This is what the selected team members of the GFSI Working Group Hygienic Design of Food Facilities and Equipment are working on:

●      Define benchmarking requirements for design, installation, engineering and (preventative) maintenance to benchmark Certificate Programme Owners (CPO’s).

●      Develop criteria that are suitable to be included in the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements.

●      Include references to relevant recognised industry standards regarding hygienic design.

●      Provide a basis that, in conjunction with the other elements of the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements, could be used for equipment manufacturing certification.

●      Develop a proposal on how to handle connections with existing benchmarking requirements.

●      Recommend relevant definitions to be included in the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements glossary.

Growing awareness

Alongside the call for participation, GFSI issued a statement illustrating the growing awareness that hygienic engineering and design is key to optimise food safety:

“Correct design of food handling and processing equipment and food manufacturing facilities is more important than ever before. As we move forward with the implementation of food safety programmes, we also need to give more scrutiny to hygienic design of facilities and equipment for the entire food supply chain. In most regulatory and industry food safety programmes this is momentarily addressed in a general manner. However, the terms used are only broadly defined, and interpretation of acceptability is left to the individual auditor and their particular aptitude for equipment evaluation. GFSI, powered by The Consumer Goods Forum (CGF), is uniquely positioned to bring the key stakeholders together to collectively address this issue.”

EHEDG experts at work

The experts who dedicate their time and expertise to GFSI working groups do so on a voluntary basis. To ensure the entire industry spectrum is taken into account in an unbiased way, the GFSI Working Group for Hygienic Design of Food Facilities and Equipment is composed of a wide variety of representatives including retail, manufacturing and food service representatives, as well as international organisations, governments, academia and service providers to the global food industry. The following experts take part in the GFSI Working Group for Hygienic Design of Food Facilities and Equipment:

How does a CIP installation work?

Hein Timmerman: “Cleaning In Place, or CIP, points to cleaning activities that don’t require any dismantling of production equipment. Most production environments will have one central cleaning unit that is connected to all closed food production processes. This centralized CIP unit pump connects to all pipes and components that need to be periodically cleaned from within. Traditionally, CIP installations first rinse the system with warm water, then use an effective yet affordable cleaning solution like sodium hydroxide or nitric acid for a thorough cleaning, and finally rinse with water before the production line can be used again.”

Have CIP systems evolved throughout the years?

“Yes, they have, and mostly in recent years. For a long time, the ‘remote washing machine’ approach (with one central CIP station that does all the cleaning in a production environment) has been the most common way to use CIP. But since modern food consumers want more variety on their plates, more and more food producers lean towards more decentralized CIP systems that consist of several satellite CIP units. These new systems are better suited to meet varying CIP demands and therefore offer more flexibility combined with the required traceability. To determine which CIP system is best for you, you really need to look into the specific needs, from the products being processed to the local circumstances. Oftentimes some kind of hybrid system turns out to be the best solution for the job.”

Why should CIP installations be hygienically designed?

“First of all, CIP installations should be designed, fabricated, constructed and installed according to hygienic design principles to ensure a continuous and consistently effective cleaning in place operation. Since it is difficult to inspect the cleaning results from within, it’s extremely important to control all hygienic aspects of CIP cleaning on a detailed level. The best way to achieve this is by applying hygienic engineering and design guidelines throughout all design, fabrication, construction and installation stages. Another big benefit is that hygienic design CIP installations generally use less water and cleaning solutions, which makes them more sustainable and more efficient in use. The newest CIP systems also focus on product recovery and help to minimize food waste.” 

> Article continues below photo of Hein Timmerman, Global Sector Specialist Diversey

What are the main risks regarding CIP?

“Let’s start at the beginning. CIP is a cleaning technique that has been very widely applied for many years, and because of that, many things are taken for granted. Some people tend to pose statements like: ‘We’ve always done it like this, so just copy the old CIP system to clean a new process line.’ But every process line needs a dedicated system, and if you forget to describe your user requirement specifications right at the start, some food safety parameters will be difficult to control. Also, CIP cleaning is generally done in the middle of the night, and many bulk volume cleaning procedures are not sufficiently validated. Sure, the operator starts the CIP-procedure and checks if it finished before restarting the production process, but a green signal doesn’t necessarily guarantee that the end result is satisfactory. New monitoring techniques, that make use of real time sensor data, provide operators with more information to validate real life cleaning results and ascertain food safety risks more accurately, but these types of sensors are expensive, and you will always still need to take samples and perform visual check-ups. We use long camera-equipped endoscopes for this to see what’s really what’s going on inside the tubes and equipment. If you want to improve the food safety of your CIP processes effectively without breaking the bank, the best place to start with is the central CIP unit. A clean heart is a good start to achieve trustworthy CIP cleaning routines.”

Does the quality of the cleaning solution affect the cleaning results?

“It certainly does. When choosing a cleaning solution, you really need to address the specific cleaning needs with regard to your installation and the product that you produce. A well-suited, tailormade cleaning solution will not only improve the cleaning results, but will also let you accelerate the cleaning procedure, which results in productivity increases. Even more importantly, it dramatically reduces the risks of food contamination, call-backs and shut downs. The importance of good CIP is often undervalued, but only by people who don’t realize how much effective CIP significantly contributes to lower total costs of operation. Since CIP is a complex working field that requires the combined expertise of food technologists, microbiologists and engineers with knowledge of flow mechanics, one is well advised to consult the necessary experts before taking any irreversible investment decisions. Another good advice I can give you is to read the hygienic design requirements for CIP installations in the upcoming EHEDG Guideline Document 50. EHEDG Connects will keep you posted on when that new guideline is ready for download, so make sure to stay connected via: www.linkedin.com/company/ehedg.”

It’s a rewarding moment for Working Group Chairman Taco Mets and his EHEDG Working Group experts from Fragol, Klüber and Tetra Pak, who contributed to this new EHEDG guideline publication. Mets has been advocating the use of food grade lubricants for almost thirty years now, partly to serve his employers at Van Meeuwen Industries, but also because he’s a mechanical engineer at heart, who strives to take away misunderstandings and to create awareness that the choice and use of lubricants determine the reliability and productivity, longevity and food safety of industrial manufacturing processes. Mets: “This guideline shows food producers and machine equipment engineers that lubricants are vital construction elements that deserve their full attention.”

Are there any industrial processes that don’t need lubricants to work properly?
“Almost none, but there are considerable variations with regard to the amount of lubricants needed for producing different kind of products. In general, it’s safe to say that closed and dry processes need significantly less lubricants than open and wet processes. With the exception of modern pumps, most industrial production machines need lubricants to function properly. Lubricants avoid wear and prevent internal damage resulting from friction by mechanical forces. All lubricants are meant to establish some kind of “aquaplaning” to separate moving components with a lubricant layer, but only H1 and HT1 registered food grade lubricants also take food safety into account.” 

What parameters determine the quality and effectiveness of lubricants?

“Quite a few, but besides viscosity, one of the most important ones is the temperature. Just a rule of thumb: an incremental temperature increase of only ten degrees will halve the lifetime of most lubricants. Synthetic lubricants offer a better heat resistance and flow ability at low temperatures, and some fluorinated lubricants are even applicable for temperatures of up to 280 degrees, so they can be used to lubricate conveyor bearings in ovens. Another parameter is speed. Machines that operate rather slowly need thicker lubricants with higher viscosities than machines with fast rotating components. Other functional quality determining parameters are directly related to the specific use of an application. A hydraulic system needs other lubricants than a gear box or a compressor. The amount and frequency of relubrication and oil changes is also directly related to the applications, conditions, and the productivity of machines.”

What’s new? 

“We included many new and very useful elements, like a list of requirements and recommendations for the use and storage of food grade lubricants, hand-on tips to minimize product contamination risks and information on the deterioration of lubricants during operation and the use of lubricants during maintenance. We also included real life examples with pictures, and a flowchart that illustrates how to shift from conventional to food grade lubricants. This document now offers a lot of practical value. It also clarifies a lot of misunderstandings about lubricants, especially with regard to the H1 and HT1 registrations that are often unrightfully perceived as EC 1935/2004 food contact materials regulation.

> continue below the photo of EHEDG Working Group Lubricants Chairman Taco Mets
 

Why does this guideline only focus on H1 and HT1 food grade lubricants? 

“Because our EHEDG Working Group members unanimously agree that to optimize food safety, food producers and machine equipment suppliers should exclusively use H1 and HT1 registered food grade lubricants. If you also use conventional (not H1 or HT1 registered) types of lubricants, you will need tight and strict procedures and documentation systems to keep your workers from using the wrong lubricant at the wrong places. Lubrication is an area of expertise that has been greatly underestimated for many years, but there seems to emerge a general awareness now that you just can’t use lubricants that contain lead, chlorine, sulphur or graphite in food production environments. Luckily, there are plenty of food grade lubricants available these days that don’t use toxic additives. This guideline helps you to learn what aspects you have to pay attention to when it comes to choosing the right lubricants for your needs. This basic knowledge will help you not only to protect your gear and your food safety, but it might even save you quite a lot of money in the long run, because lubricants are often sold in package deals and lots of end users don’t really know what they buy.”  

Lubricants in package deals? How does that work?

“Lubricants are often sold in combination with machines, because some machine builders want to engage in the maintenance, repair and operations market. And some of them essentially force their machine users to buy aftermarket lubricants (often rebranded under some private label) by linking it to their warranty policy. It’s probably legal, depending on the full scope of their business model, but from a technical and food safety perspective, it is downright bad practice, because it totally disavows the importance of high-quality food grade lubricants. It’s another reason why all food and food equipment producers should read this guideline. The right knowledge is always the best way to protect yourself from scams and from taking decisions. It’s important to create more transparency in the food industry.”   

Food grade lubricants are expensive compared to conventional lubricants…

“They certainly are, at the moment that you have to buy them, but when you look at the big picture and take the actual use of your machines into consideration, then high quality food grade lubricants often turn out to be very interesting investments. By using H1 and HT1 registered lubricants, food lubricant experts have managed to reduce their processing downtimes related to re-lubrication by up to 90 percent. This guideline helps you to make not only technical, but also well-thought-out economical decisions. Because the better your lubricants match with your applications, the less time and effort you’ll have to spend to keep your processes to run smoothly. “ 

What’s next?

“This guideline will serve the industry in the upcoming years, but lubricants will continue to evolve in line with new machine equipment industry developments like the ongoing miniaturization of sump volumes, increasing mechanical stress and rising operating temperatures. All of these developments have consequences for the future use of lubricants and will keep lubricant producers busy. In the meantime, EHEDG will develop an update for its EHEDG Training Installation, Maintenance and Lubricants, which will be based on this new guideline as well. Our goal is to make everyone in the industry understand the benefits that good lubrication offers for improving food safety, productivity and reliability of machinery. It’s an area where many food producers can still take advantage of untapped reserves, and it all starts with reading this EHEDG Guideline Doc. 23.”  

