by: Ken Sherman

In the United States, PVC is by far the most commonly used cover material for loose leaf ring binders. The field of Information Storage also includes the use of CDs, DVDs and other digital media. Vinyl heat-sealed binders and cases have proven popular for these products as well.

Traditionally, vinyl has been the material of choice in custom binder applications since it easily lends itself to multiple color silkscreen printing, foil stamping, embossing or debossing, appliqué, and now even digital printing.

Expanding decorating possibilities even further, cover designs are now often printed on paper and then embedded under a clear vinyl overlay. Thus, virtually any artwork can be utilized within the framework of vinyl binder manufacture. This “entrapment” binder is somewhat similar to a retail “clear-view” binder where the user simply inserts the artwork into an open end of the clear vinyl overlay. Printing on paper is faster and much less costly than elaborately decorating vinyl.

The entrapment binder is better than a clear-view binder, because all sides of the overlay are sealed shut and the artwork can be placed very close to the seal on all sides. The seal also is much tighter to the copy so that air space is eliminated and the binder has a true “custom” appearance.

Entrapment binder covers, as well as other vinyl binders with many parts to assemble, become much more labor intense. Let’s get down to cases (pun intended).

Imagine a vinyl binder with interior front and back cover pockets, with three-pieces of cover art (front cover, spine, and rear covers) and a clear overlay. To assemble this cover, a heat seal turntable must be set up to provide for placement of TEN components:

• Interior vinyl pocket
• Opaque vinyl liner
• Three chipboard pieces for front cover, spine, and rear cover
• Opaque outside vinyl cover
• Three pieces of printed cover artwork
• Clear vinyl overlay

To run such a job, setup time is considerable because each station of the turntable must be configured for each of these parts. To run the job, a constant supply of these components must be furnished to the production line. To get reasonable production output requires two or three operators. Based on information from past BIA industry surveys, three operators can produce, at best, about 1,800 units per 7 1/2 hour shift, while two people can make about 1,400 or 1,500.

So we see that this type of binder is considerably more labor-intense than a standard vinyl binder cover that has only five or six components.

	3 PERSONS	2 PERSONS	(1 person automated)
OUTPUT	1,800	1,400	2,700
MAN HOURS	22.5	15	7.5
SETUP TIME	90 min.	90 min.	40 min.

Pick and place automation makes the most sense here. Production output can easily increase to 2,500 to 2,800 units per 7 1/2 hour shift, with only one operator needed. Let’s look at the impact this has on cost by comparing an automated production line with both a two-person and three-person non-automated production line.

The above table shows that an automated assembly line will produce 50 percent more units than a 3-person line with just 1/3 of the labor cost. Setup and changeover times are reduced by half. Note that this automated line can produce 93 percent more units than the two-person line with only half the labor cost. In both cases, setup and changeover time is reduced 56 percent.

Today, pick and place automation systems provide a cost-effective solution. Typical payback on this equipment is less than two years. The value of the labor savings is much greater than monthly lease/purchase payments, so cash flow is positive.

This same equipment also will run conventionally decorated binders with results that are superior to hand-placement of components. The secret is an optical sensor that locks in on part of the decorated design and can register on the design, rather than the perimeter of the material. The improvement in registration is astounding! This brings up another important element: ACCURACY. Pick and place machines can place a binder part to within 1/10,000ths of an inch accurately, every time. The improved quality of the final product can be easily seen. The dramatic reduction in spoilage is a further cost reduction.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Do I need to have a full-time “engineer” to operate and maintain the equipment?
A: No. The equipment, while sophisticated, can easily be maintained “in-house”.  Most parts can be found at Grainger’s and other local industrial parts sources. Choose automation equipment from the most experienced developers. From the beginning, they will guide you through the process.

Q: The last time I checked, this kind of equipment takes up too much space and requires very large-diameter turntables. Is this still true?
A: Not at all. Use your existing turntables. Most plants already have 84″ to 96″ diameter turntables. All you add is one or two automation modules, depending on the kind of jobs you expect to run most of the time. A standard binder with 5 or 6 components requires only one module, while entrapment or clear-view binders use two.

Q: For clear-view or entrapment binders, must I buy two modules at the same time?
A: Your choice. The very fact that this equipment is MODULAR means you can add the second module at any time. The first module is generally a sheet and board feeder, so it can be used also for pre-sheeted decorated and undecorated binders.  Until the second module is added, you can still make clear-view binders by using another operator to hand-feed the sheeted clear. You will still increase production speed, whether making decorated or clear-view binders, with the single module.

