Kreator Volume 12.
Number 2, 2025 pp.
P-ISSN: 2354-9505 E-ISSN : 2548-9542
Open Access: https://doi.
org/10.
46961/kreator.
Analysis of the Characteristics and Shelf Life of Multimaterial and Monomaterial Snack Packaging Addinda Revi Liana1* 1 Packaging Engineering Technology.
Polytechnic of Creative Media.
Indonesia
ARTICLE INFO
Article history:
Received June 26, 2025 Revised December 12, 2025 Accepted December 31, 2025 Available online Dec 31, 2025 Kata Kunci:
kemasan fleksibel, monomaterial, multimaterial, keberlanjutan Keywords:
flexible packaging, monomaterial, multimaterial, sustainability This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.
ABSTRAK
Peningkatan limbah kemasan fleksibel di Indonesia mendorong pencarian solusi kemasan yang ramah lingkungan.
Penelitian ini membandingkan karakteristik fisik, mekanis, dan stabilitas kemasan snack berbasis monomaterial dan multimaterial berukuran 68 gram.
Penelitian dilakukan di PT.
X menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif Dua OPP/ink/PE/VMBOPP/Resin .
OPP/ink/PE/VMPET/CPP .
Parameter yang diuji meliputi WVTR.
OCCTR, tensile strength, sealing strength, bonding strength, dan COF.
Pengujian dilakukan selama 7 minggu pada suhu oven 80AC, disetarakan dengan penyimpanan 3 tahun pada suhu Hasil menunjukkan kemasan monomaterial memiliki performa yang kompetitif, terutama pada nilai WVTR dan tensile strength, walaupun nilai OCCTR masih lebih tinggi.
Kemampuan daur ulangnya menunjukkan potensi besar dalam mendukung kebijakan pengurangan sampah plastik dan pengembangan kemasan ABSTRACT The increasing volume of flexible packaging waste in Indonesia drives the need for environmentally friendly packaging solutions.
This study compares the physical, mechanical, and stability characteristics of monomaterial and multimaterial snack packaging, each with a net weight of 68 Conducted at PT.
X, the research uses a quantitative comparative approach.
Two packaging OPP/ink/PE/VMBOPP/Resin .
OPP/ink/PE/VMPET/CPP .
Parameters tested include WVTR.
OCCTR, tensile strength, sealing strength, bonding strength, and COF.
Samples were conditioned in an oven at 80AC for 7 weeks to simulate three years of room temperature storage.
Results show that monomaterial packaging performs competitively, particularly in WVTR and tensile strength, although its OCCTR is Its recyclability highlights significant potential in supporting plastic waste reduction policies and contributes to the development of sustainable packaging in the snack food industry.
INTRODUCTION
Copyright A 2025 by Author.
Published by Politeknik Negeri Media Kreatif Flexible packaging is extensively used in the food industry due to its lightweight nature, convenience, and cost efficiency.
However, the growing reliance on flexible packaging has contributed to a substantial increase in plastic waste, particularly in Indonesia.
According to Waste4Change .
, of the 244.
72 tons of flexible plastic waste generated daily, only 2.
99% is successfully recycled.
This low recycling rate highlights the urgent need for alternative packaging solutions and a deeper evaluation of packaging materials in terms of their performance, storage stability, and environmental impact As part of efforts to transition toward a circular economy and in alignment with national regulations, such as Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia No.
75/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.
1/10/2019, which outlines the roadmap for waste reduction by producers for the period 2020Ae2029, a target has been set to achieve a 30% reduction in producer-generated waste compared to the projected waste generation in 2029 (Ministry of Environment and Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia, 2.
In addition, the European Plastics Strategy aims that by 2030, all plastic packaging placed on the market should be recyclable or reusable (Kaiser et al.
, 2.
In response to these initiatives and to reduce waste generation.
PT X *Corresponding author E-mail addresses: addindarevili172@gmail.
Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
has recently developed monomaterial-based snack packaging.
Although monomaterial packaging has the potential to be recycled, it must demonstrate performance comparable to that of multimaterial packaging in terms of stability, physical properties, and mechanical properties.
According to a Technical Report issued by CEFLEX .
(Circular Economy for Flexible Packagin.
, flexible packaging that is considered readily recyclable is primarily based on polyolefin materials, such as mono-PE, mono-PP, and PE/PP blends.
The recycling tolerance limit for monoPP compositions is defined as having a polypropylene (PP) or polyolefin (PO) blend with a polypropylene content exceeding 90% by weight.