To participate, please submit your story idea in the comments section on the EHEDG LinkedIn page: www.linkedin.com/company/ehedg. 

After the final submission deadline on July 1, all participants will be asked to cast their votes (3, 2, 1 points) for their favourite top 3 topics. The winning story ideas will be featured on EHEDG Connects Online and on this EHEDG LinkedIn page for the whole food industry to see. 

Contest rules: 1) The contest is open for all registered EHEDG members (personal and company members). 2) Article idea descriptions in max. 150 words including max. two links. 3) One article idea submission per applicant. 4) Every article proposal may only be submitted once. 5) Final submission deadline: July 1 at noon. 6) Voting starts on July 1 and ends on July 10 at noon. Only participants can vote and only participants that cast their votes in time stay in the race. 7) And voting for your own story idea is not allowed, of course ;-) Happy submitting! 

Yes, beer is considered food, at least in Bavaria it is. In this southern part of Germany, it has been officially so since 1516, the year that Duke Wilhelm IV wrote history by drafting the first food law in the world. A contemporary version of ‘Das Reinheitsgebot’ still regulates the purity of Bavarian beer until this day.    

Beer and Bavaria go together like Bavarian Beer and Bratwurst with Sauerkraut, and not only Germans can enjoy it. Beer is exported from Bavaria to beer connoisseurs all over the world. Consequently, many new breweries emerged in Bavaria, but only a handful brands brew the traditional Bavarian Weissbier like the Schneider Weisse G. Schneider & Sohn GmbH brewery does: in the authentic traditional way, by adding the yeast to the wort in open tanks, and by letting the final fermentation stadium continue inside the closed bottle to make the beer even more tasteful and refreshing. 

The impressive neoclassical Befreiungshalle (Hall of Liberation), that commemorates the victory over Napoleon in 1815, dominates a hill above the town and oversees the picturesque village and the Danube river. The historic building of the Schneider Weisse brewery is situated at the central market square of Kelheim. In 1607, it was transformed into a wheat beer brewery by the Bavarian Dukes of Wittelsbacher. In 1928 the Schneider family, that had been brewing wheat beer since 1872 in Munich, continued brewing the legendary Schneider Weisse wheat beer here in Kelheim. After the 1970’s, the wheat beer market expanded and step-by-step the distribution spread out globally.

Brewing Master and Executive Director Technology & Logistics Hans-Peter Drexler: “The challenge was to keep the high quality level consistent while transitioning from a local to an globally distributed product. As a reaction to unexpected beer quality fluctuations and product callbacks in 2004, the brewery started a journey that would introduce modern hygienic engineering and design to the traditional brewery process, while simultaneously preserving our unique traditional brewing process.”

Controlling food safety and beer quality

Drexler was on site when the first problems arose, and recalls the events as they unfolded: “One of the hygiene challenges related to our traditional brewing process is that our brewing is done under relatively high processing temperatures and that we don’t apply pasteurisation techniques that would compromise the taste of the final product. We always test the quality of each batch in our in-house laboratory, and product faults have occurred before, but could always be corrected, . However, the microbiological balance within the process seemed more and more seriously disturbed and out of our control, resulting in a significant increase in product faults. Since we didn’t know what caused the fluctuations, we decided to systematically investigate all probable causes. But where to start?” 

Drexler: “We suspected that the decline in product quality had to be related to some source of microbiological contamination, and together with the experts of GEA we started looking into those parts of the installation that were the most difficult to clean and replaced some couplings and valves, but that didn’t solve the problem. We started looking into the design of areas that were not initially conceived as being hazardous, like the whirlpool, where the wort that was cooked to a hundred degrees Celsius is rotated to secrete the turbid residues which are gathered at the bottom of the whirlpool while the remaining clear wort is pumped out from above. We found out that the drain valves within the whirlpool didn’t comply with the latest EHEDG Guidelines, so we replaced them by GEA valves that didn’t have any dead spaces. This intervention resulted in an instant improvement of the beer quality, but as it turned out, we weren’t quite there yet.” 

Looking further down the road

As Schneider Weisse and the hygiene experts of GEA looked further into other areas of the process lines that could potentially have caused the problems, they turned their attention to other areas in the process. Drexler: “We discussed the cleaning circumstances of buffer tanks, that where situated between the fermentation and the bottling process, and discussed different possibilities to improve them, while at the same time also considering the effects of every intervention on the final taste of our beer. We had to go about very carefully, because obtaining a consistent beer quality was just one goal we wanted to achieve - the other was to preserve the original taste of Schneider Weisse wheat bier. That’s why our quality control system consists of three steps. We start off by analysing the chemical and technical properties of each batch of our beer production in our testing laboratory, like the amount of alcohol and flavouring and the CO2- and PH-levels. Then there is a microbiological analysis phase that analyses the amount and combinations of the microbiological components that strongly determine the flavour. The third testing stage is the tasting.” 

Dream job

Every week, a panel of professional beer tasters gathers in a special beer ‘Stube’ in the Schneider Weisse brewery to thoughtfully taste, judge and discuss even the slightest variations in the overall taste of the final products. Drexler: “Yes, that sounds like a dream job, but it’s actually very serious work, because in the brewery, we utilise the combined outcomes from all of these tests to adjust our settings, like the amount of hop we add to the process. Beer is a natural product, so there are always variations to adhere too, due to variations in the taste of the natural ingredients. To brew beer with a consistent taste and quality, we have to control all of these fluctuations by adjusting our process accordingly. Even in these modern times, where we use high-tech monitoring systems to analyse the DNA-structures of the microorganisms in the beer, the sophisticated taste buds of a professional Bavarian beer taster is still the ultimate reference for monitoring flavour consistency.”

Back to beer business

After replacing various process components by EHEDG certified materials, Schneider Weisse G. Schneider & Sohn GmbH decided to invest in a new brewery process line to produce a range of new Schneider Weisse beer variations, like alcohol free and clear (filtered) wheat beers. Drexler: “It was the sign of the times back then, and we made good use of the extra investment opportunities to further optimise all of our ongoing processes, because after initially having restored the consistency of our product quality by replacing the drainage valves in our whirlpool installations, we experienced an unexpected downturn. It was caused by the yeast accumulation installation, that turned out to contain a few completely hidden weak points. We solved that problem by replacing the complete installation.” 

Schneider Weisse G. Schneider & Sohn GmbH consulted GEA again to develop a comprehensive hygiene concept that covered all separate installations in conjunction with all the relevant design criteria based on EHEDG Guidelines. Drexler: “Together with a team of Experts from GEA, led and conducted by Anton Ladenburger, we then improved the hygienic designs of the drainage system, the water and air conditioning, the mixing mechanics and the beer feeding system. Traditional Bavarian wheat beer needs to be feed with ‘Speise’ (unfermented wort) shortly before bottling. It is like feeding the yeast shortly before bottling to activate the final stage of fermentation inside the bottled product. This has to be done very precisely. If you put too little in, the carbonation and taste will be too flat, and if you put too much in, there will be too much CO2 causing the bottles to burst. Since this last addition enters the final product, this stage must be conducted in an extremely clean environment to prevent microbes to enter the bottle. one One could say that this last brewing stage is not only crucial to obtain the widely appreciated taste of Schneider Weisse white beer, but also to the food safety of the beer.” 

Future-proof future

When looking back on this period between 2004 and 2008, Drexler and his colleagues can safely say that the Schneider Weisse brewery has managed to safeguard the unique taste and quality as well as the food safety of their nutritious beer brands. Drexler: “We succeeded in gradually implementing hygienic engineering and design in an essentially very traditional brewing process, without compromising on food safety or taste. We did it step-by-step, without breaking the bank and without losing our identity and credibility as one of the best Bavarian brewing houses since 1872. And thanks to our commitment and the expertise of the professionals at GEA and EHEDG, we haven’t had any problems since 2008. We protect our strong legacy, our traditions including our Reinheitsgebot, and we guarantee the food safety of our beer. So why not give it a try and experience the real taste of our Bavarian beer brewing tradition? It’s all in there. After all, Schneider Weisse beer is more than just a beer beverage, it’s like healthy food, an honest nutrition for your body and spirit. Grüss Gott und Zum Wohl.”     

Why do we put food stuff in liquid to then dry it again?

Karl-Heinz Bahr: “For various reasons, but mostly to produce food particles with consistent properties, and to improve the quality of the product, for example by adding vitamins or minerals prior to drying. Many of those dried food products are intended to be dissolved prior to consumption, like milk powder. And of course, after you dry a product, you don’t need to transport the water, so this typically reduces the weight of the product by 70-80%. Transporting dried products is therefore less expensive and better for the environment. Also, the (microbial) stability is much higher in dried products."

How to get the hygienic dryer that's best suited to our needs?

“By defining your requirements as clearly as possible. Start off with your product and user requirement specifications. Every detail is equally important: the kind and type of end product you want to produce, the look and feel, the smell and taste. The viscosity and transition temperatures of your product matter, as well as the droplet size required to produce your dry material particles. And let's not forget about the rheology of your product - it determines the shape and size of the spray nozzles. Furthermore, you have to think about the needed pressure, the temperature, the amount of air, and even the shape of the spray dryer. Some people think that all dryers are the same, but dryers come in various shapes. Also the liquid can be prepared in various ways, so it is not only the spray dryer itself that matters. That's why the building design and the utilities should be considered as integral parts of the process. The environment has a big influence on the product as well, not only in relation to energy consumption - it also needs to be hygienic and, most importantly, as dry as possible to avoid microbiological issues. The goal is to realise consistent and effective drying processes without wasting resources. Even big food companies cannot do this alone. They seek support from experienced system integrators. To a layman's eyes, spray and fluid dryers may not look very sophisticated, but they are in fact very delicate thermo-energetic systems.”  

Why is that?

“The temperature, pressure and energy balances within the installations determine their effectiveness and the quality of the product. Spray dryer and fluid bed dryer installations are very prone to the slightest fluctuations in temperature, pressure levels, the quality and quantity of the drying air and so on. Therefore, when designing and configuring spray dryer and fluid bed dryer installations, it’s always a challenge to find the best possible balance between the productivity, the water and energy consumption and of course the food safety and quality aspects. You can imagine that to reach this balance, you need a top-class team of suppliers and operators."

Sounds like a lot of work. Time consuming? Expensive?

"Spray dryers are not cheap, so you need to do your homework before making investment choices. If you want to educate yourself, the newly updated EHEDG Guideline Document 31 Hygienic Engineering of Spray Dryer and Fluid Bed Plants is certainly a good place to start, since this guideline contains a comprehensive oversight of many hygienic engineering and design principles applicable in spray dryer and fluid bed plants, not only related to the equipment but also for the environment it is placed in. The guideline is developed by experts of the EHEDG Working Group Dry Material Handling. Many details of the process and the environment are thoroughly discussed and related to specific design choices. Because even when you work with an experienced system integrator, you are always better off when you are aware of some of the details that you need to pay attention to. This helps you to make sure you have a hygienically sound spray or fluid bed drying installation in place."

