........-..H....w.n..,-I....u\.,......23.. .11... L r
...u.-...\.Wuu&u-.b.ond U0...- ..-u..wI:§,:m- ..-.-...,..
6p), >UNII I I. II 00‘. .! “(gammIf I . 4-. I..u...w!...........( . “amt .. .
m» I .I ..III\ . .IISII 9U... ”tummy“? J ELIE».- I,I....1.x, . . . , .
d I- I I. . IIIIIIIIIIIIII 3.0! I.‘ uh“. I. Li. I . u .L. .ILHRII . .I. -
.IrlIJI.” .LIIIIIIILn--udn%u .IIII. III-.1.-. 9- . I. I. ru-III I .II.. .. - I
v . v. .0110“ (I. 11.14 IfI' . Ib-I I .. E1... log“...
I. . . ’U‘I III-(WNW. I .7. IIIIUWOIIIIIHNIHOII. (- I". v Ac III I v om“?
I. II I .II I .II. .II-Il-Ikbpaflnl-IWII. .l .m: .III-I. v. II-iquIII.u-I.....--.I-.I.I.- -
.. kc .IflIIIIIIIIIN-I-IIIIII ‘7le III III. I I IN II-nIIMIIII I-II-ImIvaI. . ...
. - Qt 1 ‘l o | I
l‘ 1] III" 3%“ V:- ‘ O‘III o‘nlllrlw I i u
. -..- a I -I-..‘ rum-I... .21.- . .
I I I III-III, ob I‘lIIIOIIoIIIlll‘I.‘1II IV‘II “1va 0-. QIIIIInIVWv.I I
IIIIII .IIhMuz-VI .I I.I..IIH~..IIIflrIIIlI9III .J-ewallwaI-Ifld... \J-II... J. .
III: .II:m..n.qu- nun-L mm”. u... u..\.-.. «Wk...- .. .n I
I - . II I. - .II . .
\I. .O I
. . I

II I ”I
13.1%.“?! III-E. -
x I, V I
IIIII-IIfl-II‘IIII I.IIII-.I\IIII\I a? . II
I .I
.

 
  

 

         

CI“

'11

I '
.WML..IIIIhW-.u-I~I)ulh.-III. . . In"... Ian-t
. - I. I. -.IIII.\-I(r|3.quI-I. MIIIflvIflII. I“)
a. I ‘ I . I... III I I IOI’fiagw
. .56..“uIIfivm-IIIIBI-wfi-wz.
. IIIIQJIII
v s

       

 

      

0 o
9. IIIIIIU. I I u I
.Ir :3?“ .1 .I. I . I -...
. k‘QIOIDoI. IfiwIlI . 0%. n
g J I» I '0‘ .II I.

     

 

 

  

        
                                

 

     

   

  

      

 

  

    

  

  

       

