David Savastano, Editor05.18.20
Just before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down pretty much all trade shows, RadTech International North America, the Association for Ultraviolet and Electron Beam Technologies, held its biennial show, RadTech UV+EB 2020, at Disney Coronado Springs in Orlando, FL from March 9-11, 2020.
The conference focused on the growth of energy curing technologies (UV, UV LED and EB) in key markets like paint and coatings, graphic arts, 3D printing and industrial applications.
While some speakers and exhibitors pulled out, RadTech’s Mickey Fortune said that RadTech 2020 did as well as could be expected, despite the coronavirus.
“The elephant in the room was certainly the coronavirus, but with our Disney resort partners, we took precautions and were gratified to see so many people join us in Orlando for the conference—most of our sessions were full, and exhibitors typically seemed satisfied that the ‘right’ customers attended,” Fortune noted. “This included several end-users from Fortune 100 companies. Orlando seemed to be a popular choice for our attendees, and is a leading candidate for our 2022 event.”
Sessions on Graphic Arts
Graphic arts were covered in a variety of sessions over the three days. The Printing & Packaging section looked at the role of UV and EB inks in packaging.
Elliot Coulbeck of Lubrizol Ltd. led off the segment with “Multi-Functional Dispersants for UV Inks.” He discussed a new prototype dispersant from Lubrizol.
“Our new prototype is giving good let down compatibility and color strength,” Coulbeck noted. “We have improved solubility and increasing performance on a range of pigments.”
Imtiaz Rangwalla of Energy Sciences Inc. followed with his talk on “Recyclable Packaging Options with Electron Beam Curing Technology.” Rangwalla began by asking what the industry can do to improve recycling.
“What can we do as suppliers to help the recycling of plastic,” Rangwalla said. “The flexible packaging market is close to $32.3 billion in North America and is 19% of the total packaging market. It is steadily growing.’
Rangwalla noted that inks are 6% of $17.5 billion of flexible packaging materials, while films and resins are the vast majority of costs at 70%. He then discussed the interest multinational CPGs are showing.
“PepsiCo says that sustainable plastics vision is rooted in three pillars – reduction of plastic use, increasing recycling rates and reinventing packaging,” he said. He added that in California, producers will have to prove that amount of packaging recycled is 30% by 2026.
The goal is to make flexible packaging recyclable. “You may need a top layer of EB PV or MDOPE or BOPE,” Rangwalla observed. “Through the use of EB to increase the heat resistance of the top ply PE film, a sufficient temperature gradient could be created between the top ply printed film and bottom ply, increasing sealing speed. EB gives a lot more flexibility to packaging.”
Julie Cross, Domino Printing Sciences, was next up with “Food Packaging Compliant Inks and Set-Off Migration,” which due to travel restrictions, Cross delivered by video. Cross focused on set-off migration, noting that materials must be manufactured in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practices so they do not transfer constituents to food in quantities that endanger human health, change the taste and other aspects.
“Development of a food packaging compliant ink is considerably more difficult for inkjet compared to analog inks,” Cross observed. “Printhead technology requires significantly lower viscosity.”
Domino designed inks that were formulated to be compliant with Swiss Ordinance and Nestle Guidance, but to be food packaging compliant, a functional barrier was still required.
“Migration can still occur when inks are food packaging compliant,” Cross concluded. “Extra curing may be required to achieve sufficient cure to prevent set-off migration and it is possible on a hybrid digital/flexo press.”
“Attainable Sustainable: Using Electron Beam Technology in Compostable Flexible Packaging,” the final talk of the Printing & Packaging session, was led by Karl Swanson and Sage Schissel of PCT Ebeam and Integration, LLC.
Swanson noted that according to Smithers Pira, the global packaging market was $975 billion in 2019. Sustainable packaging is growing 25% to 30% per year.
“Some of the current issues in packaging are consumer-driven, such as the need to maintain product safety, respond to shorter runs, and fast delivery,” Swanson reported. “Sustainability is a key trend for major CPGs, and electron beam can make it possible. EB can eliminate a layer of lamination, downgauge film, uses no photoinitiators or solvents, with less energy consumption and material waste. EB has a smaller footprint and works with digital printing allows print on demand. Using polyethylene with surface printing with an OPV as a final layer, it is compatible with the recycling of PE.”
Sustainability and UV/EB
The closing day opened with a variety of topics, with Sustainability & Regulatory an important segment. Brigitte Lindner, RAHN USA Corp., began the session with “Regulatory Landscape for UV/EB Printing Inks in Europe.”
