Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
net/publication/287028653
CITATIONS READS
8 7,168
3 authors, including:
Frank Moerman
KU Leuven
25 PUBLICATIONS 182 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Frank Moerman on 06 April 2020.
10
Cleaning-in-place
F. Moerman, European Hygienic Engineering & Design Group, Belgium
P. Rizoulieres, Boccard Food, France
10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 Definition of ‘’cleaning in place’’
Cleaning-in-place (CIP) is an automatically performed method of cleaning, applied to remove residues
from complete items of plant equipment and pipeline circuits without dismantling or opening the
equipment. It is a system of cleaning engineered to provide fast, productive, consistent and
reproducible high quality cleaning of all product contact surfaces to a predetermined level of
cleanliness, by circulating chemical (detergent and disinfectant) solutions and rinsing water through
tanks and piping of a food processing plant that remains assembled in its production configuration,
and by jetting or spraying of the product contact surfaces under conditions of increased turbulence
and flow velocity (Moerman, 2002; Majoor, 2003).
Table 10.2 Disadvantages of CIP systems (Adams & Agarwal, 1990; Christi, 1999; Majoor, 2003).
Disadvantages More specific …
High capital cost Investment costs for implementing CIP in a new facility or retrofitting
an existing plant are considerably high, especially because most CIP
systems are custom designed. The complexity of the hardware and
software to control and monitor the CIP process further increases
capital expenditure. But payback of the investment is usually less
than a year, due to the lower labour, raw material and energy costs
Less suitable to remove in- CIP lacks effectiveness in removal of heavy soils in the meat and
soluble heavy soils poultry industry. In these areas, the application of CIP is limited to
vacuum thawing chambers, pumping and brine circulation lines, pre-
blend/batch silos, and edible and inedible fat-rendering systems.
Process equipment must be For both hygienic processing and adequate CIP, process lines and
hygienically designed equipment should be hygienically engineered at the very beginning of
their design. An efficient CIP system by itself is not enough.
Inflexibility Stationary CIP systems only allow cleaning of adjacent process
equipment at reduced operational cost. Mobile CIP-units allow more
flexibility, as they may cover process equipment over a larger area.
Increased maintenance More sophisticated equipment requires more maintenance.
10.2 Key factors for an effective cleaning-in-place process
To clean the whole process equipment and piping system in a minimum of time, a CIP system aims to
combine the benefits of high solution temperature (thermal energy) and chemical activity of the
detergent chemicals (chemical energy) with the mechanical action caused by the turbulent flow and
impact of the sprays/jets of cleaning solution on the equipment surfaces (mechanical energy). But to
be successful, other factors are equally important, such as the quality of the water to prepare the
cleaning solutions (low counts of spoiling microorganisms, low water hardness), the intimate contact
between the cleaning solution and soil (all surface to be cleaned must be covered), the applied CIP
programme, the hygienic design of the process equipment to be cleaned, and the quality of work of
the cleaning staff.
10.2.2 Disinfectants
Disinfection aims to reduce the number of food spoiling microorganism (responsible for off-colours, off-
flavours and off-odours) and pathogens which may be present on process equipment after cleaning.
For the disinfection process to be successful, process equipment surfaces have to be cleaned to a
sufficient level. If large quantities of soil are still present, the efficiency of the disinfectant will decrease.
The disinfectants must be correctly applied to the equipment surfaces according to the pre-scribed
procedure of application and in the correct amounts (at the recommended concentration). Substances
that disinfectant formulations may contain (Roshner, 2005; Rizoulières et al., 2009):
• Disinfectants, with two main types: oxidizing disinfectants (hypochlorites, iodophores, ozone,
peracetic acid, hydrogen peroxide) that kill microorganisms as result of their oxidizing activity, and
non-oxidizing disinfectants (quaternary ammonium compounds, ampholytes, alcohol) that inactivate
microorganisms by non-oxidative complex reactions on either the outside or inside of the microbial
cell. Formaldehyde and phenolics are very effective but they are either toxic, either irritating or may
cause off-odours. Avoid the use of quaternary ammonium compounds for reasons of foaming.
• Buffering agents, pH-regulators (bases, acids or salts), that are used either to provide the optimum
pH required for the biocide to be active, either to control the corrosion risk typical for oxidizing
disinfectants, or to provide the necessary stability to the disinfectant in solution or concentrated form.
• Non-ionic or anionic surfactants improve wetting or enhance foam applications
• Hydrophobic non-ionic surfactants working as defoamers
• Hydrotrophic substances
10.2.3 Detergent concentration
The detergent concentration must be set according to the type of soil and the most difficult to clean
part of the processing line or process equipment. For removal of milk deposits from the heated
surfaces of a plate heat exchanger, Timperley and Smeulders (1988) obtained the best results at a
detergent concentration of 2.5% (Fig. 10.1). They demonstrated that increasing the detergent
concentration above 2.5% w/w increases the cleaning time. Hence, it is important to monitor the
strength of the detergent solution, especially in a re-use system, because high detergent
concentrations (i.e., above 2–3%) are often not economic. The chemical concentration/ detergency
should be controlled either manually (measuring, diluting) or automatically.
As general recommendations, a caustic soda solution about 1% in strength is sufficient for cleaning
storage tanks, pipelines and fermentation tanks, while 1-2% is recommended for cleaning multi-
purpose tanks and plate heat exchangers, and 2–3% for cleaning UHT plants. However, up to 5% may
be necessary to clean heavily soiled equipment. Acid solutions are normally used in the region of
<1%, since at higher concentrations corrosion of metal surfaces may occur (Majoor, 2003).
Fig. 10.1 The effect of the detergent concentration on the cleaning time over an 1-2.5% w/w range is small. The
best results are obtained at a detergent concentration of 2.5%. Higher concentrations increase the cleaning time.
However, up to 5% may be necessary to clean heavily soiled equipment (Timperley & Smeulders, 1988).
10.2.4 Temperature
Timperley and Smeulders (1988) have demonstrated that the natural logarithm of the cleaning time is
inversely proportional to the absolute temperature (Fig. 10.2). In the Arrhenius equation the logarithm
of the reaction rate is also inversely proportional to the absolute temperature, meaning that the higher
the temperature of the detergent solution, the more effective its cleaning action.
Fig. 10.2 The natural logarithm of the cleaning time is inversely proportional to the absolute temperature. The
cleaning time may be reduced by almost 60% for an increase in cleaning solution temperature from 60 to 90°C,
but the main reduction of 40% occurs when the temperature of the cleaning solution increases from 60 to 75°C
(Timperley & Smeulders, 1988).
It is important to maintain the cleaning solution in the CIP retour line at sufficiently high temperature
to avoid re-deposition of soil in this CIP retour line. A CIP system must keep the temperature between
certain target values during all stages of the cleaning process .
While manual cleaning has to be carried out at around 45–50ºC, CIP cleaning may well take place
at 85–90ºC. Higher temperatures (e.g. 100–105ºC) are used during the alkaline wash of a UHT plant.
Notice, however, that too high temperatures may negatively impact the physical and chemical stability
of the target soil, resulting in the formation of a tenacious dirt film. In example given, many proteins are
denaturated at temperatures above 80°C and even much lower, causing them to form difficult to clean
films. Acid treatments are usually carried out at around 60–70ºC. Because an enzyme-based
detergent would tend to be inactivated by excessively high temperatures, the temperature of an
enzymatic CIP solution must be limited to 55ºC (Majoor, 2003).
Fig. 10.3 In pipelines, the main reduction in cleaning time of some 70% is obtained for an increase in mean
velocity of flow from 0.2 to 0.5 m/s. After 0.5 m/s, the rate of improvement decreases as the flow rate increases,
with an asymptote occurring at around 1.5 m/s. Higher flow rates give no better cleaning results, too high a flow
can even result in ‘pipe hammer’ which can cause damage to the seals and equipment.
The design and operation of a CIP system needs to ensure that a target velocity of at least 1.5 m/s
for the passage of cleaning fluids is maintained. Parallel flows in line-cleaning circuits must be avoided
because it is impossible to control the fluid velocity in these parallel pipelines fed by the same pump.
When vessels and pipework are cleaned simultaneously, for example, care should be taken that the
right velocity can be obtained to effectively clean piping downstream of a tank. A tank can first be
cleaned by spray-balls, after which the tank can be partly filled with the cleaning liquid to create a
sufficient buffer for subsequent line-cleaning. For larger-scale and more complex systems, tanks and
pipes are often cleaned by individual cleaning circuits because such lines require a higher throughput
to obtain the required 1.5 m/s linear velocity
When sizing the CIP supply pump, it is important to consider that the pump has to overcome
pressure loss in the pipe system resulting from friction loss in the pipe itself, elbows, tees as well as
any installed equipment or instruments. When pipes with different diameters are combined in a
system, it is important to observe and calculate the flow velocity for each pipe as well as to
compensate for varying pressure losses.
10.2.6 Time
In generally, the longer the cleaning-in-place process goes on, the better the cleaning effect and
cleaning result. However, increasing the time beyond a given value provides little additional increase
in effectiveness, while the available production time decreases. Since relatively high volumes of
solution must be applied to soiled surfaces for periods of time ranging from as little as 5 min to as
much as 1 h, recirculation of the cleaning solution is essential to maintain economic operation.
It is very difficult to estimate cleaning times, because they change according to the structure of the
soils, the level of clogging, the type of equipment to clean, the characteristics of the detergents and
their concentration, the temperature of the cleaning solution, the velocity of cleaning solution in
pipelines, the impact of the spray/jets of cleaning solution on the equipment surface, etc. With respect
to the soil type, it is important to know that moist product residues are easier to remove than tenacious
films formed when the product is burned or dried on the equipment surfaces. Performing process
operations at too high temperatures and waiting too long before starting the cleaning-in-place process
results in increased product cohesion (soil-soil bonds) and adhesion (soil-surface bonds). As a result,
the factor energy in the Arrhenius equitation to overcome these higher cohesion and adhesion forces
increases, so that more chemical, thermal and mechanical energy must be supplied to the soiled
surfaces before the cleaning reaction starts to proceed. Hence, longer cleaning times will be required.
In practice, a complete validation testing procedure may allow to find the suitable contact and rinsing
times for each part of the equipment to clean. The fastest way is by carrying out visual inspections on
some critical parts of the process equipment (elbows, tees, etc.) at the end of the cleaning cycle (Plett
& Graßhoff, 2006; Majoor, 2003).
