ATEX filling machinery matched to your production
Tell us what you fill, the pack sizes and the output you need. We’ll help you compare automatic fillers, weigh systems, large-container machines and complete fill-cap-label lines.
Direct advice from a UK machinery supplier — no third-party lead service.
Compare practical machine routes
We compare your liquid, containers, required output and hazardous-area information to focus the choice on machinery that can work for your production.
Increase output with a conveyor-fed filler selected around your liquid, container, dosing method and hazardous-area requirements.
Fill larger containers accurately by weight, with a compact station matched to your pack handling and required throughput.
Handle buckets, jerrycans and drums with controlled filling, splash reduction and safer movement of the heavier finished pack.
Bring bottle handling, filling, capping, labelling and discharge together as one coordinated production line.
Protect product-contact parts with suitable materials for aggressive liquids, with ATEX features added where your application requires them.
Control stringing and viscous flow with suitable pumps, pistons and nozzles while accounting for solvent content and the operating area.
Why early planning matters
A successful project considers the filler, product supply, static control, ventilation, container movement and every downstream machine that may sit inside or affect the hazardous area.
A clear route to quotation and delivery
Define the product, viscosity, volatility, compatibility, fill volume, container and cleaning method.
Share the zone, gas group, temperature class, existing DSEAR assessment and any site-specific controls.
Select dosing, nozzles, actuation, controls, materials, container handling and downstream integration.
Agree testing, conformity documentation, layout, installation, commissioning, operator training and support.
Choose by product
Acetone, ethanol blends, thinners, reagents and flammable cleaners after compatibility and area review.
Volatile alcohol-based products, small bottles, precision dosing and closure integration.
Frequently asked questions
Provide the product SDS, hazardous-area or zone information, gas group and temperature-class requirements where known, fill-volume range, container details, target output, utilities, extraction arrangements and the downstream line stages.
Yes. Filling, capping, labelling, bottle handling and conveying can be considered as one project, but every item within or affecting the hazardous area must be reviewed in the line-level risk and conformity plan.
No. Chemical compatibility and explosion protection are separate design questions. A machine may need corrosion-resistant wetted parts, hazardous-area protection, or both, depending on the product and site assessment.
Large-container routes are available, including weigh-based and diving-nozzle systems for common 5–30 litre formats. Final suitability depends on container geometry, product behaviour, handling and the hazardous-area brief.
Your machine recommendation
Send your product SDS, container details, fill range, target output and any ATEX information. You’ll receive a practical shortlist matched to your application.
☎ 01494 623015✉ sales@lancinguk.comDirect support for new machines, line upgrades and complete filling projects.
Project scope
An ATEX filling project is strongest when the site duties and the equipment duties are defined together but not confused. The product, room, ventilation, transfer system and operating method establish the workplace risk. The filling machine must then be selected and documented for the declared conditions and intended use.
The employer or site operator needs a competent assessment of dangerous substances, release sources, hazardous-area boundaries and the measures used to eliminate or control fire and explosion risk. A product name on its own is not enough to define a zone.
Lancing uses the declared area classification, product SDS, filling method, containers, utilities and line layout to develop the machinery scope. Electrical and non-electrical ignition sources, static control, access, maintenance and documentation all need to be considered.
A protected motor, control enclosure or sensor is only one part of the installation. The assembled machine, product path, moving parts, operator controls, conveyors and downstream equipment must be reviewed against the agreed hazardous-area and conformity scope.
Platform comparison
The figures below consolidate reference information already published on this site. They are useful for an initial shortlist, but they are not universal guarantees. Final output, tolerance, utilities and construction depend on the real product, pack, hazardous-area classification and approved project specification.
| Machine route | Published reference | Best used to investigate |
|---|---|---|
| Automatic ATEX filler | 50–5000 ml; 1–6 heads | Conveyor-fed bottles, higher output and coordinated downstream equipment. |
| LUYTEXW1 weigh platform | 10–30 L; up to 30 kg; approximately 3–6 containers/minute reference | Mass-based control for jerrycans and smaller drums. |
| LUGTW2S large-pack family | 5–30 L; up to 50 kg on the reference platform | Bucket, pail and jerrycan filling with nozzle travel and heavy-pack handling. |
| Complete filling line | Configured fill, cap, label, inspect and transfer modules | Line-level controls, hazardous-area boundaries and balanced production. |
| Corrosion-resistant route | 100–3000 ml reference gravity platform; four-nozzle standard configuration | Product-contact compatibility for bleach, acids, cleaners and aggressive liquids, with ATEX reviewed separately where required. |
Evidence for quotation
A useful quotation states what has been assumed, what still needs confirming and how acceptance will be measured. The following inputs reduce avoidable redesign and make it easier to compare proposals on the same basis.
