Non-round Can Seaming Systems

A. Bizkarguenaga, J. Ariño, G. Jaio

SOMMETRADE S.L. · P.T. Zamudio · 48170 Bizkaia · Spain

Introduction
Unlike the case of round cans, the very nature of their non-round
siblings negatively impacts the regularity of the seam formation. The
design of the blank body and lid flanges, the body structural stiffness,
the curvature changes and the seaming process itself are some of the
non-axisymmetric characteristics that make much more difficult to get
a good double seam with non-round cans. In this lecture we will
survey some of these causes, their effects and how to handle them.
Regarding the machine itself, the pros and cons of the different
seaming programs adopted by the industry are discussed from the
point of view of the productivity and the double seam quality. We will
adopt a descriptive approach, based mainly on everyday experience of
preparing seam machines for a wide variety of cans. Anyhow, due to
the complexity of the involved phenomena, an important amount of Figure 1. Non-round cans involve many additional
difficulties with respect to round cans seaming.
qualitative studies and numerical simulations have been required
before bringing the concepts to the descriptive level.

Keywords: Can seaming, non-round can, seaming defects,

Seaming basics
The double seam configuration and requirements are essentially similar
for round and non-round can -see figure 2. The involved sheet metal
forming process is analogous in both cases. The body’s and lid’s
customarily pre-formed edges are first hooked, and after ironed by
means of specially shaped groves engraved around appropriate Figure 2. Seaming of round and non-round cans is basically
seaming rolls which orbit along the edges juncture. The juncture is similar in terms of initial and final state of the seam section.
back supported by the seaming chuck, which fits inside the lid The differences arise during the seaming process.
countersink. Both can elements are held together by the constraint
effect of the bottom lifter.

The round cans are typically seamed in two sequential operations,

which set up the seam progressively as the corresponding rolls orbit
spiraling around the can. Actually, in most cases the can is spinning as
the roll approaches following a predetermined law. The so-called 1st
operation performs its cycle in 5÷10 turns and the 2nd one in 1.5÷5.
The actual values depend on the machine design. Both rolls do at least
one final orbit at their nominal settings.

In this paper we assume that this process is sufficiently known for

round cans and we will concentrate ourselves in those aspects which
make a difference in for the non-round cans.
Non-round cans seaming operations
Figure 3. Round cans are typically seamed in only two
operations, which are plunged gradually in several orbits.
Here are shown in their final settings.

The first obvious peculiarity of non-round can seaming is the fact that
the seaming rolls must orbit the can following exactly or near exactly