Pre-rinse
The pre-rinse uses either a fresh, clean, cool (25°C) potable water source, or re-uses the previous
intermediate or final rinse (eventually slightly alkaline, often warm, with temperatures up to 45°C). The
pre-rinse is used to remove as much gross and loosely-adherent soil (organic fat, carbohydrates or
proteinaceous soil) as possible prior to the formulated alkaline wash. The pre-rinse step is usually
once through, which means that the rinse water - once soiled - is sent to drain, still often by purging
with food grade compressed air or a process gas. The pre-rinse water can be diverted in a re-
circulatory loop for a timed period, but usually it is not desirable to introduce excessive soiling into the
pre-rinse water tank. Immediate drainage of the pre-rinse water is still the most common practice. A
pre-rinse step is usually done during 3-10 min, and is completed once the effluent runs out clear. A
major objective is to remove 95% of all soil.
Disinfection
A chemical or heat-based disinfection step is applied to reduce the number of microorganisms from
previously cleaned surfaces. Chemical disinfection usually proceeds with fresh water at room
temperature supplied with disinfectant chemicals injected in the water just before the CIP supply
pump. In function of the decontamination acceptance criteria imposed by the quality assurance
department, the disinfectant solution may be heated. Recirculation of the disinfectant solution usually
occurs cold, during 10-30 min. If the food manufacturer has a preference for hot pressurized water
sterilization, fresh water is heated by recirculation over a plate heat exchanger or direct steam
injection. The water spent during the thermal inactivation process is either recovered or drained. The
length of this hot water sterilization process and the temperature of the hot water applied may vary in
function of the accepted level of residual pathogens and food spoiling microorganisms. Commonly
used recirculation times are 5 up to 60 min; and disinfectant solution temperatures may amount 70-
95°C. For inactivation of spores, dry, saturated steam (not overheated and free from non-condensable
gases) should be used, and temperatures should be maintained at 130-140°C for at least 20 minutes.
Final rinse
The post-rinse serves to remove residuals of disinfectants. Clean potable rinse water is pumped via
the CIP route and subsequently recovered as pre-rinse water. Rinse times and temperatures may be
variable but commonly used rinse times are 5-10 min and the rinse water is either cold or warm. The
final rinse is monitored with pH, conductivity, or resistivity (compared to inlet) to ensure complete
removal of chemical solutions.
Sometimes the post-rinse water is left in the system until the next cleaning cycle starts. It helps to
reduce water hammer effects that may occur when the lines are filled at the start of the next cleaning
cycle. However, when a pipe section between two closed valves is completely filled with a liquid,
temperature changes may cause mechanical damage to these valves and seals. Moreover, the
continuous presence of post-rinse water in a pipe section may increase the risk of contamination of
food product running in an adjacent process line, especially if both piping are interconnected and just
separated by means of an ordinary single-seat valve. As ordinary single-seat valves may leak, food
product may become contaminated with post-rinse water if the latter is continuously present against
that valve.
Drying
To aid in equipment drying, the post-rinse period may be followed by purging of sterile heated air or
sterile ambient temperature air through the process equipment. The air is commonly blown in the
process line through the CIP spray devices or via separate supply ports.
Fully automated control of cleaning programs is preferable to manual control and should include
variables of rinse, drain and recirculation times, temperatures, detergent concentration, flow-rate, etc.
all monitored and governed via either instrumentation or engineering design.
For CIP processes, potable water that is fit for human consumption (free from toxic metal ions,
spoiling microorganisms and pathogens, etc.) should be used (Table 10.3)
Table 10.3 Quality of the water used for CIP (Holah, 2003)
Parameter Limit
Temperature 20°C
pH 6.5-8.5 (max. allowable pH is 10)
Total hardness < 50 mg/l (ideal 5 – 10 mg/l) CaCO3
Alkalinity (HCO3-) < 30 mg/l
Calcium (Ca) < 100mg/l
Magnesium (Mg) 30-50 mg/l (preferably < 10 mg/l)
Silicate (SiO2) < 40 mg/l
Nitrates (NO3-) < 50 mg/l
Sulphates (SO42-) < 250 mg/l
Chlorides (Cl) < 250 mg/l (preferably < 50 mg/l)
Iron (Fe) < 0.2 mg/l
Manganese (Mn) < 0.05 mg/l
Turbidity < 1 NTU (preferably < 0.5 NTU)
Suspended solids (mg/l) < 1 mg/l and < 25 µm
Colloidal particles < 1 mg/l (preferably: none)
Silt density index <1
Dry matter (after drying at 180°C) 1000-1500 mg/l (preferably: < 500 mg/l)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) < 0.4 mg/l
Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) 0-5 µg/l
Tastes organoleptically undetectable
Odours organoleptically undetectable
Colours none
Total bacterial count < 100 cfu/ml
Mesophilic microorgansms < 5 cfu/ml
Psychrophilic microorganisms < 50 cfu/ml
Coliforms 0 per 100 ml
Escherichia coli 0 per 100 ml
10.2.9 Coverage
To obtain efficient and effective cleaning, all soiled surfaces must be brought into intimate contact with
the cleaning solution during a sufficiently long time interval. With respect to the cleaning of pipelines,
dead legs should be eliminated; (instrument) tees should be as short as possible (length of T-section
to the internal pipe diameter, L/D < 1.12); and upwards and downwards pointing dead zones should be
avoided. With respect to the coverage of tank cleaning surfaces, the correct tank cleaning devices
must be selected (section 10.6).
10.3.1 Fill-boil-and-dump-cleaning
This method is possible when, at the start of a process, an ingredient tank with a volume sufficient to
contain enough cleaning solution for the whole system to be cleaned is present. In fill-boil-and-dump
cleaning (Fig. 10.4), after manual cleaning, the tank is filled with water and detergent is supplied. The
cleaning solution is then heated to boil-up, and line flushing which is effective for cleaning piping 7.5
cm or smaller in diameter is executed. The advantages of boil-up are that it is straightforward and
requires no additional piping or spray devices beyond those required for the process. As no additional
equipment is needed, no or little capital investment is required. However, in addition to being time and
energy intensive, boils-up do not make the most effective use of aqueous cleaning solutions. There is
no residual circulation and the cleaning solution is drained, making this concept of cleaning expensive
because high amounts of water and detergents are used. This technique also suffers from poor
repeatability and the results may be inconsistent or unsatisfactory. Hence, the fill-boil-and-dump
cleaning method is also difficult to monitor and to validate (Cerulli & Franks, 2002; Jeffery & Sutton,
2008).
Fig. 10.4 In fill-boil-and-dump cleaning, after manual cleaning, the tank is filled with water, after which detergent is
supplied. The cleaning solution is then heated to boil-up. There is no residual circulation in the cleaning system,
and the cleaning solution is drained
This single-path cleaning-in-place method is only recommended for relatively small process plants,
very dirty processing equipment or special process equipment (e.g., separation membranes because
of the specificity of cleaning products that are used). This concept is also appropriate when the risk of
cross-contamination is high. This method of cleaning-in-place is commonly used in the pharma-
ceutical industry (Lorenzen, 2005).
CIP return
The cleaning solutions can be routed back to the CIP system either by gravity (where feasible) or via a
low-speed CIP Return pump. The return pump should have a no-flow protection, to prevent premature
failure of the pump. Sometimes, the return pump is aided by an eductor. An eductor generates suction
in the return line, thus ensuring that the return pump never air-locks. To generate that vacuum, the
eductor requires a motive fluid that can be delivered by a small motive pump. One of the CIP solutions
(usually the same one as the returning solution) is sent from the source tank through the eductor and
back to the source tank. Thus the motive fluid is different at different stages of CIP. The CIP return line
may have a sample point and a sight glass, allowing validation of a cleaning process (Seiberling,
1997; Christi, 1999).
Sorting and recovery
Upon return to the CIP system, the solution can go into one of the CIP tanks or diverted to drain. Re-
use CIP systems are generally programmed to “waste” a small part of the solution at the end of each
cleaning cycle to continuously remove soiled solution from the system. This is followed by the addition
of fresh water to bring the solution tank to the normal operating level after which the conductivity-cell
based chemical feed system will add more cleaning chemical. A detergent solution that becomes less
quickly polluted during its recirculation through the process equipment being subjected to a caustic
cleaning step can be re-used many times. This is especially possible in process plants where parts of
the process equipment are not heavily soiled, and where the pre-rinse water succeeds to remove a
high percentage of soil during the preliminary rinse.
Fig. 10.7 A typical reuse CIP system consists of (a) caustic tank(s), an acid tank, a water recovery tank and a
final rinse water tank, all interconnected by piping and provided with valves and manifold fitted with CIP supply
and return pumps. Detergent chemicals are fed in-tank or in-line. The content of each of the CIP tanks is
mixed by recirculation over the corresponding CIP tank through the CIP supply/recirculation pump,
and is meanwhile heated during its passage over the heat exchanger. At the adequate strength and
temperature, all monitored by conductivity and temperature sensors, the recirculation valve closes and
the cleaning solution flows in the CIP supply line. The cleaning solutions can be routed back to the
CIP system either by gravity (where feasible) or via a low-speed CIP Return pump. Solutions are
recovered to the corresponding tanks or sent to drain (courtesy of Sanimatic).
CIP supply
At that moment, the CIP tank recirculation valve closes and the CIP supply valve opens, allowing the
cleaning solution to pass a strainer, to finally flow in the CIP supply line. The strainer may be a self-
cleaning type that discharges accumulated debris to drain whenever the pressure drop across the
device exceeds a pre-set value. The CIP supply line is connected to the spray devices located in a
vessel or other pieces of process equipment, and the piping that needs to be cleaned. Dry running of
the supply pump which could damage the pump is prohibited by a no-flow sensor.
Maximum recovery of caustic and/or acid detergent solutions is only possible after adequate
sorting of the cleaning solutions and rinse waters. Sorting/recycling of solutions is governed by a
conductivity sensor which is installed at the end of each CIP return line on the CIP station. When this
sensor detects that the conductivity of a solution is higher than a pre-set target value, the CIP solution
is returned to the corresponding detergent tank. In a subsequent rinse step, the cleaning solution is
flushed away by the rinse water, with as result that the conductivity signal decreases and finally drops
below a pre-set value, triggering a changeover valve that routes the rinse water to drain instead of to
the relevant detergent tank. But once a pre-set minimum conductivity value has been reached,
indicating complete removal of acid or caustic from the system, the intermediate or final rinse is
stopped. Usually, the entire CIP sequence is automated, allowing the CIP system to stop regularly at
specific steps.
Sorting of solutions is only efficient if intermixing between cleaning solutions and water phases is
minimal. Hence, the transition and boundary between two successive phases (in e.g., between the
caustic and rinsing sequence) must be sharp. The transition between two phases will be long if too
much intermixing as the consequence of poor hygienic design of the process equipment (e.g., due to
dead legs) occurs, or because different equipment units are cleaned in series. Sorting of solutions
could also be governed by timers but is less appropriate than sorting by means of conductivity
sensors.