A study by Carullo et al.
reported that monomaterial polyolefin packaging exhibits comparable performance to multimaterial packaging in terms of water vapor barrier properties, sealing strength, and bonding strength.
Consequently, monomaterial packaging offers added value due to its improved recyclability.
Furthermore.
Pettersen et al.
concluded that recyclable monomaterial packaging can be used for packaging chicken fillets without compromising shelf life.
These findings represent a significant advancement in the packaging industry and highlight the potential of monomaterial packaging to reduce food packaging waste.
The problem addressed in this study is the lack of data on the long-term stability of monomaterial-based snack packaging.
Therefore, this study aims to compare the characteristics of monomaterial and multimaterial snack packaging in terms of: barrier stability against water vapor and oxygen .
ssessed via WVTR and OCCTR test.
, interlayer physical strength .
ssessed via bonding and sealing strength test.
, mechanical strength of the film layers .
ssessed via tensile strength and coefficient of friction test.
, and the potential recyclability, evaluated through yield analysis of the packaging structure.
The tests were conducted over a period of seven weeks at an oven temperature of 80AC to simulate accelerated storage, equivalent to approximately three years at room temperature.
The data were analyzed using statistical methods, including standard deviation and linear regression, to evaluate changes in packaging properties over time.
These steps are expected to determine whether monomaterial packaging can serve as a sustainable and practical alternative for industrial-scale METHOD This study employed a quantitative approach with a comparative method to analyze the differences in characteristics between monomaterial and multimaterial snack packaging.
The samples used were 68-gram packages, each tested for six parameters: sealing strength, bonding strength, water vapor transmission rate (WVTR), oxygen transmission rate (OCCTR), tensile strength, and coefficient of friction (COF).
The study was conducted from February to June 2025.
Storage simulation was performed by accelerating the storage time at an oven temperature of 80AC for seven weeks, representing approximately three years of room-temperature storage.
Testing instruments and methods followed ASTM standards, namely ASTM F88 for sealing and bonding strength.
ASTM F1249 for water vapor transmission rate (WVTR).
ASTM D398 for oxygen transmission rate (OCCTR).
ASTM D882 for tensile strength, and ASTM D189 for coefficient of friction (COF).
The test data were analyzed statistically using:
Mean dan standard deviation OcycU xE = ycn xE = The sample mean ycUycn = the value in the data distribution n = Total number of observations ASD = AOo Oc.
OexE)2 ycuOe1 ASD = sample standard deviastion X = the value in the data distribution ycuI = The sample mean n = Total number of observations Linear regression was used to evaluate the trend of changes in characteristics over time y = ax b Addinda Revi Liana / Analysis of the Characteristics and Shelf Life of Multimaterial and Monomaterial Snack Packaging Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
y = value of the dependent variable when the independent variable is zero
x = independent variable b = y-intercept of the regression line
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
WVTR .
ater vapor transmission rat.
Table 1.
Mean and standard deviation of WVTR for multimaterial and monomaterial WVTR .
r/yco2 /yccycay.
Number Shelf life Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49 Standard Deviation (SD) Multimaterial (OPP/ink/PE/VMPET/CPP) 0,357891 0,256871 0,324657 0,245691 0,314567 0,268549 0,254116 0,288906 A0,043 Monomaterial (OPP/ink/PE/VMBOPP/Resin PP) 0,289512 0,215681 0,227426 0,235684 0,224578 0,225671 0,214817 0,236425 A0,026 The average water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) of multimaterial snack packaging was 288906 A 0.
043 g/mA/day with a VMPET thickness of <12 AAm, while the monomaterial packaging exhibited a WVTR of 0.
236425 A 0.
026 g/mA/day with a VMBOPP thickness of <20 AAm.
A study by Nurani et al.
reported a WVTR of 0.
1634 g/mA/day for flexible packaging with the specification OPP20/VMPET12/CPP35 and a WVTR of 0.
5 g/mA/day for a VMBOPP 20 AAm barrier.
These results indicate that the thickness of the barrier layer, whether VMPET or VMBOPP, significantly influences WVTR values.
in general, an increase in barrier layer thickness improves the WVTR performance.
WVTR is a critical parameter for snack packaging, as it directly affects the ability of the packaging to maintain product crispness during storage.
Lower WVTR values correspond to better moisture barrier performance, thereby helping to preserve the texture and quality of the snack product over time.
OCCTR .
xygen transmission rat.
Tabel 2.