Figure 4. Typically, the can supplier curls the non-round
lids only partially. The transition between the curled and
non-curled segments is a real discontinuity with great
impact in seaming formation. In rectangular cans, the effect
is magnified by the start of a curved segment of the lid.
Figure 5. Curling during seaming can be deeper than lid
pre-curl because the body flange is already in place. In such
case this preliminary seaming operation goes beyond a
simple smoothing of pre-curl discontinuities and may
become a real folding of the lid hook for those cases in
which the first operation alone does not succeed.
Figure 6. “Classic” 1st Operation is very much like the
typical 1st operation of round cans. Though most of the
times the real process is accomplished by two opposite
rolls, instead of one, orbiting in two interlaced spirals.
the lid contour. There is a wide variety of shapes: elliptic, ovals of
different nature, oblongs, filleted rectangular, etc. Except in the elliptic
case, most non-round cans contour can be defined in terms of tangent
arc/segment polylines. The major difficulty on the side of the seaming
machine comes from the necessity to accurately generate these orbits.
We will come back later to this important point when we examine the
seam defects due to non-conformal orbits. Now we will describe which
seaming operations are generally used for non round cans.
Curling. Round lids are generally pre-curled during the manufacturing
process. The curl is an important feature for a good performance of
the automatic de-stacker device, but it also helps the seam formation.
Pre-curl depth is limited by the necessary clearance to fit the lid on the
body flange. Due to manufacturing reasons it is uneconomical to curl
non-round cans uniformly along the whole contour, so they are
generally curled just along the straightest sides. This fact induces
seaming problems, not only because more forming work will be
necessary during first operation, but even more because the change
between the curled and uncurled zones is a discontinuity which most
of the times acts as a seam defect nucleation point (droops and vees).
We must recall that the seaming process is a kind of sheet metal
forming in which the material is not completely guided by the seaming
rolls during the formation. We must rely in the tendency of the
surrounding material to drag the non-constrain
ed parts of sheet to the desired place. If a sharp discontinuity is
present, like the transition between curled and uncurled sections, this
desired dragging is ruined and the edge is ejected from the hook. The
detailed mechanism by which this happens is complex, we will only
mention that it consist of an edge buckling initiated by abrupt
curvature change of the sheet along the rolling direction. In addition,
for rectangular cans the discontinuity coincides with the change
between the straight and curve segments. This fact plays an important
role in the origin of the defects. See figure 4.
For the above-mentioned reasons some non-round seaming machines
include a preliminary operation for smoothing the pre-curl along the
lid contour eliminating the discontinuities. This operation is performed
in a single parallel orbit, not spiraling.
The curling during seaming can provide further advantages. As the lid
is already placed on the body mouth, this operation can be much more
aggressive than a simple curl smoothing, folding the lid curl around the
body flange up to a level that the lid hook is nearly set to its final state.
As in this folding process the material can be reasonably well driven,
the lid hook can be formed nearly without wrinkles. This feature has
proven a good solution for some difficult cans. See figure 5.
1st Operation. The goal of the first operation with non-round cans is
entirely similar to the case of round cans: to form the lid and body
hooks ready to be ironed by a second operation. It can be said to a
great degree of exactitude that for analogous blank sections, analogous
1st operation shapes have to be reached. However, the work is more
difficult to do with non-round cans.
In the past the round can technique was mimicked as close as possible,
so the first operation roll was introduced in 8÷15 spiraling orbits with
the intention to do the forming work as progressively as possible.
Progressive meant to divide the hook forming process in several steps
of lower deformation rates, and this was believed to be good for better
drawing the lid material. Different mechanisms and tactics have been
used to this end, but it is not the aim of this paper to review them. We
will only mention that in most cases the 1st operation task was in fact
performed by two or four opposite rolls orbiting in interlaced spirals
instead that by only one roll in a single spiral. This technique is called
“the classic method” and it is still widely used by most existing non-round
seaming machines. See figure 6.

As a matter of fact, the classic method reached its ceiling when modern
cans came into play. While the market was continuously increasing the
quality standards, factors like two piece cans, aluminum, thinner and
less plastic sheet metals made more and more difficult to obtain good
seams. The 1st operation is the most critical point with respect to these
factors by the reason already discussed that the material is not
positively guided during the deformation. During the eighties it was
discovered that a different strategy could be more efficient in term of
seam quality and process speed. This technique is known as “plunge
method”. We will explain how it works. It is simpler that the classic
Figure 7. “Plunge” 1st Operation has proven more efficient
method, indeed. The first operation roll is abruptly plunged to its in drawing the lid material into the desired hook. In
nominal setting and a single parallel orbit is executed around the can. addition it allows arranging the whole seam cycle very
No spiraling orbits. See figure 7. Contrary to the old believes, the efficiently increasing the mechanism performance 2 or 3
folds.
material is better controlled with this method and much better results
can be obtained. The orbit start point is chosen to plunge the roll
within the less curved segment of the contour because this is the less
sensitive area. In some machines two opposite rolls shares the work,
each of them performing only half an orbit.

2nd Operation. During this operation the material is better driven than in
the 1st operation. Here the key point is to use a suitable grove profile.
This profile must fit the shape of the seam plied-sheets, while
constraining any tendency to the seam to drop. So 2nd operation is less
delicate than 1st one and this is true for round and non-round cans.

As for the case of the first operation, there exist classic and plunge
methods in non-round can seaming but, notoriously enough, some kind
of plunge strategy has been already used for round cans second
operation. Plunge 1st operation is always used in combination of plunge
2nd.