Additional tanks
The water consumption in a re-use system can be further optimized by providing a recirculation facility
for the hot water. The unit could also be fitted with neutralisation tanks in which the alkali and/or acid
solutions are neutralized prior to their disposal into the effluent system. The capacity of the tanks is
defined in advance by the circuit volume, temperature requirements and desired cleaning. An ideal re-
use CIP system has the ability to fill, empty, recirculate, heat and dispense contents automatically.
Fig. 10.9 To avoid ‘dead areas’, valves should be installed very close to the main CIP supply line at the upstream
side of the branches to the tanks, which is the case in the branches 2, 3 and 4. If this is not the case, a dead area
of stagnating liquid will be formed. During in-place cleaning of tank D, a dead area will be formed in the branch 1
to tank A, because the valve is installed at considerable distance from the CIP supply line. That stagnant cleaning
liquid will not be properly removed when changing to the next stage of the cleaning cycle of tank D. In a similar
manner, the branches from the process tanks to the CIP return line should have valves positioned close to the
CIP return line, which is the case in the branches 2’, 3’, 4’ and 5’. In branch 1’ to the CIP return line, a dead area
may be observed. Further, the CIP supply and CIP return line should be directly interconnected (5) beyond the
branches to or from the process tanks. This loop (5), which is provided with a block valve (6), allows removal of
cleaning solutions and rinsing waters over the whole CIP supply and CIP return circuit. A fluid from a previous
step in the cleaning cycle can be replaced by a subsequent one via the interconnection CIP supply-CIP return
line. Single-seated valves between cleaning fluids and food product are not safe enough because of the risk of
occasional leakage over the valve seat. Because only one single-seated valve is installed in branches 1 and 2,
the product in tanks A and B is at risk for contamination if cleaning fluids leak over the valve seats. Contamination
of food product also may occur if cleaning fluids leak over the valve seats of the singe-seated valves in branches
1’ and 2’. A double block-and-bleed arrangement of two butterfly valves in series with an inline separation cavity
between both butterfly valves (points 3, 4, 3’ and 4’) allows to safely separate CIP fluids from product.
10.5.3 Self-drainability of the CIP supply and CIP return lines
To avoid the formation of standing “pools” of liquid food product, it is a general rule in the food industry
that it should be transported through process piping that is free of dead ends, properly supported to
prevent line sagging and provided with a downward slope of 1 m per 120 m in the direction of flow.
Besides quick removal of product, also cleaning solutions and rinse waters must be quickly drained.
Piping systems that are self-draining facilitate evacuation of residual rinsing water during and/or after
cleaning, which results in less intermixing of the rinse waters with the cleaning solutions. A better
separation of successive liquid phases of a cleaning cycle (e.g., a rinse water and a cleaning solution)
makes that less detergent chemicals are wasted along with the rinse waters being sent to drain. A
better preservation of the concentration of detergent chemicals in the cleaning solutions, gives better
utilization of detergent chemicals. Therefore, all pipe runs of the CIP system (CIP supply and CIP
return piping) should be equally supported and sloped with a downwards pitch to the same extent as
process piping. CIP supply and return lines are usually drained when a cleaning procedure is
terminated, and therefore should have drain valves at appropriate places.
Transfer panels
Transfer panels (Fig. 10.10) are composed of a series of nozzles or ports (“plug-in” ports with tri-clamp
ends) welded into a 316L stainless steel plate. Transfer panels are free standing with legs and foot
plates or wall integrated. The nozzles are connected by hard sanitary stainless tubing to the inlets and
outlets of process vessels or other functions (e.g., CIP system) in an all welded construction. The
interconnection between the different ports is made with sanitary U- and J-bends. With the addition of
proximity switches, transfer panels enable electronic confirmation of proper line connections before a
particular process circuit is initiated, thus preventing accidental miss-transfers. A system of transfer
panels is suitable for small plant operations, and allows separate in-place cleaning of different process
units.
Fig. 10.10 By application of two flow plates, the two process units can be cleaned in-place separately via two
different CIP circuits (courtesy of Suncombe CIP & Process engineers, Ltd.).
Double block-and-bleed butterfly valve system
A double block-and-bleed arrangement of two butterfly valves in series with an inline separation cavity
between both butterfly valves allows to safely separate CIP fluids from product (which can be
observed in Fig. 10.9). Nowadays, double block and bleed systems consisting of two sets of butterfly
valve components arranged in series within a single integral valve body exist, to provide an inline
separation cavity when both valves are in the closed position. That cavity allows safe in-line separation
of CIP fluids and product. Facilities are provided to drain leaking fluids to atmosphere, should either of
the separate valve seats fail. They additionally allow turbulent circular washing action in the separation
cavity (Fig. 10.11).
Fig. 10.11 This double block-and-bleed arrangement of two sets of butterfly valve components arranged in series
within a single integral valve body allows to safely separate CIP fluids from product. The separation cavity has two
pneumatically interlocked poppet valves, tangentially opposed to provide for turbulent circular washing action and
proper drainage of CIP or flushing liquids. Their position also facilitates a drain to atmosphere should either of the
separate valve seats fail (courtesy of Tyco Flow Control).
Fig. 10.12 Mixproof intersections can be designed by a suitable combination of three single-seated shut-off
valves, that allow safe in-line separation of CIP fluids and product. When valves 1 and 2 are shut off, the line
intersection between both valves can be open to atmosphere by bringing valve 3 in an open position. Any leakage
over the seats of the valves 1 and 2 is immediately observed and can be drained via the drain port without any
possibility of one medium being mixed with the other (Bylund – Tetrapak, 1995).
Mixproof system of one shut-off valve and one change-over valve
This mixproof system with one shut-off valve and one change-over valve (Fig. 10.13) allows flow of
product from one line to the other. When both valves are appropriately closed, the lines are isolated
from each other and two different media can flow through the two lines without being mixed. Should
either of the separate valve seats fail. leakage may be observed and go to drain without any possibility
of one medium being mixed with the other.
Fig. 10.13 A mixproof system with one shut-off valve (1) and one change-over valve (2) allows flow of product
from one line to the other if both valves are in their open position. When both valves are appropriately closed
(such as demonstrated), the line intersection between both valves is open to atmosphere, and any leakage of the
CIP solutions or product will fall outside the system via the drain port.
Fig. 10.14 (a) A typical design of a double-seated mixproof valve consists of a valve housing with an upper valve
chamber (1) and lower valve chamber (2). Between the two chambers the valve seat area is arranged with two
seats, usually one on top of the other with a separation cavity (3) in between. The seats consist of an upper
closure device (4) and a lower closure device (5), typically a disc, which are connected to independent the upper
shaft (6) and lower shaft (7) for opening, closing and individual seat lifting. The cavity acts as a leakage chamber
(3) and is open to the outside via a drain pipe in the bottom shaft (8) for leak detection. In the closed position, the
upper valve chamber (1) and the lower valve chamber (2) are each sealed by a valve disk, held independently on
its seat by spring pressure. (b) To open the connection between the upper pipeline (9) and lower pipeline (10), the
actuated lower valve disk (5’) is raised off its seat first and then moves upwards a short distance before contacting
the upper valve head (4’). As a consequence, the drainage chamber (3’) between the upper and lower body is
gradually decreased. (c) Both valve disks move then further together into the open position. Meanwhile, in the
more modern double-seated mixproof valves, the remaining cavity between the upper and lower valve disks
remains sealed against the product area (11). It is important that the lower plug should be hydraulically balanced
(12, balancer) to prevent pressure shocks from opening the valve that may allow products to mix. When the valve
closes, first the upper plug seals and then the lower plug seals. Both opening and closing of double-seated
mixproof valves may give very small product losses getting in the cavity between the two valve discs during
operation. However, this cavity can be flushed clean with cleaning fluid via a hose connection (13). The cleaning
fluid will drain to the outside via the bores (10) and drain pipe (8) of the lower closure device. ln aseptic
applications, steam or a sterile barrier may be applied in the atmospheric opening (vent) to prevent ingress of
microorganisms (courtesy of GEA).
Fig. 10.15 System of double-seated mixproof shut-off valves is used for mixproof separation of incompatible
media such as cleaning solutions and liquid food product at flow path intersections within the pipe system. Tank
filling, emptying and CIP processes may run at the same time.
Fig. 10.16 Because of the rather high costs of mixproof valves (1), they can be replaced at the points of
connection to the CIP circuit by mixproof system with one shut-off valve and one change-over (flow-diversion)
valve (2). An additional advantage is that occasional draining of a process tank can be done independently from
the CIP circuit.
10.6.2 Major objectives of spraying or jetting the vessel, equipment or tank surfaces with
cleaning solution
As alternative to manual or fill-boil-and-dump cleaning, the interior of tanks, vessels and other large-
volume pieces of equipment is best cleaned by means of tank cleaning devices, stationary or rotary.
Compared to manual and fill-dump-and-boil cleaning, they permit fast, productive, consistent and
reproducible high quality cleaning while ensuring operator safety, with less cross-contamination
between product batches, less off-spec products, increased economy (due to reduced consumption of
water, cleaning agents and energy during CIP), less effluent, and reduced downtime (increased
productivity). Some tank cleaning technologies can reduce costs more than others.
10.6.3 Key parameters that determine the effectiveness of a tank cleaning process
Tank cleaning is defined by Sinner (1960) as spraying or jetting of vessels, equipment or tank walls
with a hot cleaning solution, to loosen and remove the soil by the impact of the spray or jet streams
or/and by the mechanical action of the free falling film of cleaning solution along the vessel surface.
Tank cleaning devices apply chemical (detergent chemicals), thermal energy (heat) and
mechanical/kinetic energy to the surfaces to be cleaned, three of the four factors in the well-known
Sinner’s circle that allow the cleaning process to take place. The importance of each of these factors is
different for each of the three broad categories of tank cleaning devices:
• stationary spay devices
• rotary spray devices
• rotary jet devices
10.6.4 The important role of tank cleaning devices in the energy- and cost-efficiency of a tank
cleaning process
With respect to the tank cleaning process, increasing the mechanical action factor allows for significant
reduction of the higher cost factors in the Sinner circle, such as heat, detergent chemicals, time and
also water. Savings on energy (e.g. heating of cleaning solutions and energy for recirculation) and
water usage provides significant financial benefits to the food manufacturer. Moreover, notice that the
cost of energy and water is still raising, and likely to continue to raise. The time spent for cleaning
leaves less time for the production of food products. Reducing the cleaning cycle time and thus the
downtime always has a direct financial benefit.
