Sign up for the Packaging Digest News & Insights newsletter.
Machine builders influence, interpret packagers' needs
January 29, 2014
16 Min Read
.svg?width=1280&auto=webp&quality=95&format=jpg&disable=upscale "Machine builders influence, interpret packagers' needs")
Packaging is big business—and it's growing. Control Engineering and Packaging Digest set to investigate this dynamic market through the Packaging Automation Benchmark Study, a three-part, year-long research project conducted by Reed Research Group. This comprehensive view of the state of packaging automation reveals the technology, market drivers and business issues affecting packagers, machine builders, and system integrators.
This is Volume 2 of the Packaging Automation Benchmark Study, focusing on packaging machine builders and the state of the market from their point of view. These machine builders have a unique role in the market, both influencing and interpreting the needs of packagers and the offerings of automation component and software vendors. In Volume 1, published in April 2008, research results came from the packagers themselves. In Volume 3, research will focus on the system integrator community, providing insight into how their interaction with both packagers and machine builders is driving innovation. A key focal point for that study is a view of technology adoption and strategic use of data acquisition. Survey outreach will begin in late fall 2008, with results published in December 2008.
Complete research results, as well as Webcasts, podcasts and other resources based on the research can be found online. Access all at www.controleng.com/automationresearch or www.packagingdigest.com/automationresearch.
Top 5 markets represented
• Food | 51% |
• Beverages | 47% |
• Pharmaceuticals | 38% |
• Personal care/cosmetics | 36% |
• Household chemicals/products | 36% |
• Machinery, electronic equipment | 31% |
Number of people employed by company | |
• Under 20 | 12% |
• 20 – 99 | 26% |
• 100 – 249 | 24% |
• 250 – 499 | 11% |
• 500 – 999 | 10% |
• 1,000 or more | 17% |
2007 sales volume | |
• Under $10 million | 25% |
• $10 million - $24.9 million | 24% |
• $25 million to $49.9 million | 12% |
• $50 million to $249.9 million | 15% |
• $250 million to $999.9 million | 13% |
• Over $1 billion | 12% |
Location of corporate headquarters | |
• United States | 78% |
• Europe | 13% |
• Canada | 3% |
• Asia | 3% |
• Central or South America | 2% |
• Other (please specify) | 2% |
• Mexico | 1% |
Locations where OEMs have production | |
• >United States | 90% |
• Europe | 31% |
• Asia | 25% |
• Mexico | 13% |
• Canada | 12% |
• Central or South America | 9% |
Typical type of packaging performed by your machines
• Flexible packaging | 54% |
• Cartons | 45% |
• Labeling/labels | 36% |
• Shrink wrap | 30% |
• Cases | 28% |
• Folding carton | 28% |
• Rigid plastic | 26% |
• Bottles (plastic) | 24% |
• Bottles (glass) | 21% |
• Cans | 19% |
• Stretch wrap | 19% |
• Blister Pack | 15% |
• Tube | 15% |
• Clamshell | 13% |
• Other | 9% |
Ethernet protocols supported | |
• EtherNet/IP | 95% |
• Modbus TCP | 29% |
• ProfiNet | 24% |
• SERCOS III | 23% |
• EtherCAT | 15% |
• PowerLink | 10% |
• Foundation Fieldbus | 8% |
• Other | 4% |
With whom do you collaborate on new packaging machine designs | |
• Customers' packaging engineers/designers | 73% |
• Automation suppliers | 54% |
• Internal packaging engineers/designers | 51% |
In-house system integrators | 40% |
• Materials suppliers | 37% |
• Other OEMs | 31% |
• Contract system integrators | 26% |
• No one, do not collaborate | 7% |
Typical build time for new equipment (from contract signing to acceptance test signoff) | |
1 – 3 months | 30% |
4 – 6 months | 40% |
6 months to 1 year | 24% |
More than 1 year | 5% |
Standard |
|---|
Instrumentation and control components |
• Components and connectors |
• Safety |
• Process sensors |
• Instrumentation and analysis |
• Vision systems |
Application and programming software |
• Programming applications (such as HMI) |
• Data historian/data analytics |
• Enterprise integration and analysis |
• ERP |
• MES |
Motors, drives and motion control |
• Motors |
• AC drives |
• Servos |
• DC drives |
• Steppers |
Machine and embedded controllers |
• PLCs |
• Safety |
• Discrete sensors and readers |
• PACs (controller integrating motion and logic) |
• Embedded/board-level controllers |
• Multi-axis motion controllers |
• Robotics |
Networks, communications hardware, software |
• I/O products and cabling |
• Safety |
• Network software and diagnostics |
• Switches, routers and gateways |
• Wireless solutions |
Process and advanced control |
• Electronic work instructions |
• Barcode |
• Advanced control (e.g., simulation) |
• Process and batch control |
• RFID |
HMI and industrial PCs |
• HMI hardware |
• HMI software |
• Industrial PCs |
OEMs Agree
Our customers require increased flexibility in packaging systems | 53% | 23% |
Automated packaging lines are critical to maximizing our customers' capacity | 56% | 43% |
In the next five years, sustainability will become a major driver for automation of packaging lines. | 38% | 37% |
Global availability and international standardization of packaging lines are essential to packaging end users. | 20% | 26% |
Customers see packaging machine flexibility and integrated automation as a key competitive advantage. | 44% | 51% |
Our customers place a high value on packaging operations as a strategic competitive advantage | 36% | 51% |
Our customers should take greater advantage of flexibility in packaging systems to improve time to market | 38% | 40% |
Top three reasons to automate packaging processes |
|---|
OEMs say |
• Control labor costs |
• Gain production efficiencies |
• Gain competitive edge |
Users say |
• Control labor costs |
• Gain production efficiencies |
• Gain competitive edge |
Main benefits expected when deciding which processes to automate |
OEMs say |
• Removing production bottlenecks |
• Access machine diagnostic data |
• Ability to access production data |
• Recipe-driven/tool-less changeover |
Users say |
• Ability to access production data |
• Recipe-driven/tool-less changeover |
• Ability to access diagnostic data |
Percentage of customers who specify brands of controls
Less than 10% | 37% |
10% - 49% | 36% |
50% - 74% | 11% |
75% - 89% | 11% |
90% or more | 6% |
Percentage of customers accepting alternative recommendations | |
Always | 8% |
Frequently | 37% |
Sometimes | 52% |
Never | 4% |
OEMs perception of the value customers place on being involved in selection of components | |
Great value | 23% |
Moderate value | 53% |
Little value | 19% |
No value | 5% |
You May Also Like