It is worth commenting that, with plunge method, the operations can be

arranged very efficiently, because they are brief and can be overlapped
to a high degree. The full effective cycle can be reduced to only one
turn plus a small arriving-delay per each subsequent operation –the
arriving-delay depends on the architecture of the seaming mechanism,
typically ¼ or 1/3 of a turn. If two rolls per operation are used, the full
effective cycle could be reduced in an additional ½ a turn. These leads
to a dramatic grow in the performances of the machine, increasing the
output 2 or 3 times with respect to the classic method for equivalent Figure 8.a.. Seaming force Fs develops as consequence of
the normal and frictional pressures in the grove while the
mechanism rates. lid hook is drawn. The stress distribution of this force
Fs(ϕ) spans the contour zone being seamed with a tear
shape distribution.

Figure 8.b. The seaming force Fs is counterbalanced by the
constraint reactions of the chuck and body flange. Many
times these constraints cannot hold locally the force Fs and
the countersink slips down and other mechanisms come
into action..
Figure 9. When body flange pressure cannot withstand
countersink slippage, the countersink starts working
structurally. This response is very different in the straight
and curved areas. While curved zones support the seaming
force almost without lid sinking, the straight parts fail to
support it and a considerable sinking takes place. The
longer the straight parts the deeper the sinking. The larger
the countersink angles the larger the depth differences
between straight and curved zones.
Seaming forces
Before examining seam irregularity aspects we need to understand
some of the forces which are involved in the seaming process. We will
concentrate on the 1st operation because it is this step where the
seaming forces more severely deform the can.
We have already mentioned how the juncture under seaming process is
held in place by means of the chuck and the lifter. The chuck lip acts
as an anvil providing a stiff back support to the juncture area. As the
1st operation roll pass by a given section, the lid flange slides following
the grove profile, setting up the lid hook in this way. This process
develops substantial contact pressures and friction forces, which
accumulates along the profile, giving the resultant FS of the figure 8.a.
The resulting force depends mainly on the friction coefficient between
the grove surface and the lid sheet external face; and on a complex
interrelation of the grove profile curvature and lid sheet bending
resistance (This is a very simplified viewpoint. In fact, roll diameter
and lid contour curvatures have also a very important influence). It is
important to notice that this force is developed over all the zone of the
lid being drawn in each instant. The stress distribution in this zone is
shown in the top view of the figure 8.a. The seaming force FS is
considerably stronger with plunge method than with classic method. As the
roll travels along the contour, the stress shape translates and produces
a drift effect, which sums up an undesired tendency to move ahead the
lid material. We will discuss some consequences of this drift when we
discuss the lid countersink sinking in the next paragraphs.
The seaming force FS is counterbalanced by the constraining reactions
of the chuck and the body flange –figure 8.b. The condition for
keeping in place the juncture while seaming is approximately given by,
FS
FB ≥
µC Sinθ + Cosθ
µB −
µC Cosθ − Sinθ
where FB is the minimum body lip force to avoid countersink tendency
to slip. θ is the chuck lip angle, µC is the friction coefficient between
chuck and lid, and µB is the friction coefficient between body flange
and lid. When this condition is not locally fulfilled in the seaming
zone, other mechanisms must come into action, as we will see in the
next sections.
In the remaining part of the paper we will survey some of the principal
causes of seam irregularities in non-round cans.
Countersink irregularities
This is one of the most troublesome points when dealing with non-
round cans. The countersink depth changes along the contour. Long
straight segments tend to have deeper countersinks than sort or tight
curved segments. Why is this a problem? First there are aesthetic
reasons (if very intense can also affect the functionality of the
automatic can openers), but the main problem is that irregular
countersink depth means irregulars lid hook length and hook overlap,
which in turn are critical parameters for seam safety.
The reason of the countersink depth irregularity is the uneven response
of the can structure to the seaming forces along the different points of
the contour. We have already seen that many times, especially with
large countersink angles (θ), the bodies flange fails to support the
seaming force and the countersink tends to sink. In such cases the
countersink reacts structurally against the sinking. At the contour
straight segments the countersink panel is a plane strip and works like
a slender beam bending under the seaming force. The stiffness in these
points is not very high. At the curved segments the panel has a conical Figure 10. Compensation of countersinks sinking. The
shape offering much higher stiffness against the sinking -see figure 9. depth of the countersink sink is subtracted to the lid flange
leading to shorter lid hook and overlap. Adding the
Consequently, countersink depth increases during seaming much more expected amount of sinking to the lid curl roughly
at long straight sides than at curved segments. compensates this problem.

