Introduction
At a Glance
Operational gaps are often systemic. What starts as weak specifications can become risky workarounds and eroded trust. Sometimes things that look like shallow gaps turn out to be gaping holes. Regardless of where your gaps lie, three best practices avoid further issues:
- Be deliberate in planning, detailed in specifications, and thorough in documenting
- Don’t encourage workarounds; take the more difficult route if it protects you from costs, risks, and performance cuts
- Align your expectations with reality, and keep your vendor on the same page
Keep your eyes out for common secondary packaging lines problems, and always take steps to mitigate the issues before serious damage occurs.
Sometimes operational gaps are like getting hit over the head with a red flag; other times, they quietly eat money and efficiency until you notice them after they’ve caused serious damage. Whether you’re looking for answers or guarding against future problems, we want to guide you to a more efficient line.
In this article, we’ll cover:
- Gaps in pre-purchase startup
- Gaps in machine lifespan and normal runtime
- Gaps in the search for growth
- Next steps and options to mitigate each gap
Gaps in Pre-Purchase and Startup
Equipment underperformance starts well before the machine is built and in your plant. It begins with the conversations you have with vendors, the needs you over- and under-value during the buying process, and the expectations you have for your equipment.
Get things wrong in the beginning, and you’ll have problems every step of the way.
1. Weak Line Requirement Specifications
When line needs are ambiguous or missing, the machine on your purchase order (PO) will likely be overbuilt or geared-up for underperformance.
Key Problems:
- Capital is misaligned with your machine – either an overly capable machine that you over-paid for, or lost investment in a machine that can’t fulfill your needs
- Change orders spike during commissioning
- Equipment can’t handle your product, pack pattern, or material variability
To Fill the Gap:
- Build a user requirements specification (URS) or request for solution (RFS) sheet, that lists measurable throughput, overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) goals, and training requirements
- Be transparent about your reality – e.g. film, glue, tray specs, etc. – and make that clear before engineering
- Clarify and rationalize your SKU-mix for flexibility needs
- Define what factory acceptance test (FAT) and site acceptance test (SAT) success will look like through pass/fail windows
Note: If you’re looking for more detail regarding specs to bring to vendor meetings, take a look at one of our other articles:
2. Unrealistic Speed Specifications
When you look at a vendor’s spec sheet and see a speed rating of “X cases per minute (CPM),” that doesn’t mean that’s the sustained, reliable rate the machine will continually achieve. Oftentimes, that’s a spec under certain operating conditions, which is rarely hit by most lines.
Key Problems:
- Capital is wasted on a machine that can’t meet your line’s speed requirement, and project justification is challenged
- Original production schedule breaks down with new speed realities
- Manual labor and additional staff are used as a workaround, causing additional cost and labor issues
To Fill the Gap:
- Define your expectations and ask vendors about three rates:
- Mechanical – Maximum speed the machine can run under certain conditions
- Sustained – Typical continuous run speed under normal conditions
- Net (OEE) – True average speed, including all line factors to measure actual productivity
- Look for throughput data that uses realistic run windows and minor stops
- Work with engineering to design accumulation windows deliberately
- Ask vendors to demonstrate throughput tests during FAT and SAT
3. Overvalued Flexibility
When you purchase one machine to handle every SKU, it tends to backfire. One machine that can do everything, usually does nothing well.
Key Problems:
- The machine can’t be relied on because of over-complexity
- Training and troubleshooting become expensive and unsustainable over time
- The long-term value of the machine declines, because of continuous machine maintenance and parts wear
To Fill the Gap:
- When making machine and vendor decisions, take both flexibility and simplicity into account – try to strike the right balance for your line
- Split your high-running SKUs and low-running SKUs between different applications
- Have an idea for your SKU-mix 3-5 years from now, so you can outline future-proofing early
4. Vendor Quotes Don’t Compare One-to-One
Vendors regularly include different factors in their baseline pricing. When you receive a quote from two different vendors, there may be more than the machine alone in the price you see.
Key Problems:
- The vendor who was initially the “low cost” option becomes the most expensive, with customizations and service costs added in
- What’s included in your contract remains fuzzy until something breaks and responsibility is due
- Your ability to ramp-up machine output suffers, because of early assumptions regarding capabilities and inclusions
To Fill the Gap:
- Use standardized request for quote (RFQ) templates with built-in scope checklists
- Score vendors using weighted metrics (e.g. risk-ownership, support, machine lifespan, capital price, etc.)
