Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Average weight legislation


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 7 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 14 October 2008 - 08:09 PM

Hi there

I have been trying to get my head around the weights and measures(packaged goods) regulations 2006. As an example i am thinking of a 2000g pack in a batch of 10000 similar packs. The tolerable negative error would be 1.5% of nominal weight- so 30grams with no bag falling below twice the TNE or 60g. I get that bit!

Its the part about acceptable amounts between T1 and T2 that i am wooly on. Can someone see the light?! :rolleyes:



#2 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,597 posts
  • 1114 thanks
268
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 16 October 2008 - 08:11 PM

Hi there

I have been trying to get my head around the weights and measures(packaged goods) regulations 2006. As an example i am thinking of a 2000g pack in a batch of 10000 similar packs. The tolerable negative error would be 1.5% of nominal weight- so 30grams with no bag falling below twice the TNE or 60g. I get that bit!

Its the part about acceptable amounts between T1 and T2 that i am wooly on. Can someone see the light?! :rolleyes:

Hi Ads, I got the first bit of your post and then I lost the plot. What is T1 and T2? Bearing in mind I know nothing about weights and measures but would like to learn.

I bet you thought you had a useful answer :rolleyes:

Regards,
Simon

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#3 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 7 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 18 October 2008 - 11:46 PM

I was referring to the Weights and Measures (Packaged Goods) Regulations 2006. They basically outline a system of packing to ensure the average weight of a product "batch" meets certain criteria. The main focus is on the three packers rules;

It shall be the duty of the packer or importer of packages to ensure that they are made up in such a way as to satisfy the following rules—

(a) the contents of the packages shall be not less on average than the nominal quantity;
(b) the proportion of packages having a negative error greater than the tolerable negative error shall be suYciently small for batches of packages to satisfy the requirements specified in Schedule 2;
© no package shall have a negative error greater than twice the tolerable negative error.
(2) Compliance with the rules in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) shall be determined by the
reference test.

So the tolerable negative error (TNE)is the maximum that a pack of product can be below its nominal weight. (T1)This varies according to the weight of the pack- outlined in the regs. Twice the TNE is T2

Now since my first post i have had a pretty good crack at this......

The second test is a test to see if the packs are acceptable on average. From what i can gather you work out the mean weight of your production run, then you work out the standard deviation of the produciton run. You then calculate ....nominal quantity, minus the standard deviation divided by the sqaure root of the number of packs minus 1)

or Nominal quantity - (std dev/sqrt of (number of packs in batch-1))

If the mean is greater than the above calculation then your batch is legal.

Or you could just pack to minimum weight but thats something else i havent looked at yet!!



#4 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 7 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 18 October 2008 - 11:49 PM

By the way, found a fantastic site on Food law in the EU/UK-http://www.reading.ac.uk/foodlaw/

Regularly updated by professor at university of Reading. A good resource



#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 14,041 posts
  • 3874 thanks
468
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 19 October 2008 - 08:45 AM

Dear ads78,

Indeed, from memory, the maths part is equivalent to a t-test. it basically tests how much deviation might "reasonably" be found from the declared value assuming the producer is (of course :whistle: ) packing the exact stated amount.
Depends on what / how much you are packing but it is IMEX surprisingly generous to the typical producer. I guess this is partly a result of historically acrimonious and failed attempts by the powers-that-be to devise more punitive approaches.

It also gets more complicated where the net weight of frozen, glazed, retail products is involved :smile:

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#6 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 7 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 19 October 2008 - 10:25 AM

Thanks for that- T-test i understand. I was having trouble relating it to anything. Thats very helpful. Guess i better dig out my notes!!



#7 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 7 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 19 October 2008 - 12:38 PM

So what about minimum weight packing? Is their any law for that? We pack to minimum weight at the moment. I dont know if its a left over from the old regs? :smarty:



#8 AS NUR

AS NUR

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 581 posts
  • 53 thanks
9
Neutral

  • Indonesia
    Indonesia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:east java, indonesia

Posted 22 October 2008 - 08:32 AM

dear Ads...

