Fitment screening tool
Direct answer: Use this matrix to identify a candidate spout-bore review range from viscosity, the largest suspended particle, and filling route. The ranges are practitioner starting points, not universal engineering limits. Product rheology, temperature, pump, nozzle, cap system, consumer dispense rate, and cleaning process can change the answer. Final fitment selection requires actual product, pouch, cap, and filling-line trials.
Interactive matrix
Choose the viscosity band measured at the relevant use or filling temperature, enter the largest expected particle—not the average—and select the filling route.
Candidate review range
This range combines a practitioner viscosity band with a provisional particle-clearance screen. It is not a final specification or an industry standard.
Line note: Confirm the machine nozzle, spout ID, rail/neck geometry, pump, temperature, cap feed, and torque together.
Decision boundaries
Practitioner screening ranges
These ranges are published supplier experience, not a universal standard. They are presented transparently so the assumption can be tested rather than hidden.
| Product behavior | Indicative viscosity | Candidate bore to review | What can change it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thin, particle-free | 1–2,000 cP | 8.5–10 mm | Foam, target fill speed, pour rate, nozzle fit |
| Medium flow | 2,000–10,000 cP | 10–13 mm | Temperature, pump, stringing, repeated dispensing |
| High viscosity | 10,000–50,000 cP | 13–16 mm | Rheology, squeeze force, residue, sanitation |
| Very high viscosity / particles | Above 50,000 cP | 16–22 mm or larger review | Largest inclusion, bridging, open-top alternative, cap family |
Test requirements
Record viscosity method and temperature, maximum particles or fibers, foaming, stringing, settling, dose repeatability, fill pressure, and evacuation.
Confirm nozzle OD and insertion, spout ID, rail and neck geometry, pouch support, pump path, cleanability, cap feed, and applied torque.
Check fitment weld, cap leakage, side storage, drop and shipping stress, consumer pour or squeeze force, residue, and repeated reclosure.
A personal-care project began with blank samples rather than custom printing. The review covered an offset corner spout, spout diameter and cap style, bottom-gusset stability, headspace, matte hand feel, and repeated handling in a shower environment. The next decision gate was the customer manufacturer’s formula, filling, dispensing, and usability test—not an immediate production claim.
Sources and limitations
Stanley Package nozzle-size guide — supplier-published viscosity bands and a provisional 3:1 particle-clearance rule. We label both as practitioner guidance because they are not universal standards.
Xinchuang machinery guide — equipment-manufacturer guidance emphasizing real product samples, flowability, pump, nozzle, temperature, particle, pouch type, capping, and cleaning inputs.
Anacotte spout-size guide — broader decision framework without treating any diameter as universally safe.
Turn the screening result into a sample brief
Share the tool result with your product, equipment, processing, quantity, and market details. Our technical team will use it as a starting point for sample planning—not as a substitute for filled-pack validation.
Get direction on pouch type, film structure, closure, finish, and shelf-life risk before locking a specification.
Share your target run size so we can compare digital, custom, and bulk production trade-offs.
Include filling method, pack size, material preference, artwork status, and launch timing for a more precise reply.
