EEME Can&End - Guidelines and Best Practice Booklet Mod

Can & End Handbook
Guidelines & Best Practice
CONFIDENTIAL
Next Review: Continuously
Document Details
Revision no 9.0
Issue date June 1st 2004
Work Forum BCME (Beverage Can Makers Europe)
Involved Parties Coca-Cola Enterprises, Europe
for development: Rexam
Ball Packaging Europe
CROWN Bevcan Europe
Copy list: All EE&ME Divisions & All manufacturing plants in BCME
Downgauging Guidelines 3
1.1 Technical Package Authorization:.........................................................................................3
1.2 Step by Step Downgauging Guidelines: ................................................................................4
Best Practice Booklet for Lacquer Application on Steel Cans 5

1.1 FMEA STUDY......................................................................................................................5
1.2 Use of FMEA Study: .............................................................................................................6
1.3 Categorization used for Severity, Detection and Occurrence................................................8
1.4 Decision Trees for Lacquer Application..............................................................................10
1.5 Sampling procedure 1st Spray..............................................................................................10
1.6 Sampling procedure 2nd Spray............................................................................................11
1.7 Technical Investigation .......................................................................................................11
1.8 HFI Procedure .....................................................................................................................12
1.9 Release HFI Procedure ........................................................................................................12
Stress Corrosion Guidelines 13

1.1 Background .........................................................................................................................13
1.2 Cause and Result .................................................................................................................14
1.3 Recommendations ...............................................................................................................14
1.4 Test Method for Assessing the Dryness of Can Ends..........................................................17
1.5 Description of figures ..........................................................................................................18
June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 2/21

Revision:9.0 Next Revision: January 2005
Downgauging Guidelines
In order to facilitate an appropriate approach towards downgauging for can & ends the
following guideline has been issued. The guideline should be shared between
involved parties, suppliers, bottler and local Divisions.
1.1 Technical Package Authorization:
The packaging supplier authorization process is an essential part of the Coca-Cola

Quality system. Non-authorized packages can not be purchased and supplied into the
Coca-Cola system. It is the responsibility of the individual Coca-Cola divisions to
grant the authorization for the operational area of the individual division.
A downgauging step is a change of basic elements for the can & end package and is in
principal considered to be an introduction of a new package design. For this reason, a
new technical package authorization is required. The technical package authorization
is a one-time event for each package design. Roles and responsibilities in the package
authorization process are outlined below. For more details see next page:
P&SES-QG Division
Gauge Overview EE&M Recommends a technical Package Recommendations
Capability Study package authorization Lab tests results
GP&T communication Line Trials
Test request / Lab test Communication Specifications
Communication & Communication &
Package
Capability data Agreement
Authorization
Communication &
Supplier Agreement Bottler
Downgauging Purchase
Can & End QA
Figure 1: Technical Package Authorization Process
As a central group, the Packaging & Sales Equipment Supply Quality Group
(P&SES-QG) provides the "Recommended Technical Package Authorization" as a
service to the Coca-Cola divisions. Based on inputs, such as the recommendation,
local requirements, feedback from bottler, own experience etc., each division is
responsible for granting the final authorization of the package. It is essential that all
involved parties, the bottler, the local division and the P&SES-QG are informed prior
to any downgauging step.

1.2 Step by Step Downgauging Guidelines:
Down gauging activities should be communicated between all involved parties; the
local division, bottler and P&SES-QG. The suppliers are asked to provide yearly
planning for planned downgauging steps including technical information, timings and
scope.
Further implementation of the downgauging step should be agreement by the involved

parties; the Bottler Purchasing, Bottler Central QA, TCCC Global Procurement,
TCCC Division Technical.
Suppliers should provide a full capability study evaluated against the Pan-European
Spec V8.1. Capability study should include date from the current old can and
downgauged can. The study should be carried out by manufacturing line (cans) or
module (ends). Please note that capability studies might be available for current cans
and ends in the Packaging Suppliers database.
A test request for performing the Drop and CART test in Brussels should be launched
by local division or PSES-QG. Shipment label will be send to supplier in order to
facilitate the most appropriate delivery in Brussels. 24 non-damaged cans are required
per line for each test. Results from supplier and Brussels Lab will be compared in
order to align Drop and CART test capabilities.
Capability Study will be evaluated by central Europe Packaging team and a

recommendation provided to the local division. It the responsibility of the P&SES-QG
to maintain the supplier overview of the EE&M area in terms of technical supplier
information. Each supplier should provide these overviews.
Line trial with the new package must be carried out at the bottler.
Finally, it the responsibility for the individual division to grant the final authorization.
Additional Remarks:
Downgauging is normally followed by a 12 month market evaluation.
If performance issues appear, immediate corrective action must be put in place by the
suppliers, including gauge change if needed.

