FOOD SAFETY EQUIPMENT

eHANDBOOK

TABLE OF CONTENTSFood Safety Is Top Concern Going Into 2021 3

Our annual Manufacturing Outlook Survey identifies manufacturing issues for the new year.

Overcoming the Challenge of Tracking Sources of Foodborne Illnesses 9

In-line Direct Steam Injection Heater is Ideal for Food and Beverage Manufacturing 12

How Real-Time Locating Systems Can Deliver an Entirely New Level of Food

and Employee Safety 15

Cabinet Washers: The Better Way to Clean-Out-of-Place (COP) 18

Maximizing Carry-Over Improves Bottom Line for Tea Manufacturer 21

AD INDEXAnritsu • www.anritsu.com 4

Nelson-Jameson • www.nelsonjameson.com 6

OSIsoft • www.osisoft.com 8

Pick Heaters • www.pickheaters.com 11

Siemens • www.siemens.com 14

Sani-Matic • www.sanimatic.com 17

Vac-U-Max • www.vac-u-max.com 20

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 2

www.FoodProcessing.com

Food Safety Is Top Concern Going Into 2021Our annual Manufacturing Outlook Survey identifies manufacturing issues for the new year.

By Food Processing

Food safety generally

and the changes

and challenges to

safety posed by the pan-

demic were uppermost in

the minds of manufactur-

ers who responded to our

20th annual Manufacturing

Outlook Survey.

The survey was taken

during November of

last year, just before the

second wave of the pan-

demic peaked. It received

158 responses. We asked

how respondents were

coping with it, giving

them multiple answers to

choose from (more than

one if they wanted). The

most popular answers

were “we had to change

production scheduling to

meet changes in demand”

(59%) and “we make

workers stand farther

apart on the plant floor”

(52%).

Some respondents included

comments about the pan-

demic that were not part

of the options provided:

“We have to sanitize

all the areas every few

hours”; “Delays in receiving

supplies”; “Tremendous

focus on worker educa-

tion on how to stay safe

and healthy”; “Hard to see

vendors”; and, simply and

sadly, “Fallen morale in

workers.”

Employee training 71%

More/improved sanitary equipment 42%

HACCP plan 33%

Third-party certification 32%

Improved sanitary design of equipment 30%

Improved pest control program 27%

Rapid microbial detection system 23%

Outside consulting services 21%

Other 7.1%

How is your company’s capital spending budget for 2021?

Generally, how do you feel going

into 2021?

What are your company’sproduction plans

for 2021?

What does your companyplan to do with sta�ng

levels?

How has the pandemic a�ected your operations? How has the pandemic a�ected your operations?

01020304050607080

01020304050607080

WHAT FOOD-SAFETY PRACTICES ARE IN PLACE OR ON THE WAY?

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 3

www.FoodProcessing.com

Your customers have more on the line than dinner...that’s why we built the XR75 X-Ray. It protects consumers by detecting the smallest contaminants in the industry, while advancing product quality and overall food safety.

Learn more about the industry’s most precise and reliable inspection detection equipment with unmatched performance and low cost of ownership at anritsu.com/infivis.

WE INSPECT TOHIGHER STANDARDS...

YOUR CUSTOMERS’.

XR75X-RAYINSPECTIONSYSTEM

In the very first question, we

gave respondents a list of

10 manufacturing issues to

rank in order of importance.

The top four finishers: food

safety, cost control, worker

safety and changes due

to COVID. (The latter two

obviously can be conflated.)

Of course, there are more

than 10 manufacturing

issues facing the industry,

so we allowed respon-

dents to specify their own.

Some of the more interest-

ing ones:

• “How to improve training

to deal with poor prac-

tices and reduced labor

available.”

• “Less paper, more com-

puter-based tech.”

• “Employees quitting early

rather than finishing sea-

sonal work because they

qualify for unemployment

and receive govern-

ment checks because of

COVID-19.”