~V '
III‘IIlI IIIIH Q
. . I .‘III .IXIIIIII.‘.HIIIIMIIII
D‘Ifnuwoi‘.“ .I..II 5‘ I III"..III¢VIIIl\mmIII\I1-IIQII .I II I
. I. .I IIIIrI-IIIIII .IHTUIJI-II: .nI-IIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIJ-IIIII . I...
.H I III‘ II Il.‘§0‘.rn:l I51! Ifi‘III‘ ‘1 II! DII
.I .o I! - I.‘ In" I} '0‘ ‘1 v 0 ~11: VII .
I IIIIII‘E IIII .II III-llfiL‘IIIIIIIIIOIIIVIIIflnfiiIII-ILI MIIXIMIIHI-IIIIIIjirII. I... III»
I . I 1|. I II. E .v I I
Q “II:I.I\IIII|I|\ .IIII. IcIIIy‘grthl‘Q‘OrAflIl’I i‘lx’nlfll . I II I II
- \ «III-II 15 I. \3. III I I I. . \ I. I
. -..1I..H -. -13-.II.IIIII.I0II-.II.I31.~I..,. Iv .IJIIIQI.I.I.III.IIu.II.d..ImI1....I-IIII. .-..- .- I . -
I. l. . .IIII .| UIIIPIIIJ ”10.0.0.1.in IIIWEV‘HIIIEUIMM‘I‘. I .QIIquIIII I I.
II...I...‘.PI fiAfi‘d‘hfl-I‘ll“..fl%|.l {xenfluHWOH III. ’NIH-‘II‘I; II
I v! IQ‘IIhI .ll. I'DIIIQI I-r!II\I‘lOI..“ut . ul‘I .1.on ‘1‘:
IIIIIII-nhth-IVIIII-hIIIpflDUIIIII-III‘ZIIYIIIIIII .InhuIYMIIIIIlil -..\~ -I I..-
- . III... IIIu. IIIkMIIIIIwI...-IIII III-I»..- Iu. . .- -
193.1%nI-IawullI 1.! -. . - -
III III
II In! . I I
.I .5... I II I
I I. .
IN? {I- I. II o (I. III
I. II II .- n I
I I I . A II . I
‘ Q 0 ' '0‘ | V I I
o I I I I I
I I I c I l
I I I 4 .
I III I. I .II
. .I - I - I -
1 IIIQIIIIII I I?! . ..-II. I u - I II - .
II II . - o - I- -
IIIIIIIJIIIwI .N.UIIII.I.I.11I.I- .. I . u- I - . . . .I ..
‘||II N"! III II‘V‘I‘IO. ‘IIIII ‘I . I. I - I
I III..." I 1 .“I| O I. . I I III I
-I I. II (III‘I‘I IIIIIIII III .IIII‘IIIIII- I . . I. II I: 1. .I i I I. I u: -
IIIPIIHNUIIIII-Ig‘III-IL I q)IIIII.U.-\ III-LI... 1.7.1.1....- I L. . I . . . . -. -x. .
III-I. III .9 IIIIIVIIIII--I-II.I.II...IHI..I-.. IIII I.I.. I -. . - - I. . ..r . .
t‘I-PHII II- II IIolI'II‘IItIIIfi I I III! OII.III.IIIIIII I I . - I . I.II. .I I
L] I I I ‘dl .II IIIIWI . VQIIIII I “3““..9”? . IVA-wh- HII IIII I. . I. 4...! I .. I-I~ .I
{111411 I I.\I II I‘ll.“ ‘III III . I III III-MI...» IIIII. I h. II I . l . ,I I I
IIIIIIIIIIWIIIIuHNIIt III-Nu.” I. “IN-GI“... III IIIIIII III-us..II-I.~.- . «IUII. IMHVWCII... Iu-IIPvI : II {III - .
.- II .,- 1. .I ..... .Iv l--I- I- V \ I
II II \IOMOIII [l\ I I IIYIIIIOIIIIIIIIIIIIILII. I.ItIIIIIInflI|[-\II . . 4“ ‘IthuVI I’JifiIol L I I‘II IIIII YIIIIHWI.'.. . . I .>..
I|\II I‘ll III) I! V . .ll‘ I (I‘D ‘ I‘ Iullo III C“ -- I‘Ill‘li
I I I. I- IIIIINIIuIIIIIu \.IIIIIII.-I..\-.vI.II-.I I. .3- 5.; Ind-n? .r...... uni-III...“- III-IUIIIJWI..II..III.I.-I\IILIIIIIII)I
I. élfllfllfl‘fih I». - I|IIIII I». {I‘flIIIJI ' IIIIIIIII0.|.I.0 . r. .I. “IAIN-“V .LIII. IFIIIIIIIIJWIIIII. I III .I IlI.v.c-U~MIIII.‘..§ILHIIIII‘IIIII V INJEHBL
I‘JI‘IIJII’IHI‘I. 11. II ‘I‘II..LI.‘| III- . IIIII.‘.IIInI..I\I' .10. .ll‘beIIIIJKI..|.I9~I I I IIII IIIOIII. III“. II IFIIII‘I l l‘
q III II I L‘Iflu.\|?\ I II .. I ...AIIO..II-IIJ .O-I‘M.“ ‘IsIIlI\.-I..II IIH..\ .I IIIoIIAIIIII‘..o141\II 1!: IIIIIIIIIIII I I - III. I
l l . III I “II I‘VIIII {0.1 1 - v.1. “II. IIIE.‘II- I. II. 'III .- OII I0. III-IIJIII.I\.‘IIIII..II .lt‘I-IR.IlAI\IIIIIII.HIu'III.z|IlI-‘.’Il%
.I I II I ‘I‘i I. I II I\ " "IIIILII II It‘IIROI ‘1‘}1‘II;I‘ \l. I .I .IIIIIilv‘II.‘IA .‘IIIIII .II‘III ‘1‘ .
.I 'IIII'III- ‘l 1 ‘1. IIIII‘OI ‘ \I-I '5... IIIVIIIQ.’ IIIIIIQI“|I\I\III
‘IIJIIIIIIa‘Ic'lJIIII‘I .IIIIP. IIIIIIIJ III"...- .I...I'\IIIIII l. huflIAOPIII‘IILIIIi Il-III‘I I.II..II-I I.I II H.1l. III, I.lII.IIAIvNIIIII..II1}I“II“null-III‘IIIIIUIIIIILMT .I-IIuhIII‘IIIIIIII II'II.
"4’0”." In.-- I.“ !IIIIIIIIIIII -‘In IIInr-IILr u. I. IIIIII..III. I .I. I‘I-I‘. .vaanIIIhIIIIikIIIIlI.II....\I\.\IIIIIIHIIII\.. Hm.) .I . UIIIII‘ll-Jh-II.I...\..|.IIIIIILII‘II
“I ‘t. I IJIII'I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIDI W IIfi-VN-IKIW“.IIIII II. IILIIIIIIIIII \.III II". \- .I.I..J-. IVIIunlflnlrlI..- ..I.. ..I\ I. \.I.|I.\IIIII|.
I I .. ii‘tk‘ In I .II. III-.3 I...II.III, ‘Il.I\III...QrIIII‘I.I..I ‘ru.l. . II- .I III-III -I III‘IIII‘II‘II
'I I.“ I . III E DI..II‘I\| III. .1‘1 . ’ II. I II‘II.‘Il
- n-d.I-.IIII.I|IIII IIIIlII-II‘IlaI-IIIII - -\;.I .II 41...:IIII.I-I.III 1 . III. l-.I...I..I..\. I WC“. III-I |IIIIII III-I...
I I’lil'b}."v.‘ll.0 ,I II‘ .I OI... I II - .V ..K"I.I“rfl ‘HvII. {It .IIIIVIIJII'IIVI'I. hholIlIIIIII\|\. -..o- .Iu-.I‘I 11!? I‘.
. I IIIII .v‘II-II. IIIII. -II.I-. I 1. I III-3.-.? IIHIUIII{HII.LI-I.I‘\.. .I.l\|. I‘M-NI...» II...I I.-.7III.I.-...I.II.I-I {IL-I MNHIIHI . II... .- I. IIIJI.”
I . . ‘lrIIIaIII II.I|!II|I|!|.P.H\‘ILI|II.‘I .III‘IIIII: I- . MI...,I-IH.-.v..Iu.IuI.d.I-.Ivc. \an III .I..III.IIIN \I II. I..I-.-.I I\. .I .IVI-..III-I.VI.-.II {XLII I1. IIIIM III- “I
I Q» I III .IItI‘II I'l-lI'III II‘“'. ‘ IIII I IIlII IIIIIII IIIIUII III-Iv.)v|‘II. . III- I II II III... \‘J‘u IIIII .Y.I\.Jl.-’I .II? II”.- II- '
II 'I :III. III! u . - I III\I\II\\|1“..|HI(|-LVII\I. .II‘OIIIIPII‘II‘I. . ILIIII‘I. \I. III. . IIIIHIWIIIIIJII III,‘ .lIIIVI IUVI - II III II -
III! IIIII . . II I-l‘l..II III III\ I . \IOI I. I. I .. II. I I-. ‘I
I . .I‘IMHMHHIIIIIILIIIII IMIIII$IIIIdIv I I I.."«H.III.IIII I III, Iva-VIII.- II. .II-II u I .. .1“ . IJIUI It- f.I.I|.IIIII-I.Unx.I-.ID IQIIIIIm
.. I I-IIII‘IIIIIIIIIGII III..- IlellId II-I. I I II IIIIIPIIILMI” III II .I ‘1“... I. III II- -I-.II.-III-U [III . .II-Il \I-III
OlIuIIWI'Il‘ I't'tl‘l“? III.» I IIUIfluII‘IIIO \I L .I I II I “I.0III|IIIII‘- I. \‘Al -. I. II. II! I Il‘vfi‘t. IIIIIIGOIIQJI 1IOII|\.I.
II - I I.I\I IIIIIIII‘uII‘IOII-IIII‘ [#1..--In,.IIIl \II‘IKIIIfllIIIIIIOI‘yYI II,.I. I L ‘I IIIIIVO-I III}. II ... .-..I I...I\\IVIQ1 I‘IIIL-.-I.JI.IIIF. IIhIIIIYIIIII‘III‘II
I I I ’ ‘I IIII\III..IVIIII .l. .sIL II I\ II III-III!“ IIIII|IIl\ IIIIIIII‘I‘ II II I ll. . III. lf“!
n IIIIIIIII #oIfiIKI}-I¢-n-.-.|.vd.«-th.-..IIWIII‘III.II.III.IIUI-I.IIIII«. \I-III {Q‘IIIIIIIZII {duh-II III ..uIILuUII.I-I..l.-..-I.1IrI-1 I IIIhIIDIII‘it... IIIIIIII .- .- .\ -I\II.“-
I .IIII‘III...I'.IIIIIII|\‘.I \ - 1 III IIIIIII-III1 . IRNIIII “IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIPI II I‘ll-I IIIOIIIHIJHI‘II w IIIIUIIIIIII .IIIIII....IIII I'..II.III‘ III QIIItIIII’IV. .IIIIIIIL
I t.“ ‘I‘m I-l‘l I.I 5.1!.‘1 . lovt OIII'\O ‘I‘..>\I§ ”‘0! III IlII‘lo‘...II.Il ‘I..‘I\ III.I\|I ‘LK “II-OIIIIIIIJIV-Hh III.‘ - I III-IIIIIII. \Il LII. IIIIII‘qIII I IIIIII. .l .\.l.0. .
II1'-'I.| 1’ .I\ I. IIIII.I.IIIIP~IIII.IVI-\Uubwhl-II‘I.‘I.II.I fivflr‘II-II-I.. Iu‘I“I IIIUI III II.- §II.III.HI.||I- I .I I.II- . ‘1I'I.9I...I...I. IIIIIII‘ "I. IIIIIIhA-HI'. I‘III .|\I|n
IIII'IIIIIIIIIIUII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII. II ,IIIIIII‘II.‘ III‘UaNI: II .III .III III-{II- III. --.I l I III. III I '|.\ll III. III
IIII I .I.III- lIIII-IIIII. I (III 83.? I ..I III... 7. I-.Il\. I. :II-l.‘\II-IIIII {HG-Il-IIKIII I .II III
IIIIIIIIIIII l1y‘l-\ I .- ‘Id-IIIIIIII. (IIIIIIIIIIII-I. \IIOI III-“IIIlIIIIIIvaquthIII. II I ; 9““ (III II I.- I..1.-IuII. III .- IIII.|.\v\l-I I-IIJIJ III 0 .III
