Tag Archives: robotics

Robotic technology, automation

Robotics Technology for Small Food Manufacturers

By Matt Inniger
No Comments
Robotic technology, automation

Robotics technology has been a staple of certain manufacturing subsectors (automotive, aerospace, etc) since the 1950s, far longer than most people think. Food and beverage manufacturing isn’t a subsector most of the general public would associate with robotics.

However, robotics are widely used in the largest food manufacturing facilities worldwide, in a variety of use cases. The benefits of robots aren’t limited to food manufactures with sky high capital budgets. Thanks to advances in the past decade, food and beverage manufacturers of all sizes can leverage the benefits of this technology.

Use Cases

Let’s start with walking through the most popular use cases for robotics in most food manufacturing facilities, of any size. While these are the most common, it’s not an exhaustive list. If you’re considering a use case that isn’t discussed here, consider whether the physical operation is both predictable and repeatable. Is the target object of the physical operation presented in the same way every time? Does the target weigh the same? Is the path that a robotic arm would take to accomplish the task identical for reach repetition? If so, it’s likely a good fit for robotics.

By far the most common use case in food manufacturing is end of line packaging, firstly palletizing followed by case packing. These are so popular because once most food products are fully enclosed, they’re identical to any other widget from an operational standpoint. This means that palletizing cells designed and utilized primarily in other CPG sectors are plug-and-play for food manufacturing.  Case packing can be more complicated, depending on the packaging for a specific product. Products without rigid packaging can be tough for robotic arms to securely grasp with traditional tooling, and products in very small containers can present a speed problem that would require multiple robots in a single cell to overcome.

Front end pick and place operations like depalletizing, conveyor loading, etc. are also excellent applications for robotics, but are much less common generally in food and beverage outside certain product categories.

Use cases that are far less common, but still completely feasible depending on the specifics of different production processes, are food contact applications. The most feasible food contact applications for robotics are product agitation for specialty liquid or bulk solid products where container agitation isn’t available or sufficient, or pick and place on exposed product, usually container packing.

Food contact applications are more uncommon, for some reasons that are good and some that aren’t. While concerns around end of arm tooling affecting delicate products and robotics keeping up with required throughput are perfectly reasonable, concerns about cleaning robotic arms and end of arm tooling are mostly based on a lack of understanding.

Food Safety Considerations Around Robotics

If we consider the end-of-line packaging use cases presented initially, these operations typically happen outside of the sanitary production room, most of the time in spaces with just minimum GMP protocols. With fully enclosed food products, this means that the robotic cells themselves can be treated like any case erector or sealer and cleaned minimally, since risk is low.

For food contact applications, any robotic cell would need to comply with the cleaning regimen for the specific production process. Full washdown environments would seem to present an issue for the precise electronics required for robotic systems. However, washdown certified arm cowling and custom design soft shell shrouds for CPUs allow robotic cells to operate reliably without additional maintenance in high water environments.

Different Robotics Solutions

So, let’s discuss what a robotic solution for any given use case might actually look like. While there are a myriad of specialized robotic types and five fixed-type industrial robot categories recognized by the International Federation of Robotics, we’ll focus on the types most commonly used, especially in food and beverage. These are articulated, delta, and collaborative robots.

Traditional, fixed-place, industrial articulated robotic arms are exactly what most people think of when they picture a manufacturing robot. These arms usually have six axes to provide a high range of motion, can extend to a very long reach, and can also handle the highest amount of weight. While these units are robust and capable, they generally aren’t a good fit for small or midsize food manufacturers unless the use case deals with a very heavy pick and place operation or the ROI on the use case is very high. These units are expensive, take up a lot of space, and require a substantial amount of guarding to operate effectively, drastically reducing the flexibility of the overall production process.

Delta robots are lightweight, high-speed robots that are generally mounted over the top of production lines for pick and place operations that require high cycle frequency but not excessive range of motion. These robots specialize in container packing use cases, especially in multi-unit cells that handle high throughput lines. However, this capability comes at a high price, often with the highest initial investment of the three robot types we discuss today.

