Packaging Automation Benchmark Study, Part 2: 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...

08/22/2008


Sidebars:
Research Methodology
Key Findings
Other articles in this study

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

Optional

Total

Instrumentation and control components

• Components and connectors

74%

13%

87%

• Safety

76%

10%

86%

• Process sensors

62%

16%

78%

• Instrumentation and analysis

49%

26%

75%

• Vision systems

21%

54%

75%

Application and programming software

• Programming applications (such as HMI)

54%

21%

75%

• Data historian/data analytics

25%

36%

61%

• Enterprise integration and analysis

16%

36%

52%

• ERP

15%

24%

39%

• MES

15%

23%

38%

Motors, drives and motion control

• Motors

80%

8%

88%

• AC drives

73%

12%

85%

• Servos

70%

13%

83%

• DC drives

56%

23%

79%

• Steppers

60%

19%

79%

Machine and embedded controllers

• PLCs

69%

17%

86%

• Safety

73%

10%

83%

• Discrete sensors and readers

56%

26%

82%

• PACs (controller integrating motion and logic)

41%

28%

69%

• Embedded/board-level controllers

43%

24%

67%

• Multi-axis motion controllers

39%

28%

67%

• Robotics

27%

37%

64%

Networks, communications hardware, software

• I/O products and cabling

69%

15%

84%

• Safety

66%

10%

76%

• Network software and diagnostics

40%

32%

72%

• Switches, routers and gateways

43%

27%

70%

• Wireless solutions

15%

43%

58%

Process and advanced control

• Electronic work instructions

34%

31%

65%

• Barcode

22%

41%

63%

• Advanced control (e.g., simulation)

23%

29%

52%

• Process and batch control

32%

28%

60%

• RFID

11%

36%

47%

HMI and industrial PCs

• HMI hardware

57%

20%

77%

• HMI software

52%

22%

74%

• Industrial PCs

40%

34%

74%



OEMs Agree

Users 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

77%

• Gain production efficiencies

52%

• Gain competitive edge

28%

Users say

• Control labor costs

81%

• Gain production efficiencies

74%

• Gain competitive edge

48%

Main benefits expected when deciding which processes to automate

OEMs say

• Removing production bottlenecks

49%

• Access machine diagnostic data

40%

• Ability to access production data

39%

• Recipe-driven/tool-less changeover

38%

Users say

• Ability to access production data

48%

• Recipe-driven/tool-less changeover

44%

• Ability to access diagnostic data

42%


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%



OEMs can use the criteria shown to determine the Key Buying Factors packagers consider in a purchase decision. Multivariant analysis like this allows a business to consider both importance and satisfaction on a number of factors, giving an OEM a much better idea of where they can direct their marketing efforts.




ONLINE extraOther articles in Packaging Automation Benchmark Study, Part 2

:



Research Methodology

Data for the Packaging Digest and Control Engineering 2008 Packaging Automation Benchmark Study was gathered over a two-week period in the beginning of June 2008. Respondents came from the subscriber base of the following publications' print magazines and E-newsletters:

  • Packaging Digest

  • Control Engineering

  • Plant Engineering

  • Converting

E-mail invitations were sent to the subscribers inviting them to complete a Web-based questionnaire. Over 3,900 industry members responded to the invitation for the second phase of the study. Respondents were qualified as to their company's role in packaging, with 198 respondents who meet the qualifications as an Equipment Supplier/OEM. Another 1,046 respondents met our qualifications as purchasers of packaging equipment and participated in a supplemental study. All results are posted in aggregate, and individual results are kept strictly confidential.

Key Findings

Business Demographics

  • 19% said their company's revenue is totally derived from the packaging industry.

  • Almost 60% of OEMs derive less than half their business from the packaging industry.

  • An overwhelming majority of OEMs believe packaging will stay the same or grow in terms of its overall share of their company's business in the next five years.

  • Those companies currently deriving 25% to 75% of their business from the packaging industry are expecting the highest growth.

  • The United States, followed by Europe and Canada, are currently the top markets for packaging among respondents.

  • In the future, respondents expect the most growth to occur in Asia, followed by the United States and Europe.

Machine design and functionality

  • The most typical types of packaging performed on the machines built are flexible packaging, cartons, and labeling/labels.