I II‘IIIIIIIIII II . IIIIYII I‘ll-IIIIIWII III». - .I.. . III.- I-.I IIIIII...I\. .2- .1 . IIIIII- II -(n'l‘l‘lIIIII
IIIIII.II.II.III.II|Jn|-I$.I «AU-III- IIIHIwIIX-IWIIIDIIII llIII-II.II.|.--\I.II.III\.IIIIII-.\ .I-.I III I..- \ .--.n Iii-7.1.: ILI. Q.- . 1 .II- III.. II
I fii‘f‘..I.I.I..I.uII1.I|II?-U-IIII|I..III...III,II.I.IIIII..LI.I- H-I-HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIJI II-.IN.I..HI.-I,AfihIIIuII III. I..- ”WIN-uni.- -_.\-..-I-.\III IIIIIIP- II. AIII‘IIIIIIWIIII- IIIIIII. IIIIIII J.
I. III II Ikt‘t‘ mun-I.HIIIIIIIL.IIII-III-._ .IIh‘. “III-III?) :.I.I.-.I-.-r.-.l.. . - II...IH.I...-. HID 2. .. .III. .I..I-l.-. I II 1......- . ”VII-KI"!
v . III'I‘IIII- IL'IIIIII. .IIIl-LPIIIIIIIIIIIII IIDPIII.III I.II IIIIIII.‘\I ...|I.\ II‘IIIII. - .-- . .LrI .-.. -.I.....I.I\.II\II . IA
. I. I II 11.1.“ .-III\‘ I'l- III IAI I .|.I- IIII {I I- . .IIIIIlI Illl" .
.I‘IIIIII‘". I\II‘|IIQ I‘I'I‘I‘ III'II IIIIII III-‘0‘“ I . I . -.. .. I‘II‘Il. \- .I
IIIIIII -.1.|Il.- {III-.- II . .-.II-....III-III.WIu--fln}m.!- r... .IL.UII..III-o.i. I. c VIII-I ...- .---r.-.I III-II IIII-Iu III--I-I-III-I...IIu-IIII.\II ITIAII.
I QII IIIIIIIII'IIIIII‘IIII. III-IIIIIIIII II I .05.!I I‘RII Ill" I.l- II. I’IIII -' I. OIII .. II-..IIIIII. .‘(IIIIItI I.Ill I ‘I.I.‘&'
. IAINNIIHII” .MII... \I -...IIIIJV.I .-. IPPIIIWLIwIl.‘ II .IIIIIIUYII- . I‘INIIII-II III IIIIIYIII.I.IIIII1..I .II. IhILI- -IH.LIW.nI.fi JII’I-III III
. II IIIIIII I II I II.\..\I. I... I I? ..I.I . I I I I! I I
I 1 II. I IU’r-h‘ IVIVI. I - .I III! III - ..I§. I IIVI II I I I l “tum
IIIIIFIL'. II III II...I.4\‘ I... IIIILIII. II....kI.IIIIIII\II§IVIIyl‘.lIIII\.”|“)\.I-II\OI“ I..|II\IIV“INII-II.III “III-I‘ll. IIIIHIIII.|\I| .I.\I\II.IIH\.IIIIIIII.-I0III.I.\I-llf II-I IIIIIIIIII..III.I|
IIIIII' I II-I III III {IIIPIIIIIII‘IIII \Il- III'III‘II II. I I‘IIVI u... I- II.- ... I I, .-.I\II|.. . III III.- {POPUII
. I II I,“ It'll. II-KII. III-IIIIIIII‘IIIIIIIIINI'HIINO‘II IIIlan ‘NIIIIIIIII .1 III. III... «II I I.l.\\...r I . I7-.. [III-V II
I- I III-II. I I .I I YIII'.I.I.IIIr . -.|.l.l. .l .I III... I.I“VIII\I\II.II II:- .v .I .I I .I. . ..\l I ILI.I.1I. . I..IIIII.II UIHIHJ.‘ I
. I‘IIIIJI‘IIII‘I.‘ I‘ml-HNII 0‘ .I .YIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJIIIIrll-IIIIIIIIIIquI‘IIII I) .IIIlII III IIIII.I II-- VIA-I‘MIIIIYIWII. II -II.LHW.IM. -IIIIIHIFVIIIHIIN‘II. III-II I LII‘I
I -.-. -II,I‘.IIINI.III-I-II.-IIHI\III.III -U-I IIIurII-iII IDIHII- VII-I I..I\.I\fl--.III.--.II - ,II.. - ..........I...IH . I I . .III \.....u.II,.I. \T. .1..I. ..I- .I III- .II-I. -I- I.|\...|I III-I. I
I IGII‘IIIKI {Dani} .I.|I.IITIIIJI5‘\II.|I‘I.III- V-“IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPI-HIIII-I-II-FNII-I-I. I (III... III-”III. .II- . . LI-II-IVImoI .I I... .II. -.-,1III.\IIIIIII. -:- 1‘11
II IIIIIII I.I\II - .IIIIIII. .II Il-IE‘: Iull\u . III- III..- II . I.I.l -IiIIIII. . V..I- .L..--|-I Ihun
- lilfllfifik IIILT III-UrlIIIIUIAIOIII. .IOIIIJII‘IIII I‘Vlll huh-0.1-1. 1,..IIII I II IY.‘V..I IIHII. 1- . I I III-III I .III- IwDIHI. - III .3. III-IIII.
. OO‘I I‘lIl'I‘IIII I 0. III|\Y\ III \II. .-II.\.I‘.III‘|I.I.I\ I‘hl‘II. -I\I Ik‘I.III .UIII‘I‘ I I. I'I.I III .1
IlfiIIIMd. I-III «III .IrIIIII-I .IIIIIIrIIII IIIII...\I..II I I-IIIIII .06..- .r- . I I.-II -.\III . III! I. III.
I I‘ll... \KII- 1?‘ IIIIIBIIIIIIIII'I III‘II ‘IIIIUI-HIIIII II\II ...I.I.\l (I III-IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII . TIIII-Y .IIIIIIIIII. .IIII1I I... I} JIII Ill-I. II
. II. I ” OI‘I“\IIVIII|IIII II“ I. ‘ \‘U‘InIIII IaII-lthIIIIILIr-IAI‘ IIVL IIIQ‘IIJIIIQII‘IIIII. .IIII\I.IIO-IIII'I.I ”II-IFIUhMII O-‘I.II.I~ III. I
.I _ II. n. . I. III IlIlIalIyV-IIIIIIIIrI,IIH.-I|..I .I IIIIIIII..\1|.II LI.IIIIIIhrIILoUI\-IIIII.UII.IH.UI.I-.\1I.I(II.- .I.I- (II- I.\.1.-II...II.I..I ..III.~II.-.II!IIIIHIIII.I--: IH\II|.- «.Iv-I L: , .- HI III-IKHVVII .IIIIII III
. II! flu}, .‘IIII.‘ IIIIII.II.III..II\I\II".IIII\IVD\ I ’fi‘l‘i Il...I . IrI. ,..IIII.II.II.I\I- IIIII .lc IIIII‘II-III (I- 'I‘y I I IIN.
I. [III III!- III‘I. . II-IIIII III.III’ {III- I‘l‘l‘l III‘ II‘II\I I II‘II II LII-JV.II. . II‘I . . I... .\ I.|II|.\II\.\I.'I0I I-II.I I III.I||.I. kc.
. .I I: III-II ‘JI .IIII‘IIII.‘\IIIIII£I\IV.\'I\I\I IIIIII.I JIIIIHIPIHIMI III-.- I ..| .I‘IlfiI.I\'l.\I.I11II\IoUI\H-~h\§I-..IIII-.-.HPIH u I- II! I- .I I I
.u . III-II. II‘IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII‘IIIIIIIIJIIIWHIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIUJ rIIIIIIII. IAIII‘YIIIIII 60?... .I..LI.....r,. . - I. Jinn-”VII I. |I| III .4 .Il-IIIIIIIIhIIIIII..I.I\IIHII‘.II\.-IIIII
. . ...I-IIII\4I.‘IIIIII-IhV|I“IommHI-umt\-.HUI.U} \I‘I‘ ‘\ HUI-I.-. I . ‘I’IlHIIIIIII-IIIIL-IHIIRIIII. nun-II llII‘u..$IIIII\IIr\JIIvnfl-u.n\.IIIII IIIIIIIII.
I I.|I|II. II II \IP... \I‘IILIl‘I .‘I’I‘GI‘IIIIWIU‘IJIIIIIII ,leJ\I‘I'-u.‘I.\III5 IIIIII II I . .I‘lrIIIIE IIII In - ‘I- .IIIII..|II
I .I «I III!!\ \l‘ I'vIIII:uI-IIIIIIIIIIHIIIIIvIIIIIIIII-YIIIIIHI.""II-IIIIIIIILIII. II.., II .II InI.I\I.nu.-IIII ..I. I. IlIIIIIn’. .‘I
I . IICI I‘I'I. III I'-I I IIIII.IIII.|I.||I.I.II.I . .I .IIIIIIIDII I II I 1! IILII I II
I v .Il‘pl‘I.|l. II'IIII‘ II IIII.-I0‘.III.I III I‘I‘II .I‘IIII‘I‘I'I ‘IIIII'I .I-I
IIIIIIII.‘A.III|IO'II. IIIII‘I‘III'II'III- - I.‘II.I- I)’III.I.|I||.'III
I -I. . 54 ..III. III.-- -IIIII.I-.|., I \r‘fll-I VII..- -I J I. III
. III. III. II...IIIIIIIAIIIII QIIIPIJIHII I.- ...“II I"\I.l‘\II‘ III-IIIIIIIII
III .v.I-...-.II IIle III «HP-1-1. I II I p- I..II.IE\.I\IIIII\I.-II,IIIIII.I.. II.“
I III II.)- - l - IIUNII‘III\I‘I..II)\-IIUIIIII. I IlIIl-IIIIII IIIII.IIII II.II.I-
IVII. .5 IIIIIII I III-{II I ..Iotu-.HII IIIIMIIWIIIIZrlI... ..I IIIIIIIIHIH
DI‘II \I‘IIII III‘ dull}. {II-“‘0‘. I. .u I‘ II I.v“'lfll| II. n“ I'I IIIhVVII-II III
IIIIIIIIIII. Ivy-1“.“ IUI‘I KI OIIIISIIUIIIIIIIIII. III-III”... éx-‘W‘III‘ IIJIM‘I‘IIIHIIIIIIIINI .|\1.1III..I‘IIHII|.
.- I. I‘III. .|.1-.I.-II- II- I - III-III.“ . . . . II -..I
l.‘ Ill III-I'IIHIHHIY IIIII-u AIHI‘“\‘I“OIIIUdeII. ,‘IKIH‘UIWIIIIIHl-OI'I.
.....»1I...Iw1\r«tflu.-3II...I-.......I...I.II..... “UNLIII. ...II...II . .r..JnIIvIIIIYL. 115.191!le III-.IIIII
IV III-I IIIIIIIIHUIIIIIIIILIL-I. I1-.. “I. I‘ IIIII . . . III-II
‘11 n I‘UVIQIQIIHINIIM'III .IIIIQIIII'I I’llIIII“.h-.IIIIIIIII.I.”IIWIII\I).II. II \I‘HI
de-IIIIIIIIIQIIIIHIIIIIII‘VIIIIIIIIIIILII IVIIIh-II. IHIIII7-;..I“- ....I|II .NIllIofl-HIIIIII -III III. II
.III I'll IJI‘I III ‘90. 1!. ..II III ‘II‘II.- I I‘KIIIII‘III
- IIII III-IIIII-II ut.I.-.II.IIII-IIQ.‘ .UQII. 1“. \fl.\3 II II I‘II
I II‘IIIIIII’III'IIOIIIIII \IIIIuI OI‘I .‘III'?IIIIII‘IIIIIII
II‘IIIIIIIIRIIJ I. II' I I.‘ .w I! III ..I I
0‘ IIIIIIIIIIII .I-IVIIIIIIIIIIIII“ \.|-\.I|I
III-[III n IIIII.
I '1‘,-