What are the most common mistakes?

“We have to make a clear distinction between operational and process line design mistakes. First of all, people tend to underestimate the effects of a lack of control over the system process variables, for example when using unconditioned airflows. When the humidity of the air outside of the plant changes, it can affect the system in unexpected ways, resulting in fluctuating product quality or material deposition on the inner walls of the drying chamber, ducting, cyclones and product transport lines. A general rule of thumb is that better hygienic design dryers allow for more inconsistencies in these variables without immediately compromising on food safety and food quality. However, to really optimise food safety in spray dryer and fluid bed dryer plants, one has to look at the system and the environment as a whole: as a combination of design and usage aspects. The process is the product.”

The process is the product?

“Yes, because with most dry particle food products, taking samples for product release purposes doesn’t make much sense, since it’s impossible to take a representative sample. This is particularly true for microbiological testing. In a powder product, only one square centimeter in a full batch could be contaminated while the rest is fine. That means that besides a trustworthy hygienic design of your installation, you need very strictly supervened cleaning procedures and operating instructions and a top-class team to run, clean and maintain the installation. Hygienic engineering and design can definitely minimise contamination risks, but only if all food safety determining variables are fully controlled.” 

Thanks for your clear answers.

The Germans call it Industrie 4.0, others talk about smart industries, but essentially everyone is pointing in the same direction: a future in which every piece of industrial processing equipment is connected, via the Internet of Things (IoT), with each other and with management systems in a massive cloud of data. But as exciting as the digital future may seem, the question is: can all of this contribute to our food safety?

So how to improve food safety by digital means? We can of course start off by putting sensors in every single piece of our food processing equipment and adjust our process parameters to the incoming real time data streams, but the real opportunities for improvements lay in the possibilities to connect all data streams across the supply chain. 

In a world where food industries are faced with new food safety challenges every day (some of them related to globalisation of supply chains and markets, others to declining consumer trust), digitalisation may offer much-needed possibilities for improvements. Food suppliers, especially farm to fork companies, are expected to drive innovations to control food safety aspects across the food supply chain. After all, these are the companies that need to stay on top of global food safety risks. It seems however that some of the most promising innovations are driven by technology companies. By looking into new possibilities to harness the power of digital technologies, they aim to find new competitive advantages in a highly competitive food equipment market. One of these companies is the Bühler Group. This Swiss Food Technology Company recently launched an online information platform that intends to help food processing companies to optimise the traceability of their raw material and product streams. 

Giovanna Pozzan, Digital Product Owner Data Analytics and Services at Bühler Group: “The globalisation of the food supply chains makes food safety management more dynamic and challenging, and a growing number of our customers that use Bühler food processing equipment approach us with questions on how to deal with food safety issues that arise due to the increasing complexity of their supply chains. They face new and sometimes unexpected challenges, for example because they find bacteria on food ingredients that they never encountered before. New global product routings and a growing number of transitional stages and intermediate food ingredient locations create a demand for real time contamination data." 

Pozzan: "It is why Bühler Group launched the online information platform safefood.ai, that scans thousands of online data sources for local and regional contamination news and that enables food producers to better predict food safety issues in their supply chains. By scanning the latest product recall news, alerts and warnings from international and national food authorities, web pages and social media news, safefood.ai helps food producers to stay aware of trends and risks before they can affect their business.” 

Besides investigating new digital possibilities to optimise food safety individually, food industry related companies also start to share their resources to ramp up the innovation power needed to meet future challenges. Coincidentally, this momentarily also occurs in Switzerland, where The Swiss federal institutes of technology ETH Zürich and EPFL (Ecole Polytechnique Féderale de Lausanne) launched a joined research initiative with Givaudan, Nestlé and Bühler [link]. 

While this initiative focuses primarily on research related to consumer trends and sustainability, other initiatives bet on the promises of blockchain technology to optimize the digital traceability and consequently the food safety of food ingredients. Food retailer Walmart for example is working with IBM on a food safety blockchain solution and announced that Walmart is requiring all suppliers of leafy green vegetable for Sam’s and Walmart to upload their data to the blockchain by September 2019 [link]. Meanwhile, Dutch retailer Albert Heijn makes an effort to enhance traceability and transparency across its orange juice supply chain by implementing blockchain technology as well [link]. 

Blockchaining the food supply chains 

What can blockchain technology already do for food safety? That depends on who you ask. In this Forbes article [link], food, science and health writer Jenny Splitter states that ‘despite the promises that blockchain technology will transform the entire food industry by increasing efficiency, transparency and collaboration throughout the food system, essentially it’s just a digital ledger, a digitised record of whatever data is added by its members, with no ability to verify the accuracy of the underlying data itself.’ 

When asked to comment, Fraunhofer Institute Deputy Director and Head of the Department for Process Engineering and Packaging IVV Dresden Marc Mauermann begs to differ: “After one of the stakeholders in a specific food supply chain has added information to his blockchain, it is impossible (or at least extremely difficult) to erase or alter that data entry without detection. This makes blockchain technology suitable to become an important part of the big technology puzzle needed to manage food safety risks across food supply chains. The benefit for food safety is perhaps the biggest benefit of digitalisation for the food industry, even bigger than the efficiency benefits."
  

Mauermann: "Imagine a digitally connected food supply chain, gathering and sharing information amongst all stakeholders. With this information, smart data processing and modelling, based on effective structures, we might get a better picture of the performance of the full range of the food supply chain that is connected to one specific food product - from the farm, via processing and packaging to logistics and retail. It can really change the rules of the game, since bad food supply batches can be easily traced back to their sources. Consequently, the pressure on every stakeholder in a food supply chain to comply with good manufacturing practices will be much higher than it is now.”

Infrastructure 

As promising as the perspectives for digitally powered food safety may be, the development of digital process, information and traceability management will only take off after the underlying digital infrastructures are put into place. Another challenge is that at this point in time, food processing companies are not yet used to handle big data streams. A survey, conducted in 2018 by GFSI and DNV, amongst six hundred food industry professionals concludes that most of them just don’t know yet how to utilise blockchain technology to improve food safety. However, swift changes are to be expected here, since 44 percent of the respondents stated to already use sensor technology and the other 56 percent expects to start implementing sensors within the next three years. Also, 40 percent expects to start using blockchain technology with the next three years. 

What remains to be seen is if all those survey respondents will have put the necessary IT-infrastructure in place before then. Mauermann: “At the Fraunhofer Institute, we are momentarily working on different parts of the backbone of digitalisation, for example directly on machinery processes, where we develop monitoring systems and adaptive cleaning procedures based on real time process data coming from sensory systems. To do this on a large scale, digital twin representations of the process lines have to be designed. In other words: everything starts with engineering. Many food industries still work with legacy design processes and machines that are not ready for digitalisation. That’s why we are investigating new ramp up scenarios and methods for effective transitions from legacy to digital twin machines. The time has come for food producers to really look into the digitalisation options for their current process data. We need to find out if existing inline monitoring systems can be mathematically linked to quality criteria and if not, how we can renew our systems to make them future-proof and suitable for upcoming digital developments. There’s still a lot of work to be done, but it’s definitely worth the efforts, since the potential benefits are great, especially for food safety.” <

How does CIFST contribute to food safety in China?

CIFST: “CIFST has always attached great importance to the standardisation of food safety, and lists the formulation and revision of food safety standards as an important part of its annual work priorities. In recent years, in the process of developing and revising China’s national food safety standards, CIFST has organised a strong scientific and technological community to safeguard the healthy and sustainable development of the industry. In 2016-2018, CIFST participated in the development and revision of more than 20 food-related standards. CIFST has participated in the formulation and revision of the National Food Safety Standard-Good Manufacturing Practice for Milk Products, the National Food Safety Standard-Good Manufacturing Practice for Powdered Formulae for Infants and Young Children and other national standards related to hygienic design in food production; with an increasing focus on food hygiene factory design, CIFST has gradually shifted the focus of food safety control to the hygienic engineering and design of food factories.

In order to better align the testing method with international standards, CIFST has signed a cooperation agreement with AOAC, and further established the working direction for CIFST-AOAC cooperation to gradually align the testing method with international standards. In order to effectively carry out the publicity and implementation work for food safety standards, answer questions for the industry, and promote the implementation of standards, CIFST has coordinated relevant authorities, expert teams and related enterprises in the process of standard formulation and revision to increase the interpretation, publicity and implementation of standards, and used the institute’s conference reports, seminars and a variety of new media to explain relevant national standards.”

What added value does EHEDG and the EHEDG Regional Section China offer to CIFST and food industry stakeholders in China?

“EHEDG is a well-known professional organisation dedicated to food hygiene engineering design. Its credibility and recognition level in the global food industry is self-evident. At the end of 2015, at the invitation of EHEDG, Meng Suhe, President of CIFST, visited Europe with a group of people. After field visits to and exchanges with local food and related enterprises, testing centers and EHEDG headquarters, the two sides signed a strategic cooperation agreement and agreed to assist the promotion of EHEDG’s philosophy across China so as to provide technical guidance to the whole process from plant design, equipment procurement to manufacturing installation and operation and maintenance for Chinese food enterprises so as to ensure the safety of food production. CIFST has held a series of seminars, training sessions and other activities with the support of EHEDG.

In 2016-2018, training sessions on food hygiene engineering and design were successfully held in Shanghai, Beijing and other places for three rounds, including the session in 2017 when Mr. Knuth and Mr. Gregorio went to Beijing to offer training, which was highly praised by the trainees for professionalism and practicality. In 2018, the EHEDG World Congress on Hygienic Engineering & Design was successfully held in London. The Chinese delegation was invited to attend the meeting. Through communication with EHEDG, the two sides enhanced mutual understanding and friendship. In addition, well-known multinational businesses in the area of food hygiene design, represented by ACO and Ecolab have long been actively participating in and supporting EHEDG in China. For CIFST, through continuous cooperation with EHEDG, CIFST has increased its voice in the area of food hygiene engineering in China and expanded its influence in the area; further improved its expert team in the area of food engineering and design in China through the export of technology and experience from EHEDG; promoted the diversified development of its business and strengthened the business contact and cooperation with related enterprises.

In the Chinese food industry, the focus is previously put on the technological advancement of equipment and processes, neglecting the cleaning and disinfection of pipelines, the hygienic design of water supply and drainage and other steps in the production process. Through the contact and exchanges with EHEDG, the design concept of food factories has been changed, with a strengthened food safety system management that provides technical confidence for ensuring food safety from the source. China has a huge food market and its food industrialisation level is on the rise. The production environment and technologies of food businesses are mixed, with many places in need of improvement. It is expected that EHEDG and CIFST will have more cooperation in the future.”

