EOAT for In-Mold
Labeling:
Feasibility for Low Cavitation
By
John M. Westbeld, Engineering Manager, SAS
Automation, LLC
Often, In-Mold Labeling (IML) is centered on
food packaging where higher cavitation and
volume make it cost justifiable. Low
cavitation IML applications are where the cost
justification is tougher and are prevalent in
the automotive, home appliance, and toy
industries. Making low cavitation applications
attractive to the IML process depends upon the
automations ability to produce good parts in a
cost effective manner.
The
benefits of IML are clear. Film laminates can
replace paper or plastic labels and the print
and color do not fade or peel off of the part.
The film consists of several layers that
include coatings, print, color, and a
micro-porous backing sheet. The advantage of
molding films onto plastic parts is that the
micro-porous backing sheet allows the plastic
to flow into the pores creating a permanent
bond. Another advantage is the film will
shrink with the cooling part so you won't see
any ripples on the surface. When the IML
process is automated you also get consistent
positioning of the labels on your molded
parts. In short, you get better looking
product that is going to stay that way.
Automating the
IML process is where the cost justification
comes into play. It is obviously not cost
effective to have an operator place a label
into the mold in between molding cycles
because of added cycle time. The labels must
be precisely staged and then transferred (via
robot with End-of-Arm Tooling - EOAT) into the
mold in a repeatable manner.
Labels can be
staged in a number of ways depending on the
amount of operator interface you want to have.
Simple manual slide tables can be used to
stage the labels in the robot cell guarding
when the operator can place the labels in
custom nests for each cycle or if the robot is
capable of picking from a stack of labels.
Rotary tables or lift tables can be utilized
when the operator interface is desired to be
limited. Whichever option you choose the
staging equipment needs to locate the labels
positively with the same orientation, as the
labels will be placed into the mold. It also
needs to have label presence and orientations
sensing to ensure the labels are placed into
the mold consistently and correctly. The
staging equipment may also need to locate the
robotic EOAT within the nest. This way the
robot will pick up the labels with precision,
which allows precision placement in the mold.
All 3 are examples of cost effective ways to
present the labels to the robot/EOAT for low
cavitation applications.
It is desirable
to have a full servo robot for IML automation.
Cartesian robots and articulating robots have
shown to be equally capable of the accuracy
and flexibility needed. The EOAT must secure
the label firmly and locate the label
precisely in the mold as well as secure the
molded parts. The EOAT may need to dock in the
staging equipment and the mold for positive
label positioning. The labels are held in the
mold by means of an electrostatic charge. The
charge applicators can be located on the EOAT
or outside of the mold depending on how well
the label holds the charge, humidity
considerations, and dust and dirt attraction.
If the charge applicator is placed on the EOAT
then the robot will need to control the power
to the charging unit.
Also,
additional cables will need to be run through
the robot cable tracks to transmit the charge
from the charging unit to the charge
applicators. If the charge applicators are
located outside of the mold then the EOAT must
be equipped with a vacuum plate with an
antistatic, high resistivity pad to keep the
electrostatic field on the label. Making low
cavitation IML cost effective requires
dependable equipment and good quality labels.
Costs range between EU 19,000 - 40,000
depending on the application for the staging
equipment, EOAT, and charging equipment. Some
questions you should have answered before
getting your vendors involved are:
- How many
cavities/labels in the mold?
- What
material is being molded?
- What is the
mold daylight?
- Which side
of the mold are we inserting on (Core or
Cavity)?
- Is the mold
textured or will it be textured?
- Are we
placing the label close to a mold gate?
- What type of
accuracy do we need on label placement?
- Do we need
to secure the finished part as well as
place the label?
- Can we
modify the mold to include EOAT locators
if needed?
- What
make/model of robot and is it a full
servo?
- What is the
payload of the robot?
- Can the
robot use vacuum confirmation or a switch
to sense the top of the stack of labels?
- What type of
staging equipment is needed?
John M. Westbeld is Design Manager at SAS
Automation LLC For article feedback, John can
be reached at getagrip@sasgripper.com
|