IIII.| ' I
. II I- I
no)”; .IIININUIIIIfII: -I: (III-III... .. .I
IL I .II III-V..-IIIWI\.RIlI..I.lII-hu-III III I
§ JIHVINHVI -III . l1“),‘\| E‘I‘I .III
I Isn‘l‘lqlofl I I . I’.\ III- I.nII‘.II.II{
1”” ”III-II I141 hPIII-II III II} I-. .I I)”. IIlnIHIIu
. I. hIIIII.III.!V.II.IIIlI.a"III-IIUII2IIII. Z- I. .
I IIIIII -
I . I
I I

 

THESlS

2» a}; IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII L

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

THE ESTIMATED COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH CONVERTING
TO ASEPTIC PROCESSING AND PACKAGING FRCN A TYPICAL
CONCENTRATED ORANGE JUICE SYSTEM

presented by

Robert William Lundquist

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.S. . PACKAGING

degree m

(éWM

Paul Bankit, Ph.D.

Major professor

 

 

 

 

Date October 27, I983

 

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 042771

 

 

IVIESI_} RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
LIBRARIES remove this checkout from
-_ your record. FINES w‘lIl

 

 

 

 

be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below. ;

[VI/5. : [C 2

[IN ’21 1333
.N

 

 

2 " “La; s
l 00 4295 m
“‘1'?"
I rm 2 a 19?}! ”fidml
‘ {>7 i 2 842
1 pr '1 K 199‘4.‘
‘58 1

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE ESTIMATED COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH CONVERTING
TO ASEPTIC PROCESSING AND PACKAGING FROM A TYPICAL
CONCENTRATED ORANGE JUICE SYSTEM

BY

Robert William Lundquist

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

School of Packaging

1983

Copyright by
ROBERT WILLIAM LUNDQUIST
1983

ABSTRACT

THE ESTIMATED COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH CONVERTING
TO ASEPTIC PROCESSING AND PACKAGING FROM A TYPICAL
CONCENTRATED ORANGE JUICE SYSTEM

BY

Robert William Lundquist

The analysis's objective is to determine an appropriate
aseptic technology which can produce semi-liquid particulate
food for retail sale and to demonstrate its quality integ-
rity as well as cost elements versus presently utilized
practices.

