Metallic inclusions are the number one contaminant in food products, causing product quality and consumer safety issues. Phil Brown, sales director, Fortress Technology, looks at the technologies behind effective metal detection, explains the three key frequency options and why it is essential to select the correct frequency for your food application


any factors will determine the theoretical sensitivity of a metal

detector used in the food industry. Among them the aperture size (the smaller the aperture, the smaller the piece of metal that can be detected), the type of metal, product effect, and the type and orientation of the contaminant as it passes through the detector. Environmental conditions, such as airborne electrical interference, vibration and temperature fluctuation may also affect performance. In order to reduce metal contaminant risks it is essential to identify the optimum frequency for any product. Many products inspected inherently have electrical conductivity and/or magnetic permeability within their makeup. For example, any product that is iron-enriched, such as cereals, creates a large magnetic signal that the detector must overcome in order to detect small pieces of metal. These are referred to as ‘dry’ products. Conversely, wet’ products with high moisture and salt content, such as bread, meat and cheese, are electrically conductive. Dry products tend to be a lot easier in

terms of detection capability, because you don’t have to worry about the product effect. Equally, you suffer with the sensitivity level on the wet products, because you have to deal with the signature of the product. Even amongst wet products, bread, is very different to meat. They are both conductive, but meat has more water, so consequently the two exhibit very different product effects. The detector must remove or reduce this

‘product effect’ in order to identify a metal contaminant. So the solution is to change the frequency of operation to minimise the effect of the product. The downside is this can impact your ability to find different metals. When you drop frequency

18 MAY 2016 | AUTOMATION Fortress’s new

Interceptor range carries out real time analysis of low and high frequency signals in parallel making it possible to identify conductive product effect, such as high moisture and salt content in bread

you tend to enhance your ability to find ferrous metals, but you really limit your performance when it comes to non- ferrous metals, because the lower end of the frequency is more responsive to magnetic effects of the contamination. By the same token, if you take the frequency higher, the reverse happens. Running product samples and tests is

advisable. Experts will tend to know what the frequency bands are likely to be, but it’s always dangerous to be too presumptuous because sometimes different types of the same product can behave in different ways.

Most metal detectors use a balanced coil system to detect ferrous, non- ferrous and stainless steel contaminants

EVOLUTION OF METAL DETECTION In the last decade, metal detection technology has progressed significantly. Nowadays, a food manufacturer generally has three technology options - fixed frequency, multi-frequency and simultaneous frequency. With a single tuned-frequency device, the operating frequency has to be picked to suit the product. With a difficult conductive product like meat or cheese, or a larger product, the frequency has to be set low to deal with the product effect. That makes the system less sensitive to the detection of stainless steel and non-ferrous metals. About 15 years ago, the introduction of

selectable frequency made life a little bit easier, but the metal detector still had to be set to run at a specific frequency. In a

worst-case scenario, that would be a low, less sensitive frequency. To solve this, Fortress built a system that had two frequencies for simultaneous inspection at a high and a low frequency. The high frequency could detect stainless steel, while the low frequency was able to meet specs on ferrous metals. It worked really well, but it was quite expensive and difficult to build. The Interceptor range that Fortress unveiled last year built further on this technology and improves stainless steel metal detection capability on ‘wet’ products by a further 100 per cent, compared to the most recent generations of metal detectors. This means it can pick up metal contaminants half the dimensional size previously identifiable. Like other metal detectors, the Interceptor also reliably detects the full range of ferrous and non-ferrous metals, including stainless steel. Significant engineering and other

challenges have had to be overcome to make the system more affordable for smaller-sized food manufacturers. Adding more electronics and a new coil structure enabled new cost efficiencies to bring the Interceptor system’s costs to only slightly more than a standard metal detector. The new technology works by carrying out a real-time analysis of a low frequency and a high frequency signal in parallel. Using an advanced algorithm, the Interceptor splits the product and metal detection signals and then link the readings back together. Compared to the traditional approach of tuning into specific frequencies, this new method makes it possible to identify the product effect (most noticeable at lower frequencies) and eliminate it from the higher-frequency signal, where the potential effect of the metal is more prominent.

Fortress Technology T: 01295 256266


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  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64