Best Practice Booklet for Lacquer Application on Steel Cans
As part of the project to minimize the number and severity of consumer and customer
contacts on metal off-taste and perforation, Coca-Cola and the BCME developed a
“1st Pass Best Practice Booklet”
The “Best Practice Lacquer Application” Booklet is a procedure to capture learning

regarding perforations and a minimum inspection plan regarding Lacquer
Applications with an Action Plan in case of non-conformance.
The booklet consists out of 2 parts.

1. A FMEA study to capture learning regarding perforation
2. Decision trees with the minimum requirements for a Quality Control Plan on
Lacquer Application.
1.1 FMEA STUDY
This document is a tool for a perforation risk analysis of the different process steps in
the Steel Can Making Process. The risk level (RPN) is determined by the
classification on three areas, Severity, Occurrence and Detection. The classifications
laid down in the booklet. The score on Severity is fixed by the Team 1 initially. Every
individual plant has to determine the score on Occurrence and Detection.
The overview of the risk level (RPN) of all process steps shows for every single plant
what the most critical process steps are with regards to perforation. It is the plants
responsibility to set-up an action plan as a results of the FMEA Study. This document
will be reviewed by TCCC annually, with the latest market information and
accordingly forwarded to all concerned Steel Can Making plants for evaluation.

1.2 Use of FMEA Study:
The FMEA study is to be used by the Plant to optimize their Quality Plan. FMEA
study to be used to support decisions in inspection process (See Decision Trees
below)
Lacquer Integrity FMEA
PLANT: Date:
…………………………………………………… ……………………………………………
……….. ………
Item Failure in the Process Severity Occurrence Detect RPN

Incoming Material
Tinplate Pinholes (caused by laminations 5
Lubricant (ATPS vs DOS 5
Roughness of Tin 5
Lacquer Non-Conformance 10
Base / Rim coat Non-Conformance 5
Inks Varnish
Auxiliary systems Trials 5
(1) Contractors 5
Auxilliary systems Washer chemicals 10

(2 Cleaners – silicon content 10
Compressed Air Quality 10
Pin Chain Oil/Lubricator System 10
Body maker coolant filtration system 10
Front End
Cupper Cupper coolant 10
Bodymaker Punch scratches 10
Not cleaned 10
Dome tooling – cracked, scrap 10
Washer
Water Quality 10
Drying oven/washer control 10
Speed 10
Cleaning, bacteria control 10
Coater & Decorator
Start – up Cleanliness of Area 5
Cleanliness of mandrels 10
Cleanliness of pins 10
Clear Basecoat inside can 5
Oven Temperature 5
Maintenance procedures e.g. 10
Greasing 10
Normal running Cleanliness of Area 5
Cleanliness of mandrels 10
Cleanliness of pins 10
Clear Basecoat 5
Oven Temperature 5

Conveying System
Cleanliness of covers 5
Cleanliness of conveyors 5
Placement of covers 5
Layout (no dent areas) 5
Air quality 10
Spraying Machines
Machines cleanliness–grease-nozzles 10
Machine control/set-up 5
IBO Control – high & low temp alerts 10
Auxilliary equipment (pumps/filters) 10
Necker Flanger
Air blow offs 10
Grease build up 10
Machine setting / lubrication 1
Damaged tooling 10
Palletisation
Palletiser/ sorter Hook to replace cans 5
Palletiser fingers (dents, dirty) 5
Storage
Can Handling 5

1.3 Categorization used for Severity, Detection and
Occurrence
Severity Score
No noticeable effect for consumers 1
5
Incidental leaker
Number of perforations in market > 3 complaints on 1 shift of

production. 10
Blocked pallets in warehouses
Leakage detected in warehouses
Occurrence: Probability that failure can occur in the process Score
Never happened 1
Less than 5 times per year 5
More than 5 times per year 10

Detection: Probability that defect will be detected in the Score
process.
(Very) high:
- 100 % automated inspection (reliability known and regularly
checked) 1
Moderate:
- operator self control (regular checks)
- 100 % manual inspection 5
(Very) low:
- zero inspection
- rare visual checks 10

1.4 Decision Trees for Lacquer Application
The different Decision trees show the minimum requirements for a Quality Control
Plan on Lacquer Application.
The process steps shown in the 5 decision trees:

1. Inspection on 1st spray
2. Inspection on 2nd spray
3. Technical Investigation
4. HFI procedure
5. Release blocked stock (HFI)
The steps above are are steps that as a minimum should be implemented, in case of
inspection or in case of non-conformance.
In the booklet is also laid down the minimum information that must be available for
every process step.
This information has to be laid down per individual plant as internal data.
The process steps and information should be integrated in the normal plant QA
procedures, and also be used as a benchmark tool within the supplier’s plants.
1.5 Sampling procedure 1st Spray
Start
No of cans
Control Cans (1) Frequency
Method
no yes
Fail
Internal specification
No of cans
Further Control Frequency
Method
(3)
no
Fail (4)
Record (5) Where
When
What yes
Who
Technical Responsible
Information
investigation (6)
No
process

1.6 Sampling procedure 2nd Spray
Start
No of cans
Control Cans (1) Frequency
Method
no yes
Fail
Internal
No of cans
Further Control Frequency
Method
(3)
no
Fail (4)
Internal
Record (5) Where
When
What
yes
Who
Technical Responsible HFI Procedure (7)

investigation (6) Information
No
process
1.7 Technical Investigation
Start
Check
Investigation (1)
FMEA
Study (2)
Documentation
Corrective Actions
on the process (2)
Long Term Actions

Short Term Actions Control (3)
FMEA Review
Yes Fail (4) No
Where
Record When
(5) What
Who

1.8 HFI Procedure
Start
No of cans
Frequency
FMEA Study Control previous Report
pallets
(1)
no yes
Fail
(2) Internal
Decisions
procedure
Uneffected
stock (3)
Release HFI Release (5)

procedure (4)
Record (6) Where

When
What
Who
1.9 Release HFI Procedure
Start
Decisions
Respray possible procedure
based on Criteria
Method
Investigation (1) yes
no
Re-spray Pallets
Decisions procedure (4)
Criteria
Method Sort of
the
cans No of cans
possible Control (5) Frequency
no Method
yes (2)
yes Fail
(6) Internal
no specification
Method Sort (3) Scrap (7)

Documentation
Documentation
End

Stress Corrosion Guidelines
Stress Corrosion-Technical Bulletin
The recommendations below have been formulated to minimize the risk of stress corrosion on
aluminium easy open ends used in the packaging of beverages in aluminium and steel 2 piece
beverage cans.
1.1 Background
Under normal conditions of use, aluminium alloy beer and beverage Ends perform without
any issues however, under certain filling and storage conditions external corrosion takes place
in the score area of the End that causes premature opening of the score panel.
The cause of this failure is commonly referred to as stress corrosion, but is otherwise known
as (TGSC) Trans-granular Stress Corrosion.
Stress corrosion typically takes place in products packed in shrink-wrap packaging during
storage in warehouses, but can also occur in non shrink-wrapped packages. The risk of stress
corrosion rises dramatically in hot and humid climates typically +30deg. C and humidity
+60% relative humidity (rh). Depending upon conditions, described later, failure can occur in
a matter of days or take several months.
Visible tab staining can be an indicator to the presence of stress corrosion even though the
corrosion mechanism may not yet have developed to the point where the score panel has
opened.
For the better understanding of stress corrosion, please refer to attached detail at the end of
this bulletin.

1.2 Cause and Result
The corrosion takes place in the score area of the End due to the presence of moisture and the
resultant chemical reaction with the aluminium alloy. The ongoing corrosion occurs at the
base of the score, weakening the residual metal. This corrosive weakening together with the
internal Can pressure and the inherent stress created within the End during manufacture,
causes the premature opening of the score panel. The corrosion process is greatly accelerated
by the increased presence of salts (chlorides and sulphates / halides) which can remain on the
End or be present in any residual rinse water after inadequate drying of the Can body and
End.
Failure of one can in a shrink-wrapped pack will normally release moisture and consequently
initiate corrosion in the remaining cans within the pack.
1.3 Recommendations
The BCME strongly recommend that the following precautions be taken to minimize the risk
of stress corrosion:
1. Post Seamer Rinsing
The Can and End should be thoroughly rinsed after seaming to remove any product or process
residues. The rinse water supply should ideally be electrically interlocked to the Seamer such
that the line cannot run without rinse water sprays being operational.
Note: Conveyor/Track lubricant (soap) and/or product carryover to the warmer water can
contribute to corrosion. Build up of these contaminants in the water can be prevented by
efficient rinsing prior to entry.
2. Can Warmer/Pasteurizer
The use of a can warmer/pasteurizer is recommended to ensure that the product temperature at
the time of secondary packaging is above the dew point. This will help prevent condensation
from forming on the Cans and Ends during subsequent warehousing. The presence of salts
such as Chlorates and Sulphates accelerate the stress corrosion process therefore management
and analysis of the water quality in this area is essential.
3. Can & End Rinsing
Regardless of whether the filled Can has been through a can warmer/pasteurizer both the Can
body and End must be thoroughly rinsed prior to secondary packaging to remove any salts,
track lubricant etc.
This should ideally take place as near as possible to the secondary packaging station but
immediately prior to the Can & End drying station.