This effect is difficult to control or compensate because it depends on

factors as unreliable as the can filling, which sometimes helps
supporting against the sinking. Nevertheless, can-makers use to foresee
a rough compensation for rectangular cans in order to get acceptable
regularity in the lid hook. They provide the lid flanges with additional
width in the straight sides, while trim the width at the corners. The
blank flange width can differ in as much as 0.75mm in a typical club
can; see figure 10. A present trend is to decrease the countersink angle
(θ) to reduce the influence of the seaming force. Some modern cans
have as low as 1.5 degrees instead of the common 4 or 5 degrees.

The seaming force increases with the friction coefficient between the
grove and the lid surfaces, as well as with the grove profile curvature.
So, the control of the countersink sinking depends too on a good
choice of roll profile and on the finishing quality of the roll grove.

Within the straight segments there is another source of irregularity.

The countersink sinking is not symmetrical. It is deeper in the second
half of the straight part than in the first one -see figure 11. This is
because the countersink panel is partially supported by the already
seamed sections. The whole effect is a drifting of the sinking which
produces the maximum depth well after the middle point of the
straight segments.
Figure 11. The countersink sinking in the straight segments
has and inverted bell shape, but it is not symmetrical. The
maximum depth point is backward the straight part mid
point. The sinking effect tacks place just ahead the roll,
while just behind the lid is already seamed and constrained,
leading to a drifting that explains the asymmetry.

Distortion induced by asymmetric body stiffness

Round cans are axi-symmetrical. This means that any radial sections
behave in identical way under compression forces between chuck and
bottom-plate. With non-round cans the structural response of each
section can be very different. The can body shows different stiffness in
different areas. Curved parts are stiffer in both axial and radial
directions, while straight parts are weaker -see figure 12. The bottom
plate force tends to be transmitted through the stiffer paths,
consequently the curved parts are more loaded and more pressure is
transmitted to the lid at these areas. We have already seen that this
body flange pushing pressure is important for control the seaming
operations. In addition the flat parts tend to buckle under the pressure,
deforming the can and lowering even more the pushing pressure. In
general, the body structure tends to deform irregularly and put the
different zones of the contour under different seaming conditions.
Figure 12. The structural response of non-round cans under
bottom plate pressure is different at the different sections.
Curved zones are stiffer in both, radial and vertical
directions. The bottom plate pressure is mostly transmitted
through stiffer sections. This uneven behavior has a final
impact in the seam regularity.

Figure 13. Embossed shape of the body bottom can be
designed to properly redistribute the lower plate pressure
to the body flange.
Figure 14. Seam formation –here 1st operation only shown-
is a plane strain sheet conformation process in contour straight
zones. Initial lengths keep constant all through the
process. The metal sheet is basically bent or folded.
Figure 15. In curved zones the material is enforced to flow
in a centripetal fashion and it must shrink in (l) direction.
To compensate this shrinkage the metal expands in
thickness (t) and width (w). The Lankford index of the
sheet metal determines how this expansion is shared in by
these two components.
Two piece cans are typically embossed with special bottom shapes for
certain purposes. One of these purposes is to properly redistribute the
bottom pressure transmission pattern – see figure 13.
Altogether, the lack of structural symmetry of the body is one of the
intrinsic peculiarities of non-non round cans that indirectly produce
many of the seam irregularities. The only possibility to minimize the
effects is to use a correct value for the bottom plate pressure and,
sometimes, to design a customized lower chuck as to correctly fasten
the body avoiding undesired deformations and rearranging the bottom
pressure transmission pattern.
Effects radial drawing
The effect that we will analyze in this paragraph is related to problems
like wrinkles, vees and droops in the curved segments of non-round
cans. It is concerned to the essential difference of drawing condition of
the lid and body flanges in sections of different curvature. The seam
formation in a straight zone –hooking and ironing- involves basically
metal sheet folding -see figure 14. Material strain along contour
direction -(l) in the figure- can be practically ignored in the whole
process. Initial lengths δli keep unchanged till the end of the process.
Technically speaking it is a plane strain conformation process. This
condition completely changes in curved zones -see figure 15. In this
case the material is drawn toward the center of the curve and forcefully
must shrink in (l) direction, δli lengths reduce to δli´. The amount of
shrinking depends on the curvature and the seam panel width. The
strain in (l) direction is given by
Ri′
ε l = Ln
Ri
being Ri and Ri´ the initial and final radiuses respectively of each strip
δli. This in-plane straining of the sheet metal must be compensated by
opposing strains εw and εt, in the sheet in-plane perpendicular direction
(w) and out-of-plane direction (t) respectively. The material volume
must keep always constant, this leads to the condition
εt+εw+εl=0
The strain ratio among εw and εt, is determined by the Lankford index
of the sheet material (r) –also known as plastic an-isotropy index-
εw
r=
εt
This index depends on the sheet metal grain structure and gives the
readiness of the sheet material to flow in-plane when drawn, instead of
changing its thickness. High (r) values are desired for drawing process
because it reduces the differential thinning or thickening of the sheet in
zones of different drawing ratios. Typical values of (r) for tinplate are
between 1.3 and 1.9. Taking, for example, a average value of r=1.5 and
the geometry of a ordinary European ¼ Club can, the resulting strain
ratios of the lid edge extremity are: εl=-0.21, εw=0.13 and εt=0.08. This
imply that the sheet thickens at this point increase in a 9.5% by the end
of the seaming process (t1=t0·eεt). A bit more complicated calculation
shows that the total lid flange width stretches about a 8% (strain is
different for each point of the flange section and an integration along
the profile must be done to compute this value). Note that these lid
flange elongation renders higher lid hooks that expected in the can
curved zones. Therefore, this effect of curved parts, though small, is
adding to the countersink sinking of the straight parts in producing
seam irregularities.

