 SEAMING SIMULATION |
| |
|
| |
 Sommetrade - idom quest
|
| |
|
| |
 |
To develop a strategic innovation for the double seaming technology. |
|
Contributing to metal can innovation. |
|
Applying our know-how on the subject. |
|
Consultancy on double seam, new cans design, seam-ability,
tooling design, materials,… |
|
Seaming systems adapted to the requirements of innovative cans: Functionality, reliability, quality, stability,… |
|
| |
|
| |
Can innovation issue |
| |
|
| |
Logical solution -> reduced seam, but:
|
Market resistance. |
|
Doubts about small integrity. |
|
Present seamers accuracy and stability. |
|
Lack of authoritative knowledge. |
Many times the seaming is the real obstacle.
 |
|
Often underestimated at the first stages. |
|
Acute problem with today innovation needs. |
|
It blocks very interesting can innovations. |
|
Non round DR tinplate cans. |
|
Complex shape cans. |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Pre-test
validation |
| |
|
| |
|
(2.95 mm seam height, 0.16 mm lid, 15 mm corner radius)
|
(2.40 mm seam height, 0.17 mm lid, 18 mm corner radius)
|
 |
 |
| (Plan view of chuck and lid flange strip after one 1st operation. Simulation results) |
Locally concentrated and sharp wrinkles ? very difficult to iron in second operation Overall conclusion: non acceptable seam (verified by tests)
|
Lid flange tip strip shows very uniformly distributed and smooth wrinkles, which will be easily ironed in the second operation.
Probably only one first operation will be needed.
Overall conclusions: proposed redesign will definitely yield an acceptable seam. |
|
| |
|
| |
As a result… |
| |
|
| |
Why use Seaming Simulation for can design?
|
Accelerate market lead-time. |
|
Save money. |
|
Innovate minimising risks. |
|
|