Q: I was under the impression that this equipment costs around $1,000,000 for each assembly line. We are just a medium-sized manufacturer and cannot justify that.
A: The kind of automation modules we are discussing here cost but a small fraction of that. As we’ve mentioned, the equipment will produce a positive cash flow and most likely pay for itself in less than two years.

Q: I had heard that automation is great, but only if you set it up once and run the same product “forever” because setup and change overs are so time and labor-consuming.
A: There are certainly machines on the market that fit that description but the modules we are describing can be set up and changed over in between one half hour and one hour. Far fewer fixtures are needed at each turntable station and that is what consumes time and labor when setting up or changing over. Programming each module is simple. A laser scanner “sees” the turntable setup and “learns” where each binder component must be placed. After that, repeatable accuracy produces consistent, quality covers every time.

Q: Can the modules roll-feed from pre-slit vinyl rolls?
A: Yes, modules can be built to feed either vinyl sheets or slit rolls. In the case of clear overlays, as in clear-view or entrapment binders, roll-feeding the clear is best. The module feeds the proper length of vinyl from the roll, cuts the sheet and then places it into position. Undecorated opaque vinyl also lends itself to roll-feeding. If you are slitting and sheeting your vinyl, such as for decorated covers, sheet feeding is ideal.

Q: What does the one operator do in a full entrapment job?
A: As we’ve said, a complete entrapment needs only one operator. This person removes the finished cover, then inspects and strips the “ribbon”. The operator then places (for example) the inside pocket and liner. The modules do the rest.

Q: Must the machine be stopped to load vinyl or board?
A: In the case of modules that are feeding sheet vinyl and board or entrapment-printed sheets, the machine can be loaded while continuously running due to double-width hoppers. If the module is built to roll-feed the vinyl, changing rolls would need a brief stop of 30 seconds to 60 seconds.

Q: What brands of automation modules are being used most in the United States?
A: This type of equipment was first developed specifically for our industry by Douglas Lee of Lee Manufacturing in Ste. Genevieve, Mo. There is more of their equipment in use in the U.S. than any other kind dealing specifically with the custom industry. Each module is designed and built-to-order. Automation is not a “one size fits all” affair. Each individual situation is looked at, analyzed, and the best automation solutions are then presented.

Ken Sherman is the president and CEO of Charles Leonard Western, Inc., the leading supplier of metals and devices in the Western United States. Sherman has been in the industry for over 40 years. He has been a frequent speaker/panelist at BIA Conventions and also has authored numerous articles for trade publications. 

by: Larry Tanowitz

Postpress No Longer an “Also-Ran”

Until relatively recently, the graphic arts industry has compartmentalized its thinking about process management. For years, talk of “seamless” integration stopped at the delivery end of the press, just short of the bindery. That thinking has been replaced by the understanding that printed products are only as good as the processes that tie up their loose ends efficiently. Driving developments beyond automation and toward postpress process integration is the need to get reliable information to the bindery in a useable format. In fact, much bindery equipment already can gather, report and store job-specific data. The key elements of an integrated postpress workflow include the following:

• Improved interface between prepress, press, and finishing equipment
• Centralized control of bindery components
• Automated setup
• Storage of previous job parameters
• Faster makeready to increase net output per shift
• Quick turnaround
• Faster job changeover
• Ability to monitor operational and materials costs via data collection and analysis
• Minimal operator intervention
• Process reliability and consistency
• Higher efficiency
• Productivity gains
• Enhanced flexibility
• Reduced material costs
• Reduced labor
• Reduced waste and spoilage
• Reduced downtime
• Improved load balancing with fewer scheduling conflicts
• Streamlined material handling

Printing Begins with Postpress

The logic behind the renewed attention to postpress processes is irresistible: All printed products must be finished. As a critical determinant of the materials and processes selected for production, finishing is a key differentiator of quality after the press. Poor choices made in the product planning stages have the potential to compromise the quality of the bound and finished job, especially if it contains complex cuts or folds, or uses inks or coatings that are difficult to handle.

Despite the need for an unrestricted flow of data between a plant’s business and production functions, many printers still conceive of the bindery as discrete from the rest of the shop. Even in plants where MIS, prepress, and press processes are networked, the bindery too often is perceived as an island unto itself.