All the preceding reasoning is basically correct for the whole seaming
process if the seam is properly ironed by the second operation. The
increase in sheet metal thickness is observed in experiments and it
agrees pretty well with the calculated values. The lid hook extra length
has been also observed, even though it is usually shadowed by other
phenomena. Nevertheless, at the end of the first operation the lid hook
rarely behaves in curved zones as described. We have already
commented that the first operation is a drawing process with low
control of the material flow. The most common response of the lid
Figure 16. In tight curved zones sheet metal buckling
flange extreme to the in-plane shrinking demand in (l) direction is that assimilates the shrinking requirement in (l) direction during
of a micro-buckling. The extra length is absorbed by edge waviness, the first operation. Unavoidably, some kind of wrinkles
commonly known as lid hook wrinkles, see figures 16 and 17. In those arises. When these wrinkles are uniform and smooth it is
not difficult for the second operation to flatten them.
figures it is shown how the lid hook edge has the same length that
before the hooking δl, but it is sinuous and spans the reduced contour
length δl´. At this stage there has not been major shrinking of length or
growth of thickness and width in the lid edge.

The wrinkles at the end of the first operation are unavoidable in tight
curved zones. If these wrinkles persist after the second operation
beyond a given percentage of the lid hook length, the seam is
considered unsafe (30% with respect to the hook length is considered
the maximum acceptable wrinkle depth value for round cans, while up
to 50% can be allowed for non-round cans). Leaving aside the sheet
metal mechanical characteristics –temper and thickness are the
authentic governing parameters-, it is compulsory to start with smooth
and uniform first operation wrinkles, like those shown in the figure 16.
If the wrinkles are few and sharp like the ones shown in figure 17, the
second operation would not iron out them.

The key question is how smooth and uniform wrinkles can be

provoked instead of sharp ones. Again, lid material yield stress and
plastic elongation and sheet thickness are the commanding parameters.
It is a commonplace the continuous cost reduction trend to –can
weight reduction- by using thinner and thinner sheet metals with
harder and harder materials -both characteristics must vary opposing
because can strength needs to be maintained-. These properties
progress in the bad direction from the seaming point of view and, in
fact, it is the seaming ability one of the most important obstacles to use
thinner sheet metal. We will not discuss here possible solutions in this
respect, like mini and micro seams, etc. The first operation roll grove Figure 17. The plunge 1st operation –shown in figure 16- is
profile has also an important role, but in our opinion this is a point notably more efficient than the classic one -shown in this
figure-. In this case few wrinkles arise in the first orbits and
that has been over assessed. It is actually a variable with obvious room these are progressively sharpened in the subsequent passes.
to play with, but once a few design key factors are satisfied, little can If the wrinkles are very deep they become pleats after
second operation. Sometimes these protrusions scratch the
be improved by shape refinements. For the time being no very much can body and form vees and drops.
advantage is expected from profile optimization, yet a reliable theory of
seaming profiles would be desirable to clarify this controversial
subject.