Lastly, let’s discuss collaborative robots, the category that is the best fit for a large majority of use cases in small and midsize food manufacturing facilities. Collaborative robots are similar to articulated units, in that they are multi-axis arms that are compatible with a variety of end of arm tooling. However, there are key differences. Collaborative robots are smaller, generally are not fixed (which is to say they are often mounted on wheels or rails), have a more limited reach and max weight capacity, and most importantly require zero safety guarding. This is because collaborative robots are force-limiting, they are built with sensors that detect nearby obstacles and objects in order to prevent collisions. This makes collaborative robots safe for human operators to work “in collaboration” with, and allows for easy one-to-one automation of some manual tasks. Collaborative robots also have lower utility requirements, often running on 120V outlets, and cost far less, with entry level models starting in the $30,000 range.

These unique aspects of collaborative robots make them a great fit for small and midsize food manufacturers to automate the low hanging fruit that is end of line packaging and palletization. In fact, this is such a great value that multiple robot integrators build off-the-shelf palletizing cells that incorporate feed conveyors and integrated controls all for under $100,000. This type of plug-and-play solution is an incredible value for almost any small food manufacturer still manually building pallets.

Additionally, collaborative robots are available in full washdown configurations for food contact applications. CIFT uses a FANUC CRX collaborative robot at our shared-use commercial kitchen in a full washdown environment for food contact tasks.

Conclusion

Robotics can offer a significant amount of value to food manufacturers of all sizes. Collaborative platforms provide the best bang for the buck and are a great place to start for most companies. Lastly, don’t be afraid to utilize robotics in food contact applications, if the use case is feasible otherwise.

Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

How Collaborative Robots Can Increase Food Production Capacity

By Emily Newton
No Comments
Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

As the population grows, food production capacity must likewise increase. While that’s generally good news for food manufacturers, scaling can be complex, especially amid widespread inefficiencies and labor challenges. Implementing collaborative robots in manufacturing can help overcome those obstacles.

Collaborative robots—also called cobots—work alongside human workers instead of in fully automated workflows or behind machine guarding. If food manufacturers can implement them effectively, this robot-human collaboration can make it easier to increase production capacity in the following ways.

1. Speeding Warehouse Operations

Warehouse operations are common bottlenecks, and as online food and direct-to-consumer services grow, they’ll become increasingly crucial. One of the most impactful ways cobots increase capacity in manufacturing is by making warehouses more efficient.

Cobots are especially helpful in picking. Walking accounts for most of the picking time, and it’s easy for humans to make errors in these workflows. Consequently, using cobots to manage picking while humans handle other tasks increases warehouse productivity two times over on average.

When cobots handle the most time-consuming tasks, warehouses can move more product in less time. As a result, these facilities manage rising throughput without significant delays, enabling faster growth without sacrificing shipping times or costs.

2. Mitigating Labor Shortages

Similarly, cobots can address labor shortages that currently stop food manufacturers from reaching peak capacity. Many professionals worry about the impact of robotics on jobs, but cobots augment human labor, not replace it. In addition, employees today are leaving the workforce faster than employers can replace them, so businesses need solutions apart from human workers.

Collaborative robots help by automating the facility’s most mundane or time-consuming tasks, which leaves human employees with more time to spend on other work. The factory as a whole can accomplish more as a result.

3. Minimizing Errors

In addition to excelling at repetitive tasks, collaborative robots can also handle the most error-prone tasks. Monotonous workflows—such as packaging, labeling and picking—are common in food production and not ideal for humans, who get tired and distracted easily. Using cobots in these roles instead can minimize mistakes. Fewer mistakes translate into less disruption to the workflow and fewer wasted materials. This, in turn, increases throughput, making upscaling more cost effective.

4. Improving Safety

Like conventional industrial robots, cobots can automate the most hazardous tasks in a facility to minimize injuries. Unlike traditional robots, cobots can work safely alongside humans without additional safety stops. Consequently, they minimize machine-related accidents, offering more safety than other automation systems. Food manufacturing plants will have less unplanned downtime due to workplace accidents. With more uptime, they can increase production capacity.

Automating parts of the workflow also creates more production data to analyze. Increased connectivity and data have helped manufacturers respond to foodborne illness outbreaks faster, improving the safety of consumers, as well.

5. Enabling Flexibility

Conventional robots can produce similar benefits in many of these areas but they come at the cost of flexibility. Using collaborative robots in manufacturing lets food producers enjoy the advantages of automation without sacrificing adaptability.