What are the challenges for the upcoming years (in relation to the further industrialisation of the Chinese food industry and/or demographic food trend developments)?

“China’s food industry has developed steadily in the country, the world’s largest and most attractive market, but not without setbacks. The food industry, which accounts for 11.2% of the country’s industrial economy, has many blanks in the core technologies of bioengineering, intelligent manufacturing, genetic engineering and many other fields. This requires the joint efforts of all food science and technology workers. In aspects such as food safety assurance, quality and brand improvement, environmental protection, energy conservation and emission reduction, industrial innovation and development, policy revision and improvement, and consumer education and guidance, all parties must make unremitting efforts and overcome difficulties to realise the healthy and sustainable development of China’s food industry so as to meet the people’s growing need for a better life.”

How do you envision the further collaboration between CIFST and EHEDG?

“EHEDG has advanced food engineering and hygiene design concepts and technologies, and has the authoritative certification capability in the industry. In the future, I hope that CIFST and EHEDG will strengthen cooperation in further promoting food engineering and hygiene design concepts and technologies in China, and step up cooperation in food hygiene engineering and design training sessions, seminars, EHEDG lecturer recommendation, and journals and magazines. The two sides may cooperate in multiple ways to spread more food hygiene design concepts.”

For outsiders it looks as if there's no clear formal hierarchy between the many national and local government departments that oversee and enforce food safety policies in China. How do new food safety regulations arise in your country?

“China has a long food industry chain and many departments are involved. The State Council established a food safety committee to set up the overall coordination mechanism that is committed to promoting inter-departmental policy coordination and cross-regional collaboration for food safety. Based on maintaining and promoting health, a food safety management model suitable for China has been formed.

Article 28 of the Food Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China further stipulates that “the establishment of national food safety standards shall be based on the results of food safety risk assessment and fully consider the results of risk assessment of edible agricultural products, with reference to relevant international standards and international food safety risk assessment results. The draft national food safety standards shall be released to the public to solicit opinions of food producers, traders, consumers, and relevant departments”.

What can China learn from other countries and what can the global food industry learn from China?

“As the country with the largest population in the world, China is of key importance in safeguarding food safety. It also faces great challenges in ensuring both quantity safety and quality safety. After years of integrated management and strict control, China’s food safety environment has shown a steady and improving trend, and food industry governance experience with Chinese characteristics are also formed: for a long time, the Chinese government has attached great importance to food safety and has always treated food safety as a major political task. As a priority issue in the field of public safety, food safety is managed in accordance with the “most stringent standards, regulation, punishment and accountability system”.

The country has improved laws and regulations, supervision systems, integrated regulation and investment support to continuously enhance the ability in food safety governance, fully demonstrating the institutional advantages of socialism with Chinese characteristics. More than 300 colleges and universities in China have set up food safety majors. The training of food professionals is undergoing a shift from quantity to quality, and efforts have been stepped up in training talents in food quality and safety majors so as to provide sufficient technical talent reserve for the future development of China’s food industry. With the extensive application of a large number of emerging technologies such as industrial cloud, big data, AI and blockchain in the food industry, science & technology and the food industry will realise seamless connection in the whole industry chain of raw material production, processing and manufacturing, and circulation and consumption. Sci-tech innovation has become a new driving force for the development of China’s food industry.” 

Since the official establishment of the EHEDG Regional Section in China in 2015, EHEDG volunteers have supported the Chinese food industry in various ways. By exchanging knowledge and by establishing new networking connections in the colourful Chinese food industry sector, with Chinese universities and the Chinese government, these volunteers raise awareness for the benefits of hygienic engineering and design. How did they approach their mission and how are they doing so far?

In this article, Monica Chen (ACO Drainage Technology Shanghai and Secretary of EHEDG Regional Section in China) and Hui Zhang (Hygiene Expert of a multinational company of FMCG and Chair of the EHEDG Working Group Cleaning and Validation) share their views on hygienic engineering and design awareness in their country of birth, where processes tend to unfold slightly differently than in other parts of the world.

Are the Chinese interested in what EHEDG has to offer?

Monica Chen: “They certainly are. China’s food industry is modernising at its fastest pace ever, using more technology to scale up and meet higher standards, and our EHEDG training courses, conferences and seminars are very popular in China. Nevertheless, it took us quite some time to start things up. The first steps towards the acquaintanceship between China and the European Hygienic Engineering and Design Group were taken in 2013, when ACO Industrial opened an office in Shanghai and started gathering professionals while building a local network of food industry stakeholders. One of the strategic aims was to introduce young professionals and Chinese students to western food safety and hygienic design knowledge.” 

The food safety regulations in China are complex. How do you find your way around them?

Hui Zhang: “There are many government departments that oversee and enforce the policies in China, including ten national government departments like the Ministry of Health, the State Food and Drug Administration, the Ministry of Agriculture, the China Institute of Food Science and Technology, the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection, and Quarantine, the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Science and Technology, and the National Institute of Nutrition and Food Safety. In addition to these legislating bodies there are also many local and regional food safety agencies active in China. For outsiders, it sometimes seems that there’s no clear formal hierarchy structure between these agencies on the local and national levels, but processes tend to unfold differently in China than in other parts of the world, and you just have to find the right approach to reach your goals. The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and the State Council also regulate food safety issues. The Food Hygiene Law of 1995, passed by the NPC, amended the 1982 Food Hygiene Law and still regulates most aspects of food safety.” 

How did you approach your goals?

Monica Chen: “After two years, we had established connections with Shanghai Ocean University via the Dean of the School of Foods Science and Technology (SHOU) Wong Wang Chi Xi Chang, who is very committed to convey an hygienic engineering and design mindset to the university students. In 2016, the first group of students of SHOU followed an EHEDG training and after that, more universities and university teachers joined the program, like Jiangnan University in Wuxi. Our strategy is to raise the awareness for hygienic engineering and design from the bottom up, starting with the new generation of professionals that enters the Chinese food industry. In order to introduce EHEDG guidelines and training courses we also wanted to establish an EHEDG Regional Section, but no non-governmental organisation is allowed to be active in China without the approval of the Chinese government. In order to obtain that approval, we first had to find a Chinese organisation that would be willing to accredit our EHEDG Regional Section in China. Eventually, we found a valuable partner, the Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology (CIFST), which is playing a leading role in the Food Industry in China. In 2015, Mrs. Meng Suhe, President of CIFST visited the EHEDG Foundation Board in Frankfurt to sign the Regional Bylaws between EHEDG and CIFST.”

What will 2019 bring?

Hui Zhang: “We hope of course that the importance of hygienic Engineering and Design for food safety and sustainable economic development will be acknowledged by the legislative organisations in China, because as soon as that happens, things may unfold very quickly. In the meantime, EHEDG China will continue to organise EHEDG training, conferences, seminars and help food factories to innovate.” Monica Chen: “Since the Chinese food industry consists of many different and mostly small sized companies, it’s quite a challenge to find key audiences to maximise the impact of EHEDG. This year we will focus on reaching more students, teachers and the big Chinese food producers to establish a firm base for the future development and integration of hygienic engineering and design expertise in China.” 

Every single day of the year, 200 Sachsenmilch trucks pick up more than five million litres of raw milk in an area of 200 kilometers around Leppersdorf. They make sure that the enormous cooled tanks on site can continue to supply the many processes taking place. The annual production volume of Sachsenmilch encompasses 2,6 billion pots of yoghurt, 320.000 tons of UHT milk, 150.000 tons of milk and whey ingredients, 100.000 tons of cheese and 70.000 tons of butter.

These numbers, as impressive as they may be, are not the only reason why Sachsenmilch is a leading supplier in the dairy product world. Sachsenmilch also leads by example concerning effective and consistent food safety management, with a company culture that enables every Sachsenmilch employee to embrace hygienic engineering and design rules. Dr. Lars Gorzki, General Production Leader Sachsenmilch Leppersdorf GmbH, explains how they do it.

What processes are the most hygiene-critical around here?


Dr. Lars Gorzki: “One of the most sensitive processes here is the production of dry mix lactose, a basic ingredient of baby food. To maximise the food safety of the lactose production units, we established an extremely hygienic production zone by implementing EHEDG guidelines while also creating a hygiene focused company culture. That’s why everywhere on site you see billboards with babies on them, accompanied by the message: our customers, our responsibility. We made it a personal responsibility of each and every employee working here to strictly adhere to these core elements, by posing one simple but meaningful question: ‘Would you feed today’s lactose product to your own baby?’ We have quite some fathers and mothers of young children working on site, and this message really struck a chord.”

What about the others?


“To create an effective food safety company culture, you need to first create a solid support foundation, represented by a critical number of workers who are intrinsically motivated to optimise food safety - in this case: the operators of our plant who are also fathers and mothers. In the first two years of the development of this plant, we invested extensively in creating a high level food safety culture by putting the emphasis on everyone’s individual responsibility, in order to make it socially acceptable to point out safety hazards to each other. By now, everyone here feels comfortable to address a colleague in case any hygiene regulation might get touched. To make this possible, we of course needed to implement crystal clear rules and regulations, and to find effective ways to convey them to our staff. EHEDG helped us to get everything right. We are proud to be an EHEDG Company Member, and we implement the comprehensive range of EHEDG products and services to optimise food safety at our production site, from the training to certification services to the guidelines and the networking opportunities that EHEDG offers to exchange ideas and best practices with other food companies, hygienic engineering and design experts and equipment suppliers.”

Can you give us some examples of how you implemented hygienic design on site?


“It all started with the layout of the premises. We positioned the Molke 5 building where the lactose is processed behind another building that we use as a sort of a buffer. There’s only one entrance to get into the buffer building, and consequently from there into the different food safety zones. Everyone has to change clothes twice and to avoid any misunderstandings, the floors are coloured to match with the different green and red safety zones. In the red zone (also called the dry zone) where our fluid bed dryers are located, we only use EHEDG certified components and materials. There’s decontamination chambers for all equipment going in and out of this zone, all electrical cabinets are hygienically designed, with sloping roofs for easy cleaning, we have online air quality and pressure systems running that we can log into from anywhere in the world. I could go on for a long time here, but believe me when I say that a great number of details are addressed here. However, as soon as we see a possibility for further optimisation, we will look into it. That’s another reason why we are an EHEDG member: we stay in touch with the latest developments."

How do you know how effective your efforts are in your day to day operations?