  • The most common type of packaging equipment made by OEMs is package handling, conveying, and cartoning.

  • Packaging equipment types expected to grow most over the next 5 years include product inspection, robotics, and form/fill/seal.

  • OEMs are incorporating the following types of automation most in their machines:
    - Instrumentation and controls
    - Motors, drives, motion control
    - Machine and embedded controllers
    - HMIs and industrial PCs.

  • Designing new packaging machines is a highly collaborative process, with 73% of machine builders collaborating with customers' packaging engineers, 54% collaborating with automation suppliers, and 51% collaborating with other departments internally.

  • OEMs say there are two main reasons end-users are not currently using all the automation features their machines offer: knowledge level of the workforce (77%), and automation features exceed customer needs (57%).

  • The majority of equipment manufacturers mention they are addressing this problem by offering onsite training, and creating easy to read manuals.

OEMs and end users disagree most in these areas

  • Currently, most OEMs customers are not too involved in specifying brands of automation controls. In addition, OEMs state their customers are willing to accept some level of alternative recommendation.

  • OEMs believe that automated packaging lines are more likely to be critical to maximizing customer capacity, while end users are less likely to agree with this.

  • OEMs think customers place less emphasis on the competitive advantage that integrated automation can offer, while the end user survey says they value the competitive advantage.

  • OEMs believe their customers don't place much value on packaging operations as a key strategic advantage, while end users have indicated that they do.

  • Most OEMs customers do not specify brands of automation controls. Among packagers who do specify brands, it is less likely they will accept an alternative recommendation. They also put greater value on being involved in the selection of components.

Research Methodology

Data for the Packaging Digest and Control Engineering 2008 Packaging Automation Benchmark Study was gathered over a two-week period in the beginning of June 2008. Respondents came from the subscriber base of the following publications' print magazines and E-newsletters:

  • Packaging Digest

  • Control Engineering

  • Plant Engineering

  • Converting

E-mail invitations were sent to the subscribers inviting them to complete a Web-based questionnaire. Over 3,900 industry members responded to the invitation for the second phase of the study. Respondents were qualified as to their company's role in packaging, with 198 respondents who meet the qualifications as an Equipment Supplier/OEM. Another 1,046 respondents met our qualifications as purchasers of packaging equipment and participated in a supplemental study. All results are posted in aggregate, and individual results are kept strictly confidential.

Research Methodology

Data for the Packaging Digest and Control Engineering 2008 Packaging Automation Benchmark Study was gathered over a two-week period in the beginning of June 2008. Respondents came from the subscriber base of the following publications' print magazines and E-newsletters:

  • Packaging Digest

  • Control Engineering

  • Plant Engineering

  • Converting

E-mail invitations were sent to the subscribers inviting them to complete a Web-based questionnaire. Over 3,900 industry members responded to the invitation for the second phase of the study. Respondents were qualified as to their company's role in packaging, with 198 respondents who meet the qualifications as an Equipment Supplier/OEM. Another 1,046 respondents met our qualifications as purchasers of packaging equipment and participated in a supplemental study. All results are posted in aggregate, and individual results are kept strictly confidential.

Research Methodology

Data for the Packaging Digest and Control Engineering 2008 Packaging Automation Benchmark Study was gathered over a two-week period in the beginning of June 2008. Respondents came from the subscriber base of the following publications' print magazines and E-newsletters:

  • Packaging Digest

  • Control Engineering

  • Plant Engineering

  • Converting

E-mail invitations were sent to the subscribers inviting them to complete a Web-based questionnaire. Over 3,900 industry members responded to the invitation for the second phase of the study. Respondents were qualified as to their company's role in packaging, with 198 respondents who meet the qualifications as an Equipment Supplier/OEM. Another 1,046 respondents met our qualifications as purchasers of packaging equipment and participated in a supplemental study. All results are posted in aggregate, and individual results are kept strictly confidential.

