The closures we stock
On this page8
Why they are already here
All six leaves in this use case carry cr_required in our process constraints. The shelf is built from those constraints, so the child resistant closures come with it rather than being something to go and look for after the fact.
What that is worth
The common failure in this category is to design around a conventional cap, discover the requirement late, and find that the neck finish chosen has no child resistant option. Starting from a shelf that already contains them avoids that entirely.
The numbers
466 closures on this shelf: 284 continuous thread, 39 child resistant, 26 spouted, 20 dome lids, 18 flip tops, 9 phenolic, 9 liners and sealing discs, 7 buttress, 6 round tub lids and 5 specialty.
A child resistant closure is a system, not a cap
It performs against a protocol with the container it is fitted to and the liner it is used with. Changing the bottle, or changing the liner for a better chemical match, is changing the system.
Which collides with the resin problem
This is the craft where the liner has to resist the contents. A liner chosen for chemical compatibility and a closure chosen for child resistance have to be the same decision, made once, rather than two decisions made by different people.
Check the neck before falling in love with a bottle
The shelf concentrates on 38-400 at 80, 24-410 at 79, 70-400 at 64, 33-400 at 51, 58-400 at 41 and 53-400 at 40. Staying on a well populated finish is what keeps both the child resistant option and the liner choice open.
And a child resistant closure is not a safety claim
It is a packaging requirement for specified substances. It does not make the contents safe, it does not replace the hazard labeling, and saying so on the label would be a claim the regulation does not support.