Figure 18. The can twisting consists of a rotation of the
bottom with respect to the top. It is typically observable in
heaps of many stackable cans. The effect is very intense
when there is significant gap between the lid countersink
and the body mouth. The exceeding body wall is dragged
ahead producing the twisting.
Figure 19. The body wall dragging introduces shear stresses
and other effects that can produce irregularities in the
seam. This takes place particularly in rectangular cans at the
end of the last corner.
Figure 20. The exceeding body wall dragged along the
contour accumulates at the end of the round and forms a
bulge in the wall. The swelling can be large, and then the
roll crash into it producing a dent. Most of the times a slim
bottom restrain like (A) can solve the problem if the gap is
not very large.
In this section we only will see the importance of using the plunge or
classic methods with respect to the wrinkles. One of the characteristics
of the plunge method is that, as the roll progress hooking the lid
flange, the edge does not buckle immediately. The sheet border is
properly put in his final hook shape without buckling, while the
exceeding sheet material is accumulated in a bulge before the rolling
point. When the accumulated bulge grows too large the roll step on it
and the sheet edge slides behind the rolling point gently buckling the
already hooked flange into a smooth wave. The key requirement for
the roll design is to be able to properly swell back the fore bulges
before they grow too large and the hook is ejected down. To this end
the grove profile design is obviously important, but the roll diameter is
also important. Large roll diameters facilitate very much the task.
So, within certain limits the plunge method handles fairly well the first
operation requirements. On the contrary, the classic method is
considerably less efficient, in the sense that the wrinkle generation can
abort the hook formation or can end in sharp and uneven wrinkles like
the ones shown in the figure 17. Indeed, the wrinkles arise after the
earliest orbits pretty much like described for the plunge method but
obviously in less number and less deep. For the subsequent passes, the
flange edge already has buckling initiating ripples sparsely distributed.
Instead of increasing the number of wrinkles, the exceeding edge
material is absorbed by sharpening the initial ripples. The hook, when
formed, ends with few and sharp wrinkles, which will be difficult to
iron out. Many times, these wrinkles are so deep that touch the can
body wall during the last passes of the roll, scratching it and jamming
the hook formation itself –see figure 17. In these cases the result is,
not only wrinkles and pleats, but also vees, drops and droops.
Can twisting by seam drag
From the seam quality viewpoint this effect is not as important as the
previous ones, but it is certainly generated by the seam process and can
produce an unappealing distortion of the can. In some cases it can be
so intense that bulges and notches appear in the body walls. Finally, in
less frequent cases, it can lead to important variations of seam
parameters along the can contour.
The effect consists of a torsional deformation of the body along the
vertical axis. The top and bottom faces remain flat and parallel,
because they are constrained by the chuck and the bottom plate, but
they are rotated the one with respect the other. The phenomenon is
produced by a dragging ahead of the body flange along the seam
contour -see figures 18 and 19. The body flange is basically folded
during the first operation. This is not a very aggressive forming, but in
the curved zones and especially when the body does not fit tightly
around the lid countersink, it tends to push ahead the body flange and
wall. This effect is accumulative and it is more intense where the 1st
operation ends its work. The net consequence is a rotation of the
bottom of the can, as it is shown in the figure 18. Most times this is
only observable after careful inspection or when many stackable cans
are put in a heap. When the fitness between lid countersink and body
mouth is poor, the excess of body contour is accumulated at the end of
the operation and a bulge arises in the body wall. The roll bottom rim
pushes inside the bulge, producing a notch just under the seam. This is
illustrated in the figure 20. When the gap between the lid and the body
is not very large, the torsion can be practically eliminated using an
appropriate restrain at the lifter plate, (A) in the figure 20. The same
solution can eliminate the bulge and notch in these cases of low gap.

When the gap between body and lid is too large, the excess of body
edge affects the seam formation, particularly at the end of the last
corner of rectangular cans -some times at the opposite diagonal too-.
In such circumstances the body flange becomes too large and irregular
at this point and makes difficult a correct end hook formation. This
circumstance is sometimes evidenced by a long and smooth seam
droop in the mentioned areas.