10.6.5 Effect of mass concentration and velocity on the impact per unit tank area of a fluid
stream expelled from a cleaning nozzle
The resultant force of a fluid stream acting on a surface is equal to the rate of change of momentum
(Moerman & Leroy, 2002):
∆(m.v)
F = _______ = v.∆m/∆t + m.∆v/∆t
∆t
This equation shows that the impact force of fluid hitting an area of the target surface changes if either
the velocity or the mass changes. With increasing distance from the tank cleaning device, the water
spray or jet breaks up into drops and droplets due to collapse of unstable fluid sheets by internal
friction, or due to the shearing action and entrainment of air. When drops and droplets become smaller
in size, their mass decreases concomitantly with as result that they hit the target surface (e.g., tank
wall) with much less force. Moreover, notice that moving drops are decelerated by air friction, with
smaller drops losing more rapidly velocity than the larger ones. Hence, the smaller sized droplets and
drops with lower velocity will hit the target surface (e.g., tank wall) with much less force.
The highest impact per cm2 in a specific target spot will be obtained if the fluid mass remains
concentrated along the centre line over an as far as possible stand-off distance L from the nozzle.
That high density water jet or spray also better maintains its velocity during its travel towards the tank
wall. However, if the same water mass is distributed over a larger area, the impact per cm2 at that
specific target spot will be much less, especially because the drops and droplets also have lost a lot of
their initial velocity.
It is the type of nozzle, spray angle, spray pattern, spraying pressure and rotation speed (rotary
spray and jet device) that determine the spray/jet concentration, distribution, velocity and impact.
There are also other factors that have influence on the spray/jet concentration, such as the viscosity
and surface tension of the cleaning solution, and the specific gravity that has both mass and velocity
effects (this gravitational effect depends on the direction of the spray and jet). Every factor that
promotes the break-up of the water sprays or jets will decrease the impact of the cleaning fluid on the
tank wall. One of these factors is fluid pressure.
Although most people think that increasing the nozzle’s inlet pressure is beneficial for better
cleaning, beyond certain pressure limits stationary spray devices become prone to atomization.
Instead of a spray of cleaning solution reaching the vessel wall surface, a fine, atomized cloud of
drops will drift in the atmosphere and all impingement action will be lost. The throw length of the water
sprayed will decrease drastically, because - if dispersed - the sprayed water no longer can wet the
vessel wall at considerable distance from the nozzle. But also with free-spinning rotary spray devices,
increasing the pressure beyond a certain critical pressure limit Pcrit will give raise to a rapid decrease
of their cleaning power. When they rotate at too high a speed, the compact solid fluid streams
produced by these spray devices break open very quickly, with as result that they become less
effective impact wise. However, they still may be effective wetting wise. To anticipate that problem,
tank cleaning equipment manufacturers have developed rotational controlled (also called constant
speed) rotary spray devices with a built-in speed reduction mechanism that suppresses the rate of
rotation of the rotary spray component when the pressure exceeds a critical pressure limit Pcrit. Hence,
an increase of the inlet pressure of a rotational controlled tank cleaning device provided with orifices
that don’t support dispersion or atomization of liquid, does not result in a decrease of the impact of the
water sprays on the surface, but to the contrary will increase the impact. Fig. 10.17 illustrates how the
impact per cm2 decreases when the inlet pressure of a spray ball or free-spinning rotary spray device
exceeds a critical pressure limit Pcrit.
However, it all depends on what you want to achieve with a rotary spray device. For full 100%
coverage, a free-spinning rotary spray device still remains very effective because water is distributed
to the entire tank (all around the perimeter) almost at the same time, whereas a speed-controlled
cleaning device distributes liquid only to a limited area of the tank at a time.
Fig. 10.17 By forcing liquid through a nozzle or orifice, pressure is converted in velocity energy. But with
increasing distance from the cleaning nozzle, the water spray or jet starts to fan out and gradually breaks up into
smaller drops and droplets with less mass and velocity, with as result a decline in the impact per cm2. Beyond a
critical pressure that process of break-up is accelerated due to atomization, with the impact per cm2 falling from a
cliff. But the same graphic also may explain why beyond a critical pressure limit, the cleaning power of free
spinning rotary spray devices starts to decrease with further increasing pressure. When they rotate at too high a
speed, the compact solid fluid streams produced by these spray devices break open very quickly, with as result
that they become less effective (Moerman & Leroy, 2002).
Fig. 10.18 Stationary cleaning devices spray the cleaning solution on the interior surfaces of a vessel, equipment
or tank. Spray balls with a 185-195° upward spray pattern are recommended, spraying cleaning solution on the
upper region of the tank, to give a cleaning result that relies more heavily on chemical action, the effect of
temperature and the duration of the cleaning process rather than on mechanical action. The mechanical action to
loosen and dissolve the residues is provided by the gravity assisted cascading of the cleaning media on the
surface of the vessel, equipment or tank (courtesy Alfa Laval Tank Cleaning Equipment A/S).
Fig. 10.20 Rotating spray devices optimize the distribution of cleaning fluid by ensuring complete impact coverage
of all interior tank surfaces, while increasing the turbulence in the liquid film running down the walls (courtesy of
Alfa Laval Tank Cleaning Equipment A/S).
Fig. 10.21 Disc-type spray deflector (courtesy of Breconcherry, acquired by GEA Tüchenhagen)
(a) (b)
Fig. 10.22 Reactionary force driven tank cleaning devices: (a) rotary spray ring washer consisting of a solid
plastic ring provided with multiple slope-wise drilled holes that rotates over a thin liquid film (hydro-bearing)
around a plastic of stainless/alloy static body; (b) free-spinning slotted swirling fan rotary spray device (courtesy of
Lechler GmbH).
• Spinner (slotted swirling fan rotary spray device)
A spinner (Fig. 10.22b), made of stainless steel or alloy, is a cleaning device that rotates by the
reaction force of the cleaning water sprayed out of the slots or flat-shaped gaps of a rotating sphere
rolling on two ball bearing rows, to provide a rotating fan-like cleaning action (swirling and surging
impact). They may rotate in any position but with time, wear to the roller bearings can be the cause
of rotary spray device starting to block under its own weight. Before installation and during operation,
users must verify proper rotation of the rotating component. Introduced in a tank through a small
flange hole, a spinner can be installed at various depths, connected by means of a clip-on, weld-on
or threaded connection at a stainless steel lance (316 or 316L). These cleaning devices are excellent
in the cleaning of vessels fouled by flaky and sticky soil, because the centrifugal forces generated
during the rotation of the spinner can easily sweep the flaky material out of the rotating sphere via
these slots. A slot/flat-shaped gap in the lower part of the sphere facilitates complete leaking of the
cleaning/rinsing solution laden with flaky soil out of the spray ball, that makes spinners an excellent
substitute to static and rotary spray devices covered with bore holes that accumulate flaky material at
the inside due to their strainer effect (Moerman & Leroy, 2002).
Fig.10.23 Rotational controlled tank cleaning devices that use the momentum of the fluid flow to drive the spray
device. (a) Rotational controlled rotary spray ball; (b) Spraying Systems’ stainless steel RokonTM with small
stainless steel elliptical “cat eye” spray orifice inserts; (c) Lechler’s ACCUClean® with elliptical discharge
orifices.
• Rotational controlled tank cleaning devices with elliptical spray orifices
On the market, we also may find fluid driven rotational controlled tank cleaning devices with elliptical
spray orifices. They use the momentum of the fluid flow to drive the spray device, and maintain
constant rotating speed with increasing pressure beyond the critical pressure limit. The differential
speed reduction unit prevents in-effectual high speed spinning at liquid pressures > Pcrit. Typical
examples are the RokonTM from Spraying Systems, Co., which has stainless steel elliptical “cat eye”
spray orifices inserted in its rotating body (Fig. 10.23b); and the ACCUClean® and XactClean® from
Lechler GmbH that have elliptical discharge holes (Fig. 10.23c). Both they produce flat- or sheet-type
sprays.
The orifices, however, may clog but can be manually cleaned with a brush in a little bit soap
solution, a wooden tooth stick or pressurized air. It is absolutely not recommended to use metal tools
to clean the nozzle orifices, as they may become damaged. When using chemicals the nozzles
should be flushed with water after finishing the cleaning operation. A liquid strainer should be
installed to protect the tank cleaning nozzles against particles in the cleaning solution. If the orifices
are worn out, the rotating head of the tank cleaning devices should be replaced (Moerman & Leroy,
2002).
Fig. 10.24 Rotating jet devices produce synchronized solid water streams that lay out a tight and thorough
scouring spray pattern upon the internal structures and interior surfaces of a vessel, equipment or tank (courtesy
of Scanjet & Alfa Laval Tank Cleaning Equipment A/S).
Rotary jet devices with 1, 2, 3, 4 or more nozzles are usually fluid driven (turbine-type) or motor-
driven (electric or pneumatic), while another type is piston-driven, in particularly produced by one
company (Breconcherry, acquired by GEA Tüchenhagen). Rotary jet devices permit high impact
cleaning (usually 360° coverage) in tanks having volumes in the 15-1250 m3 range. Some rotary jet
devices are designed to provide only directional 180° upward or downward impingement cleaning.
Those producing a 180° downward spray pattern are appropriate for the cleaning of the sidewalls,
bottom or internal structures in open-top vessels, equipment or tanks (Fig. 10.26).
Fig. 10.25 Rotary jet devices produce a concentrated stream of cleaning solution that is directed onto the surface
to clean. Cleaning occurs by impingement and by the tangential shear of the stream that radiates away (the
footprint area) from that point of impact. (Courtesy of Gamajet).
Like many other tank cleaning devices, rotary jet devices cannot be installed in the tank suspended
on a hose, because the reaction of the jet will move the rotary jet machine from side to side. They
should be rigidly mounted on a supply-pipe vertical up or down by means of a clamp, weld-on or other
type of connection. Although less hygienic, the use of threaded connections is common practice. But
they should be designed to be cleanable, with no more than 8 threads per 2.5 cm of length, with
threaded grooves no deeper than their width, with thread radii no less than 0.4 mm, and preferably
with thread angles not less than 60° (in e.g., American Standard Acme 60° Stub, or equal). Knuckle
thread DIN405 is also allowed. The use of hygienic enclosed thread connections, however, is still a
better option, because the threads, if not enclosed, become product contact surfaces during
dismantling operations.
Fig. 10.26 Some rotary jet devices provide only directional 180° upward or downward impingement cleaning. 180°
downward spray patterns are appropriate for the cleaning of the sidewalls, bottom or internal structures in open-
top vessels, equipment or tanks (courtesy of Gamajet).
The use of a pre-filter or strainer to prevent particulate clogging in the drive-mechanism is always
required. Further, a nozzle to continuously clean the exterior of the tank cleaning machine is often
provided. Moreover the exterior cleaning of the tank cleaning machine is often done by the intended
leakage flow that also assists in flushing the bearing elements (Moerman & Leroy, 2002).