“We monitor everything: the quality of the purified air in the production areas, the presence of microbes on the floors, on the equipment and even in the drains. And we have clear regulations for all processing aspects, not only regarding our cleaning procedures, but also with respect to our employees. They know how to behave in all work areas and situations. For example, momentarily there is a small flu outbreak in this region, so a temporary rule is in effect that prohibits our employees to shake hands. Everyone here understands and respects a rule like that, because we know that it’s aimed at minimizing food safety risks. There is a continuous awareness to proactively think about food safety risks, based on our own personal responsibility for the health of our actual end customers. In the end, our customers are not the food companies we supply, but the babies consuming our food ingredients. We make sure that everyone is reminded of that responsibility every day. In fact, personally I don’t believe that key performance indicators alone can guarantee food safety. However, I do believe in the value of continuous risk assessment and management. Don’t misunderstand me: kpi’s are important and that’s why we monitor everything, but they are by far not enough to guarantee food safety, not even when you link them to financial incentives. You cannot intrinsically motivate an operator with extra money, but you can do it by conveying a real sense of personal responsibility. At the end of the day, every one of us wants to go to sleep feeling comfortable that our days’ work will be for the benefit and high quality nutrition of babies.”

What’s the most important hygiene rule when handling dry materials?

Gabrie Meesters: “The most relevant general directive is to keep your plant environment as dry as possible during operation. Pathogenic bacteria need nutrition and moisture to multiply, so the best way to guarantee food safety in dry food material processing areas is to effectively prevent condensation and all other forms of humidity. Compared to other food ingredient processes, dry materials come with their own specific challenges. In general, spray dryer and fluid bed plants require less frequent cleaning than wet food processing facilities, but you have to understand the reason why and how to make use of this in a hygienic way.”   

So what’s new?

“The previous edition of this guideline was published in 2005. Since then, the worldwide use of fluid bed and spray drying plants has increased significantly. Notwithstanding that most of the applied techniques are based on the same basic technical principles that have been around for ages now, the local circumstances may differ greatly and that’s where this new guideline comes into play. EHEDG Guideline 31 not only focuses hygienic engineering aspects of fluid bed and spray dryer installations as such, but also covers food safety determining aspects related to the direct surroundings of these continuing drying process installations, like supply air systems and liquid feed handling. In this updated version, it now covers the total scope, from hygienic plant layout via component design to plant operation within forty pages. So it’s almost twice the size of the previous guideline on this topic.”   

Is EHEDG Guideline 31 suitable for all types of particulate material production?

“Yes, you will find valuable insights for every type of dry material process that makes use of either fluid bed or spray dryer technology. Hygiene risks are always linked to process conditions of heat and humidity and the positioning of the process in the whole processing line. Regardless if you are producing simple starch or complex baby-milk powders - all relevant precautions that should be taken to prevent the transfer of allergens between products, reduce cross contamination possibilities and avoid growth and survival of microorganisms can be found in this guideline.”

How did you determine the new scope of this guideline?

“Our working group comprises members from various areas of the food industry. We each bring in our own expertise and together we have a comprehensive overview of the practical industry needs. In this guideline we addressed all common misconceptions and mistakes made in engineering, designing and operating fluid bed and spray dryer plants. On request of other EHEDG members, we also included a fair number of schematic overviews that help readers to quickly identify and address hidden risk factors. These overviews help readers to quickly implement hygienic design and operation requirements for their types of particulate materials processes. We decided to primarily focus on the hygienic safety of dry particulate materials, so aspects as personnel safety and environmental protection are not addressed in this document. We also excluded de-watering systems such as centrifuges, decanters and filters, since these are addressed in other EHEDG guidelines. Apart from that, EHEDG Document 31 covers everything you need to know about fluid bed and spray dryers, from materials of construction and air handling systems down to the nuts and bolts, bearings, insulation seals and welding. All of this focussed on plants handling dry materials” 

So who should read it?

“Everyone dealing with solids processing, because this guideline offers hands on instructions to make optimum use of all current hygienic engineering, design and operation insights. When implemented correctly, EHEDG Guideline 31 offers full control over all food safety aspects of continuous drying processes. There’s only one way to put it: this is clearly a must read for anyone involved in fluid bed and spray dryer plant and component engineering, design and operation.”

As a researcher at the ZERO2FIVE Food Industry Centre (FIC), Dr. Ellen Evans is involved with all stages of research; from proposal application, the collation, entry and analysis of data, the preparing of final reports for funders; the dissemination of findings at conferences through oral and poster presentations, and at community education outreach activities, through to the preparation of research publications for international journals. She supervises BSc, MRes and PhD student projects relating to food safety; current student projects include the use of food-media to deliver food safety messages and the role of dieticians in the delivery of food safety information to vulnerable patients.

Dr. Evans personal research interests include cognitive and behavioural food safety risks associated with ‘at risk’ consumer groups. As part of the ‘Food Safety Research Group’, she is involved with various aspects of food safety research from microbiological analysis, the design of intervention strategies such as food safety education initiatives for consumers and food safety training for healthcare professionals, to assessing food safety compliance in the food industry and observation of food safety practices in the innovative model domestic kitchen at the FIC. 

In addition to her research activity at the FIC, Evans regularly contributes to the organisation of research events and she gives lectures on food safety research and education at community events and conferences. She also contributes to Welsh television and radio, and peer-review research articles for international food safety journals.

ZERO2FIVE Food Industry Centre: https://www.linkedin.com/company/zero2five/

Cardiff Metropolitan University: https://www.linkedin.com/school/cardiff-metropolitan-university/

Ellen Evans: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ellen-evans-66b761a7/

Prof. Dr. Ian Wilson takes part in the Paste, Particle and Polymer Processing Group (in association with Sarah Rough and Bart Hallmark), and continues the activity started by John Bridgwater and Malcom Mackley. Their activities focus around fundamental studies, process modelling, product design and rheology, e.g. investigations of phenomena, such as wall slip, liquid phase migration, agglomeration and spheronisation, developing models of paste forming processes, such as rolling/calendering or screen extrusion and relating function, processing and formulation to deliver particular product properties. Ongoing projects include the extrusion of tungsten carbide pastes (with Sarah Rough) to understand monitor micro-structural development and defect formation, the rheology of bubbly liquids (aka cake batters and foamed cement, with Bart Hallmark), and extrusion-spheronisation of pharmaceutical materials (with Sarah Rough).

Fouling and Cleaning Mechanisms
A whole class of unwanted micro-structured materials can be found as fouling deposits on heat transfer surfaces, in distribution systems and other equipment. Fouling is a common (and expensive) operating problem in many processes, particularly the food industry, where the deposits formed can act as harbours for other problem species (e.g. bacteria ). This work relates to long-standing efforts in heat transfer and approaches the problem at three related scales: fundamental studies of deposit formation and removal (with particular focus on deposit structure and modelling), design, control and operation of individual heat exchanger units, both in production and during cleaning (e.g. for aspectic processing) and design and operation of large heat transfer networks, such as are used in energy intensive processes.

Recent work has looked at water scaling on copper surfaces (with Stuart Clarke) and novel, non-disruptive, in-situ methods for studying the growth or removal of soft layers in conjunction with John Chew  (University of Bath). The soft layers include biofilms and protein matrices undergoing swelling for controlled release. Their interest in cleaning in the food sector has expanded into studies of the flow behaviour of liquid jets impinging on vertical walls and their cleaning behaviour. This work (in conjunction with John Davidson) features collaborations with TU Braunschweig, TU Dresden and DAMTP in Cambridge.

The paper by Ishiyama et al. in Heat Transfer Engineering (2014) brought the strands of soft-solids and fouling together in a unified framework for managing fouling and cleaning cycles, where deposit ageing (converting deposit from a soft solid to a hard material) is a key factor. The Matlab code for this work is available from Dr Edward Ishiyama. Ian was awarded an ScD by the University of Cambridge for his work in this field in 2013.

Other Professional Activities
Ian is the Editor-in-Chief (Food) of the IChemE journal Food & Bioproducts Processing, IChemE University Accreditation Assessor, IChemE Food & Drink Subject Interest Group and member of the EHEDG Working Group Tank Cleaning Systems. 

Last year, Dr. Peter Golz, chairman of the EHEDG Product Portfolio Sub-Commission, explained how this centralisation secures the validity of EHEDG certificates (click here to read his article in EHEDG Connects Magazine). Now that a year has passed, it is time to learn a bit more about the person who gives substance to this newly created position within EHEDG. Introducing: EHEDG Certification Officer Mirjam Steenaard. 

Nice to meet you. How did your first year at EHEDG unfold?

Mirjam Steenaard: “The first couple of months were quite challenging, because we were still transitioning from a decentralised to a centralised EHEDG Certification Organization. All the certification, contract and financial data of EHEDG Certificate holders had to be retrieved from the various test laboratories and as it turned out, many of the records were incomplete. By now, new certification and recertification applications run through the EHEDG website, where all the necessary information to start the evaluation and certification processes have to be entered, but that has not always been the case. Prior to my appointment to office, my new colleagues at the EHEDG Secretariat had already done a great deal of work updating the certification database, but I still had to really dive into the matter to complete it. I also had to learn how all processes are organised within EHEDG. I was very fortunate to find such knowledgeable and committed colleagues at the Secretariat. Susanne, Jana and Johanna did a fantastic job: they offered me all the support I needed to get started.”

What does an EHEDG Certification Officer do on a daily basis? 

“Since all technical evaluation and certification steps are handled by the Authorized Evaluation Officers (AEOs) and, if cleaning in place testing is required, by the EHEDG accredited test laboratories, my work as the EHEDG Certification Officer mainly focuses on the procedural, financial and legislative aspects of the certification allotments. The certification process consists of several procedural stages. Firstly, the applicant who wants to certify (or needs to recertify) a component will fill in the online application form on the EHEDG website and select a preferred AEO (for a list of all AEOs: click here). What follows is an initial evaluation procedure, in which the AEO performs a design review to determine if all basic design requirements are met. After a successful design review, open equipment may be submitted directly for certification but most closed equipment will require cleanability in-place (CIP) testing by an EHEDG Authorised Test Laboratory (ATL, for a list of all ATL’s: click here). Only after successfully completing at least 3 CIP tests, will the closed equipment be eligible for certification. The certification file will be completed by the appointed AEO and reviewed by at least one other AEO before being accepted by the EHEDG Certification Officer (me). I will then fill in the contract with all necessary details, make sure that the applicant accepts the terms of the EHEDG contract and will issue a "Certificate of Compliance" after which the equipment will be listed on the EHEDG website (for a complete oversight of the certification procedure: click here). Finally, I will forward the high resolution EHEDG Certified logo to the certificate owner and monitor the correct use of the logo. If a company misuses it, I will inform them and if necessary take legal action. Generally, on a typical working day I am also very busy with answering questions of certification holders with respect to contract details and invoicing and so on. So in essence, I mainly have a supporting role to make sure that the certification procedures proceed correctly and efficiently.”

What are your plans for your second year in office? 

“We are investigating new possibilities to optimise the administrative workflows with regard to the certification processes, for example by partly automating the invoicing. Furthermore, I will have to keep up with the globalisation of EHEDG. At this moment, we have EHEDG Accredited Testing Laboratories in Denmark, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Spain, Taiwan and the USA. With the global expansion of EHEDG, the range of EHEDG Certificate applications and testing laboratories is likely to expand as well. And with the new recertification policy in place, I also expect to answer many additional questions from certificate holder from all around the world (for more info on the new recertification policy: click here). Fortunately, I speak five languages and I really enjoy communicating and working with different people, so I am looking forward to whatever future challenges I may encounter in my role as EHEDG Certification Officer. One thing I am sure of: there’s still a lot of work to be done to facilitate the EHEDG organisation and its members, and I am committed to offer my full support to any future needs and developments.” 

