Packaging Conference 11-12 October 2006, Osnabrck, Germany
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Dr. Martin Dreher DFTA-TZ, Stuttgart
Disclaimer
Please mind that the version of this presentation at hand had to
be composed at a point in time when some important input data may have not yet been available. Therefore, this presentation may not reflect the latest known status of the subject. Please check for potential later versions under www.dfta-tz.de or contact the author directly under dreher@dfta-tz.de.
Speaker
Name: Position:
Experience:
Job Tasks:
Mission:
Dr. Martin Dreher
Assistant Manager of DFTA-TZ, Stuttgart (Technology Centre of the German Flexo Technical Association), designated Scientific Leader 22 years in printing industry: apprenticed litho pressman, >16 years of work in Flexo, >20 years of observing Gravure and others Training, education, technical assessments, technical developments, presentations, etc. advancing and enhancing packaging printing (1)
(1) holding what is probably the last fundamental printing patent about a hybrid system between Gravure and Flexo, later in this presentation to be referred to as a Hybrid Printing Method
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Intro and Preface
Technical aspects What makes Gravure and Flexo tick? Market shares Cost The differentiating factor in an ever more cost-sensitive world. Outlook What may change the game? Closing
Preface
Some of the following pieces of information have been derived
from other than my own sources. They have been marked accordingly. Such information will be passed on as direct as possible, i.e. some data had to be generalised or anonymised because the underlying studies and calculations contained information that was private to the sender. I will give my personal ratings and comments about such data as direct and unbiased as possible.
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Intro and Preface
Technical aspects What makes Gravure and Flexo tick? Market shares Cost The differentiating factor in an ever more cost-sensitive world. Outlook What may change the game? Closing
The Technical Status Quo
Gravure
Flexography
Lithography
Lithography and other printing methods to be set aside here.
Both Flexo and Gravure have their particular strengths and
weaknesses. The following review relates to the respective characteristics as they are perceived in packaging printing.
Flexographys Strengths
Less expensive process
Versatility in substrates Flexibility due to exchangeability of parts of the print design Easy and simple plate making Good sharpness of bar codes, type and linework Best revolution-to-revolution registration even with thinnest substrates due to CI presses
Flexographys Weaknesses
Increasing cost due to growing quality demands in Anilox rollers,
printing inks, printing forms, tapes, etc. Limitations in Packaging Design Sporadic limitations in print quality due to:
Squeezed ink Lack of coverage in solids High dot gain Insufficient uniformity of print production
Gravures Strengths
Simple schematic of printing presses
Any (odd) repeat length Typically very good print quality in images
Gravures Weaknesses
plate making is demanding due to:
treatment of metals handling of massive metal cylinders limitations in imaging systems, etc.
Lack of flexibility due to long delivery times and missing
exchangeability of design elements Uniformity and repeatability quite demanding (larger impact of substrate surface characteristics than in Flexo)
Limited sharpness of type and linework
Registration concerns with flexible substrates (revolution-torevolution)
Characteristics of Flexo & Gravure
From: Gravure vs Flexo - Cost Comparison, PLGA
FLEXO
GRAVURE
Solids and process may need to be
separated
Ability to print solids, type and
process on the same print station
Limitations in reverse and fine type
work (improvements due to C to P and DD technology)
Ability to print fine type and line
work (further improved via laser technology) down to 1 point text.
Can print up to 150 lpi
Can print process work up to 250 lpi
Closed solids need correct
combination of plate, tape and ink
Can produce rich colors in solids
and achieves excellent brilliancy
Due to plate elasticity and
tolerances, reproducibility is largely dependent on prepress conditions and operator skill.
Excellent reproducibility, largely
independent of operator skill
My Conclusions and Ratings
on the Technical Aspects
I do agree with some of the above statements (see markers).
However, I do strongly oppose the overall notion of these statements! Neither is Gravure that advanced overall, nor is Flexo that handicapped on average!
