Wrapping Machine Punch Mechanism for Packaging Material Tear Evaluation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Wrapping machine operators face challenges in evaluating packaging materials to determine the optimal containment force for loads at minimum cost, due to the complexity of variables involved and the high costs and risks associated with traditional testing methods.

Innovation Solution

A method and apparatus that utilize a wrapping machine with a punch mechanism to simulate tears in packaging material, allowing for the determination of the payout percentage at which the material begins to propagate, form a rope, and stretch towards breaking, enabling the evaluation of packaging materials and setting up wrapping machines for efficient force application.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If traditional shipping tests and containment force tools are used to evaluate packaging materials, then adequate containment force can be determined, but the process requires large sample sizes and extensive time

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontainment force measurementVSAvoidevaluation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a simplified test model using a test load with vertical sides and applies packaging material under controlled conditions. Instead of testing on actual production loads with variable geometries, the invention uses a standardized test setup that copies the essential containment force requirements, enabling faster evaluation while maintaining measurement validity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The invention extracts the critical evaluation function from complex shipping tests and isolates it into a dedicated test load setup. By separating the containment force measurement from the variable elements of actual shipping conditions, the patent enables focused, repeatable testing that requires smaller sample sizes and less time while still determining adequate containment force.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Ease of manufacture

If multiple types and gauges of packaging material are evaluated to find optimal containment force, then cost-effective solutions can be identified, but the complexity of evaluation increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecost-effectivenessVSAvoidevaluation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies different packaging material types and gauges to specific test load configurations to evaluate their local performance characteristics. By testing materials in controlled local conditions rather than attempting to evaluate all possible combinations in complex shipping scenarios, the invention simplifies the evaluation process while still identifying cost-effective material selections.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The evaluation process is segmented into discrete test cases with standardized test loads. Each packaging material type and gauge can be evaluated independently using the same test setup, allowing systematic comparison without the complexity of evaluating all materials together in variable shipping conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Reliability

If packaging materials are tested on actual production wrapping machines, then real-world performance can be assessed, but the cost and risk discourage most companies from evaluating new materials

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveperformance assessment accuracyVSAvoidevaluation cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary evaluation of packaging materials using standardized test loads before committing to actual production wrapping machine testing. This preliminary action allows companies to assess new materials at low cost and low risk, identifying only those materials worthy of subsequent production testing, thereby reducing overall evaluation costs and risks.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The invention uses simple, inexpensive test loads that can be quickly constructed and discarded after testing. These disposable test fixtures enable repeated evaluation of different packaging materials without the need for expensive, durable test equipment, making the evaluation process accessible to most companies.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach simplifies the evaluation of packaging materials by standardizing tear formation and data collection, allowing for the identification of optimal payout percentages that balance containment force and breakage risk, thereby reducing costs and improving wrapping efficiency.

Implementation Method 1

A packaging material evaluation method performed with a wrapping machine includes the following steps: A punch is extended to form a tear in the packaging material during a wrap cycle

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMechanical Force: Mechanical Force

Implementation Method 2

data collection points indicative of a payout percentage at which the tear begins to propagate, forms a rope, and stretches towards breaking

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElasticity: Elasticity

Data Source

PatentEP2632803B1Methods and apparatus for evaluating packaging materials and determining wrap settings for wrapping machines
Publication Date: 2018.08.22 LANTECH COM LLC
  • EP2632803B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2632803B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2632803B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method of determining a wrap force or payout percentage at which to wrap a load (12) with packaging material (16) may include dispensing packaging material (16). The method may also include forming a tear (28) in a portion of the packaging material (16). The method may further include identifying a first payout percentage at which the tear (28) exhibits a first behavior. The method may also include identifying a second payout percentage at which the tear (28) exhibits a second behavior. The method may further include selecting a third payout percentage between the first payout percentage and the second payout percentage, for wrapping the load (12).