Quality over quantity, that is the prime directive for the EHEDG Sub-Committee Regional Development when regulating the regional growth of EHEDG around the world. With a clear set of strategic objectives and key performance indicators, EHEDG supports, monitors and aligns the activities of the EHEDG Regional Sections. 

What strategic objectives does EHEDG want the regional sections to contribute to?
Andres Pascual Vidal: “To raise the awareness for hygienic design in their regions, to provide guidance and to increase EHEDG recognition and technical abilities. Furthermore, the EHEDG Regional Sections are expected to realise a well-balanced membership structure, to support to EHEDG products and the EHEDG communication strategy and to increase the cooperation among their surrounding regional sections.”

How do you expect them to do that?
“One of the first things a newly established EHEDG Regional Section can do is to organise promotional meetings. Most Regional Sections do this once or twice a year, but to make EHEDG better known in the regions we stimulate them to organise at least three meetings yearly. The EHEDG Regional Sections can also develop regional EHEDG seminars, translate EHEDG guidelines into their regional languages and officially participate in external events and courses under the name of EHEDG. They are even welcome to submit ideas for stories to the new EHEDG Sub-Committee Communication to put their region in the global spotlight. We have developed a comprehensive roadmap containing hands-on information on how to deploy all of these activities. We invite all EHEDG Regional Sections, the long existing and the new ones, to follow this roadmap to reach their goals.”

What does the Sub-Committee Regional Development do in the meantime?
“The Regional Development Sub-Committee leads and develops strategies and programs for the EHEDG Regional Sections. The Sub-Committee members help the EHEDG Regional Sections to interpret and apply the EHEDG strategies, to identify needs, gaps and opportunities, to strengthen the interaction between EHEDG and its local extensions as well as to monitor and support regional activities to maximise their impact.”

Why assess and monitor the EHEDG Regional Sections in the first place?
”In the past, the growth of EHEDG was uncontrolled and unlimited. As a result, EHEDG grew very fast, but no structural performance data was coming from the regions to base EHEDG admission and funding policy on. To control the growth and safeguard the quality of EHEDG products and services, the EHEDG Sub-Committee Regional Development introduced key performance indicators (KPI) that enable us to evaluate all EHEDG Regional Sections in the same way. This also creates an honest level playing field for funding. Some EHEDG Regional Sections never ask for financial support. Others need more funding. On average EHEDG finances about half of the total costs made by the EHEDG Regional Sections. Thanks to the KPI’s, the EHEDG Sub-Committee Regional Development and the EHEDG Executive Committee can support, regulate and motivate all EHEDG Regional Sections strategically and transparently. We can now offer expertise and financial means in a targeted way to maximise the EHEDG value proposition in the regions while safeguarding the quality of EHEDG products and services worldwide.”

What are the primary selection criteria for admitting new EHEDG Regional Sections?
“First of all, every new EHEDG Regional Section must have an EHEDG Regional Committee, consisting of at least four members: a chairperson, a co-chair, a treasurer, and a secretary. Since we strive for diversity, all EHEDG Regional Committee members should ideally originate from different private organisations. Secondly, the EHEDG Regional Committee has to sign the current EHEDG bylaws that contain all strategy and process related rules of conduct. Furthermore, the applying region has to turn in an annual action plan and budget estimation that describes in detail how the EHEDG Regional Committee plans to contribute to the strategic objectives. The EHEDG Executive Committee handles the applications, advised by our Sub-Committee Regional Development and based on our preferences regarding the priority of admittance of new regions.”

Do you have any suggestions on how to promote EHEDG on a regional scale?
”It depends on the region of course, but most companies in the world of food are sensitive for a general set of compelling benefits that hygienic engineering and design can offer. Securing food safety by reducing contamination risks goes hand in hand with optimising plant productivity (as a result of shorter cleaning intervals) and with improving sustainability (through savings in chemicals, water, and energy). These economic and environmental effects are substantial and real and are underlined by the attributions of the recent “Life Best Project Awards” of the European Commission. Also, let’s not forget the business opportunities that the EHEDG community represents. Many EHEDG Regional Sections are hosted by universities and non-governmental organisations that promote EHEDG primarily from a perspective of food safety and social responsibility, but most potential EHEDG members are also interested in new business opportunities. I would suggest to always refer to several of these great benefits and opportunities that EHEDG has to offer.”

The golden era of hygienic design

"These are exciting times for EHEDG. The global food industry collectively recognises the importance of hygienic engineering and design for safe food processing and packaging. Food producers, scientists, legislators, and equipment manufacturers acknowledge and advocate that hygienic design is an indispensable prerequisite for safe food production.

EHEDG is today a trustworthy and competent knowledge platform that provides the necessary expertise to improve food safety worldwide. Consequently, membership is growing. Since our previous print publication, we have again welcomed many new members in our community. Since all of these members bring in their unique knowledge and experience, EHEDG has more expertise to show for than ever before.

Connecting the dots and leading the way

The leading role of EHEDG in hygienic engineering and design is also noticed by other organisations that strive to make the world of food a safer place. The European Commission is considering including hygienic design as a best available technique. The 3-A organisation in the United States is referring to EHEDG guidelines to formulate its sanitary standards for food producers. Also, the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) decided to develop one of its scopes with the support of EHEDG expertise. These are great opportunities for EHEDG to position the working field of hygienic engineering and design in a broad context of global food safety.

EHEDG continues to emphasise that implementing hygienic equipment and engineering solutions optimises food safety, sustainability, and food processing productivity. This is the golden era of hygienic design because the industry realises that investing in hygienic engineering and design creates a win-win-win-situation for people, planet, and profits. In our quest to support food safety and food quality, EHEDG is blossoming into a lively community of people that care profoundly about food safety. The support base for EHEDG is solid and fertile. Our well-established product portfolio provides practical guidance to the industry; our certificates keep on proving their practical value and our training programs reach more industry stakeholders every day. They will continue to do so via face-to-face training as well as online e-training programs, all as parts of our roadmap to establish an EHEDG Training Academy. By continuously improving and communicating our product offering, EHEDG collectively contributes value to its member companies.

Maximizing the value of EHEDG products and services

To stay relevant, it is vital that EHEDG continuously optimises its value proposition for its members. The many EHEDG committees and EHEDG working groups will continue to offer guidance with factual and unbiased information. They keep up with new legislation and innovation developments, publish new and update existing guidelines, establish certification opportunities and enhance training programs. These volunteers will tell you that being part of the global EHEDG community and working collectively with people from all over the world is rewarding both professionally and personally.

All EHEDG members share a common objective: we want to help to secure food safety globally. Thus it is an essential mission of the EHEDG leadership to safeguard the objectivity of all EHEDG activities. That’s why the EHEDG Executive Committee chooses to operate and communicate in a fully transparent manner. As we speak, new online and offline channels are put into place so that every EHEDG member can safely share knowledge and exchange views under the flag of the protected EHEDG brand. Because sharing knowledge means caring for food safety.

EHEDG Connects

This publication shows how EHEDG connects people that care about hygienic design and food safety. The interviews with the chairmen of the EHEDG committees and working groups show us how their teams contribute to an expanding range of EHEDG services. They explain how realigning the management structure of EHEDG has made this organisation more agile, and how our recently centralised certification process secures the validity and comparability of EHEDG certificates. By implementing new means of digital communication and topic-oriented online forums, they stimulate knowledge exchange, and by streamlining guideline and training protocols, they help to adequately disclose all the valuable expertise that EHEDG has to offer.

On behalf of EHEDG, I cordially invite you to join us in this golden era of hygienic engineering and design. By sharing our activities, accomplishments, and plans with you, we hope to inspire you to share yours too. Connect with us so we can broaden our scopes together and optimise food safety and food quality all over the world." 

Why do we need to read this guideline?
Dr. Winkler: “The quality of water used for food processing can be critical for the final product safety in the marketplace. It also affects the reliability of production processes and foremost: the health safety of personnel. In that respect, if water quality falls below acceptable standards and is allowed to form aerosols, food processing systems can become prone to microbes that can cause a potentially fatal disease in humans known as Legionnaires’ disease (to read more about the different types of microbes in EHEDG Connects Magazine: click here).

All types of water treatments, directly or indirectly linked to the production process, should therefore render the water microbiologically and toxicologically safe. 

What’s the scope of this guideline?
“This EHEDG Guideline summarises practices to ensure adequate water and steam qualities for safe use in food and beverage production as well as to how avoid the emergence of Legionella in various types of water systems. The guideline focusses on practices for product water and utility water. Utility water is used in secondary processes where no direct contact with the product occurs at any stage, for example hot and cooling water systems and fire fighting water storage. Product water encompasses the water used as a product ingredient, as rinsing water in food contact areas and water used by personnel for washing, food and drink preparation. All these types of water need to be adequately treated, stored and distributed in accordance to this guideline. EHEDG Guideline 28 covers all of these areas, from water sources to water treatments and water distribution systems, and from steam quality to Legionella control.”

How did the development of this guideline come about?
“The first steps were taken in 2003, after some Legionella outbreaks directly related to the use of inferior product and utility water quality had occurred. There was a need for clear guidelines on water management and treatment. It resulted in the development of EHEDG Guideline 23, 24 and 27. These guidelines covered different aspects of the use, storage and distribution of water in food factories and they cleared the way towards better control over water quality aspects, but until recently, there was no comprehensive hygienic engineering and design guideline covering all water management aspects in one document. So the members of the EHEDG Working Group Water Treatment teamed up to integrate the fragmented guideline chapters on water and steam management into one new guideline. EHEDG Guideline 28 is the result of that.”

What has changed since 2003?
“Most common water treatment methods remain valid. Some new insights related to the sustainability aspect of water use are included. There have also been some developments in the electrochemical treatment field, but we didn’t include guidelines on how to hygienically re-use processing water in food plants in this document. For this purpose, we refer to the Codex Alimentarius discussion paper on proposed draft guidelines and the current work being done at JEMRA: Risk based framework on water re-use, currently under development. However, since Legionella are especially dangerous when inhaled in an aerosol state, Guideline 28 does contain a section specifically dedicated to that subject. Complementary to existing legislation aimed at controlling Legionella, this guideline highlights especially those elements that are of particular importance for the food industry. So put EHEDG Guideline 28 on your reading list to learn about hygienic engineering and design aspects of different water treatment options, from sourcing via distribution to daily use in food and beverage plants.” 

You are welcome to download EHEDG Guideline 28 here: www.ehedg.org/guidelines

..............................................................

Please scroll down to watch the video. 