Current SDS, formulation or concentration where relevant, operating temperature, viscosity, density, foam, particles, conductivity, product supply and the proposed cleaning method.
Real containers and closures, dimensions, neck opening, fill range, required sustained output, batch pattern, changeover frequency and downstream handling.
Competent hazardous-area information, utilities, extraction responsibilities, layout constraints, documentation needs and agreed sample-trial, FAT and SAT acceptance criteria.
No. The suitability of the assembled machine depends on its intended use, area classification, protection concepts, electrical and non-electrical ignition risks, product path, controls and documentation. Individual components support that assessment but do not replace it.
Agree the product or representative test medium, containers, closures, recipes, target quantities, test duration, output basis, reject conditions, alarms, interlocks, cleaning checks and the evidence to be recorded. Site-specific ventilation and area-classification duties remain subject to the installation and SAT scope.
Hazardous-area project definition
A useful ATEX filling-machine brief explains what can be released, where it can be released and what the line is doing at that moment. This gives the equipment supplier, site engineer and competent hazardous-area assessor a shared basis for decisions instead of treating the filler, room and product supply as separate subjects.
Start at the source vessel and follow the product through pumps, hoses, valves and nozzles to the open container. Include normal filling, start-up, stopping, sampling, draining and cleaning. The release assessment should cover credible faults and maintenance access as well as routine production.
Record when the container is open, when it is filled, where it waits and where the closure is applied. Vapour, drips and exposed product can affect the transfer to capping, labelling or discharge, so the hazardous-area boundary should be shown across the complete journey.
Name who specifies extraction, earthing and bonding, product feed, room services, fire controls, machine interlocks and final verification. An interface left as “by others” without an owner, acceptance method and due date remains a project risk.
| Evidence to provide | What it helps define | What still needs competent confirmation |
|---|---|---|
| Current SDS and formulation data | Product compatibility, dosing behaviour, cleaning and potential release conditions. | The workplace risk assessment and the hazards arising from the actual process. |
| Area-classification drawing | Equipment location, boundary interfaces and the protection requirements supplied to the machinery review. | Zone type, extent, gas or dust group, temperature requirements and the assumptions behind the classification. |
| Container and closure samples | Nozzle access, static-control approach, transfer, capping and the open-container period. | The complete control strategy for conductive, dissipative or insulating packs. |
| Production and cleaning sequence | Operating modes, interlocks, safe stops, drains, recovery and changeover requirements. | Site procedures, permits, ventilation performance and installation-dependent controls. |
Where classification or facility information is not yet available, preliminary machinery selection can still identify likely routes. The final specification should not hide the missing inputs. Use the DSEAR and ATEX project-boundary guide, the new earthing, bonding and static-control guide and the trial and FAT guide to turn those inputs into an auditable project brief.
ATEX filling project resource map
The fastest route to a useful machinery discussion is to resolve the product, pack, automation, measurement and site interfaces in a logical order. The resources below expand the questions already covered on this website without changing the need for a competent DSEAR assessment and project-specific equipment review.
Compare semi-automatic ATEX filling, automatic filling and bottle filling against the real campaign pattern and operator task.
Use the load-cell versus volumetric guide to align the measured quantity with product density, container tare and the acceptance method.
Plan installation, vapour extraction and controls and interlocks before the final layout and FAT scope are approved.
| Buyer question | Best starting page | Decision output |
|---|---|---|
| How much automation is justified? | Automatic vs semi-automatic comparison | A defined operating cycle, staffing case and sustained-output requirement. |
| What changes the quotation? | ATEX filling machine cost factors | A like-for-like commercial boundary with assumptions and exclusions. |
| How will products and packs change? | Cleaning and changeover guide | An approved campaign transition, compatibility and verification method. |
| How will suitability be retained? | Maintenance and inspection guide | A competent inspection, parts and return-to-service plan. |
Combine the SDS, product behaviour, containers, closures, target quantity, sustained output, area-classification information, utilities, extraction, cleaning and acceptance criteria. Lancing can then compare the most practical machine and line routes without hiding unresolved assumptions.
Common project questions
These answers help separate the first machinery conversation from the competent workplace and hazardous-area decisions that remain specific to the installation.
A liquid needs an ATEX filling review when its use could create an explosive atmosphere and the filling machine or connected equipment may be located within, or materially affect, that area. The safety data sheet is important evidence, but it does not decide the answer by itself. The process must also consider release points, temperature, quantity, ventilation, transfer method, open-container time, cleaning and credible abnormal conditions.
