Retail Report: Finding the Right Track
Videojet’s Excel 170 ink-jet printer was used to apply a part number and a shade name to these nail polish bottles. When it comes to lot coding, which technology best suits your product?
By Jennifer Kwok, Managing EditorFor cosmetic and personal care companies, lot coding is a primary means of keeping track of a product. “Essentially, if you didn’t have a code on your product and there was a problem with a particular batch, without any means of differentiation you’d have to pull everything off the shelf,” says Sharon Carleton, quality assurance manager, external manufacturing, for Neutrogena.
Methods of printing lot codes range from common techniques such as hot-stamping and ink-jet printing to up-and-coming methods like laser printing. When companies embark on choosing the ideal method, the decision often comes down to package and product compatibility, functionality, and, of course, cost.
The first concern, compatibility, depends on what type of packaging material a lot code is to be printed on. “Traditionally, choosing the technology is always substrate dependent,” says Jeffrey Scicchitano, business development manager for Markem (Keene, NH). For instance, a laser coder, which creates graphics by removing ink from a package or etching them in, is compatible with many materials—but there are some exceptions. Jim Lorenz, laser product manager for Videojet Technologies Inc. (Wood Dale, IL), says that in general, laser printers can be used on materials like glass, polyethylene terephthalate, chipboard, and metallic coatings, but not on low-density polyethylene or solid metal. Scicchitano says that ink-jet can be used on many substrates, including rigid plastic, metal, flexible film, and coated cartons.
Compatibility also has to do with what type of product a package holds. “Sometimes products tend not to be compatible with ink-jet codes,” says Carleton. “The ink is more likely to come off if it comes into contact with those products. It also depends on how likely the product is to get on the location of the package where the code is printed. If you’re trying to make it impossible for a code to wear away, laser is definitely your best option.”
The second factor, functionality, can be judged by numerous factors. Quality of printing varies among coders. In terms of accuracy, laser coders are considered reliable. “With techniques like stamping and embossing that require the machine to come into contact with the package, there is the chance that the machine won’t engage or won’t engage enough and will either miss its mark or create an imperfect mark,” says Lorenz. “Lasers are, in general, more reliable because there is no direct contact with a package during laser coding, and the machine’s components are more durable. Also, the laser is driven by advanced software, so you can print variable code 24 hours a day without having to have an operator make manual code changes, because the computer can do it all. Eliminating manual code changes reduces the chance of human error while reducing the machine’s downtime.”
Speeds of printing also vary among coders. Some laser printers are faster than ink-jet printers, and vice versa.
Cost, the third factor, often influences what type of coder a company will choose. Until recently, laser coders have been much more expensive than other technologies. “Laser coders are more expensive,” says Carleton. “You’re more likely to find manufacturers with ink-jet coders in use.”
Smaller companies that rely on contract packagers to print lot codes are often limited by what types of technology those contractors have in place. Jules Laird, production manager for Too Faced Cosmetics, says, “We rarely use laser coding. That’s simply because our fillers don’t necessarily have the capability for it, because laser coders are quite expensive. Ideally, we’d eventually like to code all our products using lasers. It’s a much cleaner finish, and it would definitely be the best choice.”
Scicchitano says: “I think laser is a better choice because it costs less to operate, but because of the initial cost, a lot of companies don’t consider it and lose out on the long-term return on investment.”
The good news is that prices for laser coders continue to fall as the technology becomes more popular. When asked if he foresees the cost of laser printers ever going down, Lorenz replies, “Yes—it’s supply-and-demand driven. As competition between machinery suppliers increases, there will be more pressure to lower prices.” Scicchitano says that some of Markem’s laser coder models have become comparable in price to its ink-jet printers.
How do firms like Videojet and Markem justify the often higher cost of laser coders? Lorenz says that it behooves companies to compare short-term and long-term costs. For instance, “the advantage with ink-jet coders is that the initial purchase cost for the equipment is less,” he says. “The disadvantage with ink-jet is that you have to deal with consumables costs.”
Variable costs for consumable elements such as ink add up, as do the costs of changeovers and maintenance. For instance, Lorenz says that an ink-jet printer’s spray nozzles can also become clogged with ink, requiring frequent cleaning and/or replacement. With stamp machines, operators must always keep the stamp clean so that the machine will achieve a clean mark on each package. By comparision, laser coders require little to no daily maintenance.
Lorenz advises clients: “You have to understand that if you switch from an ink-jet to a laser coder, over a two-year time frame, what you save in consumables costs, service calls, and replacement parts will basically eliminate the price gap.”