Fully automated workflows can take days or even weeks to adjust to new processes. Collaborative workflows can adapt much more quickly because human workers are more flexible than machines. Cobots let food manufacturers capitalize on automation’s efficiency and human adaptability, providing the best of both worlds.

That flexibility is essential when upscaling because increasing capacity will disrupt some workflows. Facilities will have to adapt as demands rise and shift, and conventional automation is too rigid to make that transition smoothly and quickly. Collaborative robots are a more reliable way forward in a disruption-prone market.

Historically, food production has not been able to automate to the same extent as other manufacturing sectors. Workflows involve too much variability to meet the sudden shifts in consumer demands. Cobots offer the flexibility and speed companies need to embrace automation.

As more food manufacturers implement cobots, it is likely that the nation’s food production capacity will grow. That growth is an essential step forward as the population rises and direct-to-consumer food shipping becomes more popular.

Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine
FST Soapbox

Level Up Safety with Food Packaging Automation Technologies

By Emily Newton
No Comments
Emily Newton, Revolutionized Magazine

Food packaging automation technologies can increase productivity and improve food safety. We highlight three key packaging technologies worth investigating.

1. Image-Based Sensors

Foreign objects in packaged foods are a key cause of recalls and can lead to both physical harm and reputational damage. Some companies are incorporating food packaging automation solutions that rely on cameras to detect foreign objects before products leave production facilities.

In one example, researchers from Ritsumeikan University in Japan used a tactile-based image sensor mounted on a high-resolution camera to look for hard objects, including shell and bone fragments, within soft foods. This technology found sub-millimeter foreign bodies and required only 10 seconds to scan a piece of food.

Some sensors can sort food, such as rice, based on appearance. If the rice does not meet specifications—or if a contaminant is detected—the device emits coordinated air puffs to blow the subpar product or contaminant into a reject bin.

Image-based sensors do not replace people from inspection processes. The goal is to boost quality control by combining advanced technology with human oversight. This allows food packaging plants to reduce the risk of unsafe consumables reaching the market.

2. Robots

Robots have been game-changers in food packaging automation. Statistics show that Chinese food and beverage industry clients purchased an estimated $196 million in robotic technology in 2022, with companies from the U.S. investing roughly $160 million in these technologies. These numbers have climbed since 2020, suggesting more company leaders are embracing robotics for their operations.

Companies that don’t have enough employees to handle the workload can compromise safety if they give workers more responsibilities than they can handle or force them to work too quickly. However, robots can ease some of that strain. One robotic top loader for wrapped food products processes up to 120 products per minute, depending on the type.

In another case, a food packaging plant had only 30 employees but needed to switch to 24/7 production to meet customer demand. Adding three collaborative robots, or cobots, to the workflow made it safe for the small team to ramp up activities without getting overwhelmed.

It can take food packaging plant leaders time and effort to figure out the best ways to bring robots into a facility. It helps to determine which tasks are most prone to errors and likely to result in injury. Alternatively, managers can ask line workers which duties feel the most cumbersome or dangerous.

Many employees are initially hesitant about working with cobots. They feel more positive and comfortable about these changes when they realize the machines supplement their work rather than replace it.

3. Upcycled Food Packaging

Food packaging automation has benefits that extend beyond the production environment. Singapore-based Alterpack uses automated equipment to turn spent grain into takeout containers and other types of packaging. The packaging is microwave and freezer-safe, and people can toss it into their compost heaps after use.

The company’s goal is to help reduce dependence on single-use plastic packaging. The process requires cleaning raw materials, mixing a specialty formula and molding it into desired shapes. Automation keeps these steps safe and consistent.

Other types of automation specific to food packaging focus on consumer safety. One project from the Fraunhofer Institute for Process Engineering and Packaging involved embedding packages of meat and fish with chemosensors to measure freshness. The sensors change color automatically when exposed to volatile compounds that indicate product spoilage. The visual indicator makes it easy for consumers, grocery store workers, and others to see when food is no longer safe to sell or eat.

Elsewhere, a team of researchers from Harvard University and Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University made a type of smart food packaging primarily constructed from corn protein. The packaging contains innovative nanoscale mesh fibers and natural antimicrobial compounds programmed to sense common kinds of bacteria in food. When the bacteria are detected, the packaging automatically sprays out tiny amounts of antimicrobials to keep food fresher and safe to eat for longer.

