16 replies to this topic

[Lucas]

Hello,

I have a question that pursuits me since the time I worked for a Noodles factory in London. The question is related with the frequency of sieve inspections.

I understand that the frequency of sieve inspections has to be evaluated by risk assessment.

Let's make the question first. Imagine this scenario: a cake factory that produces a certain type of cake that only has 30 days of shelf life. The product is produced and dispatched the same day, or the day after. So my question is: What should be the frequency of the sieve inspection? Shall it be daily or weekly or even monthly?

I think that inspect the sieve every day is something that is not practicable, though a weekly or a monthly inspection is maybe to long, as the product produced between inspections might as well have been eaten by some consumers.

When I worked for the Noodle factory, the problem could not be put, as we only dispatched boxes after a month from the date had been produced. But for products that have a short shelf life, this is something that needs clarification. At least for me.

Any comments on this?

Lucas

[YongYM]

Dear Lucas:

Do you mean the sifter you use to sieve the powdery ingredients?

If yes, I think the user needs to check its integrity everytime before he/she uses the sifter.


Any comment frm the rest??

Yong

Edited by YongYM, 08 October 2008 - 01:28 AM.

[a_andhika]

Dear Lucas,

This is my first comment in BRC, so do not hesitate to argue or doubting my comment...

From the way I see, I think you need to define, what is the possible hazard that may occur in your material. Is it metal, glass, plastics, wood, etc.. And the second is, you need to define the dimension of foreign matter that may cause significant hazard to your costumer. If it wass metal or glass, you may install a detector/catcher instead of worrying about your siever. HACCP is a requirement deemed as being fundamental in BRC (section 1, is it?), so I think you need to look after your HACCP system, and know why did you think that siever is needed to be checked regularly.

For comparison, in my place, we checked the siever on every batch of production. We are a producer of seasoning powder, and we are much worrying about foreign contamination from Salt. We've audited the supplier, and we're not sure that the material is freely from foreign matters, after considering their operational activities.

Do you have another comments/opinions?


Regards,


Arya

[Lucas]

Hello again,

Just to clarify.

The example I gave (cakes) assume the use of flour, which is stored inside big silos. So, at the half way through silos and production there is a sieve that is inspected regularly to check its integrity. We all know that he have to do a risk assessment, but we also know that we might find a lot of foreing bodies in flour (wood, rocks, metal, etc.). That's why we need to inspect the integrity of the sieve.

The question here is, what should be the frequency of that inspection, knowing that the product is dispatched on the production date or the day after, and that the shelf life of the product is only 30 days? Should this inspection happen everyday? Every week?

I started to define a weekly inspection, but then I asked to myself, and if something happen between inspections? The product might have been already eaten. So there's another question here: should I guarantee the product is foreign bodies free before it is dispatched (remember the product is dispatched on the day of production)? or should I check for the damage episodes on the sieve and work out that has we hadn't have any problems related with the integrity of the sieve it is not necessary to check it everyday?

I don't want the certification auditor to say to me that I don't have the expected frequency, related with the sieve inspection.

Though... is it plausible to check the integrity of the sieve everyday??? it is not my case, but I do know that some sieves have to be dismantled to be inspected, and this means the production line must be stopped. What people do in these cases?

Can anybody help me, or be more precise?

Sorry if I am , instead of clarifying the issue, adding more confusion. Hope not!!

Lucas

[Suzuki]

Though... is it plausible to check the integrity of the sieve everyday??? it is not my case, but I do know that some sieves have to be dismantled to be inspected, and this means the production line must be stopped. What people do in these cases?

I am familiar with your type of problem in the flour / flour-based industry. However, before I can answer your problem, can you tell me if your sifter is "multi-layered type" or a single mesh sifter. If multi-layered, are the sifter mesh homogeneous throughout each layer?

So there's another question here: should I guarantee the product is foreign bodies free before it is dispatched

ISO 22000 is a system certification scheme that uses a FSMS to control its potential hazards. No food safety system can give such a guarantee although theoretically, it is good to know that you have that level of confidence in you product. However, BRC-Food is a product certification scheme and in that respect probably allow a guarantee on products to be free from adverse impact.

[a_andhika]

Dear Lucas,
I hope I am not add another confusions to you...

Pardon me, but I think the determination of checking frequency (and other control parameters) should not based on correction, but preventive. I think its already too late if you have to Hold the finished good because you found that your siever is broken. Even if it still not dispatched, it will cause major impact on cost (material, packaging, labour) and the worst thing is delaying your delivery schedule, or even cancel it.

I am absolutely sure that you're already figuring all of your potential hazards, I am so sorry if I drive you wrong. What I meant in my previous post is just to lure out what actually that you're worrying about (it doesnt went so smoothly I guess, my bad...).

