Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Steel requirements for food contact equipment

Share this

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

JamieLynn

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 21 posts
  • 2 thanks
3
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 21 November 2018 - 08:09 PM

My maintenance department is wanting to put in a rotor assembly with chromium carbide overlay blades..  This would be used on cage mill paddles, which is a food contact.  Any concerns or regulations I should be aware of???  We used stainless steel prior which caused damage and maintenance issues.



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 20,542 posts
  • 5666 thanks
1,548
Excellent

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

Posted 21 November 2018 - 08:49 PM

My maintenance department is wanting to put in a rotor assembly with chromium carbide overlay blades..  This would be used on cage mill paddles, which is a food contact.  Any concerns or regulations I should be aware of???  We used stainless steel prior which caused damage and maintenance issues.

 

Not in USA so no idea local regs.

 

Just as a basic comment, the materials/equipment should be "appropriate" for use in the intended  food business.

 

I believe that the terminology  "food grade stainless steel" exists but may include different specifics depending on the intended use, eg low temperatures etc. This, and the general sanitary design, are the supplier's responsibility of course. And equally with respect to chromium carbide.

 

But, caveat emptor, scrutinise the contract documentation.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


PQEdwards

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 31 posts
  • 2 thanks
4
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 29 November 2018 - 10:56 AM

Hi James,

 

We went through a similar process to improve the wear and therefore also likelihood of failure of the mill components.

 

We followed our change management process which includes a quality risk assessment. We needed to consider the risk that

  • The chromium levels in the product were not going to increase to acceptable levels, luckily we can analyse on-site to verify
  • Would some of our controls be less effective at removing mill components caused by wear particulates (magnetic separators and  metal detectors)

Ultimately we saw a slight increase in the level of chromium but still within acceptable levels but in the end the wear characteristics were not greatly improved.

 

So in a long winded way I am saying risk assess the change.

 

Regards

 

John





Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users