Do you try to count your Process capability ?.. ... the formula is :

CP = (Upper level - Lower Level)/ (6 x Deviation Std)..

Process capability compares the output of an in-control process to the specification
limits by using capability indices. The comparison is made by forming the ratio of the
spread between the process specifications (the specification "width") to the spread of
the process values, as measured by 6 process standard deviation units (the process
"width").



#9 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 14,041 posts
  • 3874 thanks
468
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 22 October 2008 - 11:57 PM

Dear ads78,

Did you already see this (2006) guidance document ? Seems to answer some of yr numerical queries ?

http://www.nwml.gov......20issue 2.pdf

All very subtle indeed, particularly as intended to be suitable for line control methods.

The emphasis of the "Q" check procedure inter alia has perhaps been somewhat modified over the years, eg I noticed this comment,

NOTE: Reference tests are only for the Competent Department to use, they may not be
used by Packers or Importers to show compliance with the Directive.

:smile:

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#10 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,383 posts
  • 557 thanks
74
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 25 October 2008 - 04:33 PM

Personally I think you guys are just overcomplicating! I think your original question was about this:

Only 2.5% of packs can be between T1 and T2, i.e. 1 in 40.

If you're sampling to check you comply with this and the other two rules (below) than you need to get a bit more of a statistics head on but otherwise, I wouldn't get tied up!

Btw the other two rules are (in laymans language):

The average weight of your batch has to be above the nominal weight
No pack can be less than T2

If you're stuck, why not ask your TSO for advice? They would be the people to slap your wrists if you're wrong so if they help you get it right, they're bought into it!



#11 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 14,041 posts
  • 3874 thanks
468
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 26 October 2008 - 09:24 PM

Dear GMO,

Impressed that you are able to simplify these things so concisely. :thumbup:

The beloved rule initiators seem to be slightly less confident, eg -

9. The existing Regulations were made 20 years ago and are based upon legislation dating from 1979. Since then, technological changes and process innovation have resulted in significant improvements to weighing and measuring equipment. For example 20 years ago there was relatively little computer-controlled equipment, but today it is the norm, allowing for much greater standards of accuracy. Therefore, the list of suitable equipment prescribed in Schedule 4 is increasingly out of date. This may act as a barrier to the adoption of new technology by packers and as such a barrier to innovation.
10. The existing Regulations are complex and, although there is a more comprehensible code of practice for packers, it may be hard for some packers to understand the extent of the duties placed upon them. This level of complexity in the Regulations may also act as a barrier to entry for companies new to the market. The Better Regulation Task Force identified Part V of the Weights and Measures Act 1985 as unnecessarily burdensome and complex in their report into Consumer Affairs in May 1998. Both the Committee on Public Accounts and the National Audit Office recommended reform in their respective reports on weights and measures in 2003. The proposed changes will simplify the Regulations and remove unnecessary burdens from packers and importers.


(EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES(PACKAGED GOODS) REGULATIONS 2006 No. 659 ) (24 Pages!!)

The original directives contained this –

1.2. the proportion of prepackages having a negative error greater than the
tolerable negative error laid down in 2.4 shall be sufficiently small for
batches of prepackages to satisfy the requirements of the tests specified
in Annex II;
1.3. no prepackage having a negative error greater than twice the tolerable
negative error given in the table in 2.4 may bear the EEC sign provided
for in 3.3.


I noticed a later interpretation as –

1.2 "the proportion of prepackages having a negative error greater than the tolerable
negative error laid down in 2.4 shall be sufficiently small for batches of prepackages
to satisfy the requirements of the tests specified in Annex II."
The ‘tolerable negative error’ for each nominal quantity is specified in paragraph 2.4 of
Annex 1 of the Directive. The quantity which is one tolerable negative error below the
nominal quantity is sometimes referred to as ‘TU1'.
A ‘defective prepackage’ is one whose contents is below TU1.
For these purposes ‘sufficiently small’ should be taken to mean that not more than 2.5% of the prepackages in the batch may be defective and the reference test in 2.3 of annex II is also satisfied.
NOTE: Reference tests are only for the Competent Department to use, they may not be
used by Packers or Importers to show compliance with the Directive.
1.3 "no package having a negative error greater than twice the tolerable negative error given in the table in 2.4 may bear the EEC sign provided for in 3.3"
The quantity which is two tolerable negative errors below the nominal quantity is sometimes referred to as ‘TU2'.
Solely for the purposes of setting up a quantity control system, it will be considered
acceptable if the probability of producing one prepackage below TU2 is not more than 1 in 10,000.

