The Situation
The plant had five CIJ lines coding date and batch on flexible and rigid primary packaging across two shifts. All five lines were from the same vendor, installed over six years on a rolling basis. The plant had a single AMC with the vendor covering all five machines, including ink and make-up supply.
The plant manager's concern was that ink consumption seemed high relative to the volume of packs coded. Ink and make-up purchase orders showed consistent month-on-month spend with no obvious correlation to production output. The vendor's explanation was that high ambient temperature in the plant was increasing solvent evaporation.
What the Audit Found
Finding 1: Ink Grade Mismatch
Three of the five machines were running a premium high-resolution ink recommended by the vendor for pharmaceutical applications. The plant's substrate — co-extruded flexible film — did not require this grade. A standard food-grade MEK-based ink would produce identical print quality at 38% lower cost per litre. Annual saving on ink grade correction alone: Rs 1.8 lakh.
Finding 2: Make-Up Ratio Above Specification
On-site viscosity measurement showed all five machines were running ink viscosity below the specified range — meaning operators were adding more make-up than required. Root cause: no documented viscosity check procedure and no viscosity cups available on the line. Operators were topping up make-up by visual observation of ink colour rather than measurement. Annual make-up overconsumption: Rs 0.9 lakh.
Finding 3: AMC Price Above Market
The AMC included ink and make-up supply at a fixed price per litre — 2.4x the open-market price for equivalent product from two alternative suppliers. The exclusivity was not in the original machine purchase contract; it had been introduced in a renewal two years earlier without a price benchmark. Annual overcharge on consumable pricing: Rs 1.1 lakh.
Finding 4: Unnecessary Maintenance Intervals
The AMC specified monthly preventive maintenance visits across all five machines — 60 visits per year. Actual machine service logs showed no issues requiring monthly attention on three of the five machines. The two highest-speed lines justified monthly visits; the remaining three were over-maintained. Reduction to quarterly on low-speed lines: Rs 0.2 lakh per year.
Total Saving Summary
| Finding | Annual Saving |
|---|---|
| Ink grade correction to appropriate specification | Rs 1.80 lakh |
| Make-up consumption correction with viscosity procedure | Rs 0.90 lakh |
| AMC consumable pricing renegotiated to market rate | Rs 1.10 lakh |
| PM visit frequency rationalised on low-speed lines | Rs 0.20 lakh |
| Total annual saving | Rs 4.00 lakh |
What Changed
- Ink specification updated to appropriate grade — no machine modification required
- Viscosity check added to shift startup procedure — viscosity cups provided for each line
- AMC renegotiated at audit report pricing — vendor retained (no change in service quality)
- PM schedule revised to 12 visits/year on 3 machines, 12/year maintained on 2 high-speed machines
Total implementation time from audit report to full implementation: 9 weeks. No capital expenditure. No new vendors introduced. No machines replaced.
What Was Not Done
The audit evaluated whether TTO would be a better technology for two of the five lines running flexible film. The analysis showed TTO would reduce further but would require Rs 6 lakh capital per line. The plant chose to implement the no-capital savings first and review TTO at the next replacement cycle — a conservative but financially sound decision for their cash position.
If This Sounds Familiar
If your plant has CIJ lines with a sole-source AMC and you have not benchmarked your consumable costs in the past 12 months, there is a high probability that a similar saving opportunity exists. A coding running cost audit typically takes one day on-site and 3 days of reporting.