Which common plastic is best suited for drinking vessels in the catering industry?

Tritan vs. SAN vs. PC

 

As the owner of a catering business, you may not have given much thought to the type of plastic your crockery for drinks is made from. Given the low profit margins in this industry, you have probably focussed on cost rather than other aspects. But what if we told you that the choice of material for your plastic drinkware could have a significant impact on your overall bottom line beyond just price?

This is indeed the case. Depending on your operational requirements and brand positioning, you could be spending more on your drinkware than you really need to. Or you might not invest much, but need to replace your crockery frequently because it chips, cracks or breaks, which can prove more costly in the long run.

 

We present an overview of three different types of plastic for drinking containers - Tritan™, SAN and PC - to analyse how they perform in terms of durability, replacement frequency and specific applications.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

​

About Tritan™, SAN and PC in commercially available plastic drinking cups

 

Each of these plastics is an excellent choice and has its place in the catering industry. Polycarbonate (PC) and styrene acrylonitrile (SAN) are probably among the most commonly used plastics in the manufacture of commercial drinking containers. The plastic Tritan™ was designed as an effective alternative to glass.

Of these three variants, SAN is generally the most cost-effective, while PC is slightly more expensive. Tritan™, like all premium class products, is the most expensive of the three at around 30-45% more than PC and SAN.

Both SAN and Tritan™ are BPA-free, whereas PC cannot be produced without BPA as it is part of the chemical structure. If BPA is a relevant issue for you or your guests, PC could be ruled out as an option for plastic containers.

 

Similarities between Tritan™, SAN and PC plastics for the catering industry

 

On the surface, these three materials have a lot in common:

 

• Good clarity and durability

• Achieve outstanding performance by imitating glass drinking containers

• Can be customised with brand logos, graphics and colours

• Can be designed in almost any popular style of drinkware, from glasses to specialised barware

• Available in different sizes, designs and textures

​

Looking at the situation from this perspective, one could argue that all of these options fulfil the same purpose - namely the storage of drinks. So why not choose the cheapest option? That's a valid objection. But if you analyse a little deeper, you'll see that each of these materials has different performance characteristics that can be the deciding factor in which material best suits your brand.

​

Durability differences between Tritan™, SAN and PC plastics for the catering industry

 

All three materials are characterised by their durability, but in different ways. Eastman-Kodak conducted a comprehensive study evaluating various performance characteristics of these materials. We will look at two common situations in commercial catering that can have a significant impact on durability: dishwashing and the dropping or bumping of drinkware.

​

Commercial dishwasher performance of Tritan™ vs SAN vs PC

 

In the dishwashing section of Eastman-Kodak's study, all three plastics were washed 1,000 times in a professional dishwasher. Each material was tested for transparency and structural integrity (chipping, cracking, etc.) after 1, 100, 250, 500, 750 and 1,000 wash cycles.

Both Tritan™ and SAN withstood washing in a commercial dishwasher for the entire 1,000 cycles. It is likely that each plastic would continue to perform well after 1,000 washes, but the test was not continued. PC, on the other hand, survived the first wash cycle but failed after the next test point of just 100 washes as it showed signs of cracking.

The essentials to take away: In a commercial kitchen where dishes are washed frequently, it could be necessary to replace PC beverages up to ten times more often than SAN or Tritan™. Even when you consider the price of PC beverages.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

 

 

Comparison of the drop impact resistance of Tritan™, SAN and PC

 

This section shows a change for SAN and PC. The Eastman Kodak study added an additional component to their dishwashing test by dropping the drinkware up to five times between wash cycles (using the same intervals as previously described).

Tritan™ proved to be the clear winner, passing every test inspection with no defects. It showed no chipping, cracking or crazing and would probably have lasted even longer if the test had not been terminated prematurely.

SAN, on the other hand, could not pass the drop test as it chipped on the first drop. However, this does not necessarily mean that SAN will chip or crack every time it is dropped; there is only the possibility that this may occur.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)