“There are many different kinds of inventories – REACH, Switzerland, Turkey, Eurasia,” Lindner said. “In the US, you have TSCA, Canada and a bunch of state regulations, so it isn’t very different.
“There is a huge difference between industry requirements that stakeholder policies– EuPIA, Nestle and others – which are much more strict. This is a problem for companies located in Europe that have to follow these guidelines,” Lindner added.
Marcia Kinter of SGIA followed with “Moving Forward: A Look at How the Regulatory Climate Impacts Change.” Kinter noted the difference with the linear approach (make-use-discard) and the circular approach (make-reuse-recycle).
“The nexus of sustainability and compliance are merging,” Kinter said. “Customers send a scorecard, and they want to know what is in our products. They are looking at the toxics. They are looking at their products’ end-of-life strategies.”
Rita Loof of RadTech discussed “Regulatory Development for UV/EB from the West Coast.”
Loof focused on state regulations, such as those from the California Air Resources Board, adding that most UV/EB operations are exempt from permit.
“UV/EB can help compliance. Super compliant materials (eg, UV and EB cured material), typically dry/cure more quickly, using less energy than conventional materials,” Loof reported. “The good news is that the California Senate awarded a resolution recognizing UV/EB technology as pollution prevention processes. UV/EB is Best Available Control Technology (BACT), and generates no secondary pollutants (NOx, SOx, CO, greenhouse gases).”
Panel Discussions
RadTech 2020 featured several panels looking at concerns. One such panel was Electron Beam Mythbusters, a look at some of the misconceptions about EB technology. Todd Fayne of PepsiCo served as moderator for panelists James Nowicki of Henkel Corporation, Brian Sullivan of Energy Sciences, Evan Benbow of Wikoff Color and Karl Swanson of PCT Ebeam and Integration.
Fayne said that one of the things everyone starts with is the cost, noting that EB equipment runs up to $2 million, and inks and coatings are expensive.
“From the end-user perspective, we try to get the operating cost to cost parity,” Fayne added. “You have to look at it from a total cost perspective. We can drive lots of productivity to new substrates we can use for our packaging, for example, a single layer instead of lamination. EB enables that.”
Benbow observed that EB inks do have performance benefits to consider.
“The cost of EB inks are much higher on a per pound basis, but they are 100% solids inks, so we get a lot more active materials, as well as casting a much thinner ink film, so you are using much less of it. Also, can we assign value to no longer putting VOCs in the environment. You can’t truly quantify that,” Benbow said. “The ability of EB to create strong crosslinking gives it stronger performance capabilities.”
“EB is a high cost, but what are the costs of operation, what are you getting for the investment,” Swanson noted.
“With EB you have an upfront cost on the first foot of width, but when you draw that width out, you get more competitive with UV. You also can run faster,” Sullivan noted. “When you look at flexible packaging, we can go into an account and talk all day about the benefits of food packaging. EB does not have any photoinitiators. It’s driving interest in this technology.”
Fayne noted that the use of EB is not prevalent, but it is growing. “With EB, there is not a lot of installed capacity but that is changing,” he added.
“There’s a lot of solvent flexo presses installed around the world and without legislation, it will be a slow change in packaging,” Swanson pointed out.
EB offers advantages when it comes to sustainability and regulations.
“Leadership from CPGs is certainly a driver, but regulations are also important,” said Nowicki. “Analytical techniques are getting more sensitive. Consumers get nervous when they hear about trace amounts of chemicals.”
“I want to get a non-detect,” Fayne concluded. “We have a lot of exposure as a brand owner if something goes wrong. We need to get the ink in the ballpark on price with solvent-based ink. Changing the substrate is a savings, and no clear film needed with surface printing.”
“Trends in UV+EB Inkjet for Packaging,” a panel discussion on packaging inkjet featuring UV and EB curing, was moderated by Jennifer Heathcote of Eminence UV. The panel featured James Gill of Fujifilm Dimatix, Imtiaz Rangwalla of Energy Sciences Inc., Tom Molamphy of Siegwerk, Josh Samuel of EFI and Vivien Clayton of Sartomer Americas. The panelists began by discussing where inkjet packaging is, noting that direct food contact is not happening.
“With UV we aren’t discussing direct food contact. We have to avoid transfer. We are only talking about indirect food contact,” Samuel observed.
“Secondary packaging is further along,” Gill added.
