The Hidden Cost of Coding
White Paper
The Hidden Cost of Coding
How Ink and Solvent Strategy Determines Uptime, Compliance and Total Cost per Code
Prepared for: USInks.com
Audience: Operations managers, maintenance managers, packaging engineers, plant managers and procurement teams
Scope: CIJ, TIJ and DOD coding environments across manufacturing, packaging and logistics
Executive Summary
Coding and marking systems are often evaluated based on printer price and advertised reliability. However, the long-term economics of industrial coding are driven primarily by fluids. Ink and solvent strategy directly influences uptime, maintenance frequency, print quality, compliance risk and total cost per code.
Manufacturers that treat ink and solvent as simple consumables frequently experience higher downtime, emergency orders and inconsistent print performance. Facilities that treat fluid strategy as an operational category reduce cost per code, stabilize production and improve traceability.
This white paper explains how ink and solvent decisions shape real production outcomes and provides a framework for measuring and reducing the hidden cost of coding.
Section 1
Where the Real Cost of Coding Comes From
When a new coding system is purchased, most cost projections focus on the initial capital expense and expected maintenance schedule. However, once a system is installed and running, the ongoing costs shift toward consumables and operational impact.
Ink and solvent are consumed continuously. Their performance influences:
-
How often a printhead must be cleaned
-
Whether codes remain readable
-
How long a system takes to start up
-
Whether operators need to intervene
-
How often production is interrupted
Even minor interruptions add up. A few extra minutes per shift spent cleaning nozzles or adjusting print quality can translate into hours of lost production each month. Because these interruptions are spread across shifts and lines, they are often not tracked as a single category of loss.
Chart 1
Estimated Long Term Cost Distribution in Coding Operations
The data shows that fluid related cost and downtime together make up the majority of long-term coding expense. Printer capital cost becomes a relatively small portion over the life of the system.
Section 2
Understanding Cost per Code
To properly evaluate coding economics, plants should measure cost per code rather than cost per bottle of ink. Cost per code captures the full operational impact of coding and marking, not just the purchase price of consumables.
Cost per code includes:
-
Ink consumption
-
Solvent consumption
-
Preventive maintenance materials
-
Operator labor
-
Downtime impact
-
Rework or scrap
A simplified formula is:
Cost per code equals total fluid cost plus downtime cost plus maintenance cost divided by total printed units.
Chart 2
Example Cost per Code Calculation
When downtime is factored in, the true cost of coding becomes clearer. A small reduction in maintenance or a modest improvement in uptime can produce greater savings than switching to a cheaper bottle of ink.
Plants that track cost per code gain a more accurate understanding of where their money is going and how to improve performance.
Section 3
The Downtime Multiplier Effect
Coding systems rarely fail in dramatic ways. More often, they experience small interruptions that accumulate over time. These include:
-
Extended startup cycles
-
Frequent nozzle cleaning
-
Ink viscosity adjustments
-
Code verification failures
-
Operator adjustments
Each of these events may only take a few minutes. Over weeks and months, they become a significant source of lost production time.
Chart 3
Common Causes of Coding Downtime
Fluid related issues often represent a large share of these interruptions. Incorrect ink formulations, inconsistent solvent supply or poorly stored fluids can lead to performance variability that requires constant adjustment.
Reducing these small interruptions is one of the most effective ways to improve overall line efficiency.
Section 4
Ink Selection and Print Performance
Industrial inks are engineered for specific substrates and environments. Using a formulation that does not match the production conditions can lead to inconsistent adhesion, slow drying and unreadable codes.
Substrate variables include:
-
Porous vs non porous surfaces
-
Coated corrugate
-
Flexible film
-
Metal and glass
-
Wire and cable
Environmental factors also matter. Temperature, humidity and line speed all influence how ink behaves once it leaves the nozzle.
Chart 4
Impact of Incorrect Ink Selection
When ink is properly matched to the application, print quality stabilizes and maintenance decreases. When it is not, operators may need to intervene frequently to maintain readability.
This is particularly critical in regulated industries where code clarity affects traceability.
Section 5
Solvent Strategy and Printer Reliability
In CIJ systems, solvent is just as important as ink. It controls viscosity and helps maintain stable jetting performance. Inconsistent solvent quality or supply can cause:
-
Frequent cleaning cycles
-
Startup delays
-
Increased ink consumption
-
Reduced component life
Chart 5
Effect of Solvent Consistency on Uptime
Section 6
Multi Printer Facilities and Fluid Complexity
Many facilities operate a mix of coding technologies. It is common to see CIJ, TIJ and DOD systems running on different lines. Each may require different fluid types.