Frozen concentrated orange juice is identified as the
food subject by desirable aseptic food determinants. 'The
current FCOJ system is assessed.

Concentrated orange juice's optimum sterilization method'
is proven to be an aseptic design. The best presently
available aseptic processing and packaging system is chosen
from economic guidelines.

Total system-wide costs for the model indicate that con-
verting to aseptic production increases costs $49,100
yearly. All C)8t saving reductions arise in 12 and 16-ounce

portions.

Actual conversion to this model aseptic concentrated
orange juice (ACOJ) system is not recommended without fur-
ther analysis. Additional areas of study and ongoing re-
search into aseptic technology are advised because current
and future economic pressures toward aseptic production
equipment developments may offer improved ACOJ processing

cost reductions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank the following individuals who made this
study possible: Dr. Paul Bankit who as my major professor
provided guidance and direction to my work: Dr. Aaron Brody
of Container Corporation of America who directed me to im-
portant cost items as well as offering sound advice: Dr.
Mark UeBersax who as the second committee member gave me
initial industry leads and a food science perspective on the
committee: Mr. Wayne Wagner of Peninsular Products Company
for bringing a business world viewpoint to the committee:
Mr. Fred Johnson who brought a lifetime of aseptic industry
experience to my research: Mr. Bob Halladay of Associated
Grocers for allowing me the opportunity to witness the
warehousing environments, as well as providing brokerage and
retail costs: and Mr. Steve Eisler of Cherry Central Cooper-
ative for supplying integral warehousing expense data.

A Most importantly, I thank my parents, Dr. and Mrs.
William C. Lundquist, and my wife, Nancy, who provided the
necessary love and understanding which assured the study's

success.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ........................................
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................
INTRODUCTION ..........................................
Section 1: Ase tic Production Market Needs, An Econom-
.' i2 Model for Comparing Different SFeIf Life
Products, and The FCOJ Retail Market As A
Viable Aseptic Target .....................
Market Needs ..........................................
Aseptic product attributes and market need compatibil-
it

 

 

 

 

Aseptic production economics ..........................
Aseptically produced food characteristics app market

requirements ..............................
An Economic Model .....................................
Shelf life quantification .............................
FCOJ As A Viable Aseptic Target .......................
FCOJ economics ..........Z.............................
FCOJ 22g ACOJ quality factors .........................
Textural effects ......................................
Flavor factors ........................................
Color determinates ....................................
Nutritional content ...................................
Government regulations ................................
FCOJ target market ....................................
FCOJ production factors ...............................
Distribution environment ..............................
£92 output parameters .................................
Section 2: Determination _o_f__a_n_ Optimum ACO’J Sterili-
zation System .............................
COJ Sterilization Parameters ..........................
Available Food Sterilization Processes ................
Aseptic processes .....................................
Aseptic Food Sterilization ............................
Direct methods ........................................
Indirect processes ....................................
STORK-STERIDEAL Shell Syst-m ..............;...........
CHERRY BURRELL-SPIRATHERM Pubular System ..............
Optimum COJ Aseptic System Selection ..................
Section 2; Selection RENEE Optimum ACOJ Packaging Sys-

tem .......................................
Package DeveISEment ...................................
ACOJ packaging requirements ...........................
Viable Aseptic Packaging Systems ......................
Aseptic paperboard-based packaging systems ............

 

 

 

 

 

-1-

Page

iii
v
1

Page

TETRA PAK Systems ..................................... 79
BRIK PAK AB-3 ......................................... 84
BRIK PAK AB-8 and AB-9 ................................ 87
INTERNATIONAL PAPER Model 3500 SYSTEMPAK .............. 87
EX-CELL-O PURE-PAR N-LONG LIFE ........................ 89
LIQUI-PAK 820-A ....................................... 90
COMBIBLOC cF 5.000, 6.000,.and 10.000 ................. 92
Aseptic plastic-based packaging systems ............... 93
BOSCH SERVAC 78 ALIAS ................................. 94
CONTINENTAL CAN CONOFFAST Unit ........................ 96
BENCO ASEPACK Systems ................................. 97
ASTEC METAL BOX FRESHFILL ............................. 98
Miscellaneous aseptic packaging systems ............... 100
ACOJ Package System Selection ......................... 101
The ACOJ BRIK PAK Line ................................ 102
Section 2: Frozen and Aseptic Concentrate Orange Juice
Total System Cost Comparison .............. 108
Source Justification .................................. 108
Capital Investment .................................... 111
Land 229 building ..................................... 111
Equipment ............................................. 112
Operating Costs ....................................... 114

 

 

Labor ....00............OOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOOO 114
material .....0...O......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOIOOOIO 117

Other processing costs ................................ 119
Utilities ............................................. 119
Maintenance and repairs ............................... 121
Remaining processing costs ............................ 123
Transportation costs .................................. 124
Warehouse expense ..................................... 126
Remaining operating expense ........................... 129
Total System Costs Compared ........................... 130
Section 5: Discussion of Results, Recommendations and
Conclusions ............................... 134

Cost Shift Explanation ................................ 134
Model Limitations ..................................... 136
Recommendations and Conclusions ....................... 136
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: COJ Shelf Life Quantification ........... 139
Appendix 2: Truck Weight Analysis - BRIK PAK ACOJ ... 140
Appendix 3: Truck Weight Analysis - FCOJ Composite

Can ..................................... 142
Appendix 4: Itemized ACOJ Utility Requirements ...... 143
Appendix 5: Itemized Total System Cost Inflation Ad-

justment Values ......................... 144
Appendix 6: FCOJ Cost Conversions ................... 146
Appendix 7: Aseptic Packaging Material Cost Calcula-

tions ................................... 147
Appendix 8: Itemized ACOJ Maintenance & Repair Costs. 148
Appendix 9: Itemized ACOJ Equipment Costs ........... 149
Appendix 10: FCOJ & ACOJ Production Line Analysis .... 150
Appendix 11: Aseptic Surge Tank Volume Requirements .. 151
LIST OF REFERENCES .................................... 152

 

-ii-

TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE

TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE

TABLE
TABLE

TABLE

TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE

H
OOmQOtUI-bWNl-d

....
....

PJH
(JON
O

14.

15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

31.
32.,

33.

34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.

LIST OF TABLES

Successful Aseptic U.S. Retail Food Markets .
Aseptic Variable Marginal Costs .............
SSOJ Particles ..............................
COJ Shearthinning Mechanisms ................
U.S.R.D.A. and Percent of R.D.A. in SSOJ ....
0.8. Grade Standards for FCOJ ...............
FCOJ Target Market Domographics .............
TASTE Attributes ............................
COJ MKT Demanded Shelf Life Summary .........
Aseptic and FCOJ Operational Layouts ........
ACOJ Sterilization System Goals .............
Direct Heat Merits ..........................
Indirect Heating Merits .....................
Domestically Available U-H-T-S-T Aseptic

Food Sterilization Systems ..................