..............................................................

EHEDG Executive Committee member Knuth Lorenzen is convinced that distinct EHEDG test methodology development is even more relevant after EHEDG reclaimed its rights for allocating EHEDG certificates.

Together with EHEDG experts and the EHEDG Working Group Testing & Certification, he developed a new approach that enables EHEDG Authorised test laboratories to assess the cleanability test for open food processing equipment in the a uniform way.

Why was this new test method guideline developed?
Knuth Lorenzen: “The first EHEDG test method guideline focused on assessing the in-place cleanability of food processing equipment and dates back to 1997. Between this publication and the last one launched in 2012 EHEDG published three more test method guidelines that focused on closed food processing equipment as well. This new and long-awaited EHEDG test method guideline is the first one specifically developed for testing open food processing equipment. It was requested by many food producers who want to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff when selecting new components - just like they do with closed processing equipment. This new test method guideline is the result of an extensive process of investigating and discussing the differences between testing closed versus open food processing equipment. In open food processes, there are many more factors that can influence the test results than in closed processes where testing conditions are much easier to control.”

How did you come up with the idea to introduce robot technology?
“After their first meeting in 2015, the working group members started to investigate methods to compare cleaning effects for various types of open process components. For a long time we’ve been looking for reliable and repeatable methods to first stain, then dry and finally clean open process equipment. This had to be done in ways that would justify comparing the cleaning results with our self-built reference components. To make the cleaning results comparable, both the test components and the reference components had to be stained, dried and cleaned in the same ways, with equal angles and distances between the cleaning nozzle and the surfaces during the whole staining and cleaning process. This was quite a challenge because many components for open processing have irregular shapes, corners, and surfaces. Eventually, I realized that the only reliable way to do this would be to use a programmable robot that traces all surfaces, based on a virtual twin model of the component.”

That sounds complicated.
“Due to recent advancements in robot technology, this is nearly not as complicated as it sounds. Most hygienic design equipment is already designed in 3D-modelling software, so the equipment producers can deliver the models to the EHEDG authorized test institutes. The test institutes can then feed the 3D-model to the robots and calibrate their testing procedures accordingly. The robots are off-the-shelf-products and can easily be obtained by the test institutes themselves. Just like the food processing companies, the EHEDG authorized test institutes are eager to read this new EHEDG test method guideline - because once they know which test method criteria they have to comply with, they can immediately start offering EHEDG testing and certification services for open food processing equipment. In cooperation with the EHEDG Working Group Testing & Certification, the Fraunhofer Institute is momentarily beta testing the new methodology in a real-life test setting. Please check the EHEDG website and the EHEDG social media news feeds to stay tuned.”

More needs to be done to ensure the minimisation of food poisoning outbreaks, which still occur because of cross contamination resulting from poorly designed, cleaned and maintained food factory environments, and from the production equipment within them. 

These key messages emerged from the sixth European Hygienic Engineering & Design Group (EHEDG) World Congress held in London from 21-22 November during the Food Matters Live event.The World Congress, which attracted 350 delegates from 51 countries around the world, heard about the very latest thinking on hygienic engineering and design from expert speakers from academia and industry, including food manufacturers Mondelēz and Cargill, and leading food retailer Marks & Spencer, whose senior food hygiene technologist Katie Satterthwaite spoke about the criticality of hygienic design to good cleaning practices in food and drink premises.

Twenty presentations over the two days were grouped into four sessions covering building and equipment design; cleaning; innovation; and upgrading and renovation. Speakers discussed everything from the use of mathematical modelling to optimise spray jet removal of waste deposits from the surfaces of process vessels, through to very practical advice on equipment design and maintenance to minimise the entrapment and retention of potentially dangerous pathogens.

They also described good layout of production facilities – including air handling and water management – together with the design of all-important drainage systems, to reduce the opportunities for cross contamination. The need to carry out risk assessments when changes are made to the fabric of food factory buildings, such as when new lines are added, was discussed by Richard Leathers of Campden BRI. The practical importance of this was then outlined by Cargill’s Haydn Mann, who described his experiences with a recent upgrade to one of Cargill’s poultry processing factories in the UK. 

Several presentations described the activities of EHEDG Working Groups, which have produced some 49 practical guidelines that are now being specified and used as prerequisites by companies, food safety organisations and governments around the world to ensure the quality and safety of foodstuffs on sale to consumers. However, EHEDG doesn’t stand still. It operates a process of continuous improvement in which guidelines are periodically reviewed, updated and added to by specialist working groups as more knowledge and expertise is gained. Some of these developments were also described over the two days of the Congress.

For example, work on updating EHEDG guidance on the validation of cleaning regimes was described by Dirk Nikoleiski of Commercial Food Sanitation, while forthcoming EHEDG guideline number 50 on cleaning-in-place (CIP) systems was described by Diversey’s Hein Timmerman.

On the first evening of the Congress, a gala dinner for delegates was held at which the Hygienic Study Awards were presented. First prize went to Sawsen Zouaghi, from the School of Industrial Biology at the University of Cergy-Pontoise in France, for her PhD thesis on biomimetic surfaces for dairy fouling management. 

Awards were also presented for the best technical posters displayed during the Congress, with the first prize awarded for the development of a flexible mobile cleaning device for open processing and packaging lines from the Fraunhofer IVV in Dresden, Germany.

The EHEDG Merit awards, which recognise outstanding contribution to the organisation and the food and drink sector generally, were presented to Ulf Thiessen of GEA Tuchenhagen in Germany and Hein Timmerman from Diversey in Belgium.

As delegates relaxed during the gala dinner, they were serenaded by the glorious classical singing of female vocalist duo Belle Voci, 2018 finalists in the hit British TV music talent show The Voice UK. 

A clear sign that EHEDG is growing is the expansion and diversification of the EHEDG product portfolio. For every new product or service, the secretariat makes sure that all necessary back office processes and workflows are put in place.

Then there is the new cooperation with the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) - a great opportunity for EHEDG experts to demonstrate their knowledge on a global scale and an enrichment of the EHEDG network maintained by the secretariat. 2018 was also the year of our biannual EHEDG World Congress. We’ve been working hard so that all members feel welcome and well cared for.

EHEDG Connects: people, policies, products

As the Head Office Manager of the EHEDG Secretariat I have the pleasure to point your attention to the first issue of EHEDG Connects, a new magazine created by the EHEDG Sub-Committee Communication with support of the EHEDG Secretariat. EHEDG Connects informs about last years most important EHEDG activities and achievements and marks the start of a new communication strategy, aimed at a broader audience that includes food industry decision makers, food safety managers, engineers, equipment developers, scientists and legislators. Compared to earlier yearbooks, you will find less technical information and more stories that provide insights in the goals and strategies that drive the development of EHEDG.

As the name implies, EHEDG Connects is all about connecting and motivating people to share their knowledge. To do this, we need to trust each other, and that is why transparency is important. In the key messages that you find in this publication, EHEDG Executive Committee and Sub-Committee members talk frankly about policies, strategies and ongoing developments. You will find interviews with EHEDG Working Group members who explain why and how they developed new guidelines and with food safety professionals who share how they utilise EHEDG products and services in their working fields.

This makes EHEDG Connects an excellent publication to inform yourself about the EHEDG community and its people, while enjoying a good read and encountering familiar as well as some new faces. I wish you a great reading experience and I hope to meet you soon. Until then, rest assured that our secretariat is always standby to answer your questions - and if we don’t have the answers ourselves, we always know someone who has. That’s the power of EHEDG and the EHEDG Secretariat: we love to connect people and their knowledge.

With kind regards,
Susanne Flenner

Scroll down to watch the video.

On the pre-congress day of 20 November 2018, 80 EHEDG chairpersons from 33 countries together with the EHEDG Executive Committee and the Advisory Board members gathered for their annual Plenary Meeting.


The participants discussed the future alignment of the EHEDG strategy and operational work with a focus on further geographical expansion, the alignment of the technical portfolio including major projects like new test method & training development as well as extended communication activities. The Sub-Committees on Product Portfolio, Regional Development and Communication introduced their strategic planning in these fields.

The next EHEDG Plenary Meeting is scheduled to take place in October 2019 in Dubrovnik/Croatia.

By-law signing with EHEDG New Zealand



Ludvig Josefsberg (EHEDG President), David Lowry (representative of new EHEDG Regional Section New Zealand), Andrés Pascual (Chair of SubCom Regional Development), Piet Steenaard (EHEDG Treasurer)

The participants of the Plenary Meeting voted for EHEDG Netherlands to receive the "Best EHEDG Regional Section Award 2018" due to their activities in 2018.

Michael Evers (EHEDG Netherlands) and Andrés Pascual (Chair of SubCom Regional Development)

In November 2017, the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) sent out a call for participation in the GFSI Working Group for Hygienic Design of Food Facilities and Equipment. The objective was to define hygienic design benchmarking requirements for the GFSI recognised food safety certification programs covering food processing equipment and food processing/handling facilities. This working group has now been established, and it incorporates a significant body of EHEDG expertise. This is what the selected team members of the GFSI Working Group Hygienic Design of Food Facilities and Equipment are working on:

• Define benchmarking requirements for design, installation, engineering and (preventative) maintenance to benchmark Certificate Programme Owners (CPO’s).
• Develop criteria that are suitable to be included in the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements.
• Include references to relevant recognised industry standards regarding hygienic design.
• Provide a basis that, in conjunction with the other elements of the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements, could be used for equipment manufacturing certification.
• Develop a proposal on how to handle connections with existing benchmarking requirements.
• Recommend relevant definitions to be included in the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements glossary.

Growing awareness

Alongside the call for participation, GFSI issued a statement illustrating the growing awareness that hygienic engineering and design is vital to optimise food safety: “Correct design of food handling and processing equipment and food manufacturing facilities are more important than ever before. As we move forward with the implementation of food safety programmes, we also need to give more scrutiny to the hygienic design of facilities and equipment for the entire food supply chain. In most regulatory and industry food safety programmes, this is momentarily addressed in a general manner. However, the terms used are only broadly defined, and interpretation of acceptability is left to the individual auditor and their particular aptitude for equipment evaluation. GFSI, powered by The Consumer Goods Forum (CGF), is uniquely positioned to bring the key stakeholders together to address this issue collectively.”

EHEDG experts at work

The experts who dedicate their time and expertise to GFSI working groups do so on a voluntary basis. To ensure the entire industry spectrum is taken into account in an unbiased way, the GFSI Working Group for Hygienic Design of Food Facilities and Equipment is composed of a wide variety of representatives including retail, manufacturing and food service representatives, as well as international organisations, governments, academia and service providers to the global food industry.

For a complete list of all contributors, see EHEDG Connects Magazine 2018.

EHEDG Merit Awards 2018 

EHEDG honoured Mr. Ulf Thiessen (GEA Germany) and Mr. Hein Timmerman (Diversey Belgium) in recognition of their outstanding and long-term commitment and their distinguished services to the organization.