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Intro and Preface
Technical aspects What makes Gravure and Flexo tick? Market shares Cost The differentiating factor in an ever more cost-sensitive world. Outlook What may change the game? Closing
Flexible Packaging by Process and Region
North America $175MM
Gravure 23%
Flexo 75%
Europe $240MM
Gravure 41%
Flexo 57%
Asia Pacific $132MM
Gravure 85% Flexo 10%
South America Gravure
18% $49MM
Flexo 82%
Flexo dominated Global Print Form Market $595MM
Gravure dominated Source: Courtesy of DuPont Cyrel
Market Share Interpretations
Flexo drastically outnumbers Gravure in North America and
South America. Gravure is the underdog, hence the aforementioned aggressive statements. In Asia, Gravure is almost unrivalled in its market share and standing. However, that has been sponsored in the past by environmental legislation being less harsh than in EU and the Americas which enabled less expensive, but more hazardous plate making techniques (etching) to be used. In Europe, Flexo enjoys the largest market share, but is being challenged by Gravure constantly.
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Intro and Preface
Technical aspects What makes Gravure and Flexo tick? Market shares Cost The differentiating factor in an ever more cost-sensitive world. Outlook What may change the game? Closing
In Summary: Advantage Flexo
Advantage Gr avur e
-60%
-40%
-20%
Advantage Fle xo 0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
180%
200%
220%
240%
260%
XXXXX
Gravure vs. Cyrel round
XXXXX
Gravure vs. Flexo
XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Source: Courtesy of DuPont Cyrel
Summary of Press Related Cost Factors
Compact design of Flexographic Central Impression Cylinder
press:
Less capital investment
Less labour cost Lesser floor space requirements Lesser energy requirements
=> Advantage of Flexo over Gravure
=> Very large advantage of Cyrel round over Gravure
Source: Courtesy of DuPont Cyrel
Print Forms: Typical Prices
Where does Hell
Gravures Cellaxy sort in ?
Gravure Cylinder: Imaging incl. Copper plating and Chrome
plating (raw cylinder not included!)
250 - 1100
Flexo: Silicone Rubber direct Laser engraving (incl. Sleeve)
~ 980
Flexo: Rubber direct Laser engraving (incl. Sleeve)
~ 800
Cyrel Flexo Fotopolymers
~ 850
Cyrel round Cyrel - Plate-on-Sleeve (inc sleeve)
~ 500 - 800
Cyrel - Plate on Sleeve -adapter mandrel (incl. mounting)
~ 440
Cyrel - digital plate on steel cylinder (incl. mounting)
~ 350
Cyrel - analog plate on steel cylinder (incl. mounting)
~ 250
Thin walled mylar sleeves, no composite, no bridge mandrels
Western Europe, /m Typical sizes: ~ 0.4 to 0.6 m Source: Courtesy of DuPont Cyrel
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
Why this Large Range of Prices?
Plate Making fixed costs:
Gravure: approx. > 80% Flexo: approx. 60%
Capacities with high fixed cost drives prices and cost:
Gravure cylinder makers must use their capacities (at any price) Expansions of capacity are costly (large capital investment)
Cost of Flexo Plate Making: high portion of variable cost
Flexo plate makers may expand and reduce their capacity more freely Flexo is more flexible and open for innovation
However, in that some of the perceived cost benefits that Flexo enjoys over Gravure, are being based on the use of the (costly) Cyrel round seamless sleeves, it must be noted that the production capacities available for them in the EU market are currently insufficient for satisfying larger market demands (as is the case with direct Laser Engraving of Gravure cylinders). Hence, such cost comparisons reflect only a small niche of the market. The lions share of the packaging printing market will need to be compared upon the basis of electromechanically engraved Gravure cylinders vs. digitally imaged Flexographic fotopolymer plates (then giving Flexo a somewhat smaller, yet noticeable cost advantage).
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Intro and Preface
Technical aspects What makes Gravure and Flexo tick? Market shares Cost The differentiating factor in an ever more cost-sensitive world. Outlook What may change the game? Closing
Digitally Imaged Fotopolymer Sleeves
Digitally imaged Fotopolymer Flexo sleeves
on the rise!
Some of the printing related advantages are
short make-ready seamless designs higher press speed possible substrate savings
No plate mounting cost savings in personnel and machines time savings no mounting tape cost
New technical opportunities
alternative halftone screens with less patterns and less mottling through excellent registration (first time and continuous)
Cost of raw material is substantially higher
than with plate materials, but will be more than compensated for by the aforementioned benefits.