These are just some of the forward-thinking ways food packaging designers can incorporate automation into their production process. Options like these will likely become more widespread as more people experiment with what’s possible, spurring progress in food safety, productivity and waste reduction.

 

Robin Kix

Food Logistics: 7 Ways to Support Food Safety and Control Expenses

By Robin Kix
No Comments
Robin Kix

How food products are transported has a significant effect on both food safety and shrink. By understanding transportation options and leveraging new technologies, food logistics business can reduce these risks and better control expenses. Following are seven strategies to help you reduce your costs, minimize food shrink and support food safety.

1. Exercise Flexibility When Choosing Modes of Transportation

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, an estimated 31% of U.S. food product is lost to waste.[1] When handling shipments of raw or cold foods, ensuring the deliveries happen on time is critical for avoiding loss due to spoilage.

Being smart about your transportation choices can help combat this issue. For example, while shipping food freight by sea is much cheaper than transporting it by air, sea transportation takes significantly longer and may result in more food shrink caused by spoilage, resulting in substantial losses. Alternative options include rail transportation with refrigerated cars or refrigerated food trucks. You can also expedite specific portions of shipments when a buyer only needs part of the shipment urgently, while shipping the remaining product using a less expensive mode of transportation with a longer delivery time.

2. Consolidate Shipments When Possible

Choosing a provider that offers less than truckload (LTL) shipping is one way that you can ship lower weights at a more affordable cost.[2] Another option to consider is consolidating shipments from multiple buyers when possible in full truckload (FTL) shipping, which can further reduce your transportation costs. Review the locations of your buyers to determine whether you can consolidate several shipments into one load to cut down your total transportation costs.

3. Engage in Smart Truck Route Planning

Empty trucks can quickly drain your resources and result in reduced profits. When possible, plan truck routes to handle collections and deliveries in the same route. You want to plan your truck routes so that you don’t have empty containers along large portions of trips. Smart truck route planning helps maximize both your driver and vehicle utilization by reducing the time vehicles spend empty while in transit.

4. Ensure Foods Being Transported Are Compatible

As a freight broker, you are required to comply with all applicable laws and regulations as a condition of your license and your freight broker bond.[3] One of the regulations you need to understand is the new sanitary food transportation rule under the FDA Food Modernization Safety Act.[4]

Under this rule, freight brokers are treated the same as shippers and have multiple duties, including ensuring that the carriers you use meet all regulatory requirements. One of these requirements is to ensure that raw foods are separated from other food products during transit. Make sure you understand which foods are compatible and that the trucks your carriers use have the required equipment. Using tech tools for truck route planning can help you prevent incompatible foods from being mixed while they are in transit, which could result in penalties and potential license and bond violations.

5. Implement Item Location Forecasting

Item location forecasting helps ensure that the right foods are being shipped to their correct destinations. When you include brands, categories and families of products, it can assist with your tactical and strategic planning. When products are delivered to the wrong place, money can be lost through spoilage, fines or additional transportation costs.

Item location forecasting tools also help ensure that the off-loading sequence of the shipments you manage are conducted by compartment. This helps businesses plan how the goods should be subdivided into trailer compartments. Ensuring carriers are following the correct loading and unloading of food products can also help ensure that they are complying with their duties under the food safety rule. When you synchronize how foods flow across the supply chain, you can realize reduced transportation costs.

6. Take Advantage of Big Data

Food products flow across the globe, generating vast stores of data. Logistics companies must track origin and destination information, shipment sizes, locations, weights, traffic, driving patterns and more to ensure shipments get to where they need to be quickly and at the lowest cost. When you employ big data in logistics, it can help you predict or avoid potential bottlenecks.

Many 3PLs and shippers already rely on data to drive decision-making. A 2021 Third-Party Logistics Study found that most use data-driven approach technology to plan for demand (83%), operations (78%) and capacity (61%).[5] Using big data in your logistics operations can help improve transparency while maximizing your resources. Automated management systems can help by automating routine tasks while controlling fleets and scheduling shipments.

7. Harness Automation

Robotics and automation can offer end-to-end tracking of products as they travel through the supply chain. In addition, they can lower labor expenses and enhance productivity. Consider using automation-guided vehicles and automated container loading and unloading. These tools can increase productivity, strengthen the safety of the environment with attached warning sensors and reduce both labor and operating expenses.[6]

In an increasingly competitive environment, food logistics companies must take proactive steps to reduce and control costs while ensuring food safety. By implementing these strategies, you can streamline your processes and realize increased profits without sacrificing safety.

