Why 80% of agri-food production projects fail at the industrialisation stage
According to data documented on the Maé Innovation blog, 80 per cent of failures in agri-food production stem from a poorly scaled process: the recipe developed in the lab (1–5 kg) cannot be transferred as it stands to an industrial scale (more than one tonne per month). Indeed, the parameters that guarantee product quality in small quantities change in nature as production rates, equipment and volumes increase.
A documented failure rate, not an estimate
Furthermore, according to an analysis of food innovation dynamics, around 70 per cent of new food products fail within their first two years, mainly due to insufficient preparation and a flawed development process. In practical terms, this failure does not always stem from the recipe itself. It stems from the production line, and in particular from decisions made too hastily regarding equipment, moulds and production rates. Our guide on production management in the food industry offers further insight. Furthermore, the complete methodology for scaling up is detailed in our guide on how to industrialise a food product.
📌 What the analysis of industrial waste reveals: Analysis of thousands of production lines reveals that mechanical causes account for 35 per cent of waste, including premature mould wear and poor demoulding in the bakery and cheese-making sectors. Poor-quality moulds alone account for 15–25 per cent of total rejects on a production line.
Mistake 1: changing the mould between the prototype and mass production
This is the most common and most costly mistake. Yet it remains a frequent occurrence. Indeed, R&D teams often develop their formula using laboratory or handmade moulds, then order different moulds for mass production, assuming the result will be identical. However, this is almost never the case.
In practical terms, a change of mould between the prototype and mass production alters several parameters simultaneously: the thickness of the mould walls affects heat conduction and therefore the baking curve; the mould material affects adhesion and the quality of demoulding; and nominal dimensions vary between suppliers, even for standard sizes. Consequently, a cake that is perfectly baked and demoulded in the laboratory may come out burnt around the edges, stuck or misshapen on the production line, simply because the mould is different.
Best practice is simple: use the final production mould right from the prototype stage. This means identifying your industrial mould supplier at an early stage. The first pre-production run must already use the actual mould. In this way, all process parameters (cooking time, temperature, weight per unit) are calibrated to the actual mould, not to a laboratory substitute. The choice of the right professional mould supplier is therefore a decision that must be planned for right from the R&D stage, not when production is about to start.
Mistake 2: underestimating material losses during demoulding in food production
In industrial production, demoulding is a hidden source of loss. At high production rates, every item that sticks, is torn off or becomes deformed during demoulding represents a loss of dry matter. Thus, a 3 per cent loss rate during demoulding on a line producing 10,000 items per day equates to 300 items lost each day, amounting to tens of thousands of euros in annual losses depending on the product’s value.
Furthermore, the routine greasing of moulds, used to compensate for poor non-stick properties, also generates significant hidden costs: the cost of the fat, operator time, the risk of contamination, and the impact on the nutritional profile of the finished product. Thus, choosing a naturally non-stick mould such as Silmaé platinum silicone or Fibermaé silicone-coated fibreglass eliminates this cost item entirely.
Maé Innovation’s Silmaé moulds (food-grade platinum silicone, -40 °C to +280 °C) and Fibermaé moulds (siliconised fibreglass, up to +300 °C) guarantee perfect demoulding without greasing, even during intensive production. Manufactured in France, EU and US food-grade certified. Available in standard sizes or made to measure for your production lines.
Mistake 3: Neglecting mould/automated line compatibility
In small-scale production or in a laboratory, the mould is handled by hand. In automated industrial production, however, the situation is quite different: the mould is loaded, transported, positioned and unloaded by robots or conveyors. Consequently, a mould that is incorrectly sized for the automated line can cause blockages, parts to fall out, unplanned downtime and damage to equipment.
In practical terms, the key points to check before any industrial deployment are as follows: the mould’s external dimensions must be compatible with the conveyor’s guides and stops; the centre-to-centre distance between cavities must correspond to the dosing pitch of the dosing machine or placement machine; the weight of the loaded mould must be compatible with the lifting capacity of the robot or manipulator; and the mould must be sufficiently rigid to prevent deformation during transfer under full load.
📌 Good to know: At Maé Innovation, Fibermaé moulds are available in standard 400 x 600 mm sizes, compatible with professional trolleys and conveyors. Furthermore, our bespoke service allows dimensions and centre distances to be tailored precisely to the specifications of your automated line, with technical support from CAD design right through to production trials.
Mistake 4: failing to factor in industrial production rates when assessing the mould’s service life
A craft or laboratory mould is designed for just a few hundred uses. An industrial mould, on the other hand, must withstand several thousand cycles under intensive production conditions: loading, high-temperature firing, mechanical demoulding and cleaning. Indeed, a mould that ages poorly under high-volume production generates progressive problems that are difficult to identify: deteriorating anti-adhesive properties, warped walls and dimensional drift, leading to variations in the finished product.
Furthermore, in particular, the unexpected ageing of the mould results in a rise in the scrap rate that is difficult to diagnose. Our article on solutions for reducing scrap in food production details the monitoring and diagnostic methods to be put in place, as this deterioration is gradual. As a result, manufacturers often attribute these variations to the recipe or raw materials, whilst the real cause is mould wear. Monitoring the service life in cycles and implementing a preventative replacement plan are therefore essential. Consult our guide on new food product development to incorporate these parameters right from the design phase.
A premium mould costs 2 to 3 times more to purchase than a standard mould, but lasts 5 times longer and, on average, prevents €15,000 in annual losses due to waste, according to data from Maé Innovation. Consequently, the ROI on an investment in industrial-grade moulds is typically achieved within 8 to 12 months.
Mistake 5: Ignoring food contact standards for production moulds
During the prototyping phase, R&D teams sometimes use uncertified moulds for testing, assuming that certification will come ‘later’. This delay is a strategic mistake. Indeed, when the time comes for the HACCP audit or certification of the industrial process, a mould that does not comply with Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 (materials in contact with food) can bring the entire launch to a standstill. To understand the full scope of HACCP requirements, see our guide on HACCP standards for food industry professionals.
Regulatory requirements for production moulds
In practical terms, the regulatory requirements for moulds in contact with food are as follows: the material must not transfer any substance likely to endanger human health or alter the taste and composition of the food. The supplier must provide a declaration of conformity (DOC) and a material data sheet with the results of migration tests. For silicone moulds, the distinction between platinum-cured silicone (certified, thermally stable) and peroxide-cured silicone (less stable, potential for migration) is a non-negotiable selection criterion.
📌 What Maé Innovation always provides: All Silmaé and Fibermaé moulds are supplied with their material data sheet and their EU and US food safety declarations of conformity. To find out more about quality control in the food industry, consult our comprehensive guide. These documents are available immediately on request for your HACCP audits and industrial certification dossiers.
Are you launching or scaling up production of a food product?
The Maé Innovation technical team will support you in selecting and designing your mass-production moulds, from the R&D phase right through to industrial production.