• The Cans and Ends should always be rinsed in single file.
• It is recommended that the rinsing takes place on the final can twist prior to the drying
station via fan type nozzles ensuring that no contaminants remain on the Can or End.
• The rinser sprays should ideally be electrically interlocked to the can conveyor control
such that if the rinser is not operational the conveyor will not run.
• If it is necessary to use track lubricants these should have low chloride/sulphate levels and
be minimally applied at all times.
• The concentration level of track lubricant should be minimized and controlled on an
ongoing basis plus ideally interlocked with line controls to prevent excessive foaming.
• All evidence of track lubricant on the Can/End must be removed at the final rinse station.
• The rinse water ideally should have a pH between 6 and 8.0.
• Chloride levels should be <10p.p.m and Sulphates and Nitrates<15p.p.m.
• Where water treatment is required water softening by reverse osmosis is the preferred
option.
• Regular checks on water quality should be maintained at this critical application point.
4. Can & End Drying
The objective is to achieve zero residual moisture on the Can and End after the drying
operation and prior to secondary packaging. This applies in particular to the End and
most importantly its score area. Score Corrosion does not occur on dry Ends.
• The Cans and Ends should always be dried in single file. This is more effective than mass
drying.
• The dryer should be electrically interlocked to the can conveyor control such that if the
dryer is not operational the conveyor will not run.
• It is strongly recommended that the efficiency of dryers is checked routinely (see: test
Method for Assessing the Dryness of Can Ends).
• It is also recommended that the dryer is subject to an effective maintenance program to
maintain its optimum performance.
• The BCME consider that Can and End drying is a critical element of the beverage
filling operation.
• The responsibility for adequate Can and End drying rests with the filler.
5. Secondary Packaging
Existing and future secondary packaging developments must be reviewed in conjunction with
any additional actions required at the filling plants to minimize the risk of stress corrosion.
• Perforated shrink film will help any moisture to evaporate as will ‘vent’ holes at the end
of each pack.
• The use of board packaging will help absorb retained moisture further minimizing the risk
of stress corrosion.
• The use of plastic packaging without any cardboard will increase the risk of stress
corrosion.
6. Storage
Pallets of filled product should be stored in a manner that allows good air circulation and ease
of inspection. Filled product should be inspected on a regular basis and any pallets showing
evidence of leakage should be removed immediately. As far as is possible, temperature
variations within the warehouse should be avoided.

7. Treatment of filled Product affected by Stress Corrosion.
All packs containing any End (single or multiple quantities) with blown score panels should
be removed and the entire pack scrapped, along with any other affected stock.
Do not attempt to salvage any wet cans as it is a recognized fact that these cans, due to
product contamination leading to secondary corrosion, have a high risk themselves of
leaking at a future date.
8. Transportation of filled Product.
Pallets should be transported such that there is adequate ventilation and room for air
circulation.
Use of block stacking in containers is not recommended.
The foregoing guidelines are intended to help minimize the risk of secondary corrosion
occurring. For further help and guidance please contact your BCME members
Customer Technical Service Department.

1.4 Test Method for Assessing the Dryness of Can Ends
1. Equipment required:
A balance that is accurate and repeatable to at least 0.001g.

Air tight containers and swabs.
Either
a. Sterilin tubes and cotton wool buds
or
b. Sealable polythene bags and filter papers
2. Test Procedure:
Weigh swabs in the sealed containers to an accuracy of 0.001g. Record the weights.
Take samples from the line directly after the dryers and swab immediately.
Carefully use the swab to remove all residual water from each individual End,
including under the tab and in the countersink and score.
Reseal the swab into the container.
Reweigh container and swab. Record the weights.
The difference in weight is taken as the amount of moisture remaining on the End.
3. Test Frequency:
Recommended daily, but should be continually reviewed depending on consistency of

results and process capability.
4. Points to note:
The time between sampling and testing should be kept to a minimum.