References:

[1] Buzby, Jean C., Hodan F. Wells, and Jeffrey Hyman. The Estimated Amount, Value, and Calories of Postharvest Food Losses at the Retail and Consumer Levels in the United States, EIB-121, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, February 2014.

[2] Segal, Troy. Less-Than-Truckload (LTL). Investopedia.

[3] Lance Surety & Associates. The BMC-84 Bond: Complete Guide to Bonding for Freight Brokers. Accessed on August 22, 2022.

[4] U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Summary: Sanitary Transportation of Human and Animal Food (Final Rule), March 26, 2018.

[5] Infosys Consulting. 2021 Third-Party Logistics Study: The State of Logistics Outsourcing.

[6] Jagtap, S., Bader, F., Garcia-Garcia, G., Trollman, H., Fadiji, T., & Salonitis, K. (2020). Food logistics 4.0: Opportunities and challenges. Logistics, 5(1), 2.

 

Bottle tops
FST Soapbox

Five Advances in Food Processing Machinery Driving Growth

By Emily Newton
No Comments
Bottle tops

Food processing machinery is experiencing some incredible innovations, from intelligent robots to energy-efficient motors for food and beverage processing. Adopting these emerging technologies in your food and beverage processing facility can provide valuable benefits, such as improved food safety, greater efficiency and higher productivity. Following are five advances in food processing machinery that are transforming the industry.

Next Generation Energy-Efficient Motors

Energy efficiency is a growing concern across all industries, and it’s not just about reducing carbon footprints. Cutting back on emissions due to power consumption is certainly important, but food and beverage companies can also experience monetary benefits from optimizing their electricity usage.

Subscribe to the Food Safety Tech weekly newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest news and information on food safety.Today’s next-gen motors for food and beverage processing are becoming much more energy-efficient right out of the box. The rise of soft-start and variable frequency drive engines is playing a key role in these innovations.

Soft-start motors cause less stress on machinery by protecting devices from sudden power surges. They start up using a slightly lower, limited initial charge rather than a sudden full charge. This can be compared to waking up with versus without an alarm clock—the former involves waking up abruptly while the latter is less stressful. The result is that soft-start motors allow machinery to warm up more gently and ease into operation, rather than straining electrical components with a sudden influx of energy.

Variable frequency drive motors use much less energy than other motor options. Unlike variable speed drive motors, variable frequency drive motor technology is limited specifically to AC motors. A variable frequency drive allows an AC motor to change its speed by changing the frequency of the power going through the motor. A variable frequency drive is essentially a control system for machinery engines, allowing them to start up with a lower voltage drop, similar to soft-start motors, and the speed can be adjusted to fit the unique needs of specific devices and tasks.

These energy-efficient motors also tend to be smaller in volume and weight than their conventional counterparts.

Soft Robotic Grippers

Automation, including the use of robotics, in the food and beverage industry is already happening. These technologies can deliver significant benefit as businesses struggle to keep up with demand even with fewer employees. However, processing foods like pastries, fruit or bread can be difficult with robots because their stiff grippers crush soft items when trying to pick them up. Soft grippers solve this problem.

One soft gripper designed for handling delicate food items was inspired by octopi and squids. The rubber fingers inflate and deflate using pressurized air so they open and close to precise dimensions. The gripper is nimble enough to lift items as delicate as marshmallows.

Autonomous AI Robots

Not only can automation help companies struggling with labor shortages, it can also help improve food processing efficiency. Autonomous robots, often powered by AI, are incredibly efficient at performing repetitive tasks. They can get more done in less time with fewer mistakes compared to the average employee. Food processing companies can use these robots to perform repetitive, mundane tasks that don’t appeal to employees. Workers can then be reskilled, upskilled or reassigned to more engaging and important roles.

IoT Machinery Monitoring

The Internet of Things (IoT) makes food processing machinery more intelligent and inter-connected. IoT can be used in various ways in the food and beverage industry, but it is especially helpful for monitoring and optimizing operations on the manufacturing floor. Sensors collect and relay data to a central hub in real-time. That information can be used to inform automated systems or production timelines.

