The right dispensing technique improves your process control and, in the end, saves time and money. It pays to take the time to carefully evaluate your application, process parameters, and constraints, and focus on processes that have a high reject rate or that cause a bottle-neck in production.

Part one of this series explored examples regarding spraying and coating. In this segment, we discuss three examples that demonstrate efficient Filling techniques.

Filling

From Manual to Automated Filling

Many life sciences applications require precision in both the amount of fluid dispensed and in the precise placement of that fluid. A reagent distributor who replaced a manual filling process with a robotic, valve-based filling process was able to greatly reduce problems with inconsistent fill volumes and spillage. An automated dispensing system, unlike a human operator, can dispense the same amount of fluid into the exact same location time and time again for extremely accurate and stable process control.

Key takeaway: Semi-automated dispensing robots provide a much higher level of process control and accuracy since they are less dependent on operator variability.

Nordson EFD Solutions: Automated dispensing robots

From One Valve to Three

Although it might seem like a cost savings to use only one dispensing valve to do the job of three, the reality is that it can sometime cost more to address the problems caused by using one valve when more are needed to ensure a fast, efficient process.

When a single valve is used to dispense three different fluids at different points of the process, the primary problem is cross-contamination, which results in increased rework and product reject rates.

In this example, a diagnostics company switched from using one valve to fill vials to a three-valve dispense system. Previously, the one valve was used for three different agents, which meant manual flushing and cleanup between each fluid change. By installing two additional valves, which then allowed one valve dedicated to each fluid, they were able not only to greatly reduce cleaning, flushing, and prep costs, but also to show increased compliance with regulatory requirements. The resulting cost savings more than made up for the one-time cost of installing the extra valves.

Key takeaway: Investing in the right equipment for a process saves money in the long run by eliminating costly labor-intensive operations.

Nordson EFD Solutions: 754V aseptic valves

From a Drippy Valve to a Non-Drip Valve

If any amount of the fluid that protects a contact lens in its blister pack falls onto the sealing surface of that blister pack, the entire pack becomes a reject at the end of its manufacturing life cycle. The product cannot be reworked.

A contact lens manufacturer was able to eliminate rejects by switching to a higher quality valve that did not drip after each dispense cycle. Eliminating rejects, especially when a manufactured product is nearly complete and cannot be reworked, creates significant savings – even when balanced against the onetime investment in upgrading to improved valve technology and performance.

Key takeaway: Investing in the best equipment for a process reduces the cost and waste associated with rejects or rework.

Nordson EFD Solutions: 754V aseptic valves

If you have any questions about how to improve your dispensing process, don’t hesitate to contact us.