“What is good from a migration perspective is that whatever the ingredients for UV or EB, you are doing in-situ,” Rangwalla said. “We have to comply that these migration limits are met. After I cure it by established guidelines, they have to meet the migration limits.
“UV will never be accepted for direct for packaging,” said Molamphy. “It depends on barrier properties. If it is one-layer packaging, the question becomes whether you have an ink that meets the various lists, or is it corrugated and you can use regular ink sets.
“I don’t think that UV inkjet would be approved for direct food packaging. Moving from solvent-based to water-based in flexible packaging occurred very slowly,” Molamphy added.
Gill noted that some brands are not ready to go to digital.
“I also think that digital is held to a higher standard than analog printing,” Gill added. “Digital is good at creating short runs of a hundred.”
“EB eliminates the photoinitiator,” Rangwalla noted. “That’s the advantage. EB has traditionally been chosen for food packaging for that reason – it takes away that risk of migration. EB also provides a higher degree of cure, which also reduces the chance of migration.”
All in all, inkjet is still not that prevalent in packaging.
“We are still in the baby steps for packaging,” Molamphy said. “If you look at the installation of hardware in the last five years it is growing. There is also a hybrid where you can
do customization.”
“The technology is now coming of age and is really different – it is single-pass printing and you need to run it reliably,” Samuel added. “Ceramic technology flipped completely in five years to inkjet. Packaging will go in different rates. The exciting market for us is corrugated right now.”
“There is a really compelling argument for going with digital, with different tipping points with different markets,” Gill said. “The billboard industry was done the same way for 100 years, and within seven years, every single billboard in North America was all inkjet. I don’t know if flexo will be the same. The way inkjet comes in is at the bottom and then becomes more efficient. It tends to creep up the break-even point, from 1,000 copies to 10,000 copies and more.”
Next up was a panel on “Defining Sustainability with UV & EB Technology.” I chaired the panel, which included Kinter, George Fuchs of NAPIM and David Biro of Sun Chemical, and we looked at the complex issues surrounding sustainability.
“Sustainability is a major topic in virtually every industry worldwide, and it is growing in interest,” I noted at the beginning. “It is an all-encompassing topic, covering areas as diverse as employee safety, manufacturing efficiency, use of renewable materials, conserving energy and water, to recycling, compostability and more. Topics like Circular Economy and Cradle-to-Cradle production are common today.”
The conference focused on the growth of energy curing technologies (UV, UV LED and EB) in key markets like paint and coatings, graphic arts, 3D printing and industrial applications.
While some speakers and exhibitors pulled out, RadTech’s Mickey Fortune said that RadTech 2020 did as well as could be expected, despite the coronavirus.
“The elephant in the room was certainly the coronavirus, but with our Disney resort partners, we took precautions and were gratified to see so many people join us in Orlando for the conference—most of our sessions were full, and exhibitors typically seemed satisfied that the ‘right’ customers attended,” Fortune noted. “This included several end-users from Fortune 100 companies. Orlando seemed to be a popular choice for our attendees, and is a leading candidate for our 2022 event.”
Sessions on Graphic Arts
Graphic arts were covered in a variety of sessions over the three days. The Printing & Packaging section looked at the role of UV and EB inks in packaging.
Elliot Coulbeck of Lubrizol Ltd. led off the segment with “Multi-Functional Dispersants for UV Inks.” He discussed a new prototype dispersant from Lubrizol.
“Our new prototype is giving good let down compatibility and color strength,” Coulbeck noted. “We have improved solubility and increasing performance on a range of pigments.”
Imtiaz Rangwalla of Energy Sciences Inc. followed with his talk on “Recyclable Packaging Options with Electron Beam Curing Technology.” Rangwalla began by asking what the industry can do to improve recycling.
“What can we do as suppliers to help the recycling of plastic,” Rangwalla said. “The flexible packaging market is close to $32.3 billion in North America and is 19% of the total packaging market. It is steadily growing.’
Rangwalla noted that inks are 6% of $17.5 billion of flexible packaging materials, while films and resins are the vast majority of costs at 70%. He then discussed the interest multinational CPGs are showing.
“PepsiCo says that sustainable plastics vision is rooted in three pillars – reduction of plastic use, increasing recycling rates and reinventing packaging,” he said. He added that in California, producers will have to prove that amount of packaging recycled is 30% by 2026.
