Literature Request
Sample Request
Evaluation Request
Mailing List
Ask DNP Anything
|
|
Q: Can Direct Thermal Printing Replace My Thermal Transfer Ribbon Business?
Answer:
The short answer is no. Over the years technological advances have made direct thermal
labels more durable; however, in the end direct thermal lacks one thing that thermal
transfer provides—a permanent image. Additionally, direct thermal has expensive
‘hidden costs’. Here are some things to consider if you or your end
user feels pressure to switch from thermal transfer to direct thermal.
First, direct thermal will cost you more on replacement printheads. Ribbons provide
more than just ink for printing, they also provide a backcoat that glides over the
printhead and protects this expensive part from rubbing against the abrasive label
stock. Direct thermal labels do not provide a protective coating for the printhead.
Using direct thermal shortens your printhead life by at least 50%. With printheads
costing between $400 and $700 each that doubles your budget for replacement printheads
when you calculate the cost variances of direct thermal vs. thermal transfer.
Second, as stated earlier, direct thermal does not provide a permanent image. Many
labeling applications require specific compliance standards for the label—such
as UL approval, part suppliers to automotive or electronic manufacturers, etc. These
compliance standards often specify the image on the label must be a ‘permanent
image’. Direct thermal, as a print technology, cannot guarantee a permanent
image.
Third, despite what has been suggested by some people, in situations where RFID
is being implemented, the amount of static electricity dissipated using thermal
transfer ribbons verses using direct thermal labels is negligible and of little
concern. The presence of static electricity is universal, uncontrollable and a real
problem for RFID users regardless of the printing technologies. The potential for
RFID tags and labels to come in contact with large doses of static electricity while
in transit, from cold weather to statically charged shipping containers, is the
real threat.
RFID chip manufacturers are actively working to make their RFID chips more resilient.
Plainly stated, current RFID chips are too fragile for the real world environments
and applications they wish to serve. Implementation of RFID should first and foremost
focus on the durability of the chip being used—not the amount of static electricity
dissipating from the thermal transfer ribbon. Once you’ve found a good reliable
RFID chip, then begin researching thermal transfer ribbons that provide ‘anti-static’
protection. All of DNP’s thermal transfer ribbons have anti-static coatings
built into the ribbon.
In conclusion, direct thermal cannot replace your ribbon business. As a VAR it is
your job to provide the best solutions for your end user’s problems. All print
technologies, including direct thermal and thermal transfer, were designed to service
specific printing needs. As long as you continue to provide the appropriate print
technology that best fits the application you are serving, direct thermal should
not compete with your true thermal transfer applications.
Post A Comment
Send us your feedback. We appreciate
your thoughts and comments to these questions.
Terms of Use
Q: What are Smart Labels?
Answer:
Smart labels combine both RFID and barcode technologies into one label. While both
RFID and barcodes provide the same end result—i.e. tracking assets, how each
technology gathers that information is widely different. It is important to understand
these differences in order to understand why smart labels are so valuable.
Barcodes use visible symbols printed on substrates, often labels, which are then
attached to the package or asset being tracked. These visible symbols must be scanned
one at a time to register the item being tracked. RFID, on the other hand, uses
radio frequency chips embedded into the packaging material—or in the case
of ‘smart labels’ the chip is embedded in the label affixed to the item
being traced. No visible symbol is required for RFID and multiple items can be tracked
at the same time.
So why is there a need for smart labels? Smart labels are widely becoming the best
solution for integrating RFID technology into supply chain and logistics tracking.
It provides the perfect compliment to barcode’s limitations and RFID’s
tepid market acceptance. As RFID innovators continue to refine its technology for
mass-market use, smart labels provide a safeguard, or redundancy, if the RFID chip
fails. Additionally, barcodes provide a human readable component that is still necessary
in supply chain management.
Post A Comment
Send us your feedback. We appreciate
your thoughts and comments to these questions.
Terms of Use
Q: What are the differences between near edge and flat head printers?
Answer:
The basic mechanics are the same between both printers, i.e. there is a printhead,
ribbon, and substrate. The main differences are the ink transfer process and the
printhead design. Performance and price are also issues to consider when choosing
between a near edge and flat head printer.
Let’s start with the differences in ink transfer and printhead design. In
flat head printing the printhead is horizontal, with the heating elements in the
center of the ‘flat’ printhead. The ribbon passes over the heating elements
and ink transfer takes place. However, the ribbon continues to travel in the horizontal
plane for about a centimeter before emerging from the front of the printer, where
it is directed up to the printer’s take-up spindle. This centimeter or so
of travel is very important, as it allows the ink to fully adhere to the printed
surface and then release from the ribbon.
In near edge printing, the printhead is angled approximately 45º and the heating
elements are located ‘near’ the edge of the printhead, as oppose to
in the middle. The ribbon has limited contact with the substrate. It only touches
the substrate when it passes under the printhead’s heating elements. Because
there is no ‘cool down’ period for the ribbon, the transfer process
must both adhere and release at the same time. This requires a change in the ribbon’s
formulation, particularly the release layer, explaining the need for additional
ribbon formulations specifically for near edge printers.
From a performance standpoint, near edge printers were developed as an alternative
to the limitations of flat head printers. A flat head printer typically produces
labels at speeds up to 12 IPS. Near edge printers double the print speed of flat
head printers and accommodate a broader range of substrates, such as tags and other
card-based stocks. Near edge printers also perform better on smooth print surfaces
such as polypropylene, polyester and polyethylene films.
