We’re your source for automation news. Keep up with the latest industry updates and E Tech employee spotlights, as well as tips and guidance from our manufacturing experts.
Barnum Mechanical Inc. hosted an interview with the CEO of The Better Meat Co. to discuss how Barnum Mechanical and E Tech Group supported their new production facility.
Many food processors create a proof of concept in several sizing stages before they build a full-scale processing facility. Designing an automated processing facility requires flexibility in the design and the ability to constantly improve the system with things discovered through research and development efforts. This is the story of how The Better Meat Co. partnered with Barnum Mechanical Inc. and E Tech Group to design, build, and automate a full-scale processing system at The Better Meat Co.’s new mycoprotein fermentation facility in Sacramento, California. Industry partner Barnum Mechanical teamed up with E Tech Group to support an expedited completion timeline.
Solution
The Better Meat Co. needed a full-scale processing system built from the ground up. The first step was understanding The Better Meat Co.’s current laboratory operations and what they were expecting to do in the new industrial scoped system. The project team assessed existing equipment, current system requirements, and collaborated with various stakeholders to best design the full-scale processing system, keeping alternative meat processing standards and scalable performance capabilities top-of-mind. “We have never built a fermentation plant before, whereas Barnum and E Tech Group had.” explains Paul Shapiro, CEO of The Better Meat Co. “They had a lot of experience that was very helpful in informing the decisions that we would end up making. And many of these decisions I don’t think would have been so simple for us to figure out on our own . . . They were partners with us in helping us decide what type of a design we wanted in the first place.”
The project team leveraged their expertise in automated control systems and process design to create a custom solution. The project team connected new Allen Bradley ControlLogix PLCs to Inductive Automation’s Ignition HMI application and SCADA software over an Ethernet switch. During this phase, multiple experts from both engineering firms collaborated and programmed simultaneously. The project team accomplished a software redundant control system that was capable of developer remote access support, redundant databases, recipe controls, historic data logs, and interactive reports. All of this supported The Better Meat Co.’s ability to control efficiency, remain flexible to meet new production cycles, and make real-time, data-driven decisions.
“We need lots of flexibility and variability in our facility because everything that we’re doing on our pilot scale is designed to inform what we may do at our future fermentation facility. And so, we don’t want just one process that we could lock in here.” added Shapiro. “What we’ve done with Barnum and with E Tech Group is to create a plant that actually has a lot of flexibility in terms of what we’re able to do . . . The system that Barnum and E Tech Group helped to build allows us to experiment, simultaneously with different types of feedstocks so that we can sterilize different media in order to run different types of fermentations.”
In a few short months, the automated system was capable of successfully developing The Better Meat Co. products on demand. “. . . If you can afford to add automation, it’s a good idea to do it,” endorses Shapiro when asked his thoughts on the value of automation. To date, the new system continues to support The Better Meat Co. and has not experienced a technical outage since its deployment.
Barnum Mechanical and E Tech Group enjoyed the opportunity to partner on this project to deliver a flexible system that is scalable for The Better Meat Co.’s growing operations. To learn more about the project and the customer’s satisfaction, we welcome you to watch the interview with Paul Shapiro, CEO of The Better Meat Co.
Congratulations to our client, UPSIDE Foods on receiving FDA approval. We know this is something you’ve been diligently working towards, and we can’t what comes next. UPSIDE Foods, the leading cultivated meat, poultry and seafood company, became the first company in the world to receive a “No Questions” letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for cultivated meat, poultry, or seafood. The letter signals that the FDA has accepted UPSIDE’s conclusion that its cultivated chicken is safe to eat. The agency issued this letter today following a rigorous evaluation. “This is a watershed moment in the history of food,” said Dr. Uma Valeti, CEO and Founder of UPSIDE Foods. “We started UPSIDE amid a world full of skeptics, and today, we’ve made history again as the first company to receive a ‘No Questions’ letter from the FDA for cultivated meat. This milestone marks a major step towards a new era in meat production, and I’m thrilled that U.S. consumers will soon have the chance to eat delicious meat that’s grown directly from animal cells.” The FDA released a memo detailing the agency’s review of the data and information provided by UPSIDE Foods to establish the safety of its cultivated chicken filet. In addition, FDA released a comprehensive 104 page document, prepared by UPSIDE Foods, that provides detailed information regarding the safety of and production process for UPSIDE’s cultivated chicken filet. Since its founding in 2015, UPSIDE Foods has supported the development of a regulatory framework for cultivated meat that ensures safety and transparency. In 2018, it partnered with the North American Meat Institute to advocate for joint regulatory oversight of cultivated meat by the FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The following year, UPSIDE Foods co-founded the world’s first trade coalition for cultivated meat, the Alliance of Meat, Poultry and Seafood Innovation (AMPS … Continued
Dealing with Obsolescence Can Become a Bit of a Pickle….
A pickle plant faced obsolete control system hardware but couldn’t afford downtime. E Tech Group’s automation engineers were able to upgrade their decades’ old obsolete system to a current high-speed system in 2 days with minimal downtime.
The Project: A Massive Control Systems Upgrade with No Downtime
E Tech Group engineers were contracted to update and replace obsolete hardware in a pickle plant. This project was time sensitive in two ways: the upgrade is being performed to mitigate impending risk of equipment failure, and the new building automation system must be implemented without halting production.
We knew that if the one centralized PLC5 that controlled five systems responsible for 50+% of pickle production failed, they would have to shut the entire plant down to identify and fix the issue, losing valuable time and revenue during peak production periods.