Mean and standard devisation OCCTR of multimaterial and monomaterial Number Shelf life Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49 Mean Standard deviation (SD) ycC2 ycNycI .
c/yco2 /yccycay.
Multimaterial Monomaterial (OPP/ink/PE/VMPET/CPP) (OPP/ink/PE/VMBOPP/Resin PP) 2,187326 31,15844 2,175751 31,04465 2,168259 30,98967 2,126258 30,95468 2,104789 30,88485 2,108669 30,88989 2,104998 30,91544 2,139436 30,97680 A0,036400 A0,09834 The average Oxygen Transmission Rate (OTR) of multimaterial snack packaging was 139436 A 0.
0364 cc/mA/day with VMPET thickness < 12 AAm, whereas for monomaterial packaging it was 30.
97680 A 0.
09834 cc/mA/day with VMBOPP thickness > 12 AAm.
According to Dutta & Dutta .
, the OTR of 12 AAm VMPET flexible packaging is 0.
24598 cc/mA/day.
In the study by Labthink .
, the OTR of 12 AAm VMBOPP film was reported as 53.
4515 cc/mA/day.
These results indicate Kreator P-ISSN: 2354-9505 E-ISSN : 2548-9542 Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
that the barrier thickness significantly affects OTR values: the thicker the barrier layer, the lower the OTR, which implies better oxygen barrier performance.
Snack products are susceptible to becoming limp and rancid.
Therefore, packaging with effective barrier properties is necessary to protect snacks from rancidity.
Consequently, the OTR value can serve as a critical indicator of a packaging material's ability to preserve snack product quality.
Bonding Strength Bonding Strength Multimaterial bonding strength gr/15mm y = 23.
y = 12.
Day 7
Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49
Shelf life
OPP-VMPET
VMPET-CPP
Figure 1.
Linier regression graph of Bonding Strength Multimaterial bonding strength gr/15mm Bonding Strength Monomaterial Day 7 Day 14 y = 8.
y = 13,036x 88,571 Day 21
Day 28
Day 35
Day 42
Day 49
shelf life
OPP-VMBOPP
VMBOPP-Resin PP Figure 2.
Linier regression graph of Bonding Strength Monomaterial Bonding strength refers to the strength of the adhesion between layers.
The linear regression equation for the bonding strength of multimaterial snack packaging layers is 23.
57 for the VMPET-CPP layer and 12.
86 for the OPP-VMPET layer.
Meanwhile, for monomaterial snack packaging, the linear regression equation is 8.
5714x 115 for the VMBOPPResin PP layer and 13.
571 for the OPP-VMBOPP layer.
According to Repeta et al.
, the bonding strengths of PET-PP.
VMBOPP-PP, and OPP-PP layers are 211.
08 g/15 mm, 9 g/15 mm, and 216.
1 g/15 mm, respectively.
The data obtained in this study indicate that the bonding strength of both monomaterial and multimaterial snack packaging decreases over storage Addinda Revi Liana / Analysis of the Characteristics and Shelf Life of Multimaterial and Monomaterial Snack Packaging Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
Sealing Strength Sealing Strength Multimaterial sealing strength gr/15mm y = -111.
y = -185.
130 AC
150 AC
y = -162.
140 AC
160 AC
170 AC
y = -174.
Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49 y = -147,06x 855,11 shelf life Figure 3.
Linier regression graph of Sealing Strength Multimaterial Sealing Strength Monomaterial sealing strength gr/15mm 75y = -91.
y = -161.
y = -205.
Day 14
Day 21
150 AC
Day 28
170 AC
y = -353.
Day 35 Day 42 y = -224,77x 1227,3 shelf life Figure 4.
Linier regression graph of Sealing Strength Multimaterial Kreator P-ISSN: 2354-9505 E-ISSN : 2548-9542
140 AC
160 AC
Day 7
130 AC
Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
The linear regression equations for multimaterial snack packaging at different temperatures are as follows: -147.
11 at 130AC, -174.
1 at 140AC, -162.
1 at 150AC, 22x 2474.
4 at 160AC, and -111.
2 at 170AC.
For monomaterial snack packaging, the linear regression equations are -184.
1 at 130AC, -302.
63x 2017 at 140AC, -223.
2481 at 150AC, -194.
7 at 160AC, and -124.
8 at 170AC.
These results indicate that, for all temperature variations, sealing strength decreases over storage time.
According to Yamada et al.
, the sealing strength of OPP-CPP layers was approximately 1700 g/15 mm at 130AC, 1500 g/15 mm at 140AC, 1600 g/15 mm at 150AC, 1650 g/15 mm at 160AC, and 1650 g/15 mm at 170AC.