• From someone in Bal-

timore: “Safety on the

grounds immediately

outside of our manufac-

turing facilities due to civil

unrest.”

We asked respondents how

they were improving food

safety, their No. 1 issue.

Given a choice of options,

the most overwhelmingly

popular response, at 71%,

was employee training. The

next most popular ones were

“more/improved sanitary

equipment” (42%); a HACCP

plan (33%); and third-party

certification (32%).

OPTIMISM AND AUTOMATION Asked directly how they

view the new year, 21%

said they were “very

optimistic” and another

37% said they were

“somewhat optimistic.”

Only 13% were pessimistic

to any degree, and the

remaining 29% said they

were neutral or not sure.

The survey had two other

questions that can be taken

as indicators of optimism.

Asked about staffing plans,

41% said their companies

plan to add staff, and 44%

said they probably will

maintain current staffing

levels. Asked about what

will happen to production

levels at their companies,

a plurality of 41% said the

plan was to increase pro-

duction by adding lines or

plants, while 35% said they

will probably stay the same.

Very optimistic 21%

Somewhat optimistic 37%

Neutral/I’m not sure 29%

A little pessimistic 11%

Very pessimistic 1.9%

GENERALLY, HOW DO YOU FEEL GOING INTO 2021?

How is your company’s capital spending budget for 2021?

Generally, how do you feel going

into 2021?

What are your company’sproduction plans

for 2021?

What does your companyplan to do with sta�ng

levels?

How has the pandemic a�ected your operations? How has the pandemic a�ected your operations?

01020304050607080

01020304050607080

1.9%

11%21%

37%

29%

Expand production by opening

or adding lines or plants 41%

Stay the same 35%

Consolidate production by

merging or closing lines or plants 9.7%

Don’t know 14%

WHAT ARE YOUR COMPANY’S PRODUCTION PLANS FOR 2021?

How is your company’s capital spending budget for 2021?

Generally, how do you feel going

into 2021?

What are your company’sproduction plans

for 2021?

What does your companyplan to do with sta�ng

levels?

How has the pandemic a�ected your operations? How has the pandemic a�ected your operations?

01020304050607080

01020304050607080

9.7%

14%

41%

35%

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 5

While most suppliers simply deliver products—Nelson-Jameson delivers solutions. Through our comprehensive product offerings and expertly curated

food safety programs, Nelson-Jameson can help lower your transaction costs while providing the products and services you need to produce safe, quality food.

Visit our website or give us a call for specific product information.

Your Safe, Quality Food is our Business

1-800-826-8302 • nelsonjameson.com • sales@nelsonjameson.com

Color-Coded Products Metal Detectable Products Footwear & Surface Sanitation

Sanitation & Environmental Testing Hand Hygiene Industrial Vacuums Specialty Cleaning

This optimism, however moderate, echoes

the attitudes of American business as a

whole, according to the economic advisory

service IBISWorld. Its “business sentiment

index,” defined as a gauge for “the over-

all health of the business environment,”

will increase 5.7% in 2021, as consumer

confidence improves with an end to the

pandemic in sight.

Automation is an ongoing issue in food

manufacturing, and it’s something we

always ask about. One of the biggest issues

that arise in automation is hiring people

who can handle it.

“I think one of the major reasons why food

and beverage have been slow to automate

is that they’re having difficulty finding the

technical workers needed to design, pro-

gram and operate automation solutions,”

says Tyler Noesser, technical director

of Alliantgroup, a provider of specialty

tax services.

“It seems counterintuitive because we

assume automation will take jobs, but in

fact automation ends up creating a demand

for technical workers,” he continues. “The

fact is, even if a food and beverage com-

pany wants to automate, there just is not

a large enough pool of technical workers

versed in automation.”