(Guidance for the Harmonised Implementation of Council Directive 76/211/EEC
WELMEC European cooperation in legal metrology, 2000)
(underlining is mine)

Personally, I liked to carry out some of the statistical tests included so as to be forewarned of what to expect from an official analyst. Of course, if all the packages always have net weights above the declared net weight, further evaluation is superfluous. :whistle:

Rgds / Charles.C

Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#12 ads78

ads78

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 49 posts
  • 7 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:lincs

Posted 08 November 2008 - 10:31 PM

So to clarify, minimum weight packing is purely packing to nominal weight minimum, and is not legislated? I suppose correct control of weight using the average system can allow you to reduce giveaway and increase output over time. Thanks for all the info... :biggrin:



#13 Richard Ross

Richard Ross

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 18 November 2008 - 05:47 PM

The Average Quantity System

The average quantity system is designed to replace the minimum weight system for packers producing goods on a volume basis to EEC Average weight packing. All goods packed must be checked accross a scale where the BATCH size is less than 100, however where the BATCH size is greater than 100 then only a small proportion of the packages need be sampled in order to meeet your responsibilities. We can provide systems for both process control or QATesting using a PC if required.

Minimum Weight - Each pack must contain at least the quantity marked on the pack. Any weighing/measuring equipment used must be approved for trade use, and should be "stamped".

Average System - This differs from the minimum system in that some packs in a group may contain less than the marked quantity as long as 3 packers rules are followed which are

1. On average the packages of the BATCH must be equal to or greater than the nominal quantity i.e. some may be under as long as some are over.

2. The proportion of non-standard packages shall be sufficiently small to satisfy the requirements in the Weights and Measures (Packaged Goods) Regulations 2006. A non-standard package is one which contains the nominal quantity minus the ‘tolerable negative error’. This TNE is calculated in accordance with the regulations.

3. No package in the group may be inadequate. An inadequate package is one which contains the nominal quantity minus twice the TNE. The table can be found at http://www.scaledire...rageWeight2.htm

The Regulations for packing to EEC average weight changed in April 2006 to allow packers to package their goods in quantities up tp 25Kg, and also that any equipment used shall be approved for trade purposes

Quality Checks- These must be carried out to ensure the three rules above are being complied with, usually this is on a sample of the batch.

The number you need to check depends on the size of the batch, remember it's not the mean of the production run but the total batch of products made that day.

Anyone wishing to ‘e’ mark packages, import or export them is required to give details to their local Trading Standards Department to ensure they are registered packers and make available their filling process for Reference Testing.

Hope this helps

#14 Simon

Simon

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 11,597 posts
  • 1114 thanks
268
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Life, Family, Running, Cycling, Manager of a Football Team, Work, Watching Sport, The Internet, Food, Real Ale and Sleeping...

Posted 18 November 2008 - 08:20 PM

Hope this helps


I'm sure it does Richard. Thank you for your contribution and welcome to the forums.

Regards,
Simon

Best Regards,

Simon Timperley
IFSQN Administrator
 
hand-pointing-down.gif

Need food safety advice?
Relax, you've come to the right place…

The IFSQN is a helpful network of volunteers providing answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts on food safety management systems and a wide range of food safety topics.

 
We could make a huge list of rules, terms and conditions, but you probably wouldn’t read them.

All that we ask is that you observe the following:


1. No spam, profanity, pornography, trolling or personal attacks

2. Topics and posts should be “on topic” and related to site content
3. No (unpaid) advertising
4. You may have one account on the board at any one time
5. Enjoy your stay!