Hygienic Study Award 
The Hygienic Study Award is a joint initiative of EHEDG, VDMA and Fraunhofer IVV. This award honours the next generation of young researchers and scientists by promoting science and research in the field of hygienic processing. The winners of the 2018 Hygienic Study Awards are:

First winner: Ms. Sawsen Zouaghi (Professeur en Procédés et Ingrédients Bio-sourcés / Ecole de Biologie Industrielle, Cergy, France) for her thesis on BIOMIMETIC SURFACES FOR DAIRY FOULING MANAGEMENT

Second winner: Ms. Noor Zafira Noor Hasnan, PhD (Department of Process and Food Engineering / Faculty of Engineering, University Putra, Malaysia) for her thesis on INTEGRATED FOOD FACTORY SYSTEM DESIGN FOR MALAYSIAN SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES (SMEs) IN THE PROCESSING OF CONVENIENCE FOOD PRODUCTS

Third winner: Mr. Ole Mathis Magens (Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology / University of Cambridge, UK) for his thesis on MITIGATING FOULING OF HEAT EXCHANGERS WITH FLUOROPOLYMER COATINGS

You can find more information on the Hygienic Study Awards here. 

EHEDG Best Regional Section Award
After each regional section presented its achievements of 2018, the attendees of the EHEDG Plenary Meeting distinguished EHEDG Netherlands as this years best regional section.   

EHEDG Poster Awards 
The congress featured a poster exhibition with the following winners:

1st Price: Fraunhofer IVV Dresden 

2nd Price: Fraunhofer IVV Dresden 

3rd Price: Seepex GmbH

EHEDG welcomed David Lowry (Managing Director Lowry Food Consulting Ltd.) at its Plenary Meeting in London, where the Regional Bylaws with New Zealand were signed with the EHEDG Foundation Board. David Lowry will soon start up by establishing a Regional Committee and is full of enthusiasm to spread the word about EHEDG at the other end of the world. If you are interested in the future activities of EHEDG New Zealand, please contact Dave@lowryfc.co.nz.

Ludvig Josefsberg (EHEDG President), David Lowry (representative of new EHEDG Regional Section New Zealand), Andrés Pascual (Chair of SubCom Regional Development), Piet Steenaard (EHEDG Treasurer)

For many years, certificates were issued by test institutes. Why change that?

Dr. Peter Golz: “The independent test institutes are doing a great job and will continue to take care of all the product testing in the future. EHEDG centralised the final stage of the allotment of EHEDG certificates to make sure that all tests are harmonised and that all current EHEDG certification criteria are applied. Another reason for the centralisation is that EHEDG needs to have control over the prolonging of the certificates. Prior to the centralisation, there was no system in place for the recertification and re-evaluation of formerly certified products. Equipment that was certified in a time when old certification schemes were operative remained valid after new guidelines and certification schemes came into effect. This created an uneven playing field for new applicants. By centralising its mandate for issuing certificates, EHEDG can continue driving innovation and can guarantee that every single piece of EHEDG certified equipment listed on its website complies with the applicable EHEDG certification criteria.”

How does this centralised certification and recertification process work?

“To assess whether a specific application meets all the necessary current EHEDG certification class criteria, one needs reliable test results and the right expertise to interpret those results. The test institutes still gather their test results based on clear testing instructions, but the evaluation of these results is done collectively by the members of the EHEDG Certification Working Group. This group consists of Authorised Evaluation Officers who control each other and must follow strict procedures that are defined by the EHEDG Executive Committee and guarded by an independent EHEDG Certification Officer. This Certification Officer is also responsible for granting or denying EHEDG certificates and reports to the EHEDG Executive Committee. A comprehensive system of checks and balances secures that all working group members can act objectively and independently and that all approvals and rejections of certification applications are well substantiated. Furthermore, anything that can have an impact on the certification and recertification process is discussed by the members of the working group. They also prepare, monitor, update and develop test methods and assessment schemes.”

What does this mean for holders and applicants of EHEDG certificates?

“According to the new certification scheme, certificate holders have to sign up their components for a recertification process once every five years. Once a year they are requested to declare that the design of their certified component has not changed since the certification date. Certificate holders who want to renew their certificates need to initiate the recertification process in time to receive a new certificate issued under the current EHEDG certification scheme. As the re-evaluation needs to be done by one of the EHEDG Authorised Evaluation Officers, the applicant should contact one of them to initiate the process. A list of these officers is published on the EHEDG website. For equipment that was tested and certified before the introduction of the current certification scheme in 2015, EHEDG implemented a transition policy. By 2020 only certificates which have been issued or reissued under the current certification scheme will be listed on the EHEDG website.”

Is everything going according to plan up to now?

“We are making great progress, but initially we experienced some unexpected drawbacks because we underestimated the time and efforts it takes to obtain all the certification data from the various test institutes. Some contact data was outdated, and some test institutes that issued old certificates no longer exist. As a result, some holders of old certificates weren’t noticed about the need to re-certify their certificates as timely as intended. Our apologies for that. In hindsight, it would have been better to have finished the centralisation first and to implement the recertification policy later. For now, we are completing our certification database and developed an online registration tool that certification holders can use to update their information and help us to reach the appropriate people within in their organisations before we have to take down their equipment from the EHEDG website.”

Does equipment that is withdrawn from the EHEDG website bear a higher hygiene risk compared to the listed components?

“Not necessarily. It simply means that the withdrawn equipment was due for recertification and hasn't been re-certified in time. Nothing may have changed from a technical point of view, and the equipment might still meet all requirements of the current EHEDG certification scheme, but EHEDG cannot guarantee it. There is no other way for EHEDG to ensure that every single piece of equipment listed on its website complies with the current EHEDG certification criteria than to clean this list up. It’s in the common interest of food producers an all stakeholders contributing to the advancement of hygienic design. There are clear procedures on what needs to be done to get withdrawn equipment back on the list. If in doubt, please contact us. We are happy to help out."

We’ve been pasteurising and sterilising for ages. Why renew these guidelines now?

Bengt Eliasson: “Pasteurisation and sterilisation are well established, most widespread and important methods to preserve liquid food. This is why the initial guidelines for continuous pasteurisation and sterilisation were the very first guidelines that EHEDG published to optimise food safety in the food industry. That was back in 1992. Since then, new technologies and new legal requirements and regulations have emerged. EHEDG translates all those new developments into practical guidelines that the food industry and its suppliers can work with to comply with all requirements. EHEDG also wants to help its community members to find the information they need more efficiently. Therefore, all EHEDG working groups recently agreed to structure their guidelines in a new format. So now the guidelines for the pasteurisation and sterilisation of liquid food are published in this new, more user-friendly format.”

So what’s new?

“These new guidelines contain hands-on information aimed at food producers, machine equipment developers and plant designers who need to comply with the latest food hygiene regulations. The old versions of these guidelines focused primarily on milk production, thus limiting the possible applications of these guidelines. The renewed guidelines also cover the production of other liquid foods and high acid products like fruit juices. They provide practical technical frameworks that include a wide array of topics ranging from general considerations regarding the applied pasteurisation and sterilisation techniques to hygienic process design and technical matters concerning effective flow diversion, recirculation and cleaning and control processes. All information is presented in line with the new EHEDG guidelines format that structures information into categories like design, production and maintenance aspects. For those who want to go one step further, these guidelines also contain useful information on techniques to optimise energy efficiency and minimise maintenance intervals.

Do these renewed guidelines cover everything we must know?

“There’s always more to know, but these publications are very comprehensive. They contain guidelines that help readers to make sure that correct temperatures and processing conditions are maintained, that any unacceptable deviation in key process variables results in an automatic flow diversion or shutdown and that the production process is stopped before fouling becomes significant or before thermophilic bacteria growth becomes too intensive. The guidelines relate to the importance of hygienic design in the different stages of the pasteurisation and sterilisation processes. The guideline on pasteurisation, for example, states that the process equipment downstream of the holding tube must be hygienically designed and hence cleanable, possible to disinfect and bacteria tight. This guideline furthermore offers means to prevent the risk of mixing pasteurised and unpasteurised products. Moreover, both of these guidelines even include practical guidelines on how to utilise hygienic design principles to tackle specific regional legislation requirements.”

You mentioned energy efficiency. How sustainable is hygienic design?

“Energy efficient solutions in general, and heat recovery techniques in particular, are becoming more and more important for food producers. They are willing to invest in new techniques to optimise efficiency - not only to save energy, water, and chemicals but also to maximise their productivity by minimising cleaning time intervals and waste. Hygienic design offers many possibilities to save energy and minimise downtime. These guidelines contain several chapters that help EHEDG community members to make sustainable choices to minimise contamination risks and to save energy and money. The guidelines illustrate that investing in hygienic design solutions is economically viable. By applying hygienic design we can shorten CIP times, make the production more efficient by overall increasing availability and reduce the total cost of production. Since investing in hygienic design improves overall efficiency, it’s is a cost saving investment it. It also avoids recalls and public health hazards.”

Is there a link between hygienic design and new forms of energy re-use?

“The guidelines also illustrate how certain systems work, for example, a system that enables producers to preheat their products by heat recovery using a secondary circuit. Heat recovery systems are in general more complex regarding plant design, but the results are very satisfying because they require significantly less energy. Even when investment budgets are limited, these guidelines offer interesting options. In sterilisation processes, for example, it’s also possible to preheat a product after the holding section with a sterilised product in a regenerative heat exchanger, making for less complex plant designs and realising the same amount of energy savings.”

So it’s not the germs we need worry about then - it’s our inner terrain.

“Exactly. And let me conclude with yet another quote of the great Louis Pasteur, who not only discovered the power of pasteurisation, but who also had a very clear vision on how to handle food safety in general: ‘Whether our efforts are, or not, favoured by life, let us be able to say, when we come near to the great goal, I have done what I could.’"

Improving online presence of EHEDG

On the plenary meeting of the EHEDG World Congress, the EHEDG Sub-Committee Communications illustrated how each member has the power to make EHEDG well known around the world and on all levels of food processing companies. 

6 easy steps  to a higher social media exposure for EHEDG 

Step 1: Go to your LinkedIn account and type in the upper left search window: EHEDG

Step 2: Or go directly to: www.linkedin.com/company/ehedg/

Step 3: The EHEDG LinkeIn Company Page will show up. Click on the button 'Follow'.

Step 4: From now on you will receive all of the EHEDG social media updates in your timeline.

Step 5: If you like a post, show others that you like it by clicking on the 'like' button.

Step 6: Even better: share the post or post a comment. This will multiply the reach of the post.

For more insights on the new communication strategy of EHEDG, please read the interview with the chairman of the EHEDG Sub-Committee Communication Karl-Heinz Bahr in EHEDG Connects Magazine. 

On behalf of the EHEDG Sub-Com Communication and global food safety: THANK YOU!