We asked respondents to rank 10 strat-

egies for dealing with personnel issues

related to automation. Their top three

choices (with multiple answers allowed):

Expanding in-house technical training,

42%; recruiting maintenance technicians,

33%; adding in-house engineering capa-

bilities, 31%. A quarter said they were “not

addressing the issue.”

A couple of respondents alluded to the

need for training. One said, “We are seeking

a variety of ways to help train and educate

students in the field of automation and

mechatronics.” Another said, “Working with

outside consultants to assess and imple-

ment automation and train staff.” One gave

the simplest possible explanation for not

having to worry about automation: “We’re

still making hand-twisted pretzels.”

THE FULL REPORT IS ONLINE

Our 2021 Manufacturing Survey, conducted online in November 2020, garnered 158 responses from food & beverage industry professionals. The most common categories were further-processed foods at 13.5% of responses, baked goods at 11.6% and meat/poultry/seafood at 9.7%. There were 14 questions in all, but we had room for only three infographics in this print report. For a download of the full report and more demograph-ics, go to bit.ly/mfg2021. Read the complete story on

FoodProcessing.com.

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 7

PROCESSING/MANUFACTURING

CONSUMPTIONBuy local; make informed decisions

RECYCLINGRecycle packaging and compost food waste.

A sustainable food supply chain is ripe with environmental benefits, and manufacturers have a golden opportunity

to deploy sustainable practices on the plant floor.

Thanks to operational

data, manufacturers

can increase

sustainability while

reducing costs—

all while maintaining

quality.

FARMINGCrop and animal waste/fertilizers; pest management and irrigation techniques; smart production to reduce waste

TRANSPORTATIONLow emissions vehicles; reduction of “food miles” thanks to local sourcing

DISTRIBUTIONDecreased warehouse time and quick distribution; recycling/composting; carbon offsets

PACKAGINGReusable packages and smaller, lightweight containers

RETAILCompany-led initiatives and incentives

THE SUSTAINABLE FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN

VIEW CASE STUDIES:The Sustainability of Real-Time Operational Data

To learn more about increasing food manufacturing sustainability using operational data, visit www.osisoft.com/food-and-beverage

All companies, products, and brands mentioned are trademarks of their respective trademark owners.®Copyright 2021 OSIsoft, LLC | 1600 Alvarado Street | San Leandro, CA 94577 | www.osisoft.com

Heineken Espana uses plant floor data to:

• Meet goals to reduceWATER CONSUMPTION

by 25% and reduceCO2 emissionsby 40%

• EMPOWER USERS TOreduce energyconsumption

Thanks to data from its sausage cooking line, Tyson:

• QUICKLY ISOLATEDTHE ROOT CAUSEof a deviation

• FIXED THE ISSUE

prior to a COSTLY RECALL

When brewing temperatures changed, data helped Deschutes:

• SEE A 60%time savingsIN FERMENTATION

COOLING• SAVE 72 HRS PER BATCH

OF PRODUCTIONtime for eachFERMENTER

• MACHINE PERFORMANCE

BY 50% ANDavailability by 30%

• OEE BY 30%

Leveraging real-time data on its FFS machines, Illovo improved:

Overcoming the Challenge of Tracking Sources of Foodborne IllnessesBy OSIsoft

Romaine lettuce is a staple in many

home and restaurant kitchens, but

shoppers found the crispy green

vegetable difficult to locate in late 2018.

As an outbreak of E. coli-tainted romaine

began to make headlines, it was pulled from

store shelves and restaurant delivery trucks

all over the country. By the time the source

of contamination was traced back to a Cal-

ifornia farm, and sales could be restarted,

more than 60 people had been infected and

dozens had been hospitalized.

While the romaine case drew an inordinate

amount of attention, it underscores the

massive combined impact of foodborne

diseases. In the U.S. alone, they make about

50 million people sick annually, according

to the Centers for Disease Control and Pre-

vention. Of those, more than 100,000 are

hospitalized and about 3,000 die.