The temperature set by PT.
X was 150AC.
Although the sealing strength of both multimaterial and monomaterial packaging decreases over storage time, the average sealing strength at 150AC is comparable to previous studies: 1537.
5 g/15 mm for multimaterial packaging and 1585.
8 g/15 mm for monomaterial packaging.
Tensile Strength Tensile Strength Multimaterial Tensie strengt Mpa y = -25,857x 1120,6 y = -18.
Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49 shelf life Figure 5.
Linier regression graph of Tensile Strength Multimaterial Tensile Strength Monomaterial y = -2.
Tensile strength Mpa y = 13.
Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 shelf life Figure 6.
Linier regression graph of Tensile Strength Monomaterial Addinda Revi Liana / Analysis of the Characteristics and Shelf Life of Multimaterial and Monomaterial Snack Packaging Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
Tensile strength is also influenced by the Machine Direction (MD) and Transverse Direction (TD) (Turriziani et al.
, 2.
Based on the data obtained, the linear regression equations for tensile strength of multimaterial snack packaging are -25.
6 for TD and -18.
04 for MD, with a total thickness of 68Ae70 AAm.
For monomaterial snack packaging, the linear regression equations are 1.
61 for TD and -2.
79 for MD, with a total thickness of 76Ae 78 AAm.
These results indicate that, over storage time, the TD and MD tensile strength of multimaterial snack packaging decreases, whereas the TD tensile strength of monomaterial packaging increases and the MD tensile strength decreases.
COF (Coefficient Of Frictio.
Tabel 3.
Mean and standard deviation of COF multimaterial Number Shelf life Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49 Mean Standard deviation(ASD) In-in static kinetic 0,215 0,190 0,327 0,204 0,364 0,243 0,355 0,245 0,370 0,259 0,318 0,223 0,313 0,219 0,323 0,226 0,053 0,024 COF(Coefficient Of Frictio.
Multimaterial In-out Out-out In-met
static kinetic static kinetic static kinetic 0,345 0,336 0,278 0,333 0,174 0,182 0,382 0,323 0,323 0,434 0,164 0,175 0,360 0,310 0,359 0,377 0,245 0,227 0,385 0,343 0,392 0,409 0,227 0,209 0,391 0,317 0,339 0,328 0,207 0,220 0,365 0,376 0,332 0,350 0,202 0,221 0,337 0,373 0,339 0,351 0,201 0,219 0,366 0,340 0,337 0,347 0,203 0,207 0,021 0,026 0,036 0,039 0,028 0,021 Out-met
0,150
0,180
0,155
0,168
0,211
0,225
0,176
0,193
0,160
0,197
0,202
0,212
0,193
0,204
0,178
0,197
0,024
0,019
Tabel 4.
Mean average and standard deviation of COF monomaterial Number Shelf life Day 7 Day 14 Day 21 Day 28 Day 35 Day 42 Day 49 Standard deviation (ASD) In-in static kinetic 0,295 0,224 0,283 0,222 0,286 0,233 0,288 0,211 0,291 0,230 0,302 0,220 0,300 0,266 0,292 0,229 0,007 0,018 COF (Coefficient Of Frictio.
Monomaterial In-out Out-out In-met static kinetic static kinetic static kinetic 0,492 0,425 0,462 0,358 0,273 0,251 0,566 0,457 0,409 0,346 0,240 0,214 0,560 0,532 0,300 0,334 0,248 0,220 0,563 0,509 0,360 0,319 0,288 0,257 0,494 0,438 0,402 0,348 0,246 0,225 0,556 0,444 0,372 0,315 0,279 0,269 0,527 0,464 0,389 0,335 0,260 0,240 0,537 0,467 0,370 0,336 0,262 0,239 0,033 0,039 0,056 0,016 0,018 0,021 Out-met static kinetic 0,281 0,225 0,182 0,200 0,187 0,212 0,227 0,198 0,242 0,219 0,207 0,227 0,222 0,258 0,221 0,220 0,034 0,020 In this study, several surface tests were conducted to determine the coefficient of friction (COF) for multimaterial snack packaging.
The test configurations were as follows: IN-IN represents the CPP surface against CPP.
IN-OUT represents CPP against OPP.
OUT-OUT represents OPP against OPP.
IN-MET represents CPP against the metal on the machine, and OUT-MET represents OPP against the machine metal.
The COF values over storage time were as follows: IN-IN, static 323 A 0.
053 and kinetic 0.
