Bonding Foam into Panels: Custom Spray System Doubles Throughput & Cuts Waste 15%
When Bulky Adhesive Equipment Holds Back Entire Lines
The wrong adhesive process installed years ago can have long-lasting impacts. Hours of maintenance downtime, thousands of pounds of material waste, defective bonds, and even full-facility evacuations can be on the table when systems fail. When one North American overhead door manufacturer started seeing their system fail, our team stepped in to help.
At the production line, operators were bonding rigid foam pieces into roll-formed metal panels thousands of times per day. But their equipment and adhesive had become a major bottleneck. Workers faced unexpected maintenance downtime and frequent line stoppages. Part of their system could jam with foam, cause smoke, and prompt evacuations.
Overall, the process wasted around 10-15% of the material, rejects became too frequent, and downtime was costing the entire line. To help, our dispensing and automation experts worked with the customer’s process engineering team, spoke to operators, and helped develop a more practical spray system with a better adhesive and smarter automations.
The Glue Doctors® Delivered
- 30% smaller work cell
- 15% reduction in waste
- x2 throughput speed
- Custom process controls
The Challenge: An Outdated, Smoke-Prone Urethane Sprayer
Before the overhaul, operators used a bulky, waste-prone water co-spray system to apply liquid urethane adhesive onto each panel. Workers then pressed the rigid panels and foam together into a single assembly, ran them through an oven to dry the adhesive, nip rolled the edges, and capped the assemblies at each end.
The process showed its age with issues across efficiency, quality, and safety.
Efficiency
The legacy water co-spray and oven-dry process created frequent bottlenecks rippling across the line. Workers had to accommodate different panel designs, but it required constant equipment reconfigurations. Daily maintenance for the aging equipment also slowed throughput.
Quality
The spray process made it difficult to maintain consistent coat weights across every panel, and overspray frequently wasted adhesive. The equipment made it difficult to spray evenly across the panel without going beyond the edges, creating quality concerns and wasting material.
Safety
The oven presented the most significant risk to operations. When foam assemblies jammed in the oven stage, smoke could fill the facility and trigger evacuations, disrupting production.
Our team started by evaluating alternative adhesive formulas, fostering collaboration with suppliers, and bringing in dispensing and automation experts to achieve a smarter assembly process.
The Solution: Upgrading to a Hot Melt Spray System
To move past the limitations of the urethane spraying process, we replaced the oven-curing system with a PUR hot melt adhesive and semi-automated spray system. The new design addressed several bottlenecks at once by combining hot melt spray heads with conveyor systems and adhesive bulk drum unloaders.
Eliminating the Oven
Rather than applying liquid adhesives and sending them through an oven to dry, the new process used PUR hot melt adhesives applied directly to panels. Removing the oven eliminated the line’s largest failure point. To ensure the bonds last, the new PUR chemistry offered thermoset properties.
Improving Adaptability
One of the most impactful updates was a custom control system that automatically adjusts spray width based on panel size. Sensors detect incoming dimensions while integrated controls modify the width in real time, allowing equipment to accommodate multiple style variants with consistent coverage and reduced overspray.
Simplifying Material Handling
The update also changed how adhesives are stored and how they enter the process. A drum-fed supply system replaced bulky liquid totes, reducing floor space requirements. Material replenishment was made easy with low-level monitoring and a simple barrel switch-over process.
Core Considerations for Installing a Hot Melt System
What is the safest way for workers to interact with a hot melt adhesive system?
In this facility, the team realized sightlines were impaired by already problematic, potentially smoke-causing equipment. The oven curing process was where the most hazards arose. The replacement hot melt process eliminated the need for ovens, eliminating the smoke risk. The semi-automated sprayers drum switchover system also helped isolate operators from the hot melt materials.
What will it take to keep a hot melt spray system properly maintained?
Routine maintenance should be considered at the outset of any dispensing equipment decision. Defining and automating a cleaning and purging routine can help ease that maintenance schedule.
Here, we selected the hot melt spray system as a replacement since it was easier to operate and simpler to keep in check. Getting rid of the oven and water co-spray drastically reduced the moving parts required to get the right amount of glue on the panels.
How much space should adhesive work cells take up on the factory floor?
Growing production lines or changing priorities are often made easier when floorspace has room to breathe. Here, the system had become a physical burden due to its material format and equipment chosen years ago.
For this customer, moving from liquid totes to a drum loaded setup helped reduce the work cell size.
Can adhesive processes be more efficient with sensors and automation?
Sensors and automation often achieve the best results with some customization for your priorities. The spray system we implemented had a modular foundation for programming process controls.
Our dispensing and automation experts used the system to integrate automations allowing operators to accurately change spray width on the fly. This integration made it easier to accommodate different panel sizes.
The Outcome: A Safer, Faster, Leaner Line
Upgrading to a PUR hot melt system doubled throughput, dropped waste significantly, and simplified maintenance and cleaning demands. Safety improved as well. By removing the oven and heat curing process, the smoke risks were gone.
Automations allowed for better coat weight consistency, edge-to-edge coverage, and custom process controls, giving the manufacturer an upgrade in finished product quality.
| Previous System | Upgraded System | |
| Curing | Oven curing required, risked smoke | No oven or co-spray required |
| Maintenance | Daily shutdowns | Simpler maintenance and cleaning |
| Footprint | Large liquid totes and heating enclosures | ~30% smaller work cell |
| Safety | Heating element, smoke risk | Eliminated smoke hazards |
| Operators | 8 operators required | 7 operators required |
| Width Adjustments | Multiple dedicated stations, limited versatility | Sensor-enabled variable width spraying, adjustable on the fly |
| Application Method | Trough spray system, ~60 fpm speed | Drum-loaded, hot-melt sprayer, ~120 fpm speed |
Talk to a Dispensing & Automation Expert
Whether troubleshooting bottlenecks or designing an adhesive system from scratch, our team of experts can help you find the right materials, equipment, and process controls.