The numbers reflect a breakdown in food

safety during the manufacturing process

and signal a need for improved traceability

with food products. When a recall is nec-

essary, speed and precision contribute to

minimizing foodborne illness. The more tar-

geted the recall, the more likely it is to get

the attention of consumers. This also helps

food manufacturers to protect their brand

— appearing more competent than issuing

a massive blanket recall — while meeting

more stringent regulations.

Executing a rapid and precise recall, how-

ever, requires a significant amount of work

that can be cumbersome. Companies can

overcome this traceability challenge by

investing in cost-effective real-time opera-

tional data infrastructure.

SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM Foodborne illness has increasingly taken

the spotlight in recent years. This is a

combination of a boom in communications

channels, especially social media; the

fact that more inspections are catching

more problems; and more awareness and

education in general about food poisoning.

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 9

www.FoodProcessing.com

At the same time, there is a trend for food

companies to grow less of their own sup-

plies and rely more on local producers with

special niches such as organic products.

Those suppliers tend to rely more on paper

records, so the traceability of ingredients

might not be as robust as it would be with

larger industrial suppliers with a big focus on

engineering, safety, and quality assurance.

Another challenge is that the market for

“colonial” foods, dry foods such as cereal

with a long shelf life, is decreasing while

demand for fresh and chilled foods with

shorter shelf lives is increasing. Fresh and

chilled foods need to be shipped and stored

under target conditions, such as tem-

perature and humidity, which exposes the

companies to even more potential recalls.

For every product they generate, food

companies need to be able to identify the

supplier of each component as well as

when and where it was processed. This gets

complex because some finished products

contain dozens of ingredients. Adding to the

complexity, ingredients may pass through

multiple pieces of equipment before becom-

ing a finished product that is ready for store

shelves. This means the proper cleaning of

equipment, both at regular intervals and

after recipe changes, must also be tracked.

The most effective means for traceabil-

ity is one that can sift through multiple

data sources — including supply sources,

equipment cleaning, and logistics — to pin-

point batches of contaminated food and

show where they have been shipped. With

so many data sources in a food plant, the

key is centralizing information in a real-

time operational data infrastructure such

as OSIsoft’s PI System.

These modern systems collect and analyze

data throughout a food operation, providing

visualization that wasn’t available with paper

records and spreadsheets or siloed com-

puter systems.

CAPITALIZING ON THE INVESTMENT The ability to rapidly and precisely track

foodborne illnesses goes a long way toward

protecting a brand’s image and the health

of its customers. It also lowers the costs

of recalls, helps to minimize regulatory

fines as well as the accompanying bad

publicity, and improves the conditions

that initially led to the problem.

When selecting a real-time operational

data infrastructure, consider the follow-

ing criteria:

• Is the vendor experienced? If so, it should

be able to supply plenty of case studies to

illustrate successful deployments.

• Does the system offer pervasive compati-

bility (hundreds of interfaces) ...

Download the complete white paper here.

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 10

How Effective Is Your Hot Water Temperature?

vs.

®To learn more about Pick Steam Injection Water Heaters: https://bit.ly/3bPuSNu262-338-1191 • info1@pickheaters.com

The Pick Variable Flow Direct Steam Injection Heater is the answer for critical plant sanitation.

Its unique design provides hot water at a precisely controlled temperature over a wide operating range. Only Pick can accommodate wide variations in water flows and frequent start-stop applications such as hose stations and still deliver accurately controlled hot water on demand. Where medium to high steam pressure is available, it is ideal for a central heating system for all your plant sanitation and clean-up hot water needs.

g y y pwater needs.

Clean

Perceived Clean

In-line Direct Steam Injection Heater is Ideal for Food and Beverage Manufacturing By Pick Heaters, Inc.

Just as there are

numerous industrial

applications for water

heating, so too are there

many challenges — maxi-

mizing energy efficiency,

minimizing maintenance

costs and many others.