ACOJ and Market Demands on the Package System

Paperboard-based Aseptic Packaging Systems ..
Plastic-based Aseptic Packaging Systems .....
Number of BRIK PAK Packaging Systems ........
ACOJ and FCOJ Production Parameters .........
Building Modification Costs .................
Total Aseptic Equipment Cost ................
Total Aseptic Capital Investment and EUAC ...
No Bac 600 Labor Requirements ...............
Aseptic Labor Cost Addition .................
FCOJ and ACOJ Packaging Labor Needs .........
FCOJ Labor Costs ............................
ACOJ Material Costs .........................
FCOJ Material Costs .........................
Production Cooling Costs ....................
Additional ACOJ and Eliminated FCOJ

Utility Costs ...............................

FCOJ and ACOJ Total Utility Costs 0 O O O O O O O O O O .

Additional ACOJ and Eliminated FCOJ
Maintenance and Repair Costs ................
FCOJ and ACOJ Total and Base Maintenance

and Repair Costs ........................ ...
ACOJ and FCOJ Remaining Processing Costs ....
Transport Parameters ........................

FCOJ Transportation Costs
ACOJ Transportation Costs
FCOJ Warehouse Parameters
ACOJ Warehouse Parameters

-iii-

Page

13
27
29
33
34
36
41
44
46
49
60
63

64

76

80

82
103
108
111
112
114
115
115
116
117
118
118
120

120
121

132

123
124
124
125
126
127
128

TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE
TABLE

40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.

FCOJ Finished Goods Warehouse Costs .........
ACOJ Finished Goods Warehouse Costs .........
Additional and Total Warehouse Expenses .....

Remaining Operating Expenses

ACOJ and FCOJ Total System Costs ............

Total System Cost Comparison
Separated by Package Volume

FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE

FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE

FIGURE
FIGURE

FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE
FIGURE

mum UIDUNH
one 000

H
00
O O

....
H
O

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.

LIST OF FIGURES

The Product Wheel of Fortune
Aseptic Total Cost Per Unit Curve
Skewed Total Cost Per Unit Curve
Orange Growth, U.S.A. versus Florida .......
% FCOJ Portion of Oranges Processed
and Harvested by Year ......................
Packs of FCOJ - U.S.A. Versus Florida
Orange Structure ...........................
FCOJ and ACOJ Production and Distribution
Flows
FMC Extractor Cup Reaming
Direct Injection Sterilizer Time-Temperature
Plot
Indirect Heat Sterilization Methods
Indirect Plate Time-Temperature Plot .......
The STERIDEAL System .......................
The SPIRATHERM NO BAC 600 System ...........
The TETRA PAK VFFS Process
The BRIK PAK VFFS System ...................
The SYSTEMPAK VFFS Operation
The PURE PAK NLL System
The LIQUI-PAK HFS Process
The BLOCPAK cF 10.000 Operation ............
The SERVAC 78 AS and 78 AL/AS Process ......
The CONOFFAST HTFS Procedure
The BENCO ASEPACK 24 Unit
The METAL BOX FRESHFILL HDFS System .
ACOJ Packaging Line Layout .................

—v—

100
105

INTRODUCTION

The application of ultra high temperature short time
(UHTST) processing and packaging to higher viscosity, par-
ticulate matter food 1A! a largely uninvestigated area
offering substantial savings potential. This study seeks to
identify the economic results of converting from more con-
ventional food processing and packaging methods to aseptic
systems. The research develops and evaluates an aseptic and
a non-aseptic process/package system for an identical prod-
uct. The thesis hypothesizes that some aseptic production
cost saving advantages exist over the traditional process.
A reduction in distribution charges is the major impact of
utilizing aseptic technology. Since the industrial revolu-
tion, industry has concentrated on lowering production costs
and has largely ignored its distribution systems. Distribu-
tion channels have expanded concurrently causing today's
retail food product costs to be 20 to 40% distribution-
related. Thereforfe by implementing aseptic technology to
those products with limited shelf lives and requiring con-
trolled temperatures, food manufacturers can obtain produc-
tion and distribution cost reductions rrsulting in increased
profit at current or lower retail prices.

There are many inherent factors bearing on this analy-

sis. These factors are built upon in a logical progression

testing the study's hypothesis on a specific retail food
item. Section 1 assesses the aseptically produced food
product qualities demanded by market needs. The thesis
assumes from cited literature that excessive nutrient damage
does not occur and that the reconstituted or sterile food is
stable throughout its lengthened shelf life after processing
and packaging.

Shelf life is the expected amount of time a product
will spend as a finished good after production and prior to
consumption. Each processing and packaging system produces
a product with specific attributes. The outlays required to
manufacture these attributes are quantifiable by a special
economic/engineering model allowing a profitability compari-
son between product/process/package alternatives with dif-
fering shelf lives. Large scale distribution environment
cost reduction is available, because refrigeration or freez-
ing is no longer required and weight savings result from the
.1ight paper, foil and plastic materials. However, some
aseptically produced foods require refrigeration to limit
temperature-activated enzymatic and non-enzymatic degrada-
tion. The frozen concentrated orange juice (FCOJ) consumer
portion market is identified as the study's target for
aseptic conversion. Aseptic concentrated orange juice
(ACOJ) and FCOJ product, market and production parameters
are addressed to provide verification of aseptic process-
ing's and packaging's application to concentrated orange

juice (COJ).

Section 2 considers the general aseptic processing
characteristics for all food types. From this foundation,
an optimum ultra-high-temperature sterilization system for
COJ is designated. In true aseptic processes, the ultra
high temperature (UHT) applied for a short time produces a
food free from further micrdbial growth while retaining more
nutrient value than the commonly used retort sterilization
or hot fill methods. The sterile product is then filled
into a sterile package in a sterile atmosphere at room
temperature. Anything short of this description is notga
true aseptic process. Aseptic processing is also termed
ultra high temperature short time (UHTST) processing.
Aseptic production, in this text, refers to this true
aseptic processing and packaging definition. The thesis
assumes that the food processor has the necessary resources
to fund the capital investment in new equipment. Another
processing factor is the food's viscosity, the amount of
shear force a product exhibits as a flowing resistance.
Presently aseptic processing of consumer goods is mainly
being applied to liquid products of low viscosity, e.g.,
milk and juice. However, the temperature inherent in the
aseptic process can be high enough to lower a food product
from its normal viscous or semi-liquid state to the process-
able limits of liquid viscosity. The thesis assumes this
Newtonian fluid property is a factor altering product flow
characteristics under UHT conditions. These factors along

with particulate matter effects are discussed in detail.

Section 3 develops a compatible aseptic packaging
system for the consumer portion COJ market. The thesis
assumes that the concentrate can be run at a safe, legal and
efficient speed producing a true aseptic package of consis-
tent high strength. Cited sources verify this process/pack-
age system assumption, since actual aseptic line testing is
not available.

Section 4 calculates the estimated costs incurred by
converting to aseptic processing and packaging from a repre-
sentative Florida FCOJ production and distribution system.
Cost comparisons are made on a yearly basis and on a concen-
trated 45° Brix volume. Both systems are constructed from a
total system cost minimization outlook.

Section 5 examines the cost advantages and disadvan—
tages of aseptically processing and packaging retail portion
COJ. Shortcomings of this study, further recommendations
for research and final conclusions are discussed. Research
into regionalized U.S. ACOJ production facilities, higher
output aseptic packaging units and more gradual conversion
cost effects may identify the best form of.aseptic process-
ing and packaging implementation in the retail FCOJ market.
An aggressive aseptic research effort by Florida FCOJ pro-
cessors is recommended to undertake this challenge now,
since future energy and competitive pressures will force

some form of aseptically produced COJ implementation.