- Cross-check price and inclusions against similar applications, not just against any machine you’re evaluating
5. Failure to Account for Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
Cost at purchase price is relatively easy to evaluate. But the cost of downtime, labor, spare parts, and maintenance will add up, and often go by without proper consideration at PO.
Key Problems:
- The “cheapest” machine at PO might become a long-term money drain
- Your Finance team doesn’t trust cost assumptions, and project justification may be difficult to receive
- Downtime and workarounds become normalized
To Fill the Gap:
- Build TCO models that account for specific scenarios (e.g. future growth, changeover, unexpected downtime, etc.)
- Calculate your cost of downtime based on targets, margins, and labor rates
- Evaluate equipment based on mean time to repair (MTTR), common failures, and required skill for typical fixes
6. Fragmented Ownership During System Integration
A secondary packaging line is a coordinated system made up of many different machines. Those machines all need to work together for OEE. If ownership is scattered across your line, your OEE will suffer.
Key Problems:
- Shifting responsibility disrupts progress
- Micro-stops build up because no one owns the bottleneck
- Reworking controls and safety by machine, rather than as a coordinated effort, wastes time and erodes trust
To Fill the Gap:
- Write a line-level functional spec (e.g. interlocks, fault recovery, etc.) that you require all original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to meet, when you make a new purchase
- Assign a system owner or use a prime integrator (“single-source,” “turnkey”) model
- Standardize a state/mode controls model – meaning, use the same language and framework for controls for all your machines (e.g. Packaging Machinery Language (PackML))
- Hold a pre-install integration review when you add new machines to your existing line
7. Overlooking the Purpose of the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT)
When you and/or your vendor consider FATs performative, rather than predictive tests, problems continue to arise when the machine is in your facility. A “pass” on an FAT doesn’t mean that the machine works in your plant’s real conditions.
Key Problems:
- Machine-level issues get pushed on to your floor, rather than being solved by the OEM during commissioning
- Commissioning becomes an expensive scramble with retrofits
- Operator trust in the new equipment erodes early, and hesitancy to use the machine grows
To Fill the Gap:
- Include highly-variable materials and unusual pack patterns in your FAT
- Score your machine in FAT on mechanical, quality, cleanability, and any other significant factors for your line
- Define what FAT exit criteria includes, what constitutes success, and what merits fixing/retesting
Note: If you’re interested in learning more about what an FAT should involve, and how to achieve greatest FAT success, take a look at our other FAT articles:
8. Poorly Estimated Site Readiness
When the reality of your site and your team is overlooked, training and installation suffers. Your plant isn’t a blank slate, and it’s just as important that your machine can integrate into your line, as it is for your machine to be the right price and capability.
Key Problems:
- Delays, reworks, and overtime build-up when the machine is on the plant floor, driving cost and team frustration
- Safety incidents occur because installs are rushed
- What could have been a “ready” team, becomes an “improvising” team
To Fill the Gap:
- Pay attention to utility records, accessibility, and layout readiness well before it’s time for installation
- Work on creating an install “playbook,” to guide your install process – consider collaborating with your vendor when doing so
- Align ramp-up expectations with plant realities
9. Ramp-Up Plans Lacking Proper Support
Machine startup and ramp-up plans need just as much support as a line that’s sustained and running. In fact, they often need more. Ramp-up is the time when you’re taking ownership of your machine, and your operators are learning what their everyday will look like. That’s something worth investing in.
Key Problems:
- The line “runs,” but never stabilizes at a steady, safe, and efficient rate
- The tribal knowledge of one or two select operators replaces documentation, leaving a pile of training difficulties down the line
- Operators feel unsupported, which erodes trust
To Fill the Gap:
- Use a commissioning model, like the war-room model – a high-intensity strategy to ramp-up quickly by concentrating experts on stabilizing your line
- Define clear ramp-up stages, with checkpoints and success criteria
- Require training certifications, rather than just training attendance
10. Documentation is Unusable or Incomplete
When documentation is poorly done or undervalued during commissioning, it proves unusable, incomplete, or unhelpful when you actually need it.