If drying in single lane take 4 samples from each lane.
If drying in bulk take 4 samples evenly across the belt.
Prevention of contamination of the items to be weighed is important to avoid spurious
results.
The swabs should be out of containers for the minimum time between taking weights
to prevent moisture pick up / loss.
5. Standard to be achieved:
The objective is to achieve zero residual moisture on the Ends but the following is an
achievable minimum practical operating standard based on available modern
equipment. It is recommended that this specification is used when purchasing new
drying equipment.
Recommended Operating Standard Action
Target average less than 3mg per End
Single End 9mg or greater Establish cause & rectify.
Recheck to ensure standard is achieved
4 can average 7 mg or greater per End Establish cause & rectify.
Recheck to ensure standard is achieved

Visual checks should be carried out on an ongoing basis to verify drying performance
is maintained.
1.5 Description of figures
Fig.1 Configuration of Stay-on-Tab Easy-open-End and Score

Fig.2 Environmental Stress Crack development in Aluminium End Score
Fig 3 Environmental Stress Cracking: Fracture Surface of Aluminium End Score
Fig.4 Fracture of Aluminium End Score showing fatigue effects
Fig 5 Fracture of Aluminium End Score physically induced by pressurizing to
bursting strength
Fig 6 Tab staining on Ends affected by Stress Corrosion
Fig.1: Typical configuration of Stay-on-Tab Easy-Open-End and Score
B B
Figure 1a EO End Exterior Plan View Figure 1b Scored Region
Material Thickness Score Residual Thickness
Section B - B
Figure 1c Score Section profile

Fig.2: Environmental Stress Crack Development in Aluminium End Score
Score region shown

in Figure 2
Score Residual Thickness
Material Thickness
Environmental stress crack showing typical branching progressing from pit

beneath score exterior. Secondary sites of corrosion and crack development are
present at the left-hand edge of the score. Field of view width ≈ 200µm.

Fig. 3: Environmental Stress Cracking: Fracture Surface of Aluminium End
Score
Fig. 4: Fracture of Aluminium End Score Showing Fatigue Effects

Fig. 5: Fracture of Aluminium End Score Physically Induced by Pressurizing to
Bursting Strength
Fig. 6: Tab staining on Ends affected by Stress Corrosion


EEME Can&amp;End - Guidelines and Best Practice Booklet Mod

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EEME Can&amp;End - Guidelines and Best Practice Booklet Mod

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Can & End Handbook

Guidelines & Best Practice

Next Review: Continuously

Best Practice Booklet for Lacquer Application on Steel Cans 5

Stress Corrosion Guidelines 13

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 2/21

1.1 Technical Package Authorization:

The packaging supplier authorization process is an essential part of the Coca-Cola

Communication & Communication &

Figure 1: Technical Package Authorization Process

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 3/21

Further implementation of the downgauging step should be agreement by the involved

Capability Study will be evaluated by central Europe Packaging team and a

Downgauging is normally followed by a 12 month market evaluation.

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 4/21

The “Best Practice Lacquer Application” Booklet is a procedure to capture learning

The booklet consists out of 2 parts.

1.1 FMEA STUDY

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 5/21

Lacquer Integrity FMEA

Item Failure in the Process Severity Occurrence Detect RPN

Auxilliary systems Washer chemicals 10

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 6/21

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 7/21

No noticeable effect for consumers 1

Number of perforations in market > 3 complaints on 1 shift of

Blocked pallets in warehouses

Leakage detected in warehouses

Occurrence: Probability that failure can occur in the process Score

Less than 5 times per year 5

More than 5 times per year 10

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 8/21

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 9/21

The process steps shown in the 5 decision trees:

1.5 Sampling procedure 1st Spray

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 10/21

Technical Responsible HFI Procedure (7)

1.7 Technical Investigation

Long Term Actions

Yes Fail (4) No

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 11/21

Release HFI Release (5)

Record (6) Where

1.9 Release HFI Procedure

Method Sort (3) Scrap (7)

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 12/21

Stress Corrosion-Technical Bulletin

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 13/21

1. Post Seamer Rinsing

3. Can & End Rinsing

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 14/21

4. Can & End Drying

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 15/21

8. Transportation of filled Product.

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 16/21

A balance that is accurate and repeatable to at least 0.001g.

Recommended daily, but should be continually reviewed depending on consistency of

The time between sampling and testing should be kept to a minimum.

June 2004 - Confidential - pg: 17/21

1.5 Description of figures

Fig.1 Configuration of Stay-on-Tab Easy-open-End and Score

Fig.1: Typical configuration of Stay-on-Tab Easy-Open-End and Score

Figure 1a EO End Exterior Plan View Figure 1b Scored Region

Material Thickness Score Residual Thickness

EEME Can&End - Guidelines and Best Practice Booklet Mod

EEME Can&End - Guidelines and Best Practice Booklet Mod