Thus the study develoPs the most viable aseptic pro-
cessing-and packaging system for COJ from currently avail-
able suppliers in order to investigate and identify specific
cost advantages and disadvantages versus a typical Florida
FCOJ processor. Therefore, the research will demonstrate
the importance of aseptic technology to FCOJ processors
desiring to remain competitive in the retail pack FCOJ

industry.

Section 1 :
Aseptic Production Market Needs,
An Economic Model For Comparing Different Shelf Life
Products, And The FCOJ Retail Market

As A Viable Aseptic Target

For the study to proceed correctly, the economics of
aseptic production systems must be considered. In other
words, is aseptic production a sound alternative for every
company? ObviousLy it is not the best capital investment
for every manufacturer because each company Operates under
different internal constraints. What then determines
whether a corporation should enter into the aseptic pro-
duction? This answer and the development of a model to
quantify the determinates for management decision making are
addressed in the following discussion. Then the frozen
concentrated orange juice (FCOJ) retail market is chosen as
a suitable target for aseptic production and this investi-

gation.

Market Needs
Food products interrelate throughout their shelf lives
with three major factors: distribution characteristics,

social environment determinants and production variables.

7
Figure 1. Upon closer examination, a product's success
hinges on how well its attributes match or support a summa-
tion of these three factors termed market needs. Failure of

any of the spokes leads to product inadequacy and its asso-

ciated losses. Only when aseptically produced attributes

Social
Environment Rolling through its
1 shelf life as long
as the attributes
match the market
Product needs.
/t tr ibute 8'
Distribution Production
Characteristics Variables

Figure 1. The Product Wheel of Fortune

can better satisfy total market need should a company consi-
der a switch to aseptic production. These are the identical
decisions that are made under any major process or package
conversion.

The total market need is determined by marketing re-
search of the three previous factors for a specific product.
Ultimate project feasibility is based (”1 a strong, stable
consumer demand and on attaining increased profits to sup-
port large capita; investment. Distribution characteristics
refer to the finished goods transportation and storage
framework. Product attributes influence the distribution

structure. Products gaining weight through the channel,

8

sudh as ready-to-serve chilled juice, are best structured
with a breakbulk or reconstitution point nearest to the
consumer. Thus this reconstitution occurs at local dairies.
Micrdbiological, enzymatic and non-enzymatic degradation
limit shelf life thereby determining the channel environ-
ment. A product's profit margin and the amount of marginal
costs contained in total system costs often dictate whether
economies of scale exist.

The production variables are largely related to the
foodfs manufacturing environment. To achieve efficient
output, the most important production ingredient is devel-
Oping a well coordinated production line. Line machines
should be arranged in slightly decreasing output rates from
start to finish to ensure the operation of each machine near
its maximum output level. The use of accumulation devices
between critical functional sites can also increase expen-
sive equipment utilization.

The social environment is composed of all the possible
ethical outcomes, hopefully increased consumer demand
through improved need satisfaction, resulting from adding or
switching to a new production technology. Every consumer
interest group's and all foreseeable legislation's influence
on consumer attitudes must be thoroughly investigated. The
customer's lack of information and thereby his attitude can
be favorably enhanced if involved companies take positive

roles in educating the consumer about the technology's

9
realities. In this way, food processors can make it diffi-
cult for consumer interest groups to over emphasize a new
process's shortcomings while ignoring its advantages causing
issuance of restrictionary regulations. By the same method,
the concerned governmental agencies can be brought over to
industry's side if all processors demonstrate that consumer
protection and service is an utmost company goal. Since all
business activity centers on serving the public, at a profit
in the long run, first-rate consumer satisfaction should be
a common goal for all companies entering a developing indus-
try. Sharing indepth research explaining both advantages
and disadvantages with consumer interest groups, govern—
mental agencies, and each other can develop an environment
of favorable consumer attitudes. Education-oriented
advertising and promotion can directly aid this develoyment.
Constructive feedback from the government and consumers can
hasten industry improvements as well. New product price,
quality and'competition are also main determinates of suc-

cess or failure.

Asepticpproduct attributes and market need compatibility
Product quality, whether taste or some other sensory
value, is often the key food attribute ingredient. OCEAN
SPRAY'has discovered through its own marketing research that
product quality is the single most critical determinate in
attaining repeat purchases of its aseptically produced

foods. Every company requires brand loyalty to maintain

10

stable profit margins. OCEAN SPRAY also found price dis-
counts only achieved initial trials.1 Aseptic processing
produces a product of increased nutritional value when
compared with retorting or hotfilling. The convenience
aspect of unit portion aseptic foods can be stressed. Thus,
to obtain repeat purchases, the utmost importance must be to
produce the highest quality aseptically produced food possi-
ble. ‘This goal coupled with a reduced retail price allows
the best avenue for successful fulfillment of social envi-
ronment demands.

Depending on the established market needs, aseptic
products can be manufactured at low to high speed and volume
. to achieve profitability. This study demonstrates later in
Section 4 that aseptic product distribution channel savings
are the major expense reduction generated by aseptic produc-
tion of COJ. The extended aseptic product shelf life can
allow less frequent retailer resupply assuming the retailer
has extra storage facilities and is willing to receive
larger quantities per shipment. The larger volume shipments
may be accepted because of quantity discounts and ambient
temperature storage capability. For the same output as a

limited shelf life food plant, the aseptically producing

 

1 James E. Tillotson, "Presentation of OCEAN SPRAY's Exper-
ience in Aseptics," Packaging Expo 1982, McCormidk Place,
Chicago, IL., November 17, 1982.

ll

plant can supply a larger market area if the consumer incor-
porates the extended product life into his or her buying
behavior. This is being attempted by selling aseptically
packaged foods in multi-packs. At this point, the processor
must assure himself that a constant and sufficiently large
demand exists across the whole expanded market area for the
aseptically produced product. If demand is verified, the
expanded market area will necessitate the addition of inter-
mediate warehouses to efficiently breakbulk into less than
truckload quantities close to final retail markets.

Aseptic production requires sterility maintenance in
most phases of plant operation. To assure sterility,
aseptic production equipment is commonly automatic and
continuous. The high acquisition. cost. of .aseptic food
processing and packaging equipment and building, approxi—
mately $2,000,000 for this study's model plant, requires
optimum utilization of the capital investment. To optimally
utilize the machinery, production must be maintained near
each machine's upper limit of output. Only strict adherence
to cleaning, repairing and operator training accomplishes
high aseptic production.2 Table 1 outlines the various
industries where moderate to highly successful aseptic
conversion has already occurred in only two and one half

years since regulatory approval.

 

2 R. Bruce Holmgren, "Going Aseptic Demands Total Control
of Sterility," Package Engineering 28 (February 1983):63.

12

Table 1. Successful Aseptic 0.8. Retail Food Markets

Food Industry

 

Fresh Fruit Pieces
Tomato,Paste

l. Ready-To-Serve Fruit Drinks

2. Ready-To-Serve Citrus and Fruit Juices
3. Citrus and Fruit Concentrates

4. Fluid Milk

5. Flavored Milk

6. Pudding

7.

8.