The goal is to make flexible packaging recyclable. “You may need a top layer of EB PV or MDOPE or BOPE,” Rangwalla observed. “Through the use of EB to increase the heat resistance of the top ply PE film, a sufficient temperature gradient could be created between the top ply printed film and bottom ply, increasing sealing speed. EB gives a lot more flexibility to packaging.”
Julie Cross, Domino Printing Sciences, was next up with “Food Packaging Compliant Inks and Set-Off Migration,” which due to travel restrictions, Cross delivered by video. Cross focused on set-off migration, noting that materials must be manufactured in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practices so they do not transfer constituents to food in quantities that endanger human health, change the taste and other aspects.
“Development of a food packaging compliant ink is considerably more difficult for inkjet compared to analog inks,” Cross observed. “Printhead technology requires significantly lower viscosity.”
Domino designed inks that were formulated to be compliant with Swiss Ordinance and Nestle Guidance, but to be food packaging compliant, a functional barrier was still required.
“Migration can still occur when inks are food packaging compliant,” Cross concluded. “Extra curing may be required to achieve sufficient cure to prevent set-off migration and it is possible on a hybrid digital/flexo press.”
“Attainable Sustainable: Using Electron Beam Technology in Compostable Flexible Packaging,” the final talk of the Printing & Packaging session, was led by Karl Swanson and Sage Schissel of PCT Ebeam and Integration, LLC.
Swanson noted that according to Smithers Pira, the global packaging market was $975 billion in 2019. Sustainable packaging is growing 25% to 30% per year.
“Some of the current issues in packaging are consumer-driven, such as the need to maintain product safety, respond to shorter runs, and fast delivery,” Swanson reported. “Sustainability is a key trend for major CPGs, and electron beam can make it possible. EB can eliminate a layer of lamination, downgauge film, uses no photoinitiators or solvents, with less energy consumption and material waste. EB has a smaller footprint and works with digital printing allows print on demand. Using polyethylene with surface printing with an OPV as a final layer, it is compatible with the recycling of PE.”
Sustainability and UV/EB
The closing day opened with a variety of topics, with Sustainability & Regulatory an important segment. Brigitte Lindner, RAHN USA Corp., began the session with “Regulatory Landscape for UV/EB Printing Inks in Europe.”
“There are many different kinds of inventories – REACH, Switzerland, Turkey, Eurasia,” Lindner said. “In the US, you have TSCA, Canada and a bunch of state regulations, so it isn’t very different.
“There is a huge difference between industry requirements that stakeholder policies– EuPIA, Nestle and others – which are much more strict. This is a problem for companies located in Europe that have to follow these guidelines,” Lindner added.
Marcia Kinter of SGIA followed with “Moving Forward: A Look at How the Regulatory Climate Impacts Change.” Kinter noted the difference with the linear approach (make-use-discard) and the circular approach (make-reuse-recycle).
“The nexus of sustainability and compliance are merging,” Kinter said. “Customers send a scorecard, and they want to know what is in our products. They are looking at the toxics. They are looking at their products’ end-of-life strategies.”
Rita Loof of RadTech discussed “Regulatory Development for UV/EB from the West Coast.”
Loof focused on state regulations, such as those from the California Air Resources Board, adding that most UV/EB operations are exempt from permit.
“UV/EB can help compliance. Super compliant materials (eg, UV and EB cured material), typically dry/cure more quickly, using less energy than conventional materials,” Loof reported. “The good news is that the California Senate awarded a resolution recognizing UV/EB technology as pollution prevention processes. UV/EB is Best Available Control Technology (BACT), and generates no secondary pollutants (NOx, SOx, CO, greenhouse gases).”
Panel Discussions
RadTech 2020 featured several panels looking at concerns. One such panel was Electron Beam Mythbusters, a look at some of the misconceptions about EB technology. Todd Fayne of PepsiCo served as moderator for panelists James Nowicki of Henkel Corporation, Brian Sullivan of Energy Sciences, Evan Benbow of Wikoff Color and Karl Swanson of PCT Ebeam and Integration.
Fayne said that one of the things everyone starts with is the cost, noting that EB equipment runs up to $2 million, and inks and coatings are expensive.
“From the end-user perspective, we try to get the operating cost to cost parity,” Fayne added. “You have to look at it from a total cost perspective. We can drive lots of productivity to new substrates we can use for our packaging, for example, a single layer instead of lamination. EB enables that.”
Benbow observed that EB inks do have performance benefits to consider.
