AGD Intelligence

De-stack and shingle thin deli meat slices into retail packs

In Oscar Mayer Deli Fresh / Deli Selects packaging, freshly cut luncheon-meat and ham/turkey slices (roughly 1.75 in diameter, ~0.12 in thick, cold and tacky) arrive in stacks or as loose slices off a slicer and must be separated, weight-grouped, and partially fanned/shingled so slices overlap evenly before insertion into a tray or tub. The slices are limp, sticky to each other and to surfaces, and easily torn, folded, or smeared; stacks are described in the trade and patent literature as extremely fragile and unable to survive many handling steps without losing integrity or appearance. The task sits downstream of slicing and upstream of vacuum/seal packaging, and is historically done manually because the slices' compliance and stickiness defeat simple vacuum/pinch grippers. Slicer output is also erratic (gaps between logs, off-weight stacks rejected), so the handler must adapt grip and timing per object. It is contact-rich precisely because success depends on peeling one floppy slice from a stack without tearing and laying it cleanly, which vision alone cannot guarantee. We identified this through our own research; we have not confirmed the specifics with the customer directly. This page is our researched read — a starting point for that conversation.

Readiness
build now
Demand
promising
Source
researched
Failure tol.
medium
Tactile value
high
i

What the task is

RESEARCHED · our reconstruction

In Oscar Mayer Deli Fresh / Deli Selects packaging, freshly cut luncheon-meat and ham/turkey slices (roughly 1.75 in diameter, ~0.12 in thick, cold and tacky) arrive in stacks or as loose slices off a slicer and must be separated, weight-grouped, and partially fanned/shingled so slices overlap evenly before insertion into a tray or tub. The slices are limp, sticky to each other and to surfaces, and easily torn, folded, or smeared; stacks are described in the trade and patent literature as extremely fragile and unable to survive many handling steps without losing integrity or appearance. The task sits downstream of slicing and upstream of vacuum/seal packaging, and is historically done manually because the slices' compliance and stickiness defeat simple vacuum/pinch grippers. Slicer output is also erratic (gaps between logs, off-weight stacks rejected), so the handler must adapt grip and timing per object. It is contact-rich precisely because success depends on peeling one floppy slice from a stack without tearing and laying it cleanly, which vision alone cannot guarantee.

To confirm with the customer

Is this the actual task and sequence? What are the real tolerances, cycle rate, and reject criteria, and which steps are today's manual bottleneck? Answering these is what turns this from a researched signal into a validated use case.