Laser Engraved Gravure Cylinders
Laser engraving has been around for quite
some time, but Hell Gravure Systems Cellaxy is about to re-heat the debate due to its capability of using Copper as a medium again. Benefits should be Plating process may remain unchanged Very high engraving speed Versatility of engraving better structures
Aspects that remain to be seen are
Cost of ownership and running Reliability
Certainly a very interesting new alternative to
look at.
Halftone Screening
Advantage of Flexo over Gravure due to Flexos superior
registration quality of CI presses => Flexo may use new screening alternatives, which require good registration and, given that, may yield
sharper printed pictures with
much less halftone-related structures and a standardisation in screen angles, coupled with production safety through much less sources of error.
Plastics as Gravure Print Forms
It has been attempted repeatedly to use high-tech and highvalue plastics (in particular some Polyamides) for plate making in Gravure, thus trying to avoid the costly, environmentally critical and time consuming copper (or zinc) plating process. None of the attempts has yielded a product that enjoyed noticeable market penetration so far. However, some trials are still in process. Hence, whether or not such high-tech plastics will be successful in replacing metals remains to be seen. I personally believe in the flexible Gravure form approach, i.e. using elastic materials, which do open up a whole new line of thought ...
Hybrid Printing Method
Working title used to be Helioflex*, reflecting the combination of
Gravure and Flexo Soft and elastic printing plate
Plate making through fotopolymerisation (exposure!) feasible, utilising Flexo
printing plate materials Special doctoring system plate making preferably with Flexo plates or seamless sleeves Imaging with special Gravure-adapted positive (vs. negative) colour separation plate making even easier and cheaper than in Flexo due to shallow relief High definition of type and linework with autotypical imaging methods (film or platesetters) Rasterisation methods of Flexo applicable Optimum ink transfer - ink is squeezed out of cells through elasticity
Building a CI Gravure press is feasible
* this title has been brand protected by Hell Gravure Systems later and therefore must not be used any more, but older documents may still refer to the process under this name
Digital Printing Methods
We have a saying in the German language: Wenn zwei sich streiten,
freut sich der Dritte. (If two struggle with one another, a third party is happy.) Hence, if Flexo and Gravure struggle with one another, will Digital Printing be the happy winner? What are the benefits that Digital Printing can claim? No plate making times and cost factors Design change flexibilities
My personal conclusion: Digital printing methods will have to go a very
long way before they may challenge conventional methods in more than isolated market niches! Digital printing will be complementing conventional methods for quite a number or years to come.
Flexo vs. Gravure in
Packaging Printing
Intro and Preface
Technical aspects What makes Gravure and Flexo tick? Market shares Cost The differentiating factor in an ever more cost-sensitive world. Outlook What may change the game? Closing
Closing
Technical benefits of either Flexo or Gravure over one another may be
identified, but can only be weighed in light of particular print jobs. The best achievable print qualities of either printing method are on a par, the average print quality level is typically higher with Gravure. Cost, versatility and ever shortening-runlength aspects do speak for Flexo as the preferred method and the increased penetration of the digitally imaged fotopolymer sleeves is likely to enhance this trend. However, is the cost advantage of Flexo over Gravure still large enough to make an established Gravure printer invest in flexographic printing equipment? Maybe not. On the other hand, is the overall print quality benefit of Gravure over Flexo still large enough to make a Flexo printer invest in Gravure printing equipment? Again, maybe not. Therefore, we have something like an impasse situation now.
Closing (continued)
Admittedly, I am a Flexo proponent. In being so, I certainly dont need
to apologize for anything Flexo wouldnt be capable of doing (quality, flexibility etc.), particularly in light of the further advancements that Flexo is about to enjoy. Nonetheless, I am far from declaring victory! When considering the overall level, Gravure is certainly the quality leader. We have experienced a time of struggle between the Flexo and Gravure printing methods in packaging printing. Instead, I am advertising a peaceful co-existence of both the major packaging printing methods, Flexo and Gravure, for the purpose of advancing packaging printing as such. Please join me in this effort!
The Last Word
The Future comes step by step.
Thats what makes it endurable. Alfred Polgar
ERA European Rotogravure Association
Packaging Conference 11-12 October 2006, Osnabrck, Germany