So, back to the topic.. Do you really really worrying that if the siever not checked regularly, then foreign matter may loose? And does no more step that may prevent the foreign loose (catcher/detector)? If yes, I think you already knew that step would be a CCP, and must be controlled with well.

Then how about the frequency? I think you need to figure how long the resistence of your siever? (You may get this from the maintenance record/machine hours). If it says a week, than the control must be more strict than a week. Let say every 2 days or maximum 3 days. But the longer the frequency that you choose meaning there will be a lot more products to be hold if the siever is broken.

I hope my explanation wout create any confusion bubbles...

Regards,


Arya

Edited by a_andhika, 08 October 2008 - 11:30 AM.

[Lucas]

Hello again,

Thanks for your comments Susuki. We use a single mesh of 1,5 to 2,0 mm. It is a very short mesh, with 15 to 15 cm, so it is pretty resistant.

Arya, you're right, of course you are. I have also thought in all the problems related with the hold or a recall of the end product. That's why I decided to shorten the frequency of the sieve inspection from a week to a daily basis. But then, I think I created an issue, as a frequency as short as this one, creates some problems with the operational processes. You know that what drives company business is money, so all the production guys want is produce. If you come to them with "solution" like this (shorten the sieve inspection)... they will tell you off, as they don't easily understand quality issues. So that's why I put this question the first place. I know what should be done, but I also know that sometimes we can do things differently, with less problems to production, if we adopt another option. If there's not another option they have to do it as I tell them, as product safety is the most important thing.

We haven't had any problems with the mesh. We only find, now and then, little bits of wood, sometimes rocks. Nothing too hard that might break the mesh. The only time that happens, was because the maintenance guy didn't refit it properly.

Lucas

[AS NUR]

Dear Lucas...

In My company (non dairy creamer manufacturer) we using single sifter at the production line.. we put Sifetr as PRP in our ISO 22K Document because the sifter only use for separate powder according to the size...
We always monitoring every 3 days in line with cleaning schedule (COP)...

If the propose of your sifter is for reject any foreign body, that the significant hazard, and you dont have any process after sifter to reject the contamination, you have to put your sifter as CCP.. and you have more frequent to monitoring..

And to decide how frequent your monitoring.. you have to consider the risk, how many KG (= $) you have to reject your product if somethink bad happen in your sifter,...

thats my opinion.. hope can help you ...

[Suzuki]

We use a single mesh of 1,5 to 2,0 mm. It is a very short mesh, with 15 to 15 cm, so it is pretty resistant.

I think the answer to this concern is obvious since you only have a shifter in place. AS NUR has explained to you the potential level of concern if this shifter is compromised. The trappings you find on the mesh are for your trend analysis and could well be the reason for a recall.

[aps]

I dont mean to add to confusion but i work in bakery who produce cookies etc.

We currently sieve flour, sugar, egg replacer etc through a 1.5mm mesh and it also pases through a magnet. We currently carry out a prestart up check prior to sieving and we also carry out checks every hour (intergrity check). The reasons why we do this is because if we produce thousands of pucks a day and if we had an issue with the sieve this is alot of product to destroy or check.

Hope this helps

[Suzuki]

The reasons why we do this is because if we produce thousands of pucks a day and if we had an issue with the sieve this is alot of product to destroy or check.

I like the pre-start inspection procedure......good damage control!

[aps]

If required i can attach a document to what i currently use if any body is intrested?

Thanks

A Stoker

[AS NUR]

i think thats great i dea to attach the doc..a stoker

[aps]

Please find attached documents as requested.

The one document with a blank page is like this for a reason and this is just for a recipe of the product to be printed on as we sieve by batch.

I hope you find this useful

Thanks

Attached Files

•  QAF02_Sieving_record_new.doc   66.5KB   289 downloads
•  QAF03a_Pre_start_up_inspection_ts_Assem__Mix_siv.doc   63KB   281 downloads

Edited by a stoker, 30 January 2009 - 11:07 PM.

[Geethanjali Puppala]

Dear All,
One of my clients is Cookies manufacturer. The company have store flour and sugar in silos with an auto sieves. During their BRC audit, the auditor commented in CCP plan( if Sieving is considered as CCP), along with checking integrity of sieve, the sieve have to be calibrated periodically. Is it required? If so, what should be the frequency for calibration?
Best reagards,
Geethanjali

[Geethanjali Puppala]

Dear All,
One of my clients is Cookies manufacturer. The company have store flour and sugar in silos with an auto sieves. During their BRC audit, the auditor commented in CCP plan( if Sieving is considered as CCP), along with checking integrity of sieve, the sieve have to be calibrated periodically. Is it required? If so, what should be the frequency for calibration?
Best reagards,
Geethanjali

[Suzuki]

I can only suspect that the auditor is referring to validation of the mesh size of the sieve. I guess every time a new sieve is put in place would suffice.