10.6.11 Hygienic installation of tank cleaning devices in vessels, large equipment or tanks
Introduction
A tank cleaning device (Fig. 10.27) is commonly installed in a vessel, equipment or tank fixed on a
supply down pipe by means of an internal connection. That supply tube is inserted into the vessel or
equipment via a tank head nozzle, and is fasted onto this top nozzles by means of a tank connection.
At the outside, the down pipe has an external connection with piping or a flexible hose that supplies
the cleaning solution from a CIP-installation. Because hoses are easy to disconnect, they allow quick
removal of the supply tube and tank cleaning device via the tank head nozzle, which is especially
interesting if less hygienic tank cleaning devices are used.
It is important for static spray balls (especially those custom drilled) that they always are inserted in
the same orientation in a top nozzle of the tank, each time they are taken out and afterwards
reinstalled. In that way, the cleaning effect will not change. Typically, one may use a Spray Tube Index
Rod which projects through a tab welded to the tank head nozzle.
Internal connection
Cleaning devices can be assembled onto the supply down pipe in several ways (Moerman, 2002):
• Clip-on connection: the supply down-pipe is inserted in the slip-fit collar of the stationary or rotary
spray device, and a simple wrap around spring pin is inserted in a cross hole drilled in both the end
of the supply pipe and the neck (collar) of the cleaning device. Due to the water circulating
(escaping) through the small annular gap between the neck of the tank cleaning device and the
exterior of the down pipe, the outside of the downpipe inserted into the sleeve of the spray device
and the outer surface of the tank cleaning device can be properly cleaned (Fig. 10.28). This
connection can’t be used for rotary jet cleaning devices, because the reaction of the water jets may
support heavy vibration and bring the machine out of balance.
• Tri-clamp connection: this type of connection requires that both the sleeve of the cleaning device and
the down pipe are provided with a tri-clamp ferule to make a connection that allows quick removal of
the spray device. However, it doesn’t offer the beneficial cleaning of the down pipe, the clamp (which
is not hygienically designed) and the exterior parts of the connected cleaning device.
• Weld-on (butt-weld) connection permanently fixes the cleaning device to the supply pipe in
circumstances where the cleaning device can be left in place, or where the complete assembly of
pipe and washing device can be removed from the top.
• Threaded inlet connections: the collar of the cleaning device has a female thread to screw it on a
supply pipe provided with a threaded male end. Although less hygienic, this connection securely
fastens the cleaning device on the supply pipe. Nowadays, most cleaning device manufactures offer
a hygienic thread connection with a gasket both inside the pipe and on the outside of the pipe, which
protects the thread for 100% from the cleaning solution and the product. Moreover, where supply
pipe and tank cleaning device can be easily removed from the tank after cleaning, a less hygienic
screw inlet connection is no longer an issue.
Fig. 10.27 A tank cleaning device is commonly installed in a vessel, equipment or tank fixed on a supply down
pipe by means of an internal connection. That supply tube is inserted into the vessel, equipment or tank via a top
nozzle in the tank device, and is fasted onto the tank head nozzle by means of a tank connection. At the outside,
the down pipe has an external connection with piping or a hose that supplies the cleaning solution from a CIP-
installation. To guarantee reproducible cleaning, a Spray Tube Index Rod which projects through a tab welded to
the tank head nozzle assures that the spray balls are always inserted in the same position.
Fig. 10.28 Due to the water circulating (escaping) through the small annular gap between the neck of the tank
cleaning device and the exterior of the down pipe, the outside of the downpipe inserted into the sleeve of the
spray device and the outer surface of the tank cleaning device can be properly cleaned (Moerman & Leroy, 2002).
• Vessels need to be designed with smooth, straight walls and curved corners that can be cleaned
easily by liquid spray.
• Flat top surfaces should pitch 4% from centre to sidewalls to encourage the continuous flow of water
sprayed on these surfaces toward the walls.
• Elimination of death corners in the top of the vessel or tank. Difficult to clean areas are the annular
space between the neck of the top nozzles in the tank head and agitator shafts, down pipes, etc.
installed in the tank by means of an exterior tank connection. The ratio nozzle neck length to annular
space gap width should be 2:1.
• Application of short-neck nozzles, which means tank head nozzles with reduced L/D ratios. To avoid
a dead leg, the maximum recommended length to tank head nozzle diameter ratio shall be two-to-
one. Top nozzles should preferably be flush with the tank wall (Fig. 10.29).
Fig. 10.29 The tank cleaning process can be facilitated by applying short-neck nozzles, which means tank head
nozzles with reduced L/D ratios, short in length and large in diameter. By applying flared top nozzles, internal
shadows in the top nozzles can be reduced to a certain extent.
• Reducing the depth of manways to avoid interior shadows, because they are harder to clean and a
source of possible contamination.
• Application of flared top nozzles, eliminating shadows and providing the tank cleaning devices good
“sight” angles into the tank head nozzles.
• Providing sloped drainable (5° angle) side wall sensor ports (Fig. 10.30), rather than ports
perpendicular to the vessel wall.
Fig. 10.30 Use sloped side ports, rather than ports perpendicular to the vessel wall.
Fig. 10.31 Probes shall be inserted in sloped side ports. (a) An elastomeric seal at the entrance of the port (end
opposite to the tank wall) gives raise to an uncleanable long and large annular space between the interior
surface of the sensor port and the probe outside. (b) Protrusion of probes in a vessel wall should be avoided, as
they may form a shadow area during cleaning. (c) When the elastomeric O-ring seal is placed close to the
vessel wall, only a short crevice is formed.
• Application of baffles that are only partially fastened onto the wall of the tank instead of full length
fastened baffles. The internal support members to fasten the baffles to the tank wall must be made
from solid round bar stock having a downward slope of 5°. When gaps are left between the baffle
and tank wall, the flow allows the baffles and the tank wall to be cleaned more easily. Recommended
gaps between the baffles and the vessel wall are equal to 1/72 of the internal vessel diameter, and
1/4 to 1 full baffle width between the bottom of the baffles and the vessel base. Instead of full length
baffles, the use of baffles can be limited to the lower part of the tank or the tank may be provided
with intermittent baffles (split baffle, resulting in two shorter baffles one below the other), without loss
in mixing efficiency. Baffles can be omitted in small tanks (< 500 l), and in designs where the agitator
is mounted off-center and at the same time angled. Where material can hang-up or becomes trapped
in stagnant regions around the baffles during drainage, profiled baffles instead of flat-plate baffles
are recommended (ASME, 2009).
• Installation of hygienically designed agitators, free of pockets, sharp corners, crevices, screw
threads, etc. (Fig. 10.32)
Fig. 10.32 Install hygienically design agitators, free of pockets, sharp corners, crevices, screw threads, etc.
(a) (b)
Fig. 10.33 (a) Top view of a tank with baffle plates and agitator where shadowing of spray occurs due to
the presence of these obstructions. (b) Multiple spray devices are installed in suitable positions to compensate for
the shadowing effect and to provide complete spray coverage.
Other areas that are difficult to clean are the top nozzles in the head or the dome of the vessel, and
the annular space formed around the agitator shaft, etc. The most optimal location for top nozzles is
as close to the centre as possible. In that way, a tank without internals can be cleaned with one
cleaning device (stationary spray, rotary spray, rotary jet device) positioned in the middle of the vessel,
which may spray enough liquid into each nozzle so that the nozzle neck is covered (Fig. 10.34a). If
the top nozzles in the tank head are located at considerable distance from the centre of the tank head,
a single stationary or rotary spray device in the middle of the vessel cannot clean these tank head
nozzles sufficiently due to the internal shadows they create with respect to that cleaning device (Fig.
14.34b). In that case, 2 or more cleaning devices (stationary and rotary spray devices) should be
positioned in a circle at a distance 1/3th of the internal tank diameter from the centre of the tank (Fig.
10.35a). With tank head nozzles located even farther from the centre, these cleaning devices
(stationary and rotary spray devices) should be located in a circle at a distance 2/3th of the internal
tank diameter from the centre of the tank, especially in a tank with wall mounted baffles (Fig.10.35b).
With rotary jet devices, shielded (shadow) areas to the cleaning device can be scrubbed thanks to
deflective water jets. Hence, a single higher impact tank cleaning device (rotary jet device) may
replace a large number of stationary or rotary spray devices to clean the roof area around the down
pipes feeding cleaning solution. One jet of the rotary jet device may be directed upwards.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 10.34 (a) The most optimal location for top nozzles is as close to the centre as possible. In that way, a tank
without internals can be cleaned with one cleaning device (stationary spray, rotary spray, rotary jet device)
positioned in the middle of the vessel, which may spray enough liquid into each nozzle to ensure that the nozzle
neck is covered. (b) If the top nozzles in the tank head are located at considerable distance from the centre of the
tank head, a stationary and rotary spray device in the middle of the vessel cannot clean these tank head nozzles
effectively due to the internal shadows they create with respect to that cleaning device. But with rotary jet devices,
shielded (shadow) areas to the cleaning device can be scrubbed thanks to deflective water jets. A single higher
impact tank cleaning device (rotary jet device) may replace a large number of tank stationary or rotary spray
devices to clean the roof area around the down pipes feeding cleaning solution. One jet of the rotary jet device
may be directed upwards. (Moerman, 2010).
(a) (b)
Fig. 10.35 (a) If the top nozzles in the tank head are located at considerable distance from the centre of the tank
head 2 or more cleaning devices (stationary and rotary spray devices) should be positioned in a circle at a
distance 1/4th of the internal tank diameter from the centre of the tank; (b) With tank head nozzles located even
farther from the centre, these cleaning devices (stationary and rotary spray devices) should be located in a circle
(dot line) at a distance 1/3th of the internal tank diameter from the centre of the tank, especially in a tank with wall
mounted baffles. The location of the cleaning devices (stationary and rotary spray devices) provides coverage of
the upper portion of each baffle and “cross-chop” at the sidewalls and agitator collar. Overlapping areas are the
preferred location for top nozzles that might be the most heavily soiled. An extension arm fitted with a bubble is
positioned directly under the centre of the manhole. The bubble can apply cleaning solution directly to the
manhole cover, collar and fittings. In very large tanks, the same rules apply for rotary jet devices (Alfa Laval Tank
Cleaning Equipment A/S, 2004; Franks & Seiberling, 2008).
To facilitate the cleaning process, a vessel designer can also position all top nozzles (in the head
or the dome of the vessel) at one side of the vessel. In that case, the tank cleaning device (stationary
and rotary spray device) can be positioned in that half of the tank head, off-centre at a distance 1/4th to
1/3th of the internal tank diameter from the centre of the tank (Fig. 10.36).