Our automation team knew that in order to upgrade and separate the equipment, the five systems controlled by the central PLC would need to be migrated to either ControlLogix or CompactLogix and all communication transitioned to ethernet.
The Challenges: Time Constraints & High Stakes
Before the systems were separated
Because there were a number of hurdles to take into consideration when beginning this automation system upgrade, it took careful planning to ensure this project could be completed without disrupting production or extending the deadline. First and foremost, we had to untangle and map out the three decades of piecemeal, undocumented control upgrades that were currently keeping the facility operational.
We also had to keep in mind that this facility uses only fresh produce, and at certain times ran at close to 110% production capacity. This meant systems upgrades had to be completed over the weekend and often tested early Monday before they began production, requiring our team to pivot quickly and mitigate any potential hiccups that might occur.
Lastly, the plant itself was located in Michigan, and some of the panels in need of upgrade were outside. If operations were shut down in winter, it could potentially damage the pumps responsible for moving hundreds of gallons of water and pickles from frigid conditions into the plant. We had a small window between cold conditions and production ramp-up to execute, test and ensure operation of the modernized systems.
At this point, clear communication and setting realistic expectations with the client was now critical and of the utmost importance. While we could tailor a solution to their control systems integration that didn’t hurt their bottom line, it would take careful coordination and cooperation to pull it off with minimal disruption to production.
The Solution: Taking Things Apart to Put Them Back Together
Our relationship and open communication with the onsite operations team was invaluable, as it made it much easier to directly identify those five systems in need of audit, and to document the existing setup. This would allow our team to lay out the best solution for such an involved automation and integration install required over a very truncated timetable.
APPLIED SOLUTION:
System 1:
The decision was made to tackle the conversion of the largest system first. It consisted of a 17-slot PLC5 rack and 12 hardwired drives, with a mix of 120V digital inputs/outputs and analog inputs. All of this was converted to ControlLogix and PowerFlex 525s over an ethernet connection. NAT modules were then used to connect the PLCs to the network. This would allow the new ethernet control system to remain isolated while still enabling the controller to communicate with the network.
While the hardware installation was simple, programming proved to be a bit more challenging. Since the original PLC5 had to stay in place, code for the newly-independent system had to be disabled in the PLC5 once the new controller came online. Numerous messages between the old and new PLCs had to be mapped and tested, including some with other controllers. All the IO was then remapped and as much of the process functionality as possible was tested and confirmed operational.
Systems 2 & 3:
While systems 2 and 3 were smaller, they were no less complicated. Due to spatial constraints, CompactLogix controllers were used instead of ControlLogix. Communication with the original PLC5 still had to be set up and tested, while messaging between the PLC5 and each of the new controllers had to be configured.
Control was then disabled in the original PLC so the new ones could be tested. We were then able to remove the disabled logic in the original PLC5 for system 1 as it had been running for several weeks with no issue and established confidence in the new controller.
After system separation and upgrade
Systems 4 & 5:
The conversion for systems 4 and 5 were similar to system 1. PLC5 IO racks utilized hard-wired drives, and both were converted to ControlLogix and PowerFlex 525 drives over ethernet. As in system 1, NAT modules were used to keep the systems on the plant network but remain isolated. The same cutover approach was repeated as with the first three systems where logic was disabled in the original PLC as systems 4 and 5 came online.
Messaging between the original PLC5 and the new controllers was configured, along with communication to several other controllers. Disabled logic in the original controller for systems 2 and 3 was removed at this point. We were then able to remotely remove disabled logic for systems 4 and 5 when it was determined safe to do so.
The Results: This Control System Integration was Kind of a Big DILL
As with any large installation to be completed quickly, the need for troubleshooting issues can increase. Because we upgraded a decades-old obsolete system to a current high-speed system over a weekend, there was more testing and calibrating necessary than if it were a simpler, incremental upgrade done over time.
Learning the client wanted to walk in Monday morning and resume production at 100%, our team had to manage those expectations by communicating the need to ensure functionality at all stages of production, and that they would need to begin at 50% and increase gradually to 100%. This would allow for an easier shut down to solve any potential bugs or hiccups that may arise before reaching full production.
Our team’s clear communication and ability to manage the client’s expectations, coupled with the expert work of our engineers, has opened the door to a multi-year project with the potential for future work. Except now we know that next time, they won’t be in nearly as much of a pickle.
This article originally appeared in Automation World and features Melissa Bruno, Group Engineering Manager at E Tech Group. Click here to read the full article. During any technology assessment to determine the need for an upgrade, a direct line of communication from integrators to decision makers and maintenance and engineering teams can help them better understand how to evaluate potential solutions. When you’re working in a facility that has equipment reaching end of life or components on the verge of obsolescence, it would be nice to simply wave a wand and have everything be instantly updated. Unfortunately, because multiple installations and upgrades have been done over decades, this process tends to be a bit more involved. Before you can address obsolescence, breakdown, and security issues, you need to have a full picture of where your facility stands. To do this, we perform what we call an IT/OT (operations technology) assessment. While companies like ours perform this work, the client’s presence and cooperation plays a crucial role. Here’s how to get the most out of your assessment. Engage and understand Compounded fixes over time make it difficult to identify the main issues or where to start resolving them. Having an open line of communication with the decision makers and maintenance team, we can help them better understand what we’re assessing and what it will take to correct it. The goal is to take a large amount of material and truncate it into digestible pieces that will allow all parties to evaluate potential solutions. In many cases, maintenance technicians or other employees may not understand what we’re doing. They see an engineer walking the floor and assume we’re there to complete a particular task. In reality we’re performing an in-depth assessment that will be used to give them control over the optimizations … Continued