#15 StevoTheDevo

StevoTheDevo

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 11 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia

Posted 27 November 2008 - 11:59 PM

In Australia, as I was able to decipher, the labelled weight should be the minimal weight, you are allowed a tolerance of 1-2 percent slipping through underweight, provided they are underweight by less than 3%. Anything greater than 3% underweight is completely unacceptable.
Notably, you also cannot go a certain percentage above the labelled weight..
(I can't recall anymore detail, as I went through this a year ago and have now switched to an industrial supplier where weights and measures are less of an issue)



#16 GMO

GMO

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,383 posts
  • 557 thanks
74
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 05 October 2009 - 09:24 AM

I was just looking for some info on Australian weight legislation and saw the comment above. Does anyone have an eejits guide? :smarty:

Thanks



#17 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 14,041 posts
  • 3874 thanks
468
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 05 October 2009 - 04:07 PM

Dear GMO, I can partially answer yr query (no doubt Aussies here are more certain),

It may well depend on what type product is involved,eg retail, fish etc .

I don’t know what the conclusion was but from 2001-2006 there was a momentum to change from the then current MQS system (Minimum Quantity System)(this is not quite same as Minimum Weight described in R.Ross earlier post since in MQS some packs may be below the labelled net weight) to the AQS (Average QS), the latter being analogous to the EU system (possibly even identical, I didn't read all the details but the statistics looked v.similar and more simply stated [ :thumbup: ]).

The MQS is much simpler in application but lacks the statistical philosophy of the AQS.

It’s probably easier to enclose 2 documents proposing/describing the change, from 2001, 2006 respectively.

The conclusion is no doubt on the official website (anzfa ??) if you haven’t found it already but both systems are fairly well described below (with numerical examples!!), assuming that no further changes hv been made.

Attached File  aqs_regulations_2001.pdf   82.63KB   67 downloads

Attached File  AQS_RIS_2006.pdf   733.92KB   70 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#18 Richard Ross

Richard Ross

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 2 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 24 February 2011 - 09:17 AM

The T1 and T2 refer to the number of packages that fall within the Tollerable neative error i.e a weight that falls between 1999g and 1970g is regarded as a T1 violation and a T2 violation 2 x T1is a batch failure.

The number of T1 packages (2.5%) you are allowed in a batch depends on quatity so a batch of 10000 could have 7 x T1's (packages), violations but still be legal but if you had 8 it's reference test batch failure. if you had 500 packages in the batch then you would have been allowed 3 T1 violations and batch rejected if you had 4 x T1's

hope this clarifys your question
regard's

Hi there

I have been trying to get my head around the weights and measures(packaged goods) regulations 2006. As an example i am thinking of a 2000g pack in a batch of 10000 similar packs. The tolerable negative error would be 1.5% of nominal weight- so 30grams with no bag falling below twice the TNE or 60g. I get that bit!

Its the part about acceptable amounts between T1 and T2 that i am wooly on. Can someone see the light?! :rolleyes:



Thanked by 1 Member:

#19 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 14,041 posts
  • 3874 thanks
468
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 24 February 2011 - 05:48 PM

Dear Richard Ross,

Nice to hear from you again !(2 year holiday ? :smile: )

Actually I think the original poster sort of self-answered his own question but yr worked out example may help a few more people. :thumbup:

The so-called "average actual weight" is also part of the numerical exercise from memory (and earlier posts in this thread), the idea being to prevent processors intentionally maintaining a percentage of t1 failures just within the tolerances. From memory of the calculation, that intention is not achieved with great success in practice. Most processors try to avoid any t1 failures of course. :whistle:

Assuming it's still valid 5 yrs on, the relevant document is attached below. I believe the EC long dropped some of the content, eg the double sampling portion but I may be wrong.
Attached File  weights and measures (UK) 2006, No.659.pdf   247.95KB   58 downloads

Rgds / Charles.C


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate