Are simpler testing methods necessarily less costly and time consuming to perform?
Often we think of cost based solely on the price of the test instrument. Test instruments vary greatly depending on the type of test being performed and the test sensitivity required. However, other factors influence cost, including time required to perform the test for one, and the loss of packages from destructive testing, for another. An ideal method would be rapid, non-destructive and inexpensive. For example, a test cycle on PTI’s vacuum decay leak testers literally takes a few seconds, providing a pass/fail result. Checking for seal integrity using SEAL-SCAN™, our airborne ultrasonic inspection technology is also a fast, highly efficient non-destructive method to verify seal quality and pinpoint type, size and location of seal defects. Generally, which are more cost-effective – destructive or non-destructive forms of package testing? The point is – why destroy perfectly good product or packages to find defects? Does it make sense to use visual test methods that are entirely incon
