W13-A-008 — Additive Masterbatch vs Process Optimisation
1. What decision is the buyer trying to make?
Whether a recurring defect or performance gap should be solved by adding an additive masterbatch (slip, anti-block, anti-static, UV, processing aid, etc.) or by optimising the process (temperature profile, screw design, cooling, die geometry, drying).
2. Which variables actually matter?
- Root cause of the defect (material vs process vs equipment)
- Cost per year of the defect (scrap + downtime + returns)
- Whether the additive introduces regulatory or downstream constraints
- Line stability and operator skill
- Whether the process change is capital or configuration
3. Which variables are commonly misunderstood?
- Additives are often specified to mask a process problem — the defect returns when volume or line speed changes.
- "Just add a masterbatch" can create secondary issues (blooming, adhesion loss, printability loss).
- Process optimisation is cheaper long-term but slower to deploy.
4. What additional information is required before deciding?
- Full defect signature (frequency, batch link, line link)
- Current process window
- Regulatory scope of the finished part
- Cost of the defect per month
- Available engineering time
5. What should be included in the RFQ?
- Defect description and frequency
- Polymer + process + line speed
- Regulatory scope
- Constraints on additives (food contact, printability, weldability)
- Volume and packaging
So what should the buyer investigate next?
Whether the root cause is truly material — and whether adding an additive will still be needed once the process window is corrected.
Bridges
- W11 — Problem-First Discovery (functional additives)
- W10 — Application × Masterbatch