Advanced IML Systems Technology to Minimize Cost

AMI Thinwall Packaging 2015

Jordan Robertson

Focused Expertise. Benchmark Performance.Focused Expertise. Benchmark Performance.

High cavitation solutions to minimize IML part cost

Ultra-Thin TRIM molding technology

Future developments

Agenda

Conventional Stack Mold

IML Robot for Stack Mold

Simplified IML Container Stack Mold Layout

2x16 Layout

Robot Drawing for 2x16 Cup Mold

Hot Runner Layout: 2x16 IML Cup Mold

IML Stack Mold for Container

Dual Compartment Containers

Dual Compartment Container Mold

4 horizontal rows of mandrels/magazines

Mold pitch if driven by magazine size

Complexity of collapsing mandrel pitch

Manual adjustment of magazine positions

Stack molds usually simplify any cavitation

2x8 simpler than 1x16

2x16 simpler than 1x32

Challenges with ≥ 16 Cavities per Face

Perceptions:

Stack molds limit options

Limitations of number of labels

Limitation of system cavitation

High cavitation >= 16 is complex and involves risk

High Cavitation IML Systems

Perceptions versus reality:

Stack molds limit options

No limitations with custom hot runners

40% of IML cavities go into stack molds

Limitations of number of labels

24 & 32 label systems run well

Limitation of system cavitation

Over 50 IML stack molds built

High cavitation >= 16 is complex and involves risk

Over 25 molds running well with 16+ labels

High Cavitation IML Systems

Advantage of Stack Molds & High Cavitation*

System Information Low High

Number of Systems 12 1

System Configuration 1x2 2x16

Cycle Time 4.6 sec. 5.8 sec.

Equipment Cost $ 2,612,400 $ 1,361,000

Hourly Output (pph) 18,782 19,862 Annual Output (ppy) 135 M 143 M (7200 hours per year)

Output over 5 years 676 M 715 M

Capital/Output 0.39 ¢ 0.19 ¢ ($ per part over 5 year)

Difference (%) 51 %* Note: All data from 2004 StackTeck conference presentation.

TRIMTM (Thin Recess Injection Molding)

Technology Review:

Thin panels cover 50-90% of part area

Ultra-Thin beyond conventional designs

L/T well over 300

20%-40% weight reduction

Aesthetic effect of 90% coverage

Background: TRIM Ultra-Lightweighting

Lightweighting for thinnest, lightest

possible part

“L” is length of flow

“T” is average thickness

“L/T” is abstract measure

PP food tubs typically have:

L/T = 260-300

Thinwall Packaging

Defining Terms

“L”

TRIM - Original Design with 50% Ultra-Thin Panels

2009 In Mould Decorating Award Winner

Awards presented to Sri Thai Superware and StackTeck

TRIM Ultra-Thin Part Design

•

•

• B

•

A

• B

A

• B

A

TRIM Ultra-Thin Part Design

First Commercial Application of TRIM

IMDA 2014 Award “Best Thinwall Packaging”

32 Oz. Container with 90% Ultra-Thinwall

32 Oz. Container with 90% Ultra-Thinwall

32 Oz. Container with 90% Ultra-Thinwall

32 Oz. Container with 50-90% Ultra-Thinwall

32 Oz. Container with 90% Ultra-Thinwall

90% Ultra-Thinwall TRIM Shown at NPE 2015

90% Ultra-Thinwall TRIM Shown at NPE 2015

90% Ultra-Thinwall TRIM Shown at NPE 2015

Conclusions

High cavitation IML systems are proven technology Stack molds simplify IML robotics, many such systems running Large number of IML systems running with 16+ labels Flexible hot runner technology enables more system options Lightweighting 40% is feasible vs. conventional Unprecedented ultra-thin walls are possible with TRIM

Ultra-Thinwall IML candidates…. Single serve cups (esp. yoghurt) Horticultural Hand filled packaging (deli, drive-through) Lightweight high volume food packaging Functional features (e.g. tamper evident tabs, bale lugs)

Thank You

Contact us:Phone: 1-888-700-8555

Website: www.stackteck.com © Copyright 2015 StackTeck Systems Ltd.

Focused Expertise. Benchmark Performance.