search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
PROCESS AUTOMATION FEATURE


AN EFFICIENT WAY TO CLEAN UP YOUR ACT IN FOOD TASKS


With 90% of bacterial contamination in the food processing industry caused by poor hygienic design, one of the key areas of focus should be motors and gears, says Gareth Lenton, director of the Power Transmission Technology Centre at ERIKS UK


W


et, ambient environments, such as those frequently encountered in the


food industry, (which are usually due to wash-down procedures), provide enormous challenges. At ERIKS UK, one of the big headaches we have found for food processing companies is gears and motors, specifically, related to hygiene, cost and downtime. In fact, 90% of the bacterial


contamination in the food industry is caused by poor hygienic design, with gears and motors a primary cause of problems.


COMMON PROBLEMS There are three common problems. Firstly, condensation build-up in motors which can harbour bacteria, shorten operational life, result in downtime and increased maintenance costs. Secondly, the problem of gear corrosion,


specifically housing rust and bearing rust, which can build-up over time and, at worst, enter the food chain. Finally, food accumulation in cooling


ribs, hollow areas and sharp edges, which are immune to the daily wash-down procedures and result in bacterial build-up which may enter the food. All of these problems place enormous


cost pressure on food manufacturers who are also under price and margin pressure from their own customers, the retailers.


motors are both hygienic and compliant. The first step is to specify motors


equipped with anti-condensation de- breathing equipment, which can prevent the build-up of condensation and water inside the motor. We would recommend the use of a motor with an ingress protection rating of between IP66/69, which protects against powerful jets of water and chemical cleaning products, such as those used in sanitising processes. The de-breather captures the difference in pressure between the warm air inside the motor and the cold air outside the motor, preventing the build-up of condensation.


SMOOTH SURFACES Secondly, we would advise the specification of gears and motors with smooth surfaces, which precludes the use of tag plates, and should include easy cleaning hollow shaft covers and torque arms. Look for motors with round and easy clean designs, such as the Fenner Hypoid or Fenner KH range. Thirdly, stainless steel is an important


option. In fact, we know of one multi- national grocery retailer that is insisting all its suppliers switch their geared units to stainless steel design. However, it is important to point out


that the development of hygienic processes and the specification of


Gareth Lenton, director of the Power Transmission Technology Centre at ERIKS UK


‘The use of hygienic solutions is also more sustainable. Using stainless steel hygienic gears and motors means decreased water consumption during clean-down and reduced use of chemicals’


What’s more, regulations, such as BRC


and IFS certificates, place an extra administrative burden on manufacturers – all of which adds to the cost. And it doesn’t end there. The retailers,


whilst driving down cost from their supply chain, are also under pressure to audit their suppliers and ensure that the food offered to their customers is of the highest standard. One slip-up can provoke enormous media attention and serious damage to reputation. So, what is the answer? Our view is that


food manufacturers need a three-step action plan to ensure that their gears and


hygienic design motors, should not be solely viewed as a cost for food processors, in fact we would argue that a more hygienic motor has the potential to reduce costs over its total operating life.


REDUCE CLEANING COSTS Specifically, more hygienic systems will reduce cleaning costs, in fact our experience suggests that the use of stainless steel geared motors will speed up cleaning times and reduce the use of chemicals. For example, a potato processing facility cleaning twice a week would have to take extra care to clean


/ PROCESS&CONTROL


Look for motors with round and easy clean designs, such as those produced by Fenner


around the covers in the units which takes extra time. With stainless units there is no need for covers which, in turn, speeds up the process. In fact, we estimate that food processors could save up to 60% on cleaning costs, due to shorter cleaning cycles and reduced disassembling and re- assembling.


EQUIPMENT LIFETIME The second potential saving lies in the potential lifetime of the equipment. Minimising condensation will lead to less corrosion, less monitoring and longer meantime between failure. For maintenance teams there is also the potential for them to concentrate on projects which really benefit the entire production process rather than just firefighting gear and motor failure. The third benefit is the reduced risk of


non-compliance to the regulations that govern the food industry. The peace of mind that results from knowing, rather than hoping, for a positive outcome from an inspection is invaluable. Finally, the use of hygienic solutions is


also more sustainable. The use of stainless steel hygienic gears and motors means decreased water consumption during clean-down and reduced use of chemicals. To sum up, stainless steel motors,


provide a hygienic, sustainable and efficient solution to one of the biggest headaches facing the food processing sector. ERIKS supplies a range of Fenner


Hygienic gears and motors for the food industry.


ERIKS www.eriks.co.uk


PROCESS & CONTROL | NOVEMBER 2018 7


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