IoT sensors can reveal inefficiencies and bottlenecks in production, giving companies concrete goals to act on. They can be used to monitor the health of food processing machinery, allowing for predictive maintenance, which involves performing tuneups on equipment as soon as signs of a potential malfunction appear.

The agriculture industry is exploring IoT, as well. For example, farmers and water management companies are using it in conjunction with AI algorithms to improve irrigation systems, cut energy costs and improve water usage.

Automated Food and Facility Safety

Health and safety are among the foremost priorities for every food and beverage company. Technological advances are making it easier for companies to stay on top of health and safety measures.

For example, food processing and storing companies can use AI to autonomously monitor and regulate temperature, helping prevent the growth and spread of E. coli and other diseases. This is achieved using IoT thermostats that relay real-time temperature data to an AI algorithm, which keeps an eye on temps throughout the facility and makes adjustments as needed.

Food processing machinery is in the midst of some truly exciting advancements that are helping businesses in the industry provide better service, products and working conditions. Cutting-edge motors for food and beverage equipment allow companies to save money on energy costs, while next-gen robotics open the door to a wealth of automation possibilities.

With the help of AI and IoT, food and beverage companies can ensure their operations are running as smoothly as possible. There will certainly be more incredible advancements in food processing technology in the years ahead.

Mike Edgett, Sage

COVID-19 Leads Food Companies and Meat Processors to Explore AI and Robotics, Emphasize Sanitation, and Work from Home

By Maria Fontanazza
No Comments
Mike Edgett, Sage

The coronavirus pandemic has turned so many aspects of businesses upside down; it is changing how companies approach and execute their strategy. The issue touches all aspects of business and operations, and in a brief Q&A with Food Safety Tech, Mike Edgett of Sage touches on just a few areas in which the future of food manufacturing looks different.

Food Safety Tech: How are food manufacturers and meat processors using AI and robotics to mitigate risks posed by COVID-19?

Mike Edgett: Many food manufacturers and meat processors have had to look to new technologies to account for the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. While most of these measures have been vital in preventing further spread of the virus (or any virus/disease that may present itself in the future), they’ve also given many food manufacturers insight into how these technologies could have a longer-term impact on their operations.

For instance, the mindset that certain jobs needed to be manual have been reconsidered. Companies are embracing automation (e.g., the boning and chopping of meat in a meatpacking plant) to replace historically manual processes. While it may take a while for innovations like this to be incorporated fully, COVID-19 has certainly increased appetite amongst executives who are trying to avoid shutdowns and expedited the potential for future adoption.

FST: What sanitation procedures should be in place to minimize the spread of pathogens and viruses?

Edgett: In the post-COVID-19 era, manufacturers must expand their view of sanitation requirements. It is more than whether the processing equipment is clean. Companies must be diligent and critical of themselves at every juncture—especially when it comes to how staff and equipment are utilized.

While working from home wasn’t a common practice in the manufacturing industry prior to March 2020, it will be increasingly popular moving forward. Such a setup will allow for a less congested workplace, as well as more space and time for bolstered sanitation practices to take place. Now and in the future, third-party cleaning crews will be used onsite and for machinery on a daily basis, with many corporations also experimenting with new ways to maintain the highest cleanliness standards.

This includes the potential for UV sterilization (a tactic that is being experimented with across industries), new ways to sterilize airflow (which is particularly important in meatpacking plants, where stagnant air is the enemy) and the inclusion of robotics (which could be used overnight to avoid overlap with human employees). These all have the potential to minimize the spread of pathogens and, ultimately, all viruses that may arise.

Mike Edgett, Sage
Mike Edgett is an enterprise technology and process manufacturing expert with 20+ years leading business strategy for brands such as Infor, Quaker Oats and Bunge Foods. At Sage, he leads the U.S. product marketing team focused on the medium segment.

FST: How is the food industry adjusting to the remote working environment?

Edgett: While the pandemic has changed the ways businesses and employees work across most industries, F&B manufacturers did face some unique challenges in shifting to a remote working environment.

Manufacturing as a whole has always relied on the work of humans, overseeing systems, machinery and technology to finalize production—but COVID-19 has changed who and how many people can be present in a plant at once. Naturally, at the start of the pandemic, this meant that schedules and shifts had to be altered, and certain portions of managerial oversight had to be completed virtually.