The employer’s competent DSEAR assessment defines the workplace risk and hazardous-area classification. The machinery review then uses those declared conditions to assess the equipment and complete filling process. The ATEX requirement question guide sets out the evidence in a practical order.
Choose the filling principle only after defining the quantity to be controlled, product behaviour, container range, campaign pattern and hazardous-area operating case. A fast pump, piston, gravity or weigh route can still be unsuitable if it cannot manage foam, density change, nozzle access, static control, cleaning or the intended container movement.
Record whether the acceptance quantity is volume or mass, whether tare varies, how product reaches the filler, how the dose starts and stops, and what happens to the open pack before closure. This turns a general request for an “ATEX filler” into a comparison that can be tested.
An enquiry is ready for engineering review when the product, pack, output, site and acceptance assumptions are collected in one controlled brief. Include the current SDS, operating temperature, viscosity or density where relevant, fill range, representative containers and closures, sustained output requirement, cleaning method, product supply, layout constraints, utilities, extraction information and available area-classification data.
Unknowns do not have to be hidden. Mark each unresolved item, identify who will close it and state the stage at which it must be confirmed. This makes preliminary selection useful without presenting assumptions as final design facts.
Real product and pack samples are most valuable where physical behaviour determines the result: dosing, foam, splash, drip formation, nozzle access, container stability, closure handling, cleaning and changeover. A substitute may be acceptable for a defined check, but the difference in viscosity, density, conductivity, volatility, wetting or seal compatibility must be recorded.
A successful sample trial demonstrates the tested operating case; it does not prove the site’s DSEAR assessment or the complete installed conformity scope. Use the trial and FAT guide to define what each test is expected to establish.
The ATEX filling machine question library groups the main decisions by hazardous-area need, zone, container, output, retrofit and nozzle selection. For a machine recommendation, send the evidence already available through the existing project enquiry route.
Evidence-ready enquiry
Three evidence sets prevent a fast quotation from becoming a vague or misleading one: the current product information, the approved equipment environment and the complete product-contact and closure route.
Start with the current SDS, exact formulation or concentration, product temperature, density and viscosity information, then describe how the liquid is stored, pumped, filled, drained and cleaned. The SDS is the hazard starting point rather than a complete machine specification.
Check the machine marking and instructions against the competent area classification, intended product duty, installation conditions, external controls and supplied assembly. Component certificates alone do not establish the suitability of the complete filling process.
Trace the entire product path and the open-container journey through closure. Approve tanks, hoses, seals, valves, nozzles, cleaning fluids, cap presentation and fault recovery using the real product, packs and operating conditions.
Lancing can use the existing ATEX filling enquiry route to review the product, packs, output and line scope. Missing zone, extraction, material or closure information can then be recorded as a project action rather than hidden inside an assumption.
New classification and control guidance
These guides cover search and specification gaps repeatedly raised by UK buyers: gas group, temperature class, the Great Britain marking route, gas-detection interfaces and the limits of pneumatic-only claims.
Translate IIA, IIB, IIC and T-class inputs into a traceable filling-machine duty.
Separate market conformity from the workplace DSEAR assessment using current Great Britain guidance.
Define signals, safe states, failure responses and FAT/SAT evidence for the complete filling line.
Understand why compressed-air operation does not remove mechanical, static or process ignition risks.
Connect workplace risk duties to equipment selection, marking and project acceptance.
New large-pack and process guidance
These pages address large containers, measurement method, inerting and the highest gas-hazard Zone without changing the existing machine range or enquiry route.
Plan load measurement, nozzle access, pallet handling, vapour control and overfill protection for large packs.
Choose a measurement method from the accepted quantity, product condition, tare and verification plan.
Understand oxygen control, monitoring, ventilation, asphyxiation risk and safe-state logic.
Separate internal product atmosphere from the external Zone and identify the required evidence.
Additional engineering decisions
These focused guides address common specification gaps that can change the equipment architecture, FAT plan and final quotation.
Understand what Ex i, Ex d and other protection concepts mean for components and the complete filler.
Compare fixed and diving nozzles by foam, splash, vapour, cleaning and container access.
Separate the normal fill endpoint from abnormal trips, final isolation and containment.
Link pump type, pressure, pulsation, compatibility and fault behaviour to the dosing system.
Build a product-specific route from the SDS, formulation, packs, vapour and closure requirements.
Send your product SDS, pack sizes, fill range, target output and any available hazardous-area information.