Nowhere is this more appar-

ent than in the food and

beverage industry, where

adherence to strict regula-

tions around the use of hot

water ensures the safety of

personnel and the quality of

the product itself.

SAFETY AND SANITATION The design of hose stations

used for plant sanitation

offers an illustration of

the safety challenges.

Individual mixing tees,

which provide point-of-use

access to steam combined

with water, are a common

feature for washdowns

in food and beverage

processing plants. These

units offer the instant

responsiveness of steam

injection heaters, but they

also carry a steep price in

terms of safety concerns.

One reason is that oper-

ators can increase the

temperature of hot water

released from the tee in

the interest of speeding

a sanitation job. This ten-

dency follows the common

The challenges of industrial water heating applications are particularly relevant to the food and beverage industry.

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 12

www.FoodProcessing.com

misconception that a higher temperature

equals a cleaner surface, when in fact it

both wastes energy and unleashes the

potential for burns and scalding. Adding

to that danger is the fact that the pres-

sure-sensitive internal valve built into the

tee as a safety measure can stick, due to

hard water scaling built up over time.

Sanitation in the food and beverage indus-

try, moreover, must conform to regulations

designed to prevent food contamination.

If critical temperatures are not met, USDA

inspectors can shut down plants or portions

of them — resulting in lost production time,

and the potential for product recalls.

While small fixes may address these chal-

lenges in the short term, the most effective

solutions are built into the design of the

heating system itself. A centralized heating

system, for instance, moves steam/water

mixing into a remote location and away

from process floor point-of-use hose sta-

tions. Temperature adjustability is no longer

required at each station and the temperature

control system can be passcode-protected

to restrict equipment control accessibil-

ity, while temperature overrides can be

deployed to catch upset conditions.

EFFICIENCY, MAINTENANCE AND SCALING Systems built around commonly deployed

indirect heating methods, such as shell-and-

tube and plate-and-frame heat exchangers,

present the issue of poor temperature

control. Overshooting to ensure that critical

temperatures are met is a common strategy

to address this challenge — albeit a highly

inefficient one. The same applies to the

practice of making ongoing adjustments

to set point temperatures as a way of

staying on top of flow rate changes.

Indirect systems also have an inherent

capacity limit, which impacts the volume of

hot water available for various processes.

This can cause line speed slow-downs

during production, and full stops during

high-demand periods such as third-shift

cleaning and washdown.

The challenge of operating efficiently is

further exacerbated by hard water scaling,

which is caused by hard mineral deposits

falling out of the solution as water tempera-

tures increase. Scaling is counterproductive,

as it insulates the water from heat transfer,

while also causing system pumps to work

harder to circulate water.

The presence of scaling is a challenge for

all types of heat exchange systems, but

removing it is particularly cumbersome

within the intricate design of the tube bun-

dles or plates used in common indirect heat

exchange designs. Direct steam injection

(DSI) systems are easier to keep clean ...

Download the complete white paper here.

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 13

Enjoy a new level of food and employee safetywith SIMATIC Real-Time Locating System

Step up your game with a solution that allows you to mitigate your risk, avoid unnecessary loss of production, and build trust with employees and your community!

usa.siemens.com/beyond-locating

How Real-Time Locating Systems Can Deliver an Entirely New Level of Food and Employee SafetyBy Siemens Industry Inc.

Current events are

creating a new

urgency around the

topic of food and employee

safety within the industry.

Every manufacturer wants

to return to full capacity in

production but also miti-

gate employee harm, costly

partial or full shutdowns,

production spoils, recalls,

and loss of trust from the

public consumer.

This particular current

health threat is, with-

out question, going to

shape key trends in your

food and employee

safety investments, and

likely some investments

will even be required by

regulations meant to allevi-

ate public concern.

So, how do Real-time

Locating Systems (RTLS)

deliver significant value in

this moment of investment

decisions? This value comes

from not only knowing the

real-time location of your

employees and products, but

also being able to correlate

current and historical data

to trace the proximity of

your assets and personnel.