Concerning price, near edge printers and their associated ribbons are more expensive
than flat head. One possible reason being the timing of near edge printers entering
the US market; flat head print technology had already gained market preference in
the US. It is important to note, over the past few years, flat head printers have
improved their print speeds to compete with near edge on the issue of speed.
In conclusion, when faced with choosing a flat head or near edge printer, weigh
carefully the value of both performance and price as it relates to the print application.
The application should merit the unique performance of a near edge printer (i.e.
extreme speed and/or type of substrate) in order to fully justify the increased
costs.
Post A Comment
Send us your feedback. We appreciate
your thoughts and comments to these qusetions.
Terms of Use
Q: I want to increase my thermal transfer ribbon business in 2006, what are your
recommendations?
Answer:
There has never been a more difficult time to grow your TTR then today. General
economic conditions combined with a mature and over distributed commodity like product
has made it a real challenge for a VAR or systems integrator to grow both their
top and bottom lines selling TTR. However, it is possible to not only grow but thrive
in these current conditions. I believe growing your TTR revenues and profits are
a resultant of focusing on other products and services.
DNP has grown during the past five years because of the success of our VAR channel.
One of the ways DNP has helped our channel is our commitment to service and application
support. By working on solutions and not products we have found niches and channels
that have driven a steady and profitable revenue stream for both DNP and our partners.
Trying to grow your TTR revenues and profits by staying on the market stalwart,
TTR Wax, will provide a declining revenue and margin for the foreseeable future.
Over capacity, competing technologies and over distribution has forced the manufacturers
of TTR to turn most wax products into loss leaders. However, many of our VAR’s
are still pulling in 30+ points on their TTR wax sales. This margin, though declining,
still shows that there is a premium to be taken in the marketplace if you provide
a service and a support in tandem with your consumables sale.
Additionally, RFID and other “competing” technologies can provide both
a challenge and an opportunity. Advancements in direct thermal have taken some of
the TTR business away; however, their push into traditional TTR applications has
also opened up new applications and opportunities that were previously unavailable
to the VAR. As end users look for the “best” solution they are more
likely to evaluate all their printing needs instead of bidding out a piecemeal solution.
This provides the VAR a chance to position TTR vs. other technologies and to supply
their customer with a consultative sale instead of a product sale.
Finally, DNP continues to focus on channel structure and control. A sure sign of
maturity and over capacity is an abundance of supply in the channel. Though an argument
could be made that wax TTR is “commodity” like; a similar argument can
not be made against near edge, wax/resin, resin and specialty products. DNP understands
that to protect our non-wax TTR products we must have discipline in to whom and
how we provide our products to the market. As a resultant of our efforts we have,
in fact, grown our wax TTR well above expectations as our partners have had greater
success in providing the complete solution to their customers and have chosen DNP
as their single source solution.
Post A Comment
Send us your feedback. We appreciate
your thoughts and comments to these questions.
Terms of Use
Q: Are barcode thermal transfer ribbons (TTRs) going away?
Answer:
The short answer is no. However, I understand your concern and will address three
notable concerns I’ve heard in the past 6 to 12 months.
First, information from current TTR manufacturers suggest flat or declining sales
as many struggle with loss of market share or eroding average selling prices (ASPs).
These reports of flat or declining sales do not mean the TTR market itself is declining.
The truth is volumes are up for TTR manufacturers; an indication of increased TTR
usage. The flat or declining sales is attributed, in part, to an issue of over capacity.
As TTR manufacturers push to level their capacity they do so by gains in market
share and growth through aggressive market prices.
DNP continues to show strong double-digit market growth for our barcode TTR. We
are accomplishing these growth rates by continually providing new products and identifying
niche applications. Additionally, we are aggressively targeting general wax and
wax/resin market share.
Second, many of you have concerns with direct thermal replacing TTR in barcode labeling
applications. DNP has seen first hand an increase in the application use of direct
thermal printing. It is important to note, this has always been the case. Direct
thermal’s increased use is more a resultant of customers demanding lower printer
costs rather than lower consumable costs. Also, many customers are moving towards
smaller footprint machines easily accomplished by direct thermal printers.
It must be noted that many of the applications DNP knows were lost to direct thermal
printing have come back to TTR due to quality issues with the length of life and/or
durability of the label. Direct thermal simply cannot withstand the general application
requirements of thermal transfer.
Third, many have RFID claiming to be the end of the barcode. This concern couldn’t
be more backwards. As RFID continues its development, barcodes still remain to be
the only answer for improvements in manufacturing. The most common improvements
being logistic upgrades and human error reductions. Additionally, companies are
actually creating new applications for barcodes around RFID. The ability for RFID
to be successful has pushed barcode labeling to the forefront for many solution
providers. As companies make the big push for RFID (i.e. Wal-Mart, DoD, etc.) every
RFID label includes a barcode and TTR printing. This shows RFID is not limiting
or eroding TTR sales but expanding markets.
Stated simply, there is no technology, currently commercialized, that will negatively
affect the growth of TTR sales.
Post A Comment
Send us your feedback. We appreciate
your thoughts and comments to these questions.
Terms of Use
|
|
|
|
|
