MATERIALS HANDLING
ECONVEYINGXPERTISE
Processors can mitigate risk and prevent many safety issues by using closed conveyor systems designed with sanitation in mind and capable of automated wet cleaning
W
ith the threat of contamination from harmful pathogens such as salmonella, listeria and E. coli a continual concern,
food processors are seeking to protect not only the public but also their companies’ bottom lines from the massive costs, reputational damage and greater regulatory scrutiny associated with recalls. Te goal is a safe, clean, sanitised working environment. Given the increasing number of
outbreaks and recalls traced to post- processing contamination of foods, it is no surprise that the Preventive Controls Rule requires manufacturers to implement a food safety plan with the goal of preventing sanitation deficiencies. Te rule covers sanitation practices for food- contact surfaces, preventing microbial and chemical cross-contamination, and monitoring potential environmental pathogens for critical equipment such as conveyors. As a result, quality assurance teams are paying more attention to the type and design of conveyance systems used to help meet food safety standards. Tis includes identifying potential harbourage points where debris and pathogens can collect, as well as implementing best practices to save on costs to clean equipment, perform regular testing, and maintain the environment. “Every day we are asked for
Enclosed tubular drag cable systems are capable of automated wet
cleaning, so can help mitigate risk and prevent many safety issues
recommendations about types and designs of conveyors,” says Justin Kerr, founder of Factor IV Solutions, a food safety consulting firm that has worked with hundreds of food processors and harvesting operations throughout North America. “With conveyors, ideally there should be minimal harbourage points, they should protect products from the environment and be easy to clean.” Kerr says Factor IV Solutions assists food processors to develop sanitation
standard operating procedures (SSOPs) related to conveyors that include regular verification testing of food contact and non-food contact surfaces. However, given the risks of contamination, the potential for recalls and the additional costs associated with regular cleaning and testing, it’s advisable to select a conveyor that eliminates many of the potential risk factors.
SELECTING A CONVEYOR SYSTEM In the food processing industry, open conveyor systems such as bucket elevators and belt conveyors can be more vulnerable to contamination. With open systems, products can be exposed to pathogens, contaminants or moisture in the surrounding environment. Product can also spill onto the plant floor and make its way into drains. Consequently, processors that use such conveyors must maintain strict environmental controls including constant swabbing, testing and quality assurance.
Closed conveyor systems, on the other hand, effectively seal off products from the outside environment. Even then, it is still necessary to control the environment. Although there are several types of closed systems, one popular example when conveying high-value foods is tubular drag cable conveyors. Tese systems gently move products that are prone to breaking or crumbling through a sealed tube using a coated, flexible stainless-steel drag cable pulled through on a loop. Solid circular discs (flights) are attached to the cable, which push the product through the tube without using air. Te coated cable ensures that no debris accumulates within the strands of the cable, as the cable is totally sealed. “An enclosed conveyor such as the Cablevey provides a controlled environment that reduces the risk of
www.engineerlive.com 25
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