Let’s take a deeper look at

the value this location intel-

ligence offers you to deliver

an entirely new level of food

and employee safety and

mitigate your risks.

Key employee safety questions to ask• How can you keep employees safe using real-time proximity and

time alerts? • How can you easily trace employee contacts to isolate only those

employees in contact with potential health dangers? • How can you control employee access and traffic in areas where

potential danger exists during plant operation?• How can you ensure only employees with qualified training can

operate potentially dangerous equipment?• How can you reduce cost and time by identifying areas that need

to be sanitized after an employee has fallen sick? • How can you more easily track actual employee work hours to

prevent overwork/exhaustion?

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 15

www.FoodProcessing.com

RTLS AND FOOD SAFETY Is there a new normal required

for safety in your facilities?

A good question to consider today is

whether there are new expectations for

food and employee safety that are emerg-

ing as a result of the 2020 pandemic.

Possible food product contamination from

employee contact has certainly been a con-

sideration, but prior to recent events, most

of the attention has been given to contam-

inants in food products/ingredients and in

the plant environment itself (e.g. surfaces,

equipment, cleaning products).

This latest high-profile event is creating

new visibility and attention internally and

externally from the public, employees, and

governance organizations regarding both

food and employee safety. It will likely

lead to more regulatory requirements that

address protecting both your employees

and products from human pathogens that

could be introduced into your operations.

RTLS offers real solutions that can address

these new needs.

RTLS starts with the value of being able to

locate and track (in real-time or historically)

the position of employees, ingredients, food

products, tools, robots, or anything else

coming in and out of your plant. In terms

of food safety, this allows you to create a

system that can track and associate specific

employees and/or ingredients along with

possible contaminant sources with a day,

time and duration of exposure. This opens

the door to valuable applications that can

mitigate your risks and loss of production

and profits.

• Isolating contaminated products: When

an employee infection of any type is

detected, you can quickly isolate prod-

ucts that may have been contaminated by

the employee or other potentially infected

employees based on specific locations

and time windows.

• Mitigating potential loss: The ability to

isolate specific products allows you to

only dispose of items/ingredients that

have been cross-contaminated which

will save you money and also time in

resolving issues more quickly. You can

significantly limit your losses to products

that have been exposed during a certain

time period and supply reliable data to

maintain trust and integrity.

• Avoiding entire plant shutdowns: The

fact that RTLS can quickly perform con-

tact tracing between infected employees

and others that have not been exposed

provides manufacturers the insight to

identify, test and/or quarantine per-

sonnel while the plant continues to

operate safely.

• Compliance with government and

employer guidelines: Guidelines from

government authorities and even ...

Download the complete white paper here.

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 16

Sani-Matic’s SaniCab® P SeriesFind significant labor savings and productivity improvements across your plant with one product – the automated Sani-Matic SaniCab® P Series Cabinet Washer.

Now available with SaniTrend Cloud Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) – providing automated, secure data acquisition and reporting of critical cleaning cycle information. Additional benefits such as dashboards, OEE trends, event history, and alerts all provide actionable insights into cleaning system operation.

This is the time to stop cleaning your process parts by hand and switch to automated, repeatable, recordable cleaning. Contact Sani-Matic to make the switch to savings easy.

SaniTrend Cloud™Available With

Cabinet Washers: The Better Way to Clean-Out-of-Place (COP)By Sani-Matic

Cabinet Washers provide a faster,

more efficient, and more reliable

clean and sanitize process than tra-

ditional COP Parts Washers.

Food processing facilities are continually

looking for ways to increase their

production capacity – many times

by increasing shifts or increasing

the amount of production lines. But

an often overlooked opportunity to

provide more production time is to

reduce the time spent cleaning.

