Addressing 3 misconceptions of hygienic design!

     In the world of sanitary automation and hygienic design there are so many misconceptions that this could turn into a series unto itself. That said I wanted to start with what I think are the 3 worst misconceptions I deal with on a near daily basis.

1. Hygienic Design is expensive!

Probably the most common complaint that I hear from people is that Sanitary or Hygienically designed machinery is expensive. Sure the industry puts a higher price on things that often fall into this category, but when you really break it down, what is expensive.

Truly hygienic systems are easy to clean. Machinery that is easy to clean requires less time in sanitation cycles thus you get more day to day up time on the machine. More operating hours means a faster ROI. Couple this with the fact that easier to clean also usually means easier to maintain. Designs with fewer parts and easy to access maintenance points, means that the maintenance team also spends less time working on the equipment. Fewer parts means fewer breaks. This all equates to more uptime. Uptime means more profit.

Hygienic equipment also is less likely to end up the subject of recall notification. No company has ever went through a multi million dollar recall and said at the end of the day that they were happy they saved a couple thousand dollars at the start up of the project by buying that less hygienic system.

2. Poor sanitation practices are the reason for recalls, not the equipment!

I hear all the time how its the sanitation crew or poor HAACP that causes recalls. Although most of these food production companies lowest paid employees are the sanitation crew, I don't think its fair to put that blame on them. These people are some of the hardest working and most prideful of the employees on a food production floor. So to literally lay the blame at their feet is not totally fair.

The reality is that the effectiveness of sanitation corresponds directly to the design of the equipment. Machines with minimal access, harborage points and metal to metal contact points are nearly impossible to clean and the sanitation crews do not have any control of this.

3. Chemical sanitation negates the need for sanitary equipment!

This one absolutely baffles me. First as discussed earlier, if these chemicals cant get to every surface, then those surfaces are not getting cleaned by them. Second, most of these chemicals have a process that needs to be followed that is extremely important to even allow for the safe production of food products on the equipment after their use.

The reality is these chemical sanitizers alone are not enough to overcome the use of old, outdated, or poorly designed equipment. Sanitary equipment and Sanitizing Chemicals have a symbiotic relationship. When used properly together they can do great work in preventing foodborne illnesses, but alone neither are the complete answer.