Fig. 10.36 If all top nozzles (in the head or the dome of the vessel) are placed at one side of the vessel, the tank
cleaning device (stationary and rotary spray devices) should be positioned in that half of the tank head, off-centre
at a distance 1/4th to 1/3th of the internal tank diameter from the centre of the tank.
The number of top flanges should be reduced to a minimum but must still be sufficient in number to
allow the processing operations to proceed and the installation of a sufficient number of tank cleaning
devices. If only one top nozzle is left for installing a tank cleaning device, then more-complex cleaning
devices can be used such as arms with bubble sprayers or tee-tubes provided with a spray ball at
each end. Although mounting of angled supply lines in a tank may provide better cleaning of shadow
areas created by several internals in the tank, that angled supply pipe self may also give raise to
shadowing (Cerulli & Franks, 2002; Franks & Seiberling, 2008).
Axial positioning of tank cleaning devices in vertical vessels
The recommendations for the installation depth of tank cleaning devices in vertical tanks are as
numerous as there are tank cleaning device manufacturers and experts. The most commonly found is
0.25 X tank height H.
In a tank without internal structures, it is recommended to install the tank cleaning device on the
centre line of the vessel. A mathematical approach also allows calculation of the required installation
depth in a vertical tank. If the dome height of a tank is known, then the formula of Pythagoras can be
used to exactly calculate the installation depth of a tank cleaning device at the centre line of a vertical
vessel (Fig. 10.37).
Fig. 10.37 Illustration showing how the installation depth of a tank cleaning device at the centre line of a vertical
tank can be calculated. The dome height Hdome (in m or cm) is given by the vessel manufacturer, or can be
calculated with well-known algebraic formulae. Tank heads are usually constructed according to standards
developed by ASME, DIN and AFNOR: torispherical - DIN-28011, semi-ellipsoidal - DIN-28013, elliptical Form
2:1 (ASME), elliptical form 1.9:1 (E81-103) (NF), standard dished, flat dished, convex (spherical cap or cover) and
flat heads. The dome height Hdome also can approximately be calculated with the equation h2 = R•tan 15°. With
the Pythagoras’ equation the height Hcs (about the depth of the tank cleaning device under the horizontal line
drawn between the two top corners of tank) can be calculated. The cleaning radius r can be freely chosen by the
food manufacturer, and is not necessarily equal to the maximum cleaning radius of the tank cleaning device. If the
food manufacture prefers more impact in the top corners of the tank by the fluid leaving the nozzles of the tank
cleaning device, then he can reduce the distance between the tank cleaning device and the top corner of the tank.
However, he still must be aware to install the tank cleaning device(s) in a position to allow for sufficient coverage
of the top nozzles in the dome of the tank with the sprays of cleaning solution emitted by the tank cleaning
device(s). With both Hdome and Hcs known, the installation depth d exactly can be calculated (Moerman, 2010).
If both the total length of the tank (from tank top to tank bottom) and the length of the cylindrical
tank section are known, then the tank head height can be calculated by dividing the difference of both
lengths with two (provided that tank head and bottom are the same).
Tank ports in a wall of a tank can complicate a proper estimation of the tank cleaning device’s
installation depth. It is recommended that the tank cleaning device is installed below the side port in
the tank wall (Fig. 10.38) . If that side port is located in the lower parts of the tank, the user’s logic
would be to install the tank cleaning device deeply in the tank below that tank port. However,
immersing tank cleaning devices in the product is not a practice to promote, because process fluids
may enter the tank cleaning device when not in use and may plug the holes. The result will be
increased risk for contamination and poor soil removal, especially in the top corners of the vessel. It is
highly recommended to install side ports as high as possible, but still sufficiently low to allow correct
measurements during process operations (Tamplin, 1990).
Fig. 10.38 To avoid immersed tank cleaning devices and to guarantee appropriate cleaning of side ports, it is
highly recommended to install these side ports as high as possible but still sufficiently low to allow correct
measurements of process parameters.
In a tank with internals, the recommendations with respect to the depth of installation of the tank
cleaning devices is somewhat different from those applicable for a tank without internal structures.
Fig. 10.39 Franks & Seiberling (2008) suggest to install the tank cleaning devices at a depth where the spray
streams directed at the top nozzles in the tank head have an upward vector component of 35° or greater above
horizontal, allowing the spray to ricochet upward after hitting the target nozzle.
Franks & Seiberling (2008) recommend that fluid should hit the neighbouring top nozzles under an
angle of 55° or less from the vertical (Fig. 10.39), which in fact is the down pipe supplying the cleaning
solution to the tank cleaning device. Where head space restrictions and sensitive food products
(excluding submersion) make installation of tank cleaning devices at that recommended depth
impossible, a greater number of tank cleaning devices will be required.
Referring to Fig. 10.35a, the installation depth of the rotary jet device is calculated by Alfa Laval
Tank Cleaning Equipment A/S (2004) in the same way as suggested for centre line installations of
tank cleaning devices: tan 25° largest horizontally cleaning radius [m] - machine length (between
connection and nozzle) [m]
Fig. 10.40 The installation depth of the tank cleaning device is calculated by Alfa Laval Tank Cleaning Equipment
A/S (2004) in the same way as suggested for centre line installations of tank cleaning devices: tan 25° X largest
horizontally cleaning radius [m] - machine length (between connection and nozzle) [m]
a.
b.
Fig. 10.41 Tamplin (1990) suggests the use of a graphical approach to determine if an adequate number of tank
cleaning devices are installed in the horizontal tank, and if they are correctly spread over the total length of the
horizontal tank. Identical tank cleaning devices installed at a depth dr from the cylindrical tank roof must be
uniformly spread over the total length L of the tank in a way that the end domes and the whole cylindrical section
of the horizontal tank are covered.
To determine the amount of cleaning solution required for the cleaning of tanks by means of spray
balls, Tamplin (1990) has also made the recommendations listed in Table 10.8. The circumferential
flow rate varies with the height of the vessel for vertical- and rectangular types, and depends on both
the length and the diameter of the vessel for horizontal types (Table 10.9).
Table 10.8 Spray ball flow rates required for suitable cleaning of vessels (Tamplin, 1990)
Type of vessel Total flow rate required (l/min)
Vertical vessel (vessel diameter x π) x circumferential flow rate (l/min per m)
Horizontal vessel 2 x (vessel diameter + vessel length) x circumferential flow rate (l/min per m)
Rectangular vessel 2 x (vessel length + vessel width) x circumferential flow rate (l/min per m)
Table 10.9 Recommended circumferential flow rate (l/min per meter circumference)
required for tank cleaning by means of spray balls (Tamplin, 1990)
Horizontal cylindrical*
Vertical Rectangular
Height or length (m) diameter diameter diameter
vessel** vessel***
(up to 1.5 m) (up to 3 m) (up to 4.5 m)
3 17.4 19.9 19.9 24.8 24.8
7.5 19.9 22.4 22.4 29.8 29.8
15 22.4 22.4 22.4 37.25 37.25
24 22.4 24.8 24.8 49.8 49.8
* circumference = 2 x (vessel length + vessel diameter)
**circumference = vessel diameter x π
***circumference = 2 x (vessel length + vessel width)
Alfa Laval Tank Cleaning Equipment A/S (2004) has demonstrated that rotary spray and rotary jet
devices allow to clean vessels with respectively 30% and 50% less cleaning solution. To determine the
flow rates required for tank cleaning with rotary spray and rotary jet devices, the indicative values in
Tables 10.5 and 10.7 must be multiplied with a factor of respectively 0.7 and 0.5 (Jensen et al., 2011).
(a) (b)
Fig. 10.42 (a) Vortexing may prohibit proper tank draining, with as final result that flush, wash and rinse solutions
start to accumulate in the vessel (courtesy of Gabe Miller, Sani-Matic, Inc.).
Vortexing phenomenon
The CIP-solution-return system should be designed to maintain a very small puddle of liquid in
the bottom of a vessel. A puddle of 50 mm deep in the vessel being cleaned is quite acceptable in
order to prevent the CIP return pump to bind air. It is usual to select a CIP-return pump with a capacity
that is 10 to 25% higher than the CIP-supply pump, because the CIP-return pump not only has to
handle liquid but also a lot of air. It is not uncommon that the CIP return pump must pump a 50/50%
air/water mixture. This is especially true if vortexing takes place, which may prohibit proper tank
draining, with as final result that flush, wash and rinse solutions start to accumulate in the vessel. A
vortex, which is a common problem in round bottom tanks with centre outlet, partially blocks the exit
area, thus restricting flow, and in addition entrapment of air in the return stream may occur (Fig.
10.42a). That air may subsequently cause the CIP return pump to become “air-bound”. Once the CIP
return pump is air-locked, flow in the CIP return line will soon stop, causing the cleaning or rinsing
solution to accumulate in the process vessel.
Vortex reduction and sizing the tank outlet
Vortexing of liquid at the bottom outlet may be prevented in several ways:
• Asymmetrical positioning of the tank outlet at the lowest point.
• Application of slant bottom tanks that have a flat bottom pitched to a sidewall mounted pod and
sidewall mounted tank outlet valve, provided that the process permits such a design. The bottom of
flat vessels should pitch not less than 2% from rear to front outlet (from high to low point), and no
less than 4% from side to the centre outlet for vessels having a bottom that is dish shaped or a cone.
Table 10.10 gives an overview on the tank outlet diameter required for proper drainage of fluids out
of the tank.
• Installation of one baffle already may reduce vortexing, although its effect will be limited. To improve
their cleanability proper baffle design demands sufficient space left between the bottom of the baffle
and the vessel base, which means that baffles will not prevent vortexing in puddles of liquid below
the lowest part of the baffle during drainage.
• The outlet and CIP return piping should be sized to account for vortexing and minimum holdup. This
usually leads to bottom outlet lines larger than would otherwise be required for the process.
• Vortex formation can be prevented by installing a flat vortex breaker plate (Fig. 10.42b). That plate
(Fig. 10.43a) should have a size of approximately 3-4 times the outlet diameter, and must be
installed at a height of no more than 2-2.5 cm above the tank bottom to ensure appropriate cleaning
and wetting of the underside of the plate. It is recommended to pitch the plate with a slope of 1° to
drain the flat surface and to give the vortex breaker plate a round profile at the underside. The plate
is commonly supported with one of more “J-hook” supports of 1.25 cm round stainless steel bar
stock welded hygienically and flush to the tank bottom and the plate. Vortex breakers of the X-cross
section (Fig. 10.43b) type are ineffective and generally produce four smaller vortices that also impact
on the return flow. The plate vortex breaker, however, can enable CIP-return flow at the required rate
with only 10% as much solution in the vessel as is required with no vortex breaker, and the puddle
during CIP-recirculation can be as little as 12-20 l in large tanks at flow rates of 300-380 l/min
(Seiberling, 2001).