Key Problems:
- Diagnosing problems takes longer than it needs to
- Project managers’ compliance drops, leading to safety incidents, legal risk, and machine damage
- Audit and compliance checks take longer than they need to, and more issues are identified, so line engineers’ time is consumed with fixing processes and completing machine maintenance
To Fill the Gap:
- Define clear documentation standards early (e.g. input/output, network, bills of material, guides, etc.)
- Build job aids as work becomes steady – fault remedies, standard operating procedures for jams, lubrication point maps, etc.
- Include documentation validation as part of your SAT
Gaps Across Machine Lifespan
Sometimes issues arise during regular machine runtime due to systemic problems from pre-startup, sometimes due to too great of a focus on the early project, and sometimes for reasons from processes, staffing, and knowledge gaps.
The issues that arise in this portion of the project can happen for many reasons, but oftentimes they stem back to a consistent gap in your operation.
11. Changeover Performance Lacking on the Floor
It’s hard to estimate how changeovers will go before your team is actually there and performing with pressure, time constraints, change parts, and general fatigue. Oftentimes, operations build hopes of cutting downtime with quick changes, but those vendor guarantees look less promising on the floor.
Key Problems:
- Capacity is lost without a team that knows the machine inside and out
- Problems from startup linger, driving issues during regular runtime
- Operators try to achieve changeover goals by introducing new workarounds
- Frustration grows across the line and investments in retraining drive costs
To Fill the Gap:
- Use a changeover efficiency model like Single-Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) to guide improvements
- Manage your change parts intentionally, with mind for standardization, storage, and ease of use
- Keep recipe creation and version control central, and assign ownership to a trusted team member
12. Disjointed Expectations for Controls and Cybersecurity
When everyone on the team wants something different, nobody gets what they need. The less consistent your controls are across the line, the more you’ll see issues and arguments arise.
Key Problems:
- Troubleshooting becomes a slow process, which is highly specialized to the few who understand the controls framework
- Security blocks access and slows fixes
- Predictive, tracking, and OEE data remains locked and goes unrealized among your team
To Fill the Gap:
- Define a controls framework to make standard – include tags, alarms, recipes, network, etc.
- Build an IT-approved, secure, remote access architecture
- Align remote access to verified security frameworks like IEC 62443 – a series of standards that outline requirements and processes for automation and controls systems
13. Material Variability Undercutting Performance
Oftentimes, lines will opt for the budget-effective material contract, which optimizes costs upfront, but drives variability issues down the line.
Key Problems:
- Random micro-stops and reworks become regular in your processes
- Glue, film, and other material usage increases
- Workarounds become normal, eating time and performance from an otherwise capable line
To Fill the Gap:
- Define material specs early – as they relate to performance – and advocate for the right quality materials when searching for a supplier
- Build routine quality assurance (QA) checks into your weekly schedule, ensuring they reflect functional requirements
- Align procurement, packaging, and OEM teams on your inputs
14. Spare Parts Strategy is Inefficient
Chances are, if your spare parts strategy is inefficient, you’ve already felt the effects. It’s either working, or it’s missing the important things and hoarding what’s unnecessary.
Key Problems:
- Minor issues and part swaps become major downtime events
- Obsolete parts sit in inventory or create unexpected crises
- Budget is tied to the wrong aspects of your inventory, and missing from the right ones
To Fill the Gap:
- Use a risk-based spares model (e.g. ranking need by A/B/C), that is based on your mean time between failures (MTBF) and downtime impact
- Standardize part families across your line wherever possible, so that you have a deeper inventory and faster timelines
- Maintain a list for obsolescence and track maintenance on obsolete parts, so that you know the right time to migrate
15. Support Fails Under Pressure
A claim for “24/7 support” can mean a lot of things. It’s great if your vendor is helpful and can remedy issues 24/7, but it’s essentially pointless if the 24/7 support calls into an external service with a corresponding wild goose chase.