The plunge method is more likely to produce this kind of effects than
Figure 21. The relative position of the roll with respect to
the classic one. the chuck is essential for the seam formation. To get a
regular seam, this positioning must be exactly copied along
the entire chuck contour. This task is quite complex with
Effects of machine borne non-conformal orbits non-round cans. The concepts we use to control this
performance are the roll working diameter ∅W and
The space left between the roll grove and the chuck wall is the seaming reference point (see next figure)
pass section –see figure 22. All seaming operation rolls must follow a
trajectory around the can contour such that the seaming pass section
must be kept constant. This is an obvious requisite to get a regular
seam all around the can. It is easy to fulfill for round can seaming
mechanisms but it is a rather involved problem for non-round can
seamers.

In order to be able to evaluate the precision with which the pass

section is kept constant we need to define the roll working diameter and
the reference point. The roll reference point is the point of the grove
profile that is just on top of the chuck lip apex when the roll is in its
nominal setting. The roll working diameter is that defined by the
reference point. Note that the reference point does not correspond to
any fixed material point on the roll, it is a geometric point, which
defines the correct setting of the operation roll with respect to
Figure 22. For a given roll setting the seaming pass section
tightness or looseness of the seam formation. These ideas are more is defined by its roll reference point and working diameter
clearly shown in figures 21 and 22. If, for instance, the reference point ∅W. We will evaluate the regularity of a seam operation
is separated 0.2mm left from the chuck contour, the seam is loosen in orbit by the fitness degree of the trajectory described by
the reference point onto the chuck contour.
the same quantity. We will evaluate the regularity of a seam operation
orbit by the fitness degree of the trajectory described by the reference
point onto the chuck contour. A conformal orbit is the one which
coincides exactly with the chuck contour or is separated a uniform
distance from it. A non-conformal orbit produces a non-uniform seam.

It is worth noting that the roll working diameter depends on the roll
nominal setting. We will see that this issue is very important, because
normally a machine tooling is calibrated for a particular roll working
diameter and the calibration is lost if the operations are tightened or
loosen out the original setting.

The sources of non-conformity are to be found in the seamer

mechanism and may be very diverse. We will restrict our remarks to
some of the sources that are common to all the cam-lever type seaming
devices. Practically every non-round can seamer is based on this kind
of mechanism. Figure 23 shows a schematic view of the cam-lever
working principle. The roll, mounted on one arm of a pivoting lever,
generates the target conformal orbit as the pivoting axle revolves on a
spindle around the chuck. In turn, the lever is driven by a cam through
Figure 23. Cam-lever type seaming mechanism. The lever
pivot rotates around the center with constant angular
speed. The chuck and cam contour are conjugated
silhouettes. In absence of errors, when the follower rolls
over the cam the roll orbits the chuck in a conformal
trajectory.

