8 replies to this topic

[cbernard]

Have been tasked with developing a program to inspect packaging film upon receipt. The management team wants tests performed to verify the Quality tests already done at the vendor's facility. Of course no one wants to spend the big chunks of change required to duplicate the vendor's equipment to perform the tests. They want me to come up with some cheap, fast and easy tests to see if the film will work when they put it on the machines. Any ideas???? Looking at ability to seal, the coefficient of friction and any other parameters anyone may know about.

Cheryl

[Simon]

Hi Cheryl,

It would be helpful to know a little more about how you use the film, your products and their applications as well as your process in order to give you a better response. Can you answer the following please.

- Have you been experiencing running problems with the film on the machines? If so, what are these problems?
- Any other quality problems with the films?
- Are the films all purchased from the same supplier?
- Is the heat seal layer a film, a lacquer or can the films have either?
- Do you print on the film? If so, does it have a print primer applied by the supplier?
- What is the end product you supply? A reel or some other converted product?
- What is the end use of the converted film? Is the film in direct contact with food?

If you revert with more information I’ll try and help.

Regards,
Simon

[Penard]

Hi Cheryl,

Quite a strange question from your management! I understand we don't trust oral terms of suppliers, involving written technical specification sheets they have to refer to. If you have these sheets, they are engaged in a quality process, they must respect theses sheets otherwise it's possible to sue them - be careful to require each time you order it, specification could change from time to time without referring you.
If you don't, do not hesitate to ask them.

What is the reason for these tests (perhaps you mustn't tell us more), Haccp study, something else? If something ponctual it's useful asking official labs analysis. If you want to compare with your supplier, I'm not sure this kind of method would be a good and justifiable one.

Regards,

Emmanuel.

[Gaskit]

Dear Cheryl,

I have to back up Emmanuel's comments; why does management want "stringent" quality tests to compare against the suppliers test results? But not willing to invest money to purchase equipment required to carry out such test (you cann't guess at such things).

I take it you do recieve Certs of Conformity / Certs of Analysis with every batch? Do you also have agreed Specifications for the product? Do you undertake supplier audits? Are they complying with any standards such as BRC?

Without the financial backing and equipment needed you will obviously be resticted to say ensuring the the lidding film (for example) is the correct micron, seals to a tray effectively and then tears from the tray in one piece, along with basic hygiene checks at goods reciept.

Kind regards,

Steve

[cbernard]

We are undergoing a revamp to align with the Toyota Way, so we have advisers in the plant tearing apart all our processes and trying to make improvements. We do have letters of conformity with each shipment. The film is pre-printed, layered, the specifications change slightly for each type according to what the end customer requires. We package almonds and pistachios, some flavored, some roasted, some raw. We do have issues on occasion with the machines. Some times we get delamination. The other problems are more to do with how fast we try and run the machines and not taking the time to keep the feed reels clean. Any other issue, like print mistakes, etc are easy to find by comparing to a standard.

Thanks for the feedback and sorry it took so long to get back. The 'team' has me running, jumping from task to task, and I forgot I posted.

Cheryl

[hSusan]

Hi Cheryl,
I would like to know as well so am glad you posted back today.

Only thing I can suggest is perhaps talk with your operators on the line to understand what the key objectives are, and what problems they have with the film, that stop them from achieving those objectives.

Obviously, they need to seal the product, poor and patchy sealing performance --> slower run speed (longer clamp time --> longer cycle time limiting run speed) or machine stops to deal with product not sealing?

CoF also makes sense re. key objectives of budget line speed, uptime, waste targets .. your operators might already have 'feel and touch' tests that they use when they suspect that the film is the problem.

Similarly what else can your packaging operators tell you. They might not be right about the reasons for the problems..but you can then open discussion with the packaging supplier to understand the likely reason for the problem and target those in your receival testing?

Also.. some problems you can reliably pick up with receival checks (like print)..some you need more luck (delamination?) because they tend to be more intermittent and depends on your sample.

Finally if there are many things you could test for, perhaps testing on the top problem-causing defects may be more relevant than testing for everything you can think of..Pareto analysis time?! If you are concentrating on fewer tests, but the ones that cost the company downtime or defective product..then you may be able to justify spending on one or two specific test instruments. But really..isn't it more worthwhile to spend the time and money working with the supplier on QA rather than going QC?

(On the other hand..a 'proving period' with suppliers is a very good supplier management tool especially during the new supplier approval stage.. three very high performing companies I have seen, counter-test everything from the candidate supplier for x shipments - not looking for 'pass' results - just looking for whether the supplier is getting the same results as they are getting, and whether the supplier's people are demonstrating deep understanding of the test methodology and product requirements)

Hope that helps..and hope somebody expert in film will contribute soon :-)
Susan

[cbernard]

Thank you Susan, The issue is dying down a bit, they are moving on to new territory. What we have done, was institute a receiving check for print, etc. and started to gather data from the operators about any issues they see on the line that cost them down time. From there I plan to revamp the receiving program to address the most common issues while working with the supplier to improve performance. If the big guys want anything more, I do not plan to guess about the quality of our inbound supplies then be expected to answer as to why I didn't catch something. They will have to give me the tools if they want results.


Cheryl

[hSusan]

Hi Cheryl, it sounds like you have done everything they can reasonably expect for you to do :-) I hope you can keep in touch with your experiences/findings from the items you have implemented.. Best of luck..Susan

[Simon]

We are undergoing a revamp to align with the Toyota Way, so we have advisers in the plant tearing apart all our processes and trying to make improvements.

Don’t you just love em - consultants. Anyhow if you’re going down the Toyota way, which is all about lean manufacturing, you need to tell them that lean is about removing non-value adding work; not putting it in. No I’m sure they are very good and finding lot’s of improvements.

Reading through the thread now (I missed the replies to this) it seems as though you have arrived at a pragmatic solution. The key is always to identify the root cause of problems and put the effort in that place to eradicate or reduce quality problems to the lowest level. Remember what Deming said:

“You can not inspect quality into the product; it is already there.”

Thanks for your comments on this Susan they are all very rational. I agree operators are the best source for information relating to quality issues and by soliciting them for information and involving them in the problem solving process you get sustainable solutions and can develop a culture of continuous improvement.

Regards,
Simon