Key Problems:
- Teams stop calling vendors for support, and try to manage all failures internally
- Workarounds become more prevalent, increasing overall risk
- Downtime extends during each problem, and trust in your vendor erodes
To Fill the Gap:
- Negotiate service-level agreements (SLAs) with your vendor, keeping an eye out for response and escalation metrics
- Build a secure, remote access architecture that aligns with both your own and your vendor’s IT standards
- Review support quarterly, using real downtime data, and evaluate whether changes need to occur
16. Cleaning and Maintenance Become Afterthoughts
When specs like speed and flexibility dominate your vendor conversations, you overlook cleanability and maintenance. Then you suffer with frequent jam clearing and time-consuming sanitation procedures.
Key Problems:
- MTTR and downtime increase
- Safety risks and near misses occur during rushed processes
- Sanitation becomes a bottleneck
To Fill the Gap:
- Review your machine design early for maintenance access, lubrication points, and overall safety
- Optimize preventive maintenance (PM) using real plant feedback
- Collaborate with your vendor to apply hygienic design principles wherever possible
17. Safety and Guarding Retrofitted
It’s common for operations to underestimate the importance of safety when they’re looking at a PO. Then safety incidents start to add up, and safety guarding suddenly becomes a priority. But if safety is commonly overlooked in your line, you might have a bigger problem than a retrofit.
Key Problems:
- Retrofits are especially costly and delay time to startup
- Accessibility on your machine becomes a common source of problems, or even worse – a source for safety concerns
- Operators lose trust in the safety of their workplace
18. Ergonomics Valued Improperly
A common misconception with packaging automation is that it supplants the need for operators or manual labor entirely. Automation doesn’t mean “hands-free,” and that’s often a real gap in expectations. Ergonomics gets overlooked and your team suffers.
Key Problems:
- Injuries occur and safety risks rise
- Behavior encouraging bypasses becomes more prevalent
- Training and turnover struggles increase
To Fill the Gap:
- Perform regular ergonomic workflow reviews at stations throughout your line
- Specify requirements for human-centered roles
- Define ergonomics standards for normal work vs. upset conditions
Sometimes the hopes of a project get cut short when you look to grow. Whether the issues are caused by new government regulations, unrealistic expectations, or a line extension, you don’t want your equipment to get in the way of future growth. And it’s best to realign expectations and fill these gaps as early as you can.
19. Rapidly Evolving Regulations
We live in an era of rapidly evolving customer expectations, government and retailer regulations. Sustainability is one example of a recent change. Sometimes lines and materials can keep up, but the machines just can’t accommodate.
Key Problems:
- Machines go obsolete or require costly upgrades and retrofits to accommodate capabilities with new regulations
- Micro-stops increase from downgauged or recycled materials
- Brand commitments sound good on paper, but don’t follow-through
To Fill the Gap:
- Assess your line and team for possible material-change impacts before implementing
- Build qualification protocols for new packaging materials
- Design new projects with adjustment margins for safety, but be careful not to overbuild
20. Overestimating Multi-Site Standardization Success
When you see an explosion of recent growth, and want to extend your success to other facilities, it can be tempting to standardize equipment and processes. However, it’s important to consider the unique operations and needs of each site – what works for one facility might not work for another.
Key Problems:
- Training isn’t as easy at another site, becoming a burden
- Support and spares become fragmented and hard to manage
- Performance varies widely between sites, and it’s hard to track one with the other
To Fill the Gap:
- Define strategies by platform function – e.g. cartoner, palletizer, etc. – so that there is cross-site consistency, but not rigidity
- Standardize parts, controls, safety standards, and documentation
- Build a replication guide for future rollouts
What Do I Do Next?
After seeing 20 commonly overlooked aspects of secondary packaging lines, you might be feeling a bit overwhelmed. While these gaps differ, and the ones specific to your operation will look different from the next, the underlying principles remain the same:
- Be deliberate in planning, detailed in specifications, and thorough in documenting
- Don’t encourage workarounds; take the more difficult route if it protects you from costs, risks, and performance cuts
- Align your expectations with reality, and keep your vendor on the same page
Of course, more can always be said; improvements can always be made. But you have to follow the right path, taking one step at a time.
If you are experiencing any of the gaps listed above, try “To Fill the Gap” recommendations as a place to start. From there, if you need more guidance or would like to plan a project, reach out to a vendor who can guide you along the way.
Looking for a Guide in Your Next Packaging Project?
Schedule a discovery call with Douglas. Our specialists will answer questions, explore options, evaluate your line, and work with you to fill operational gaps.