Of course, with employee and consumer safety of paramount concern, cleaning crews and sanitation practices have taken precedent, and have been woven effectively and efficiently into altered schedules.

While workers that are essential to the manufacturing process have been continuing to work in many facilities, there will likely be expanded and extended work-from-home policies for other functions within the F&B manufacturing industry moving forward. This will result in companies needed to embrace technology that can support this work environment.

FST: Can you briefly explain how traceability is playing an even larger role during the pandemic?

Edgett: The importance of complete traceability for food manufacturers has never been greater. While traceability is by no means a new concept, COVID-19 has not only made it the number one purchasing decision for your customers, but [it is also] a vital public health consideration.

The good news is that much of the industry recognizes this. In fact, according to a survey conducted by Sage and IDC, manufacturing executives said a key goal of theirs is to achieve 100% traceability over production and supply chain, which serves as a large part of their holistic digital mission.

Traceability was already a critical concern for most manufacturers—especially those with a younger customer base. However, the current environment has shone an even greater spotlight on the importance of having a complete picture of not only where our food comes from—but [also] the facilities and machinery used in its production. Major budget allocations will surely be directed toward traceability over the next 5–10 years.

Sasan Amini, Clear Labs

2020 Expectations: More Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Technology Advances in Food Safety Testing

By Maria Fontanazza
No Comments
Sasan Amini, Clear Labs

2018 and 2019 were the years of the “blockchain buzz”. As we enter the new decade, we can expect a stronger focus on how technology and data advances will generate more actionable use for the food industry. Food Safety Tech has highlighted many perspectives from subject matter experts in the industry, and 2020 will be no different. Our first Q&A of the year features Sasan Amini, CEO of Clear Labs, as he shares his thoughts on tech improvements and the continued rise consumer expectations for transparency.

Food Safety Tech: As we look to the year ahead, where do you see artificial intelligence, machine learning and blockchain advancing in the food industry?

Sasan Amini: AI, ML, and blockchain are making headway in the food industry through advances in supply chain management, food sorting and anomaly detection, and tracing the origin of foodborne outbreaks. On the regulatory side, FDA’s focus on its New Era of Smarter Food Safety will most likely catalyze the adoption of the above mentioned technologies. On the private side, a few of the companies leading the charge on these advancements are IBM and Google, working in partnership with food manufacturers and retailers across the world.

Along those same lines, another area that we expect to grow is the use of AI and ML in tandem with robotics—and the value of new troves of data that they collect, analyze and distribute. For example, robotics for the use of environmental monitoring of potential contaminants, sorting techniques and sterilization are valuable because they ensure that end products have been through thorough testing—and they give us even more information about the lifecycle of that food than ever before.

At the end of the day, data is only valuable when you can transform it into actionable insights in real-time with real-world applications, and we expect to see more and more of this type of data usage in the year ahead.

FST: Where do you think food safety testing technologies will stand out? What advancements can the industry expect?

Amini: In 2020, technology is going to begin to connect itself along the entire supply chain, bringing together disparate pieces and equipping supply chain professionals with action-oriented data. From testing advances that improve speed, accuracy and depth of information to modular software solutions to promote transparency, the food safety industry is finally finding its footing in a data-driven sea of technological and regulatory advances.

Right now, legacy testing solutions are limited in their ability to lead food safety and quality professionals to the source of problems, providing insights on tracking recurring issues, hence having a faster response time, and being able to anticipate problems before they occur based on a more data heavy and objective risk assessment tools. This leaves the industry in a reactive position for managing and controlling their pathogen problems.

Availability of higher resolution food safety technologies that provide deeper and more accurate information and puts them in context for food safety and quality professionals provides the food industry a unique opportunity to resolve the incidents in a timely fashion with higher rigour and confidence. This is very in-line with the “Smarter Tools and Approaches” that FDA described in their new approach to food safety.

FST: How are evolving consumer preferences changing how food companies must do business from a strategic as well as transparency perspective?

Amini: Consumers are continuing to get savvier about what’s in their food and where it comes from. Research suggests that about one in five U.S. adults believe they are food allergic, while only 1 in 20 are estimated to have physician-diagnosed food allergies. This discrepancy is important for food companies to consider when making decisions about transparency into their products. Although the research on food allergies continues to evolve, what’s important to note today is that consumers want to know the details. Radical transparency can be a differentiator in a competitive market, especially for consumers looking for answers to improve their health and nutrition.