When it comes time to shut down food

processing and switch over to clean and

sanitize facility food production areas,

there are a variety of ways to get the job

done. Many surfaces within the facility

need to be cleaned using a manual rins-

ing/foaming/sanitizing process with a

combination of spray guns, foam wands,

sanitation sinks, etc.

In addition, many of the critical product

contact parts in the production line are

also Cleaned-Out-of-Place (COP’d). These

parts can include weigh scale parts, eleva-

tor buckets, trays, buckets, barrels, fittings,

hoses, and much more. The method to

clean these parts is varied and can often

be similar to cleaning surfaces where more

manual methods are employed. The prob-

lem with these processes is that they can

be very labor, utility, and time intensive.

THE TRADITIONAL WAY To help improve the cleaning process –

reduce time to clean, reduce utilities, and

reduce labor – many food manufacturers

turn to COP Parts Washers. These systems

are typically manually operated to semi-

automated and help to improve certain

aspects of the cleaning process.

Many facilities use the COP Parts Washer

primarily for the chemical wash step of

the cleaning process. The COP Parts

Washer is filled with water, chemical is

added, and the water is heated to the

cleaning temperature. The operator

takes the part out of the process, rinses

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 18

www.FoodProcessing.com

off heavy soils, and uses the COP Parts

Washer for the chemical wash to break

down the heavy soils. The part is removed

and rinsed to remove chemical, and then

sanitized before being put back into the

process for the next run.

While the chemical wash automation pro-

vided by the COP Parts Washer certainly

does improve efficiencies when compared

to manually cleaning, there are still many

touch points from an operator standpoint

and a fairly significant amount of time is still

spent handling the parts – which takes time,

increases risk of part damage or lost parts.

Think about the scenario above – if you

stop and count the touch points that the

operator has with the parts, it Is roughly 7

times that the operator interacts with the

part (remove from process; pre-rinse; place

into COP Parts Washer; remove from COP

Parts Washer; rinse; sanitize; replace back

into process).

So – how can we reduce this time spent

cleaning? And can we make it use even

less utilities, be more repeatable, be

easily recordable, and be consistent every

single time?

THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK As a reader, you may be familiar with

Clean-In-Place (CIP) Systems as a way

to automate cleaning of processes that

can be cleaned without disassembly

(in place) such as process tanks and

process lines. These systems are often

fully automated with Programmable

Logic Controllers (PLCs) that control the

sequencing and parameters, operated

via Human Machine Interfaces (HMIs).

Enter the Cabinet Washer – the fully auto-

mated “CIP” equivalent for cleaning out of

place. Parts are still taken out of place from

the process, but are then placed into a Cab-

inet Washer to be cleaned (for a larger part

like a large vat) or for numerous smaller

parts often racks are utilized to hold the

parts in place while being cleaned within

the Cabinet Washer.

The advantages of these automated,

hands-off systems are numerous – reduc-

ing time to clean, reducing labor, reducing

utility use, improving consistency of

cleaning, reducing part damage or loss,

improving operator safety, and allowing for

better data recording. Let’s take a closer

look at each of these areas.

REDUCING TIME TO CLEAN Remember the COP Parts Washer

touch points? 7 total times the operator

interacted with the part – that means that

a lot of time is just spent in transferring

and handling the part, let alone the ...

Download the complete white paper here.

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 19

69 WILLIAM STREET • BELLEVILLE, NJ 07109 • www.vac-u-max.com • info@vac-u-max.com • (800) VAC-U-MAX

Automation. Compliance. Safety. Productivity. Guaranteed Solutions.

Let us solve your bulk material handling and industrial vacuum cleaning challenges.

Perfecting powder and granular bulk material handling processes, while maximizing safety and compliance, with airtight “Performance GuaranteesTM”

Bulk Bag Load / Unload

Bulk Material Handling • Industrial Vacuum Cleaning

Bag Dump Stations w/ LoadLifterTM

ActivatorTM Bulk Bag Unloading System

Visit vac-u-max.com and fill out RFQ or call

(800) VAC-U-MAX.