“The cost of EB inks are much higher on a per pound basis, but they are 100% solids inks, so we get a lot more active materials, as well as casting a much thinner ink film, so you are using much less of it. Also, can we assign value to no longer putting VOCs in the environment. You can’t truly quantify that,” Benbow said. “The ability of EB to create strong crosslinking gives it stronger performance capabilities.”
“EB is a high cost, but what are the costs of operation, what are you getting for the investment,” Swanson noted.
“With EB you have an upfront cost on the first foot of width, but when you draw that width out, you get more competitive with UV. You also can run faster,” Sullivan noted. “When you look at flexible packaging, we can go into an account and talk all day about the benefits of food packaging. EB does not have any photoinitiators. It’s driving interest in this technology.”
Fayne noted that the use of EB is not prevalent, but it is growing. “With EB, there is not a lot of installed capacity but that is changing,” he added.
“There’s a lot of solvent flexo presses installed around the world and without legislation, it will be a slow change in packaging,” Swanson pointed out.
EB offers advantages when it comes to sustainability and regulations.
“Leadership from CPGs is certainly a driver, but regulations are also important,” said Nowicki. “Analytical techniques are getting more sensitive. Consumers get nervous when they hear about trace amounts of chemicals.”
“I want to get a non-detect,” Fayne concluded. “We have a lot of exposure as a brand owner if something goes wrong. We need to get the ink in the ballpark on price with solvent-based ink. Changing the substrate is a savings, and no clear film needed with surface printing.”
“Trends in UV+EB Inkjet for Packaging,” a panel discussion on packaging inkjet featuring UV and EB curing, was moderated by Jennifer Heathcote of Eminence UV. The panel featured James Gill of Fujifilm Dimatix, Imtiaz Rangwalla of Energy Sciences Inc., Tom Molamphy of Siegwerk, Josh Samuel of EFI and Vivien Clayton of Sartomer Americas. The panelists began by discussing where inkjet packaging is, noting that direct food contact is not happening.
“With UV we aren’t discussing direct food contact. We have to avoid transfer. We are only talking about indirect food contact,” Samuel observed.
“Secondary packaging is further along,” Gill added.
“What is good from a migration perspective is that whatever the ingredients for UV or EB, you are doing in-situ,” Rangwalla said. “We have to comply that these migration limits are met. After I cure it by established guidelines, they have to meet the migration limits.
“UV will never be accepted for direct for packaging,” said Molamphy. “It depends on barrier properties. If it is one-layer packaging, the question becomes whether you have an ink that meets the various lists, or is it corrugated and you can use regular ink sets.
“I don’t think that UV inkjet would be approved for direct food packaging. Moving from solvent-based to water-based in flexible packaging occurred very slowly,” Molamphy added.
Gill noted that some brands are not ready to go to digital.
“I also think that digital is held to a higher standard than analog printing,” Gill added. “Digital is good at creating short runs of a hundred.”
“EB eliminates the photoinitiator,” Rangwalla noted. “That’s the advantage. EB has traditionally been chosen for food packaging for that reason – it takes away that risk of migration. EB also provides a higher degree of cure, which also reduces the chance of migration.”
All in all, inkjet is still not that prevalent in packaging.
“We are still in the baby steps for packaging,” Molamphy said. “If you look at the installation of hardware in the last five years it is growing. There is also a hybrid where you can
do customization.”
“The technology is now coming of age and is really different – it is single-pass printing and you need to run it reliably,” Samuel added. “Ceramic technology flipped completely in five years to inkjet. Packaging will go in different rates. The exciting market for us is corrugated right now.”
“There is a really compelling argument for going with digital, with different tipping points with different markets,” Gill said. “The billboard industry was done the same way for 100 years, and within seven years, every single billboard in North America was all inkjet. I don’t know if flexo will be the same. The way inkjet comes in is at the bottom and then becomes more efficient. It tends to creep up the break-even point, from 1,000 copies to 10,000 copies and more.”
Next up was a panel on “Defining Sustainability with UV & EB Technology.” I chaired the panel, which included Kinter, George Fuchs of NAPIM and David Biro of Sun Chemical, and we looked at the complex issues surrounding sustainability.
“Sustainability is a major topic in virtually every industry worldwide, and it is growing in interest,” I noted at the beginning. “It is an all-encompassing topic, covering areas as diverse as employee safety, manufacturing efficiency, use of renewable materials, conserving energy and water, to recycling, compostability and more. Topics like Circular Economy and Cradle-to-Cradle production are common today.”