Consumers are also increasingly interested in personalization, due in part to the rise in new digital health and testing companies looking to deliver on the promise of personalized nutrition and wellness. Again, more transparency will be key.

FST: Additional comments are welcome.

Amini: Looking ahead, we expect that smaller, multi-use, and hyper-efficient tools with reduced physical footprints will gain market share. NGS is a great example of this, as it allows any lab to gather millions of data points about a single sample without needing to run it multiple times. It moves beyond the binary yes-no response of traditional testing, and lets you get much more done, with far less. Such wealth of information not only increases the confidence about the result, but can also be mined to generate more actionable insights for interventions and root cause analysis.

This “multi-tool” will be driven by a combination of advanced software, robotics, and testing capabilities, creating a food safety system that is entirely connected, driven by data, and powerfully accurate.

2019 Food Safety Consortium, Glenn Black, CFSAN, FDA

Say What? Perspectives We Heard at the 2019 Food Safety Consortium

By Maria Fontanazza
1 Comment
2019 Food Safety Consortium, Glenn Black, CFSAN, FDA

Last week’s seventh annual Food Safety Consortium brought together a variety of industry experts to discuss key topics around regulation, compliance, leadership, testing, foodborne illness, food defense and more. The following are just a few sound bytes from what we heard at the event. (Click on any photo to enlarge)

Food Safety Consortium, Frank Yiannas, FDA “The food system today, while it’s still impressive, it still has one Achilles heel—lack of traceability and transparency.” – Frank Yiannas, deputy commissioner for food policy & response, FDA. Read the full article on Yiannas’ keynote session

“A typical food company only has about 5% visibility into known supply chain threats.” – Ron Stakland, senior business development, FoodChain ID, Inc.

“For most of us, our supply chain is a big black hole. Why are we so fearful of technology? Is it the implementation itself? What if technology could help us solve some of those perennial problems? There are resources available to help us get there.” – ¬ Jeremy Schneider, business development director, food safety and quality assurance, Controlant

“The records tell the story of how well the facility is being managed. It’s the first thing the regulators are going to look at.” – Glenn Black, Ph.D., associate director for research, CFSAN, FDA, on validation considerations and regulations for processing technologies in the food industry 2019 Food Safety Consortium, Glenn Black, CFSAN, FDA

“We’ll see more robotics enter the food space.” – Gina Nicholson Kramer, executive director, Savour Food Safety International

Melody Ge, Corvium, 2019 Food Safety Consortium “Changes are happening; you can choose to face it or ignore it. We’re at least 10 years behind on technology. Automation/technology is not a new term in aerospace, etc., but to us [the food industry], it is. We will get there.” – Melody Ge, head of compliance, Corvium, Inc., on how industry should prepare for the data-driven transformation occurring in the smarter era of food safety

It’s okay to risk and fail, but how are going to remediate that with your employee? The more learners practice in different scenarios, the less they rely on specific examples. [They] become more adept with dealing with decision making.” – Kathryn Birmingham, Ph.D., VP for research and development, ImEpik, on employee training

“As a contract lab with the vision of testing for foodborne viruses for about 10 years—it wasn’t until about three or four years ago that we had the test kits to turn that into a reality. We also didn’t have a reference method.” – Erin Crowley, chief scientific officer, Q Laboratories, on the viral landscape of testing in the food industry

“You have to be strong and you have to believe in yourself before you get into any situation—especially as a food safety professional.” – Al Baroudi, Ph.D., vice president of quality assurance and food safety at The Cheesecake Factory, on what it takes to earn respect as a food safety professional Jorge Hernandez, Al Baroudi, Ph.D., 2019 Food Safety Consortium

“’See something, say something’ is likely not enough. We recommend that companies develop a formal detection program that includes management buy-in, HR and governance, and policy documents, formal training and an awareness program…While FDA focuses on the insider threat, we feel that using a broader mitigation approach works best.” – R. Spencer Lane, senior security advisor, Business Protection Specialists, Inc. on lessons learned from food defense intentional adulteration vulnerability assessments

“Food safety is a profession, a vocation, [and] a way of life.” – Bob Pudlock, president of Gulf Stream Search