Table 10.9 Minimum required inside diameter of the tank outlet to guarantee proper drainage of the tank cleaning
solution supplied by spray balls to a tank with vessel aspect ratio (H/D) = 2
Required outlet pipe Required outlet pipe
with reference to with reference to
Volume Tank Tank
ASME-BPE-2009 DIN11850
vessel diameter circumference
(inch) Range 2
(l) (m) (m)
Delucia (2001)
Lechler (2011)* Moerman (2012) Lechler (2011)*
Moerman (2012)
500 0.68 2.15 1.5 2 DN32-DN40 DN50
1000 0.86 2.70 1.5-2 2-2.5 DN40-DN50 DN50-DN65
2000 1.09 3.40 2-2.5 2.5 DN50 DN65
5000 1.47 4.60 2-3 3 DN50-DN65 DN65-DN80
10 000 1.85 5.80 3 3-4 DN65 DN80-DN100
20 000 4.25 13.35 3-4 4 DN65-DN80 DN80-DN100
Note: The recommended drain outlet is calculated with respect to a spray rate of respectively of 31,125 l/min per
m of tank circumference (removal of soluble soil) and 37,35 l/min per m of tank circumference (insoluble heavy
soil-type) (Moerman, 2012). These calculations correspond very well with the recommendations of Delucia
(2001). However, Delucia does not take sufficiently into account the possibility of air entrainment in the return
stream. Contrary to Delucia’s assumption that little air is entrapped in the return stream, the drainage flow rates
under gravity given by Lechler (2011) reflect much better the reality. Their data are about half the drainage flow
rates proposed by Delucia, which corresponds with the suggestion of Seiberling (1997) that a return line generally
contains a 50/50 air/water mixture.
Another way to avoid collection of pools of liquid in the bottom of the tank is intermittent supply of
cleaning solution via the tank cleaning devices, which means that after a short time of spraying the
supply valve is closed and the tank is emptied before spraying is resumed. Burst cleaning is a method
where successive bursts of cleaning solution are interspersed with drain periods. Pre- and post-rinsing
always must be done in three or more successive bursts of 20 to 45 s duration at carefully timed
intervals, in a way that sufficient time for drainage is provided and vessel collapse is prohibited
(Tamplin, 1990; Seiberling, 1997).
(a) (b)
Fig. 10.43 (a) Installing a flat vortex breaker plate approximately 3-4 times the outlet diameter, at a height of 2-2.5
cm above the tank bottom is more effective. It is recommended to pitch the plate with a slope of 1° to drain the flat
surface. (b) Vortex breakers of the X-cross section type are ineffective and generally produce four smaller vortices
which impact on the return flow in the same manner as one large vortex.
10.6.16 CIP return flow
Drainage and return flow are strongly interwoven. Cleaning and rinsing solutions can be removed from
vessels being spray cleaned in several ways (Seiberling, 1997):
• Gravity allows proper drainage and return of solutions from the process vessel if the vessel is one or
more levels above the CIP system, and if the tank outlet valves and return system piping are
sufficiently large. The return piping should be continuously pitched at a slope of preferably 2% to the
CIP recirculating unit (CIP-installation).
• For adequate drainage and return of cleaning solutions to the CIP system, the use of a product pump
and/or an additional CIP return pump is common practice.
• CIP return pumps are commonly used, especially if gravity alone is insufficient for proper tank
drainage and CIP return flow to the CIP system. A CIP return pump is needed to overcome the
friction losses in the CIP return line. The CIP return pump must be directly installed below the
process tank. If the CIP return line to the CIP return pump slopes upwards toward the tank being
cleaned, then any air is allowed to escape the CIP return pump and may return to the tank being
cleaned. As an alternative, an air-relief valve at the pump inlet may be installed, especially if the
return lines to the CIP systems are long. Low-speed (1750 rpm) return-pumps are largely preferred
over high-speed (3450 rpm) return pumps that become more easily air-bound, with as result that the
high-speed return pumps start to cavitate.
• An eductor may assist the CIP return pump in the return of both air and water to the air
separation/recirculation tank of the CIP system, where the air may disengage from the fluid.
• An eductor alone without a CIP return pump may guarantee proper return flow if the return piping is
sufficiently in size and not too long.
• The process tank can be pressurized to provide the head required to overcome resistance in the
outlet nozzle and valve, and to produce flow through the CIP return piping. However, it is difficult to
control and keep a pressure that is just enough to maintain the minimum liquid level required at the
nozzle entrance. If the pressure is too high, additional entrainment of air will occur.
Fig. 42.44 Atmospheric vessels must be equipped with an adequate permanent vent to protect it from
internal pressure or vacuum damage during normal operation, and to protect it against collapse as the
result of pulling a vacuum on the vessel with a CIP return pump or as the result of vapour
condensation that takes place after rinsing with hot wash solutions at ambient temperatures.
To improve the cleaning of process vessels and their internals, the following actions should be taken:
• It is recommended that tank holes should be opened before tank cleaning, thoroughly cleaned
(including the gasket) and put back in place for CIP cleaning and disinfection of the tank.
• During usual inspection and maintenance operations, cleaning devices must be inspected monthly to
ensure proper distribution of the cleaning solution (e.g. no fouling, clogging or blockage of holes), to
verify proper rotation of the cleaning device (rotation can be hampered if ball bearing or bushings are
worn), and to check if atomization of the cleaning solution takes place due to the delivery pressure
being too high. To verify proper rotation of a rotary tank cleaning device, an electronic pressure
sensor (Fig. 10.45) into the head or the wall of the tank can measure the changes in pressure on its
surface as the spray or jet passes by. There should be regular undulations in the measurement at
the same frequency of the nozzle’s rotation. A cruder alternative would be to listen through the wall
of the tank for the same pulsations, using a stethoscope or similar device (Welander, 2002a).
• Do not use more coverage than you really need. If you only need to wash the head, use a design
that only sprays in the required direction, otherwise you are wasting cleaning power on parts that do
not need it.
• The shadowing effect of the agitator blades can be minimized by running the agitator during the
cleaning cycle. At the start of the CIP-cycle, allowing a puddle of liquid in the tank may support the
cleaning of the underside of the rotating agitator. During the rotation of the agitator, the blades may
sweep liquid against the walls at the bottom of the tank providing some mechanical effect.
Fig. 10.45 An electronic pressure sensor into the head or the wall of the tank can measure the changes in
pressure on its surface as the spray or jet passes by (Courtesy of GEA-Tüchenhagen).
10.7 Automation
Today, most of the CIP stations, even small ones, are automated on their own, or the control over the
cleaning-in-place operations is integrated in the automation system of the separate process machines.
In the first case, the CIP station manages the whole sequence of cleaning steps, and in fact functions
like a ‘’washing machine’’ that also passes through a pre-set programme of cleaning, rinsing and
drying steps. In the second concept, the automation system of the CIP station only controls the
temperature and detergent (disinfectant) concentration. Meanwhile the automation system of each
process equipment controls on its own the whole sequence of cleaning steps (time for each path,
opening/closing of valves, flow rate, etc.) (Rizoulières, 2009).
Automation means that all actions needed to control a process with optimal efficiency are handled
by a control system on the basis of instructions that have been programmed into it. Running a CIP
process involves keeping track of hundreds of valves and operating them in different combinations and
sequences. A microprocessor based Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) is ideal for remembering
which combination is needed for a given purpose and setting up that combination in the shortest
possible time. All the transmitters (flow meters, conductivity sensors, etc.) and all controlled objects in
the CIP process are connected to the PLC, so that all the necessary information regarding
temperatures, flows, pressures, valve positions, etc. is fed into the control system. After processing
these input signals, the PLC sends out command signals in a certain order to actuate and shut off the
various control objects (pumps, valves and motors) involved in the controlled CIP process, in such a
way that the logical conditions applying to the CIP process are satisfied. The controlled components
send back acknowledgement signals confirming that the commands have been carried out. These
feedback signals to the PLC are used as conditions, permitting the next step in the sequence to be
actuated. Each PLC has its own process areas to control, but several PLCs may be interconnected to
communicate with each other over a network. To communicate with the process and the PLC
(eventually all so other PLCs), a Human Machine Interface (a PC or more simple a touch screen) is
connected with the PLC to provide the operators the ability to manage CIP recipes, including all the
key parameters. Accessibility to the CIP station key parameters should be restricted by a password.
By means of the same network, more operator stations may be connected with the PLC(s), allowing
operators from different locations in the food factory to control or monitor the CIP process. Also
included are a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system to log and process data that
provide the input for reports, analyses, statistics and diagnostic messages. All details of the
successive steps in the cleaning cycle that a given process equipment has passed, may be visualized
on a colour graphic Video Display Unit, making it possible for operators and supervisors to gain the
necessary information per shift, day or month. Each CIP cycle that was run is fully traceable, even
months later. Typical reports with information of (a) past CIP cycle(s) may include (Rizoulières, 2009):
• Identification of the equipment cleaned;
• Identification of the CIP station and ancillary equipment used to clean the process equipment;
• Cleaning programme applied (sequence of cleaning steps);
• Start and stop times for each step in the CIP process;
• Historical trends of the key CIP parameters (table or curves);
• Main events and deviations (alarms) that occurred during the CIP cycle;
• Additionally: consumption of water and steam (the CIP station must be provided with flow meters),
detergent and disinfectant consumption, etc.
Automated CIP units enhance cleaning effectiveness and reduce cleaning costs through precise
control of the variables (e.g., detergent concentration, temperature, etc.) associated with mechanised
cleaning. Some units have as many as 200 separate and variable programmes that can provide better
product recovery, improved cleaning solution and/or rinse water recovery, significant reduction in
detergent or disinfectant consumption, savings on energy, higher cleaning or rinsing efficiency, etc.
Automated systems have proven to have the potential to lower detergent chemical costs by 15-20%,
and to reduce the cleaning cycle time by 10%. Automation may also reduce the human error factor.
Example of a CIP station with an automated self-cleaning sequence, with rotation of solutions,
which nowadays are treated by means of membrane filtration to remove pollutants (Rizoulières et al.,
2009):
• Send all the water stored in the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ (= “water recovery tank”) to drain in order to
empty this tank.
• Send some caustic solution from the ‘’caustic tank’’ to the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ (via the spray ball(s)
in the “pre-rinse water tank”) to obtain a small but sufficient amount of caustic solution for
recirculation on this tank.
• Clean the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ by recirculating the caustic solution on this tank.
• Drain the caustic solution from the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’.
• Transfer all remaining caustic solution stored in the ‘’caustic tank’’ to the ‘’pre-rinse water tank”.
• Rinse the “caustic tank” with clean water, and empty to drain.