Figure 24. Non-conformal orbit produced by a 0.01%
orthotropic deformation of the seamer cam. The orbit
outrun is magnified 50 times for clarity –the spacing of
dashed lines is 0.1mm-. The resulting orbit outrun is
0.2mm. The seaming process is very sensitive to cam errors.
Figure 25. A horizontal eccentricity of 0.1mm in the
machine spindle produces this non-conformal orbit. The
orbit outrun is magnified 50 times. Each mechanism
parameter error produces a characteristic non conformal
orbit.
Figure 26. The follower recall springs generate variable
forces, which slightly deforms the mechanism, leading to
seam irregularities. In this real case the maximum outrun
error remains at 0.08mm after readjusting all other
mechanism parameters. The tight seam at two opposite
corners is very characteristic of this defect. The orbit
outrun is magnified 50 times for clarity.
a follower mounted on its opposite arm. To get a conformal orbit the
chuck and cam contours must be conjugated silhouettes for the actual
mechanism parameters.
The examples that follow try to illustrate some of the machine borne
seaming irregularities They have been obtained by computer simulation
of a SOMME 444 seaming machine running on an ordinary ¼ Club
can.
Cam silhouette errors. We have seen that the cam silhouette must be
conjugate of that of the chuck. If the cam is not manufactured exactly
to the required shape we will have seam irregularities. The figure 24
shows the non-conformal orbit that results from a cam with an
orthotropic error of 0.01% -this roughly means a maximum cam shape
outrun error of 0.075mm-. The resulting irregularity in the seam is ±
0.2mm. We can see that the seam quality is very sensitive to cam
silhouette errors. The only solution to this kind of problem is to
correctly reshape the cam.
Mechanism dimensions and geometry. Although the basic working principle
of the cam-lever mechanism is very simple, the actual devices are
rather complex, with many pieces and joints that potentialy accumulate
manufacturing and assembly errors. Any dimensional error or
misalignment that has an influence in one of the mechanism basic
parameters is prone to produce a non-conformal orbit and seam
irregularities. There are nine really basic parameters –two of them are
easily compensable-. Some parameters are more sensitive than others
with respect the seam regularity. Just to give an example, the figure 25
shows the effect of 0.1mm eccentricity of the spindle with respect to
the mechanism nominal axis. This eccentricity may seem too large for a
precision device but, when three-dimensional misalignments are taken
into account, it is not difficult to reach effective values like this in the
reality. The only way to compensate this kind of errors is to reshape
the cam directly on the machine with a special grinding apparatus.
Deflections by static loads. The mechanism elements and joints are not
absolutely rigid. A small flexibility is enough to produce significant
non-conformances under variable forces of dynamic and static
character that take place in the mechanisms. The static character does
not mean that the force does not change, it means that it is driven by
position instead of velocity or acceleration. In the static category we
can find the seaming force Fs already discussed, or the one produced
by internal springs. For instance, some mechanisms make use of recall
springs to ensure positive contact between follower and cam. In our
example the springs deflect the mechanism producing a large orbit
outrun between 0.17mm minimum and 0.33mm maximum. This error
can be roughly compensated readjusting the pivot radius. However
residual non-similarity remains with a maximum outrun of 0.08mm –
see figure 26. This effect, which produces characteristic tighter seams
at two opposite corners, is very common and some times causes
difficult to handle seam defects.
Deflections by dynamic loads. The dynamic forces deflect the mechanism
much like the static ones. The important difference is that the dynamic
forces depend on the mechanism rate. Moreover, this dependence is of
quadratic character. If the machine rate is doubled, the dynamic forces
increase four times. These forces depend too on the can shape. For a
given rate the forces are lower for near round cans –as oval cans- and
larger for slender and tight cornered cans –like long rectangular-. The
dynamic forces put real limits to the maximum rate at which a non-
round can seaming machine can run. From the seam regularity
viewpoint, the effects of a large speed can be seen in the real case
shown in the figure 27. In this example the machine is running at 120
cans per minute. The spring forces are also considered in the example.
We see that the overall effect is loosening of the operation, but the
loosening is double at the corners than at the straight parts. This is a
typical signature, frequently observed in closed can.
Figure 27. This machine, running at 120 c.p.m., shows an
Roll working diameter. The figure 28 shows a problem that we have average outrun of 0.1mm at the straight parts while at the
corners the outrun is double. This is a typical result of the
advanced at the beginning of this section regarding the roll working mechanism deflections caused by the dynamic loads. The
diameter. It is frequently found during the tooling setting. In the effect of the springs is also included in this case. The orbit
project phase the cam silhouette is designed for a roll nominal outrun is magnified 50 times for clarity.

diameter –58.00mm in this case. However, due to the real setting

needs of the different operations, the effective working diameters of
the rolls differ from the nominal one –in this case 57.66 for the first
operation and 57.22 for the second one. The actual setting needs are
often determined in a trial and error process-. Consequently, some
basic parameters of the mechanism have to be readjusted and the new
reference point yields a non-conformal orbit. The resulting seam
irregularity is 0.06mm for the first operation (still acceptable), but for
the second operation it rises to 0.13mm, showing a kind of twisting
commonly mistaken for chuck misalignment. The correct approach to
fix the defect must be determined in a case by case fashion, but
typically it needs to modify the physical diameter of the rolls.

Figure 28. The problem of the effective roll working

diameter can only be fully solved modifying the physical
diameters of the rolls to restore the reference point to the
nominal diameter. Cam reshaping solution will not work if,
like in this case, the working diameters of the different
operations are not the same.