A cost-effective alternative – Gallus RCS offset printing

The demand for offset technology in narrow-web label printing remains high. And the Gallus RCS has offered users the option of fitting interchangeable offset printing units since 2005, with Gallus already supplying around half of its Gallus RCS presses in offset combination printing configurations. Once again, the theme of offset printing also proved extremely popular at this year's Labelexpo in Brussels.

On the whole, the main unique selling points (USPs) associated with these solutions are excellent print quality and substrate flexibility. However, one of the most important questions is often left unanswered: How cost-effective are offset printing solutions?

The driving force behind offset printing

In the past, offset printing was often used only when customers demanded extremely high quality or when the base material in question left no other option. This meant that additional costs could often be justified to customers. In order to make truly cost-effective use of offset printing, the design of a press needs to meet a whole range of strict criteria. The first article in this series revealed how Gallus has satisfied these criteria with the Gallus RCS.

Indeed, although quality and flexibility will remain key USPs of this technology, the high level of standardisation offered by offset printing is another crucial factor when deciding on which main printing process to use. Requirements relating to logistics (e.g. multisourcing) and brand image (continuity of product lines, uniformity of packaging and labels) call for standardisation and, therefore, for offset printing.
Another key factor when deciding which main printing process to use is the rapid growth in the proportion of own brands. Originally, own brands were a way for retailers to protect themselves from being eclipsed by manufacturers. Today, producers of “no-name products” often benefit from copying successful brand concepts. The savings thus made on development and communication costs make it possible to lower production costs and offer goods at a lower price. This then places more pressure on the manufacturers of brand products. The competition for shelf space continues to grow and so then does the importance of differentiation.
Although this is a positive development for label printers, it also brings greater cost pressures.

Figure 1: The competition for shelf space is tough. A typical supermarket stocks
20,000 – 40,000 different items.

Makeready time versus plate costs

The following section sets out how offset printing can be justified based purely on cost-effectiveness and outlines the various factors that are involved.

In label printing, there is seldom a clear-cut decision between using either flexographic or offset printing techniques on their own. Virtually all situations demand combination printing. In other words, the main printing process is combined with screen printing, hot/cold foil embossing or coating. The sequence of individual printing processes varies depending on the job and has an almost unlimited range of combinations. What's more, a large proportion of label printing jobs incorporate special colours; sometimes in addition to process colours and sometimes exclusively.

The job structure in label printing consists mostly of repeat jobs involving one or more different types (languages, variations, etc.). Various subsets of the job therefore need to be called up periodically.

In practice, the process complexity, the diverse range of product types and high frequency of call-ups mean that makeready times account for a large share of total production time, sometimes as much as 50%. Regardless of which main printing process is selected, it is important to complete changeover and setup times for the job as efficiently as possible. This requires a coherent workflow concept and suitable makeready concepts for the press.

Nevertheless, even today, it is not quite possible to match the performance of flexographic printing in terms of makeready time and paper waste. However, the printing plates used in flexographic printing are far more expensive than those required for offset printing. Consequently, the break-even point between offset and flexographic printing is determined by the ratio between makeready costs and tool costs. Additional processes such as screen printing and hot foil embossing can be left out of this equation since they have the same impact on both main printing processes.

Figure 2: Offset printing can also offer an alternative to flexographic printing from an
economic perspective.

Short makeready times and low paper waste are essential criteria for ensuring competitiveness in offset printing. The Gallus RCS meets these requirements in full thanks to consistent front-loading technology and a high level of automation.

Taking a holistic view

There are many ways to justify the use of offset printing besides cost-effectiveness. Quality, flexibility and productivity are the three pillars on which the success of the Gallus RCS is based.

Figure 3: Even the offset printing unit on the Gallus RCS can be inserted at any printing position in just a few simple steps.

Consistent front loading, interchangeable printing processes, a sleeve system, a chambered blade, a high level of automation and job data memory – all these ensure minimum makeready times on the Gallus RCS. Furthermore, a fully automatic washing unit, motorised ink ducts, computer-aided colour management and the waste-reducing startup sequence ensure the lowest possible levels of waste.

The Gallus RCS is already an industry leader in terms of cost effectiveness. In the next edition of Gallus In Touch featuring the last part of this series we will show you how future innovations are set to make the Gallus RCS press system even more efficient and explore the impact this will have on the day-to-day work of label printers.