• Send some acid solution from the ‘’acid tank’’ to the ‘’caustic tank’’ (via the spray ball(s) in the
“caustic tank”) to obtain a small but sufficient amount of acid solution for recirculation on this tank.
• Clean the ‘’caustic tank’’ by recirculating the acid solution on this tank.
• Send the acid solution to drain.
• Rinse the ‘’caustic tank’’ with clean water, and empty to drain.
• Return the remaining caustic solution from the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ to the ‘’caustic tank”.
• Rinse the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ with clean water, and send to drain.
• Send some acid solution from the ‘’acid tank’’ to the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ (via the spray ball(s) in
the “pre-rinse water tank”) to obtain a small but sufficient amount of acid solution for recirculation on
this tank.
• Clean the ‘’pre-rinse water tank” by recirculating the acid solution on this tank.
• Drain the acid solution from the ‘’pre-rinse water tank”.
• Transfer all remaining acid solution stored in the ‘’acid tank’’ to the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’.
• Rinse the ‘’acid tank‘’ with clean water, and empty to drain.
• Send some caustic solution from the ‘’caustic tank’’ to the ‘’acid tank’’ (via the spray ball(s) in the
“acid tank”) to obtain a small but sufficient amount of caustic solution for recirculation on this tank.
• Clean the ‘’acid tank’’ by recirculating the caustic solution on this tank.
• Drain the caustic solution from the “acid tank’’.
• Rinse the ‘’acid tank’’ with clean water, and empty to drain.
• Transfer back the remaining acid solution from the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’ to the ‘’acid tank”.
• Rinse the ‘’pre-rinse water tank’’, and empty to drain.
• Empty to drain the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’.
• Send some caustic solution from the ‘’caustic tank’’ to the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’ (via the spray
ball(s) in the “post-rinse water tank”) to obtain a small but sufficient amount of caustic solution for
recirculation on this tank.
• Clean the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’ by recirculating the caustic solution on this tank.
• Drain the caustic solution from the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’.’
• Rinse the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’ with fresh water, and empty to drain.
• Send some acid solution from the ‘’acid tank“ to the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’ (via the spray ball(s) in
the “post-rinse water tank”) to obtain a small but sufficient amount of acid solution for recirculation on
this tank.
• Clean the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’ by recirculating the acid solution on this tank.
• Drain this acid solution from the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’.
• Rinse the ‘’post rinse water tank’’ with clean water, and send to drain.
• Refill the ‘’post-rinse water tank’’ and “pre-rinse water tank” with clean water.
10.10 References
Adams, D.G. & Agarwal, D. (1990),’CIP system Design and Installation’, Pharmaceutical Engineering,
10 (6), 9-15.
Alfa Laval Tank Cleaning Equipment A/S (2004), "Selection of Alfa Laval/Toftejorg tank cleaning
equipment", used as training material, Alfa Laval Training seminar - 2004, 42 p.
ASME (2009), ’Bioprocessing Equipment’, ASME BPE-2009 International Standard, New York, United
States, 213 p.
Bylund, G. (1995) ‘Cleaning of Dairy Equipment’, Ch. 21, in Teknotext AB (ed.), Dairy processing
handbook, Tetra Pak Processing Systems A/B, Lund, Sweden, pp. 403-413.
Cerulli, G.J. & Franks, J.W. (2002), ‘Making the Case for Clean-in-place’, Chemical Engineering, 109
(2), 78-82.
CCFRA (1997), ‘Hygienic Design of Liquid Handling Equipment for the Food Industry’’, in Timperley,
A.W. (ed.), 2nd edition, Technical Manual N° 17 of Campden & Chorleywood Food Research
Association, Chipping Campden, United Kingdom, 142 p.
Christi, Y. (1999), ’Modern Systems of Plant Cleaning’, in Robinson, R., Batt, C., Patel, P. (eds.),
Encyclopedia of Food Microbiology, 1st edition, Academic Press, London, United Kingdom,
pp.1806-1815.
Delucia, D. (2001),’Fundamentals of CIP design’, 14th Annual Bioprocess Technology Seminars,
October 1-5, 2001, Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 54 p.
FDA (2009), ‘Grade "A" Pasteurized Milk Ordinance’, Silver Spring, Maryland, United States, 382 p.
Greene, D. (2003), ‘Practical CIP System Design’, Pharmaceutical Engineering, 23 (2), 120-130.
Jeffery, N. & Sutton, E. (2008), ‘Design for CIP’, Suncombe, Ltd., Enfield, Middlesex, United Kingdom,
25 p.
Jensen, B.B.B., Nielsen, J.B., Falster-Hansen, H., Lindholm, K.-A. (2011), ’Tank cleaning technology:
innovative application to improve cleaning-in-place’, EHEDG Yearbook 2011/2012, EHEDG,
Frankfurt, Germany, pp.26-30.
Franks, J.W. & Seiberling, D.A. (2008), ‘CIP spray Device Design and Application’, Ch. 9, in
Seiberling, D.A. (ed.), Cleaning-In-Place for Biopharmaceutical Processes, 1st edition, Informa
Healthcare, New York, United States, pp. 159-174.
Holah, J.T. (2003),’Cleaning and disinfection’, Ch. 13, in in Lelieveld, H.L.M., Mostert, M.A., Holah, J.
& White, B. (eds.), Hygienic in Food Processing, 1st ed., Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge,
England, pp. 235-287.
Lechler (2011), ‘Tank Cleaning Nozzles’, Metzingen, Germany, 23 p.
Lorenzen, K. (2005), ’Improving cleaning-in-place’, Ch.27, in Lelieveld, H.L.M., Mostert, M.A. and
Holah, J. (eds.), Handbook of hygiene control in the food industry, Woodhead Publishing,
Cambridge, United Kingdom, pp. 425-444.
Majoor, F.A. (2003), ‘Cleaning-in-place’, Ch. 11, in Lelieveld, H.L.M., Mostert, M.A., Holah, J. & White,
B. (eds.), Hygienic in Food Processing, 1st ed., Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, England, pp.
122-166.
View publication stats
Moerman, F. & Leroy, I. (2002), ‘Several Tank Cleaning Heads for better in-situ Cleaning’, lecture in
Dutch, held at the 2nd EHEDG Belgium symposium, “Hygienic Design of sanitary installations for
the food and pharmaceutical industry”, 4th of October 2002, Antwerp, Belgium, 40 p.
Moerman, F. (2002), ‘Selecting the right Detergent for the Cleaning of your Process Equipment –
part1’, New Food, 5 (4), 19-21.
Moerman, F. (2003), ‘Selecting a Detergent for Cleaning Process Equipment – part 2’, New Food, 6
(1), 30-35.
Moerman, F. (2004), Cleaning-in-place, 2nd ed., PAON-Post Academisch Onderwijs Nederland, 479 p.
Moerman, F. (2010), ‘Hygienic tank design and Tank Cleaning Devices for a better Cleaning Result’,
lecture in Dutch, held at the Workshop “Cleaning-In-Place, from total loss to partial or total recovery
of water”, Flanders’ Food – Agoria, 26th of October 2010, Ghent, Belgium.
Moerman, F. (2012), ‘Drain Capacity required for proper Tank Cleaning’, internal document, EHEDG
subgroup Tank Cleaning, EHEDG, Frankfurt, Germany, 3 p.
Plett, E.A. & Graßhoff, A. (2006), ‘Cleaning and Sanitation’, ch. 14, in Heldman, D.R. & Lund, D.B.,
Handbook of Food Engineering Practice, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, United States, pp. 929-
975.
Rizoulières, Ph., Cluzet, A., Cecceladi, B., Remond, B., Martin, D., Coelho, G. & Barret, N. (2009),
‘Design of cleaning-in-place stations in the agro-food industry’, EHEDG France Technical
Recommendation – RT01, 1st edition, Laval, France, 36 p.
Rohsner, D. (2005), ’Traceability of Cleaning Agents and Disinfectants’, Ch.39, in Lelieveld, H.L.M.,
Mostert, M.A. and Holah, J. (eds.), Handbook of hygiene control in the food industry, Woodhead
Publishing, Cambridge, United Kingdom, pp. 672-683.
Salo, S., Johnsen, S., Jensen, B.B.B., Stogårds, E. & Friis, A. (2006a), ‘The Mechanical Effect of
Rinsing in Cleaning of Fermentation Tank Bottoms’, in Salo, S. (ed.), Ph.D. thesis, Evaluating
hygiene and cleaning efficiency of food process surfaces based on experimental data and
modeling, BioCentrum-DTU, Technical University of Denmark, 162-171 p.
Salo, S., Friis, A. & Wirtanen, G. (2006b), ’Cleaning Validation of Fermentation Tanks’, in Salo, S.
(ed.), Ph.D. thesis, Evaluating hygiene and cleaning efficiency of food process surfaces based on
experimental data and modeling, BioCentrum-DTU, Technical University of Denmark, 11 p.
Seiberling, D. (1997), ’CIP Sanitary Process Design’, Ch. 15, in Valentas, K.J., Rotstein, E., Singh,
R.P. (eds.), Handbook of Food Engineering Practice, CRC Press, Boca Raton, United States, pp.
581-631.
Seiberling, D. (2001), ‘Spray Devices used for CIP’, 14th Annual Bioprocess Technology Seminars,
October 1-5, 2001, Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 16 p.
Sinner, H. (1960), ‘Über das Waschen mit Haushaltwaschmaschinen: in welchem Umfange erleichtern
Haushaltwaschmaschinen und -geräte das Wäschewaschen im Haushalt?’, 2nd ed., HAUS und
HEIM-VERLAG, Hamburg, 69 p.
Stenby, M., Dethlefsen, M.W. & Jensen, B.B.B. (2011), ‘New Test Method for Rotating Spray Head
Performance in Tank Cleaning’, Journal of Hygienic Engineering & Design, EHEDG World
Congress 2011, Ohrid, Macedonia, pp. 41-43.
Tamplin, T.C. (1990), ’Spray Cleaning of Vessels’, Ch. 7, in Romney, A.J.D. (ed.), CIP: Cleaning-In-
Place, Society of Dairy Technology, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom, pp.124-152.
Timperley, D. and Smeulders, C. (1988) ‘Comparing Single-stage and Two-stage Detergent Systems
for CIP’, Journal of the Society of Dairy Technology 41:4.
Welander, P. (2002a), ‘Choose or Lose: Selecting the Right Tank-Cleaning Device for Your
Application’, Lechler USA, St.-Charles, Illinois, United States, 11 p.
Welander, P. (2002b), ‘Tank Washing Nozzles: Comparing Cleaning Effectiveness of Common
Commercial Models’, Lechler USA, St.-Charles, Illinois, United States, 6 p.