Reduce packaging by not flow wrapping
April 12, 2010
As part of our presentation to Wal-Mart we purchased a number of products at our local Wal-Mart and rewrapped them in overwrap. This one below showed the greatest difference in film usage between the flow wrapped version on the left and the overwrapped version on the right.
50% difference in film use
We actually saved the film as we unwrapped the flow wrapped package, so that we could compare it to the film requirements for overwrap. We found a 50% reduction in film acreage required. This substantial reduction in package size has a couple of implications. First, the ability to hang the product is gone. Second, the shipping case size is reduced.
For the first we were able to direct the manufacturer to hangtab.com where they can add a hang tab. Do-It even makes one that folds out of the way, so that it does not impact case packing space.
For the second, reduction in shipping requirements, we are hoping no one will complain.
Of course, we did not have the printed film to use for the rewrap, so the look is slightly different. But registered film is easy with overwrap. Our FA-ST servo machine is accurate to 1/32 inch and checks registration every time and adjusts as required.
About the author:
Kate Putnam is the primary author of the Package Machinery blog and maintains the company's Twitter feed: @wrapsustainably, in which she shares her perspectives on trends in packaging – especially those involving sustainability.
Read Kate Putnam's Bio
[...] Tuck and fold wrapping uses less film than shrink wrap or flow wrap plus ability to use registered [...]
Pingback by Package Machinery – Overwrapping Machines » The Elevator pitch on Package Machinery’s overwrappers — June 18, 2010 @ 1:17 pm
[...] conforms to the package, so there is not loose film as in a flowwrapper. We have demonstrated up to 50% less film use for overwrapping rather than flow [...]
Pingback by Package Machinery – Overwrapping Machines » Green wrapping machine — June 30, 2010 @ 3:56 pm