PPWR Series — Article 4 of 5

The Part Handling Challenge: How to Package 150 SKUs Without Stopping the Line

By DolcePack · Published July 2026 · 9 min read
Series: The PPWR Transition Guide for Industrial Packaging

The hardest part of automating spare parts packaging is not the machine. It is the parts themselves — variable dimensions, mixed materials, fragile geometries, and 150 different SKUs that all need to move through the same line without damage, without miscounts, and without extended downtime between changeovers. Here is how it is actually done.

Spare parts manufacturers who have explored packaging automation before — and decided it was not viable for their operation — have usually reached that conclusion because of the part handling problem. The machine they evaluated was designed for a different application. The parts did not feed reliably. The changeover between SKUs took too long. The vision system could not reliably count components with variable geometry. The conclusion was that automation was not suitable for their product range.

That conclusion is understandable, but it is based on evaluating the wrong machine for the application. The part handling challenge in spare parts packaging is solvable — but it requires a line designed specifically for the problem, not a food packaging machine evaluated against an industrial application it was never designed to handle.

Understanding the Feed Problem

The first challenge in spare parts packaging automation is getting the component from bulk storage to the filling station in a controlled, consistent manner. In food packaging, this is typically solved by gravity — liquid flows, powder flows, granules flow. Solid components do not flow. They tangle, they bridge, they jam, and they present in random orientations that are incompatible with automated handling.

The standard solution for solid component feeding in spare parts packaging is a vibrating bowl feeder or a linear vibrating conveyor. These systems use controlled vibration to move components along a track, orient them consistently, and deliver them to the filling station at a controlled rate. The design of the feeder — the track geometry, the vibration frequency, the surface finish — must be matched to the specific component being fed. An O-ring requires a different feeder design than a brake clip. A garden fitting requires a different design than a motorcycle gasket.

For a manufacturer running 150 SKU varieties, this means either a single feeder that can be reconfigured for different component types, or a set of dedicated feeders for different product families. The choice depends on the production schedule — how frequently SKUs are changed, how many SKUs are run in a given shift, and what the acceptable changeover time is. This is a decision that must be made during the line design phase, not after the machine is installed.

Counting Without Weighing

Many spare parts are sold in counted quantities — 10 O-rings, 4 brake clips, 6 fixings. Ensuring the correct count in every pouch is a quality requirement that has legal and commercial implications. A pack labelled as containing 10 O-rings that contains 9 is a mislabelled product. At scale, mislabelled products create customer complaints, returns, and potential regulatory exposure under EU product labelling requirements.

Weight-based counting — the standard method in food packaging — is unreliable for spare parts because individual piece weights vary within a single SKU. O-rings of the same nominal diameter can vary in weight by 5–10% due to material density variation. Brake clips vary in weight depending on surface treatment. For a pack of 10 components, a 5% weight variation per component can produce a weight range that overlaps between a 9-piece pack and a 10-piece pack, making weight-based rejection unreliable.

Vision counting — a camera system that counts individual components as they pass through the filling station — solves this problem definitively. Each component is counted individually, regardless of its weight or exact dimensions. The system can be configured to reject pouches with incorrect counts before sealing, and to log count data for quality traceability. For a manufacturer supplying to major retail networks, this traceability data is increasingly required as part of supplier quality documentation.

Managing Format Changeover at Scale

For a manufacturer running 150 SKU varieties, format changeover is a daily operational reality. The efficiency of the packaging line depends not just on its output speed when running, but on how quickly it can be reconfigured between SKUs. A line that runs at 16 pouches per minute but requires 90 minutes of changeover between every SKU change is not an efficient line — the changeover time consumes a significant fraction of the available production time.

Changeover time is determined by three factors: the number of mechanical adjustments required (pouch format, jaw width, fill head position), the time required to recalibrate the vision system for the new component, and the time required to update the print module for the new SKU’s variable data. A line designed for rapid changeover addresses all three factors systematically — through standardised tooling interfaces that allow quick-release component changes, through vision system profiles that can be recalled for each SKU rather than recalibrated from scratch, and through a print management system that stores variable data for all SKUs and applies the correct data automatically when a new SKU is selected.

Fragile Components and Damage Prevention

Not all spare parts are robust. Rubber O-rings can be deformed by excessive handling pressure. Plastic clips can be scratched by metal surfaces. Precision components can be damaged by vibration frequencies that are too aggressive. The handling system must be designed with the fragility of the specific components in mind — not just their dimensions.

This is another area where a food packaging machine adapted for industrial use typically fails. Food machines are designed for products that are either robust (canned goods, bottles) or that flow without contact (liquids, powders). The handling of fragile solid components requires specific attention to surface materials, contact forces, and vibration parameters that are outside the design envelope of a standard food machine.

The Post-Commissioning Phase: Where Lines Are Made Reliable

Even a well-designed line requires a post-commissioning stabilisation period. This is the phase after installation and initial commissioning during which the line is run under real production conditions — with real products, real pouches, and real operators — and any issues that emerge are identified and resolved. Feed irregularities that were not apparent during commissioning with sample products become visible under production conditions. Vision system calibration may need adjustment for specific component batches. Print module settings may need refinement for specific pouch materials.

The post-commissioning phase is not a sign that something went wrong during installation. It is a normal and necessary part of bringing a complex automated line to full operational stability. What matters is that the line integrator remains present and engaged during this phase — not that they have handed over the line and moved on. The quality of post-commissioning support is one of the most significant differentiators between line integrators, and it is the phase that most directly determines whether the manufacturer’s team ends up fully autonomous and confident in operating the line.