- +1 954 484 9700 Talk to an expert
- 4180 NW 10 Avenue Ft. Lauderdale, FL-US
Most plants don’t know what they’re spending on overspray, because it never appears as a line item.
Material that misses the product doesn’t show up in scrap reporting. It shows up as a consumption figure that seems normal because it’s always been that figure — in the air, on the conveyor, on the floor, in the wash water, and in the disposal cost of whatever collects it.
For most manual and flood application processes, the majority of the fluid never stays on the product. Metering it is usually the fastest available return on a capital request, and it’s frequently what pays for the entire system.
Overspray. Atomized material that never reaches the target. The finer the atomization, the more of it drifts — which is the tradeoff you accept for finish quality with air atomizing →, and the reason airless → or extrusion → is often the better economic answer.
Overapplication. Applying more than the specification requires because coverage can’t be trusted. This is rational behavior with an unmetered process and it’s frequently the single largest loss.
Flood and immersion losses. Dipping, bath, and roll methods transfer whatever the substrate takes. Add-on isn’t controlled, only observed.
Scrap from application defects. Parts rejected for coverage problems carry the full cost of everything done to them before the defect was found.
Cleanup and disposal. Material on equipment and floors has to be removed, and what’s collected has to be disposed of — often at a cost that scales with how much you wasted.
Rework. Squeeze-out, contamination of adjacent surfaces, and touch-up all consume labor that the application step created.
Metered systems dispense a known volume, so the amount applied can equal the amount required.
Moving from air atomizing to airless, or from spray to extrusion, can substantially cut what’s lost to the air. See the method comparison on any of the solutions method pages.
Fixed-timer application over-applies during slowdowns and under-applies during ramps. Encoder-following holds add-on constant.
Converting immersion or roll transfer to metered application typically produces the largest single saving available, because those methods have no add-on control at all.
Release agents — pan release, mold release, and die release applied manually or by flood. Usually a large, fast saving.
Lubricants — flooding a surface to lubricate a contact point. Metered striping applies a fraction of the material.
Food oils and coatings — where mist is a cost, a slip hazard, and a sanitation burden simultaneously.
Adhesives — pattern optimization typically reduces add-on without reducing bond performance.
Surfactants and web treatments — converting immersion or padding to metered application.
Wax — replacing flood or dip application with metered spray or extrusion.
Our systems exist to place a known volume in a known place — waste reduction isn’t a feature added to them, it’s what they do.
Sometimes that’s a less expensive system than the one you asked about.
Spraymation systems are still in service 40 years after installation, so the annual saving keeps accruing long after payback. Total cost of ownership is where the argument gets decisive.
Documented quality processes.
Worn nozzles and drifting systems quietly give material savings back. Spare parts, consumables, and factory rebuilds keep the system performing as specified.
A Fortune 100 tissue manufacturer needed consistent adhesive across three application points running simultaneously at over 2,000 ft/min. Spraymation’s unified multi-station system cut adhesive consumption 40%, delivered a 99.7% tail-seal first-pass rate, and paid back in under a year.
A medical device manufacturer couldn’t validate its siliconization process for GMP, with coating-weight variability above 25% and recurring glide-force failures. Spraymation’s Electromatic™ 29 system cut variability to below 8% CV, reduced silicone use 35%, and reached 0.25 mg dispensing precision.
A major OSB manufacturer’s drip bars over-applied wax and fouled the blender drum, and catalog nozzles couldn’t handle the high-viscosity emulsion. Spraymation’s custom air-atomizing spray headers cut wax consumption 30%, shortened the press cycle 15%, and saved over $150,000 a year.
It depends almost entirely on your current method. The largest gains come from replacing manual, flood, and immersion application, where most of the fluid was never going to stay on the product.
Start by measuring current consumption per unit of production — most plants haven’t, and the number is often surprising on its own. From there, an estimated add-on rate for a metered system gives you the annual saving. We’ll help you build that estimate.
Generally the opposite. Overapplication is a symptom of poor coverage control, and the same control that reduces consumption usually improves consistency.
Yes — consumption per unit before and after is the cleanest measure, which is why establishing the baseline before conversion matters.
Get Started
Most plants don’t. Tell us what you’re applying and how, and we’ll help you work out what a metered system would save.
Or call us directly +1 954 484 9700