%→97.4% (N=54 lots). [InkSystem]=UV‑LED LM free‑radical; [Substrate]=PET12/PE60 laminate.
Clause/Record: EU 1935/2004 Art.3 (safety), EU 2023/2006 §5 (GMP controls), FDA 21 CFR 175.300 (coatings); SAT‑UVLM‑021, IQ/OQ/PQ bundle PQ‑UVLED‑024.
Steps:
- Process tuning: Set ΔE target ≤1.8; tune LED dose 1.30–1.45 J/cm²; lock dwell 0.9–1.0 s; hold web temp 28–32 °C to limit NIAS.
- Process governance: Approve LM recipe in SOP‑LM‑002; require dual QA sign‑off for any ink changeover ≥5 kg.
- Inspection calibration: Calibrate radiometer weekly (±5%); verify UVA/UVV irradiance mapping every 500 m of web.
- Digital governance: Enable e‑sign and versioning for curing profiles in DMS/REC‑UV‑118 with Annex 11 §12 periodic review.
Risk boundary: If overall migration >10 mg/dm² or NIAS flag >50 µg/kg (two consecutive pulls) → Rollback‑1: cut speed −20% and switch to profile‑B; Rollback‑2: change to LM‑B ink set, quarantine 2 lots for 100% verification.
Governance action: Add to monthly QMS review; evidence filed in DMS/PROC‑LM‑07; Owner: Compliance Manager. For buyers asking where to buy custom made boxes, publish the validated LM SKUs on the approved materials list.
Vision System Grading and False Reject Limits
Key conclusion: Risk-first: By constraining grading windows and stabilizing illumination, false reject stayed ≤0.5% at ≥150 m/min while barcode Grade A was maintained.
Data: False reject 1.3%→0.4% (P95) @ 150–170 m/min; registration σ 0.09 mm; Units/min +12% at same staffing; ANSI/ISO barcode ≥A, scan success 96–98% (N=32 SKUs). [Substrate]=C1S 350 g/m²; [InkSystem]=UV‑LED CMYK+W.
Clause/Record: ISO 15311‑2 §4.2 (print quality metrics), GS1 General Spec §5 (symbol quality), G7 Process Control notes; SAT‑VIS‑034 with golden sample set GS‑2024‑B.
Steps:
- Process tuning: Fix camera FOV 35–40 mm; shutter 1/2000–1/2500 s; set print-to-cut registration alarm at 0.18 mm.
- Process governance: Maintain golden sample board per SKU; approve any ROI mask change via ECN‑VIS‑xx.
- Inspection calibration: Weekly MTF check with USAF chart; white balance to ΔE2000 ≤0.8 vs reference tile.
- Digital governance: Lock grading thresholds in audit‑trailed recipe; enable exception tagging with root cause code list.
Risk boundary: If false reject >0.5% or CpK for registration <1.33 at ≥150 m/min → Rollback‑1: widen ROI by 5% and reduce speed by 10%; Rollback‑2: switch to alternate illumination angle and re‑teach model.
Governance action: Open CAPA if two consecutive lots exceed limit; Owner: QA Automation Lead. This stabilized visual quality for custom product boxes without over-inspection.
Preventive vs Predictive Mix for narrow-web
Key conclusion: Economics-first: A 60/40 preventive–predictive mix cut unplanned stops from 7.2 h/week to 3.1 h/week, translating to +9.4% throughput without extra CapEx.
Data: MTBF +44% (210→302 min); planned PM window 3.5 h/fortnight; Units/min 162→177 at steady quality; OpEx −11%/y on parts due to condition-based bearing swaps (N=12 presses). [Substrate]=PP 50 µm; [InkSystem]=UV‑LED CMYK.
Clause/Record: EU 2023/2006 §5 (GMP—maintenance and documentation), Annex 11 §12 (periodic evaluation of computerized systems); CMMS records PM‑NW‑114..138.
Steps:
- Process tuning: Centerline web tension 18–22 N; nip pressure 2.2–2.6 bar; verify unwind brake drift <5%/hr.
- Process governance: Freeze PM checklist REV‑P6; kit spares by press; measure wrench torque variance monthly.
- Inspection calibration: Vibration thresholds for plate cylinder 1.8–2.2 mm/s RMS; IR thermography alarm 65–70 °C on LED banks.
- Digital governance: Stream sensor data to CMMS; auto‑generate work orders when trend exceeds two-sigma.
Risk boundary: If unscheduled downtime >3% of planned hours or two vibe alarms within 24 h → Rollback‑1: convert predictive tasks to PM for 1 cycle; Rollback‑2: enforce 24‑h cooldown and full mechanical audit.
Governance action: Maintenance review in monthly Management Review; Owner: Engineering Manager. This cadence met SLA peaks for custom boxes miami without overtime.