226 A 0.
IN-OUT, static 0.
366 A 0.
021 and kinetic 0.
340 A 0.
OUT-OUT, static 0.
337 A 0.
036 and kinetic 0.
347 A 0.
IN-MET, static 0.
203 A 0.
028 and kinetic 207 A 0.
OUT-MET, static 0.
178 A 0.
024 and kinetic 0.
197 A 0.
For monomaterial snack packaging, the COF test configurations were: IN-IN represents resin PP against resin PP.
IN-OUT represents resin PP against OPP.
OUT-OUT represents OPP against OPP.
IN-MET represents resin PP against the machine metal, and OUT-MET represents OPP against the machine metal.
The COF values over storage time were: IN-IN, static 0.
292 A 0.
007 and 229 A 0.
IN-OUT, static 0.
537 A 0.
033 and kinetic 0.
467 A 0.
OUT-OUT, static 0.
A 0.
056 and kinetic 0.
336 A 0.
IN-MET, static 0.
262 A 0.
018 and kinetic 0.
239 A 0.
OUTMET, static 0.
221 A 0.
034 and kinetic 0.
220 A 0.
According to Barry A.
in The Science and Technology of Flexible Packaging, as cited by Intan et al.
, slip classification is defined as follows: low slip .
410Ae0.
, medium slip .
210Ae0.
, and high slip .
100Ae0.
Based on these criteria, the COF data for multimaterial snack packaging can be categorized as medium slip for both static and kinetic values of IN-IN.
INKreator P-ISSN: 2354-9505 E-ISSN : 2548-9542 Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
OUT, and OUT-OUT, while IN-MET and OUT-MET are categorized as high slip.
For monomaterial snack packaging.
COF values for IN-IN.
OUT-OUT.
IN-MET, and OUT-MET fall into the medium slip category, whereas IN-OUT exhibits low slip for both static and kinetic measurements.
Yield of overall packaging structure Table 5.
PO (Poliolefi.
content on the yield of layer multimaterial Layer structure of multimaterial OPP PE .
VMPET
CPP
TOTAL
PE (%)
PP (%)
PO (PE PP) (%)
r/100 cm2 ) 16,38 13,77 22,75 Layer structure of monomaterial OPP PE .
VMBOPP
TOTAL
PE (%)
PP (%)
PO (%) (PE PP)
r/100 ycayco2 ) 22,55 According to a technical report issued by Ceflex (Circular Economy for Flexible Packagin.
, flexible packaging that is easy to recycle is primarily based on polyolefins, such as mono-PE, monoPP, and PE/PP blends.
The recycling tolerance limit for Mono-PP is defined such that, if the combined PP or polyolefin (PO) mixture accounts for more than 90% by weight, it qualifies for Based on the calculated weight composition of each snack packaging type, the polyolefin content was found to be 76% for multimaterial packaging and 94% for monomaterial packaging.
This indicates that replacing multimaterial snack packaging with monomaterial packaging increases the polyolefin content from 76% to 94%.
Therefore, it can be concluded that monomaterial snack packaging is easier to recycle.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrates that the characteristics of monomaterial and multimaterial snack packaging were simulated at an oven temperature of 80AC for approximately seven weeks to accelerate the equivalent of A3 years of storage.
The water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) tests showed that monomaterial packaging has a lower water vapor transmission compared to multimaterial packaging, indicating a superior moisture barrier.
Meanwhile, the oxygen transmission rate (OCCTR) was higher for multimaterial packaging.
Regarding bonding strength and sealing strength, monomaterial packaging exhibited stable values comparable to multimaterial packaging, demonstrating that the physical protection function is For mechanical properties such as tensile strength and coefficient of friction (COF), test results indicate that both types of packaging have relatively similar and consistent performance in terms of strength and slip.
Polyolefin-based monomaterial structures have significant potential as a replacement for multimaterial packaging, which is more difficult to recycle, without compromising technical Therefore, the use of monomaterial packaging can serve as a sustainable solution that supports industry goals in reducing plastic waste and promoting a circular economy.
Addinda Revi Liana / Analysis of the Characteristics and Shelf Life of Multimaterial and Monomaterial Snack Packaging Kreator Vol.
No.
2 Tahun 2025, pp.
ACKNOWLEDGE
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to PT X for providing the opportunity, access to facilities, and guidance throughout the research process.
Appreciation is also extended to the academic supervisors and all parties who have contributed valuable feedback and moral support during the preparation of the proposal and the execution of this study.
REFERENSI