Research Methodology

Data for the Packaging Digest and Control Engineering 2008 Packaging Automation Benchmark Study was gathered over a two-week period in the beginning of June 2008. Respondents came from the subscriber base of the following publications' print magazines and E-newsletters:

  • Packaging Digest

  • Control Engineering

  • Plant Engineering

  • Converting

E-mail invitations were sent to the subscribers inviting them to complete a Web-based questionnaire. Over 3,900 industry members responded to the invitation for the second phase of the study. Respondents were qualified as to their company's role in packaging, with 198 respondents who meet the qualifications as an Equipment Supplier/OEM. Another 1,046 respondents met our qualifications as purchasers of packaging equipment and participated in a supplemental study. All results are posted in aggregate, and individual results are kept strictly confidential.

Research Methodology

Data for the Packaging Digest and Control Engineering 2008 Packaging Automation Benchmark Study was gathered over a two-week period in the beginning of June 2008. Respondents came from the subscriber base of the following publications' print magazines and E-newsletters:

  • Packaging Digest

  • Control Engineering

  • Plant Engineering

  • Converting

E-mail invitations were sent to the subscribers inviting them to complete a Web-based questionnaire. Over 3,900 industry members responded to the invitation for the second phase of the study. Respondents were qualified as to their company's role in packaging, with 198 respondents who meet the qualifications as an Equipment Supplier/OEM. Another 1,046 respondents met our qualifications as purchasers of packaging equipment and participated in a supplemental study. All results are posted in aggregate, and individual results are kept strictly confidential.

Key Findings

Business Demographics

  • 19% said their company's revenue is totally derived from the packaging industry.

  • Almost 60% of OEMs derive less than half their business from the packaging industry.

  • An overwhelming majority of OEMs believe packaging will stay the same or grow in terms of its overall share of their company's business in the next five years.

  • Those companies currently deriving 25% to 75% of their business from the packaging industry are expecting the highest growth.

  • The United States, followed by Europe and Canada, are currently the top markets for packaging among respondents.

  • In the future, respondents expect the most growth to occur in Asia, followed by the United States and Europe.

Machine design and functionality

  • The most typical types of packaging performed on the machines built are flexible packaging, cartons, and labeling/labels.

  • The most common type of packaging equipment made by OEMs is package handling, conveying, and cartoning.

  • Packaging equipment types expected to grow most over the next 5 years include product inspection, robotics, and form/fill/seal.

  • OEMs are incorporating the following types of automation most in their machines:
    - Instrumentation and controls
    - Motors, drives, motion control
    - Machine and embedded controllers
    - HMIs and industrial PCs.

  • Designing new packaging machines is a highly collaborative process, with 73% of machine builders collaborating with customers' packaging engineers, 54% collaborating with automation suppliers, and 51% collaborating with other departments internally.

  • OEMs say there are two main reasons end-users are not currently using all the automation features their machines offer: knowledge level of the workforce (77%), and automation features exceed customer needs (57%).

  • The majority of equipment manufacturers mention they are addressing this problem by offering onsite training, and creating easy to read manuals.

OEMs and end users disagree most in these areas

  • Currently, most OEMs customers are not too involved in specifying brands of automation controls. In addition, OEMs state their customers are willing to accept some level of alternative recommendation.

  • OEMs believe that automated packaging lines are more likely to be critical to maximizing customer capacity, while end users are less likely to agree with this.

  • OEMs think customers place less emphasis on the competitive advantage that integrated automation can offer, while the end user survey says they value the competitive advantage.

  • OEMs believe their customers don't place much value on packaging operations as a key strategic advantage, while end users have indicated that they do.

  • Most OEMs customers do not specify brands of automation controls. Among packagers who do specify brands, it is less likely they will accept an alternative recommendation. They also put greater value on being involved in the selection of components.



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Leaders Under 40 program features outstanding young people who are making a difference in manufacturing. View the 2013 Leaders here.
The new control room: It's got all the bells and whistles - and alarms, too; Remote maintenance; Specifying VFDs
2014 forecast issue: To serve and to manufacture - Veterans will bring skill and discipline to the plant floor if we can find a way to get them there.
2013 Top Plant: Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, Ohio
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Bring focus to PLC programming: 5 things to avoid in putting your system together; Managing the DCS upgrade; PLM upgrade: a step-by-step approach
Balancing the bagging triangle; PID tuning improves process efficiency; Standardizing control room HMIs
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software

Annual Salary Survey

Participate in the 2013 Salary Survey

In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.

Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.