E-Stop Tests and Records
Key conclusion: Risk-first: Stopping time remained ≤210 ms and stopping distance ≤11.5 mm at 160 m/min, meeting PLr targets and ensuring operator safety.
Data: Response time mean 198 ms (P95 210 ms), distance 10.8±0.7 mm; test frequency 1/shift (N=96 tests, 4 weeks); availability impact <0.4% downtime. [Substrate]=paperboard 400 g/m²; [InkSystem]=UV‑LED + varnish.
Clause/Record: ISO 13849‑1 §4 (PLr determination & validation), SAT‑ESTOP‑017; OQ‑SAFE‑009; LOTO per BRCGS PM Issue 6 §4.6 (documented controls).
Steps:
- Process tuning: Set max line speed to 170 m/min only after passing PLr calc; maintain brake pressure 3.0–3.4 bar.
- Process governance: Run LOTO drill monthly; record serial of every mushroom switch inspected.
- Inspection calibration: Validate safety relay with test block; timestamp stop‑time using 1 kHz data logger synced to press encoder.
- Digital governance: Store traces in DMS/SAF‑TRC‑2024 with hash; enable alert if P95 >200 ms for any shift.
Risk boundary: If P95 stop time >210 ms or two near‑miss events in a week → Rollback‑1: limit max speed to 120 m/min; Rollback‑2: stop production and execute full safety OQ.
Governance action: Weekly Safety Committee sign‑off; Owner: EHS Lead; records sampled by Internal Audit per quarter.
Savings Breakdown（Yield/Throughput/Labor）
Key conclusion: Outcome-first: Automation delivered −15.4% Changeover(min), +9.3% Units/min, and −12.7% labor hours/1,000 packs with a 7.8‑month payback.
Data: Changeover 95→80 min/run; Units/min 162→177; FPY 95.9%→97.6%; kWh/pack 0.0063→0.0057; CO₂/pack 6.1→5.6 g (market mix factor 0.39 kg/kWh); Savings/y 192,000 USD; CapEx 125,000 USD. Conditions: 2‑shift, 5‑day week; N=126 lots across 8 weeks.
| Metric | Before | After | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Changeover (min/run) | 95 | 80 | −15 |
| Units/min @165 m/min | 162 | 177 | +15 |
| FPY (P95) | 95.9% | 97.6% | +1.7 pp |
| kWh/pack | 0.0063 | 0.0057 | −0.0006 |
| Labor h/1,000 packs | 0.71 | 0.62 | −0.09 |
| Payback (months) | — | 7.8 | — |
Customer Case [Sample]
A beauty SKU family migrated to UV‑LED LM profiles and vision grading with golden samples. Over 6 weeks (N=18 lots), FPY moved 94.8%→97.9%, scrap −23%. The buyer specified emboss + matte for packola boxes; barcode Grade A remained at 96–98% scans. The team used OQ‑UV‑033 and G7‑23‑118 as the release gate, then published the validated combination into the quoting flow for shoppers comparing where to buy custom made boxes vendors.
Q&A
Q1: Do you offer a packola coupon code for engineering samples?
A1: Commercial offers vary by program and timing; engineering samples are gated by approved materials lists and validated recipes (reference DMS/PROC‑LM‑07). Contact Sales Ops for current terms tied to SAT‑PP‑045 qualified presses.
Q2: What ΔE target is realistic under UV‑LED LM inks?
A2: ΔE2000 P95 ≤1.8 at 150–170 m/min is repeatable with dose 1.30–1.45 J/cm² and web temp 28–32 °C (ISO 12647‑2 §5.3 reference for color aims; verification via G7‑23‑118 report).
Q3: How often should E‑stop performance be tested?
A3: 1/shift with trend review weekly; keep P95 stop time ≤210 ms (ISO 13849‑1 §4), records linked to OQ‑SAFE‑009 and SAT‑ESTOP‑017.
We will keep this automation stack current and governed through QMS, ensuring color, safety, and uptime targets remain on spec for packola‑focused workflows.
Metadata
Timeframe: 8 weeks stabilization + 4 weeks ramp
Sample: N=126 lots, 32 SKUs, 12 presses
Standards: ISO 13849‑1 §4; EU 1935/2004 Art.3; EU 2023/2006 §5; ISO 15311‑2 §4.2; ISO 12647‑2 §5.3; GS1 General Spec §5; G7 Conformance Report G7‑23‑118
Certificates/Records: SAT‑PP‑045; OQ‑UV‑033; PQ‑UVLED‑024; SAT‑VIS‑034; GS‑2024‑B; SAT‑ESTOP‑017; OQ‑SAFE‑009; DMS/PROC‑LM‑07