Without coordination, this can lead to:
-
Excess inventory
-
Compatibility confusion
-
Emergency orders
-
Higher costs
Chart 6
Typical Multi Printer Facility
Fragmented sourcing leads to:
-
Excess inventory
-
Rush shipping
-
Compatibility confusion
-
Higher cost per code
Centralized sourcing reduces risk and simplifies operations.
Centralizing fluid sourcing across brands and technologies simplifies inventory management and reduces the likelihood of supply shortages. It also allows plants to standardize processes and improve reliability.
Section 7
Compliance and Traceability Risk
In industries such as food, beverage and pharmaceuticals, coding is directly tied to traceability. If codes become unreadable or inconsistent, the risk of recall increases.
Common causes of unreadable codes include:
-
Incorrect ink formulation
-
Poor adhesion
-
Surface contamination
-
Improper setup
Chart 7
Causes of Unreadable Codes
Section 8
Inventory Strategy and Emergency Orders
Emergency ink orders are a common source of production disruption. When fluids run out unexpectedly, lines may be forced to stop while replacements are sourced.
Maintaining safety stock and tracking usage patterns helps prevent these interruptions. A managed inventory strategy reduces downtime risk and stabilizes production.
Best practices include:
-
Tracking average consumption
-
Maintaining minimum stock levels
-
Rotating inventory
-
Standardizing suppliers
Chart 8
Inventory Strategy Comparison
Section 9
Case Example
A packaging facility experienced recurring startup delays and inconsistent code quality. The printers themselves were functioning properly, but fluid sourcing was inconsistent. Ink and solvent were purchased from multiple vendors based on price and availability.
After implementing a centralized fluid strategy:
-
Startup times improved
-
Cleaning frequency decreased
-
Emergency orders were eliminated
-
Overall cost per code declined
The hardware did not change. Fluid management did.
Section 10
Building a Fluid Strategy Framework
To reduce the hidden cost of coding, plants should:
-
Track cost per code
-
Standardize fluid sourcing
-
Maintain safety stock
-
Match ink to substrate
-
Audit usage regularly
-
Coordinate across printer brands
Treating fluids as a strategic input rather than a routine purchase improves reliability and reduces long term cost.
Conclusion
The true cost of coding is shaped by fluid decisions. Ink and solvent strategy determines uptime, maintenance frequency, compliance performance and cost per code.
Manufacturers that manage fluid strategy reduce downtime, stabilize production and improve traceability. Those that treat fluids as an afterthought often experience hidden costs that accumulate over time.
Understanding and managing the hidden cost of coding allows plants to improve efficiency and reduce operational risk.
Q and A Section
Q: What is cost per code?
It measures the total expense of printing each code including fluids, maintenance and downtime.
Q: Why is fluid strategy important?
Fluid selection affects uptime, print quality and maintenance frequency.
Q: How much downtime is fluid related?
A significant portion of coding interruptions are tied to fluid availability, compatibility or storage.
Q: Should plants standardize fluid suppliers?
Centralized sourcing often reduces cost and improves reliability.
Q: Can fluid choice affect compliance?
Yes. Poor adhesion or unreadable codes can lead to traceability issues and recalls.
Q: What is the biggest mistake plants make?
Treating fluids as a last-minute purchase instead of a managed category.
Q: How can emergency orders be reduced?
Track usage and maintain safety stock.
References
Industrial coding and marking overview
https://www.packagingstrategies.com/articles/95720-inkjet-coding-and-marking-technology-overview
Continuous inkjet technology fundamentals
https://www.controleng.com/articles/continuous-inkjet-printers-and-how-they-work
GS1 barcode standards
https://www.gs1.org/standards/barcodes
FDA food traceability information
https://www.fda.gov/food/food-safety-modernization-act-fsma
Coding and marking best practices
https://www.packworld.com/printing-labeling/article/21152118/coding-and-marking-best-practices
Ink adhesion fundamentals
https://www.inkjetinsight.com/inkjet-ink-adhesion-guide
Packaging line downtime reduction
https://www.automationworld.com/factory/maintenance/article/21141587/reducing-downtime-in-packaging-lines
USInks resource section
https://usinks.com/blogs/news