ASTM F1886/F1886M-09(2013)
(Test Method)Standard Test Method for Determining Integrity of Seals for Flexible Packaging by Visual Inspection
Standard Test Method for Determining Integrity of Seals for Flexible Packaging by Visual Inspection
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Seal attributes can be linked directly to a number of variables in process parameters, equipment, or material, as well as environmental (room temperature and relative humidity). Visual seal characteristics and defects can provide evidence of package integrity and production sealing problems.
5.2 Visual seal defects often will be the first indication of heat sealing process variation. They also will indicate a lack of, or potential compromise to, package integrity after physical package performance testing.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the determination of channels in the package seal down to a width of 75 μm [0.003 in.] with a 60–100 % probability (see Section 8).
1.1.1 The ability to visually detect channel defects in package seals is highly dependent on the size of channel, the degree of contrast from sealed and unsealed areas, the amount and type of adhesive between the two package layers, reflecting light angle, types of material used, the use of magnification, and the inspector's level of training and experience.
1.2 This test method is applicable to packages with at least one transparent side so that the seal area may be clearly viewed.
1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation: F1886/F1886M − 09(Reapproved 2013)
Standard Test Method for
Determining Integrity of Seals for Flexible Packaging by
Visual Inspection
ThisstandardisissuedunderthefixeddesignationF1886/F1886M;thenumberimmediatelyfollowingthedesignationindicatestheyear
of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.
A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope 4. Summary of Test Method
1.1 Thistestmethodcoversthedeterminationofchannelsin 4.1 This test method provides a qualitative (accept/reject)
the package seal down to a width of 75 µm [0.003 in.] with a visual inspection method to evaluate the appearance character-
60–100 % probability (see Section 8). istics of unopened, intact seals in order to determine the
1.1.1 The ability to visually detect channel defects in presence of defects that may affect the integrity of the package.
package seals is highly dependent on the size of channel, the
5. Significance and Use
degree of contrast from sealed and unsealed areas, the amount
and type of adhesive between the two package layers, reflect-
5.1 Seal attributes can be linked directly to a number of
inglightangle,typesofmaterialused,theuseofmagnification,
variablesinprocessparameters,equipment,ormaterial,aswell
and the inspector’s level of training and experience.
as environmental (room temperature and relative humidity).
Visual seal characteristics and defects can provide evidence of
1.2 This test method is applicable to packages with at least
package integrity and production sealing problems.
one transparent side so that the seal area may be clearly
viewed.
5.2 Visual seal defects often will be the first indication of
heatsealingprocessvariation.Theyalsowillindicatealackof,
1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units
or potential compromise to, package integrity after physical
are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in
package performance testing.
each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each
system shall be used independently of the other. Combining
6. Apparatus
values from the two systems may result in non-conformance
with the standard. 6.1 Illuminant, lighting arrangements to give about 540
lumens/m [50 fc] of white light or daylight on the specimens.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
6.2 Indelible Marking Pen.
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
7. Procedure
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
7.1 Visualacuityshallbesuchthattheinspectionoftheseal
may be performed at a distance of 30 to 45 cm [12 to 18 in.]
2. Referenced Documents
NOTE 1—Magnification devices, such as eyeloops, may be used as an
2.1 ASTM Standards:
analytical tool to characterize identified seal defects.
F17 Terminology Relating to Flexible Barrier Packaging
7.2 Inspect the entire sealed area of the package for com-
3. Terminology
pleteness and uniformity.
3.1 For terminology related to flexible barrier packaging,
NOTE 2—Different package sizes and shapes may require differing
see Terminology F17. lengths of time to adequately inspect the entire seal perimeter. Any time
requirement associated with visual inspection should allow for complete
seal inspection.
This test method is under the jurisdiction ofASTM Committee F02 on Flexible
NOTE 3—Some packaging materials and adhesives may fluoresce under
Barrier Packaging and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee F02.40 on
ultraviolet light. Viewing the seal area in a UV light box will enhance the
Package Integrity.
sealed-to-unsealed area contrast, and provide for easier defect identifica-
Current edition approved Aug. 1, 2013. Published September 2013. Originally
tion.
approved in 1998. Last previous edition approved in 2009 as F1886/F1886M – 09.
7.3 Identify and record any part of the seal where channels
DOI: 10.1520/F1886_F1886M-09R13.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
appear. Mark the location of the channels.
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on NOTE 4—All other assessed defects (refer to Appendix X1) should be
the ASTM website. categorized according to user defined accept/reject criteria. Define the
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
F1886/F1886M − 09 (2013)
actions to be taken in the event defects are detected during normal TABLE 1 Percent Incorrect by Laboratory
production runs.
Lab Samples Incorrect Percent (%)
Inspected Analysis Incorrect
7.4 Record the number and location of channels identified
1 117 0 0.00
on each package.
2 117 24 20.51
3 117 5 4.27
NOTE 5—If confirmation of channels or incomplete seal areas in
4 117 17 14.53
peelable packages is necessary, hand peel such suspected package
5 117 5 4.27
completely separating the two material components and inspect the seal
6 117 12 10.26
area of the transferred adhesive for the same incomplete seal attributes as
7 117 9 7.69
the unopened package. Care should be taken to ensure a smooth
8 117 18 15.38
continuous peeling motion so as not to cause any extraneous attributes.
9 117 26 22.22
Heat seals should be cooled to ambient conditions before peeling open to
10 117 10 8.55
allow for adhesive bonding to the opposite substrate to occur.
In some instances, a channel or unsealed area may be observed only
after the package is peeled open. Adhesive transfer is a qualitative
TABLE 2 Percent Incorrect by Material
measureofamaterial’sabilitytoreleasethecoatingratherthanconclusive
Samples Incorrect Percent (%)
evidence that the seal has not been made. It is possible to have continuous
Material Inspected Analysis Incorrect
seal integrity but fail to give complete transfer.This is because the coating
may have a stronger affinity for the substrate on which it is coated rather Film paper 300 14 4.67
Film TYVEK 300 38 12.67
thantheonetowhichitissealed.Insuchcases,anadditionalphysicalseal
PETG/TYVEK 290 59 20.34
integrity test may be required to confirm if it is an unsealed area.
Film/film 280 15 5.36
8. Precision and Bias
8.1 A round robin study was conducted in 1997, which
TABLE 3 Percent Incorrect by Defect Type
included ten laboratories, four package types, and two different
Samples Incorrect Percent
channel sizes randomly produced with 75 µm [0.003 in.] and
Defect Type Inspected Analysis (%) Incorrect
No channels 370 20 5.41
125µm[0.005in.]diameterwire.Thenegativecontrolconsists
75 µm channel 400 83 20.75
ofthesametypepackagesproducedwithnochannels.Thefour
125 µm channel 400 23 5.75
different types of packages are:
8.1.1 Open pouch—clear film/coated paper;
8.1.2 Open pouch—clear film/uncoated TYVEK ;
TABLE 4 Percent Correct by Material and Defect Type
8.1.3 Sealed blister—blue tinted blister/coated TYVEK;
Samples Correct Percent (%)
and,
Material Defect Type Inspected Analysis Correct
Film/paper none 100 97
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.