Food_Processing_7.875x10.5-for_eHandbook-Jan2020.indd 1Food_Processing_7.875x10.5-for_eHandbook-Jan2020.indd 1 7/16/2020 1:43:31 PM7/16/2020 1:43:31 PM

Maximizing Carry-Over Improves Bottom Line for Tea ManufacturerBy VAC-U-MAX

Vacuum conveying is very common

in the food industry and while most

suppliers say they can move prod-

uct from point A to point B, there are some

applications that require deeper knowledge

to thoroughly assess and meet all require-

ments for ergonomics, safety, efficiency and

quality control.

In an ongoing project to improve processes

whenever and wherever it can, a global

manufacturer of private label retail, food

service and specialty brand teas purchased

an extension conveyor system to improve

efficiency and ergonomics.

Prior to implementing the extension

conveyor, a vacuum conveyor system

transferred raw materials into portable silos

that workers rolled from one production

machine to the next. Finished product was

then transferred from silos to packaging

machines using a VAC-U-MAX packaging

vacuum conveyor.

The new extension conveyor system, from

another vendor, transported raw materials

from large bags that workers cut and intro-

duced into the conveying line. Once in the

conveying line, material moved through

the production process and the finished

product conveyed to mobile silos. The

packaging conveyor, in use for 10 years,

then transported the final product from

mobile silos to packaging machines.

The tea manufacturer produces multiple

grades of teas and the new extension con-

veyor system generated a higher volume of

fine particles in the final product of its high-

grade whole leaf tea products, resulting in a

quality control issue.

Although the extension system vendor

appropriately sized the system to gently

move the whole leaf tea through the

system, smaller particles (introduced into

the system as result of breakage during

transportation of raw materials from

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 21

www.FoodProcessing.com

suppliers) further degraded while traveling

through the extension system, creating a

fine dust.

In addition, purging filters in vacuum con-

veying systems, forces some dust back into

the receivers and therefore the product,

which in most industries isn’t an issue.

After unsuccessful attempts to remedy the

problem with the vendor of the extension

conveyor system, the tea producer con-

tacted VAC-U-MAX for a solution.

After consultation, it was clear that the

other vendor’s system wasn’t pulling off the

fine dust the process was creating, so all

entrained dust remained in the product and

carried along the entire process.

The fine tea dust, up to 200 microns in

size, is very receptive to static charge and

was clinging to the inside of the cello-

phane packaging that wrapped around the

boxes resulting in quality control issues and

increased costs through lost product, clean-

ing times and wasted production time.

The dust is just part of the product, but the

company did not want to introduce it to the

packaging machine because it makes clean-

ing and sanitation difficult.

The inherent nature of fully enclosed

vacuum conveying systems prevents loose

powder and dust from becoming airborne,

contributing to a cleaner and safer environ-

ment all around.

Vacuum conveying systems are fairly simple,

consisting of five basic parts, a pick-point

where material enters into the conveying

system, convey tubing which transfers mate-

rial between equipment, a vacuum receiver

(typically equipped with a filter, and there-

fore often referred to as a filter receiver)

which is an intermediate holding vessel for

materials, a vacuum source that powers the

system, and a control panel that tells the

system how to operate.

In essence, larger more sophisticated

vacuum conveyor systems that connect mul-

tiple processes consist of several conveying

systems (without the need for multiple

power sources or control systems), and

therefore require multiple vacuum receivers.

Vacuum receivers are the second most

modified component in a conveying system,

after pick-up points, and are integral part of

conveyor performance.

When dealing with dust, system design

requires interpretive consideration of mul-

tiple factors to reduce exposure and those

factors change with each material, applica-

tion and process ...

Download the complete white paper here.

www.FoodProcessing.com

eHANDBOOK: Food Safety Equipment 22