While it is true that computer-integrated manufacturing has eliminated many traditional bottlenecks in prepress and press production, the ability to tie postpress functionality into the system as a whole has been elusive. Despite much lip service paid to the need for so-called “end-to-end” integration, however, the discussion – until recently – has largely excluded the bindery. There are a number of reasons for this:

• Postpress processes tend to resist computer-enabled efficiency. Finishing often requires manual labor and generates waste.
• Finishing must resolve an accumulation of variables including paper weight, bulk, moisture and so on, whose effect on the final product can be hard to predict and often require manual correction.
• The time unbound sheets spend in the bindery prior to finishing, and the need for fine handwork on some projects can slow production to a crawl.
• Lack of skilled personnel in the bindery sector is acute.

Many companies hire unskilled temporary workers to fill vacancies there. At the same time, there are no real trade school or journeyman programs geared specifically for bindery employees. Integrated solutions must be sophisticated and capable, yet simple and accessible.

The sheer durability of postpress equipment functions as a disincentive to capital investment for many printers, who treat the bindery as an afterthought last in their capital investment plans.

According to NAPL, for example, just 16.2 percent of print businesses surveyed for its most recent “State of the Industry” report said they expected the demand for finishing/bindery services to be the fastest growing, compared with a host of other products and service specialties.

TrendWatch Graphic Arts reported earlier this year that 10 percent of digital printers plan to invest in bindery/finishing equipment, compared with just 3 percent of print and prepress firms overall.

In fact, computer-enabled automation is a prerequisite for an integrated bindery – so much so, that the longevity of heavy-duty bindery equipment may no longer be an asset if it deters a printer from pursuing a much-needed upgrade. The reality is that the older the equipment is, the harder it will be to integrate. If it is automated, older bindery equipment is already CIP 3/4-PPF-compatible, meaning that machines can receive and collect prepress data without also having the ability to transmit setup and production data back upstream. Whether legacy equipment can be modified to accept CIP3/4 presets, however, will depend on the type, age and degree of automation of the equipment in question. Consider the following:

• Older machines may be only partly automated, or not at all
• Many older machines cannot be retrofitted to take advantage of computerized presets
• Older machines take longer to set up, run more slowly, and require more operator adjustment – all drains on time, manpower, and other resources or factors at odds with the shift in emphasis from price to cost and the pressure to provide short runs at high volumes.

Consequently, flexible equipment should be installed now as a hedge against being caught behind the rapidly escalating technological curve. If a postpress upgrade isn’t in the cards, even an old folder can be productive when paired with advanced press equipment. Another solution may be to semi-integrate older equipment with the aid of off-line, computer-aided programs.

All of the Above

Failure to view the components of a print manufacturing workflow as a single, interdependent system that encompasses the bindery reflects the industry’s painfully slow adoption of CIM. According to a recent report by TrendWatch Graphic Arts, between fall 2003 and spring 2004, the percentage of printing firms who are challenged by “implementing the SmartFactory, CIM concept” slipped from 3 percent to 2 percent, even as “understanding the SmartFactory, CIM concept” remained steady at 5 percent. Furthermore, while 32 percent of print businesses acknowledged “reading about/studying CIM,” the same percentage also indicated that “CIM is not relevant to our business.”

Much of the resistance is economic: CIM can involve new equipment, new employees, and a potentially expensive learning curve. Some is psychological: many printers, already slow to evolve, are overwhelmed by the concept, and this has tended to blunt, not whet, their motivation to embrace change. This is especially true of the bindery, which still functions as a loss leader in many shops, yet upon whose shoulders the burden of productivity ultimately rests.

However, for printers who educate themselves about the potential benefits of integration, who are willing and able to make the necessary capital investment, and who are prepared to work closely with suppliers to maximize the return on their investment, connectivity is possible now. The tools needed to construct a postpress workflow that can participate in the growth of productivity plant-wide already are available.

Implementing an Integrated Postpress Workflow

In an ideal world, all bindery equipment would be perfectly matched in terms of speed, flexibility and control with every printing press. Machines designed to handle the output from traditional offset presses would function equally well in digital and direct imaging environments, unaffected by format, substrate or volume limitations. Bindery setup and makeready would accurately mirror the speed of the press and the size of the print run. To say that these efficiencies are not universally available or are not being taken advantage of fully, is not to denigrate the advances that have been made, nor to minimize the importance of investing in postpress technologies that can adapt to changing requirements. Instead, the opposite is true: the newest postpress innovations present more opportunities than ever for print shops to specialize and stand out from the competition.