Aseptic production economics

The identification of operating ecomonies of scale is
of critical importance to set the initial output rate and to
indicate expansion opportunities. First the difference
between fixed and variable costs must be defined. Variable
costs per unit increase under higher outputs and their
annual magnitudes thus vary with the output rate. Average
fixed costs decrease at higher outputs and their yearly
magnitudes are independent of the production rate. Marginal
cost is the amount by which total cost increases per addi-
tional unit of output. Thus, marginal costs are by defi-
nition variable costs. Table 2 identifies the marginal
production area costs which increase at higher outputs
eventually resulting in diseconomies of scale. Aseptic
economies of scale are achieved when marginal costs decrease

and fixed costs are a high propartion of total cost.

13

Table 2. Aseptic Marginal Costs

1. Materials

2. Maintenance

3. Energy, electrical and gas
4. Steam

5. Cooling water
6. Hydrogen Peroxide

7. FlOor area in plant and warehouse
8. Labor
9. Transportation

10. Machine parts and supplies
ll. warehousing
Diseconomy creation is easiest to conceptualize graph-
ically. Most products portray a "U-Shaped“ total cost
curve, meaning the least cost per unit appears at moderate

output. Figure 2 shows a typical "U-Shaped" total cost

Toad“
Cost/

I
I
I
Unit :
I
l
I
l
I

   

low

I
Output Moderate Output { High Output

 

 

._————-_—————

qumw hunts)

Figure 2. Aseptic Total Cost Per Unit Curve

curve for aseptic processing and. distribution. At low
output levels, average fixed costs decrease faster and
compose a greater portion of the total cost per unit than
marginal costs per unit. The marginal cost portion grad-
ually begins to overtake the constantly decreasing average
fixed costs, which are decreasing at a decreasing rate,

until the slope is zero. At outputs beyond this position.

l4
marginal cost increases outweigh any average fixed cost
decrease leading to disecohomies of scale for a particular
product/process/ package combination.

Failure to properly separate marginal fixed and margin-
al variable expenses can skew economy of scale or cost cal-
culations. Fflgure 3 demonstrates the implications of cost
misassignment. This misrepresentation arises when too many
marginal cost functions are assumed to be fixed. Thus the
total cost per unit curve is skewed to the right from in-
accurate data interpretation. The diseconomies of scale are

then shifted out of the relevant production output picture.

Total Cost/Unit

 

 

Actual :
"* 33:;m_ lififlse<huwe
-_ _t_-l
l
l
...—.9 ...-...
I
l
I
1
Output (units) maximum saleable or

prmhmeflfle mnmut

Figure 3. Skewed Total Cost Per Unit Curve,

Since the existence and value of economies of scale in
aseptic operation are unknown at this point, an appropriate
output must be determined for this analysis.' This study

compares system costs at a typical representative output

15
rate. Indication of operating economies is best investi-
gated after a cost reduction is proven, since a total cost
analysis requires variable and fixed cost delineation.

An aseptically’ produced product's profit. margin is
important to achieving a successful new product introduc-
tion. Aseptic production of a moderate to high profit
margin product provides a quicker payback period at a given
output. Low profit margin products require extremely high
volumes on the expensive aseptic equipment to achieve the
same payback period. Thus, the lower the inherent risk of
aseptic production for moderate to high profit margin food
products, such as fruit drinks, has been an important factor
behind the first highly-successful aseptic products being
HI-C and HAWAIIAN PUNCH.

Aseptically produced food characteristics and market re-
guirements

Aseptically processable and 'packagable foods can be
classified into two types, particulate food and liquid food.“
A liquid food's physical structure provides it with the
least temperature. and shear loads during sterilization.
Liquid product viscosity is not a problem unless gelling
occurs after processing, common in high sugar content foods.
Certain processing equipment modifications can reduce gela-

tion.3 Today many aseptic equipment manufacturers commonly

 

3 IR.G. Sargeant, U.S. Patent #3366497, January 30, 1968,
cited by J.K. Paul, Fruit & Vegetable Juice Processing,
Noyes Data Corporation, 1975, p. 47.

16
offer a group of base systems each capable of sterilizing
different products at varying outputs. When purchasing
aseptic equipment, the user should-keep in,mind any future
product additions, because some aseptic machines are quite
limited in product adaptation.

All aseptically produced foods possess a group of
common differences, because of their sterility, from their
non-aseptic counterparts. Aseptic production allows ambient
temperature storage and transportation. Some aseptically
produced foods still require refrigeration to remain edible
for six months. Sterile food can be distributed with canned
goods. As previously discussed, the extended shelf life can
allow market expansion by lowering the number of shipments
and handlings.

Varied aseptic production savings result between food
groups, because of the differences in traditional processes
utilized for liquids and particulates. Liquids are usually
flash-pasteurized at high output over 10,000 liters per
hour.4 Aseptic production can offer ‘no quantum leaps in
output over this rate. Onrline sterilizers operate faster
than the packaging equipment. A single sterilizer will feed
two to four or more aseptic packaging machines. Several
packaging machines provide accumulation if a single packag-

ing unit goes down.

 

4 Norm Kosaric et al., p. 170.

17

The second food type, particulate and/or viscous products,
is usually retorted at 250°F, less severe if the food is
acidic, for seven minutes at the slowest heating point.
Aseptic processing utilizing 50-80% of its steam for product
heating, is considerably cheaper than retorting.S For
particulates up to 4.0mm. cubes, aseptic processing can save
money over retorting. Sterilization and filling systems
have not been commercialized which handle particulates over
4.0mm. Energy requirements increase rapidly with particle
diameter.6

Aseptic processing and packaging technology is not a
trend, but an unalterable evolution in the ‘marketplace.
descending from convenience and energy pressures. Competi-
Ition forces the affected industry members to adapt. Aseptic
production's high cost equipment desires year around use to
accelerate the payback period. Thus the chosen product or
product line should be in nonseasonal stable supply to the
processor. However, if compatibly seasoned products are
available to fill in production gaps, variably seasoned

foods are acceptable for aseptic production.
0

 

5 M.R. Okos & C.C. Chen, "Energy Considerations For Aseptic
Processing Systems," Proceedings of the Aseptic Processing
and the Bulk Distribution of Food Conference, Purdue Univer—
sity. (15F16 March 1978):94.

6 Personal communication with Mr. V.R. Carlson of ASTEC
INCORPORATED, December 13, 1982.

18
An Economic Model

A simple comparative costing and profitability model is
now developed to provide management with a means to quantify
in dollars the affect of aseptic production on a food's
profit margin. The model attempts to- evaluate all added
benefits and costs on a product attribute basis. This type
of model is best solved by an engineer with a solid back-
ground in business as well as food processing and packaging.
Food packaging engineers can best accompliSh the solution.
An accurate solution requires an understanding of aseptic
production from a total systems outlook and an intimate
knowledge of shelf life analysis. The model can be utilized
for decision making between any basic process/package
systems, but it is especially suited to decisions involving
switching to processes producing extended shelf life pro-
ducts. For comparisons of identical shelf lives and
outputs, this model is unnecessary and total costs can be
directly compared for analysis. .

All companies are interested in profit margin expan—
sion. Implementing aseptic production can offer the innova-
tive manufacturer a lead over its competition. Since some
food ‘products compatible ‘with Iaseptic ‘production.'have a
strong year around market demand and a large profit margin,
capital investment in these markets can increase long term
business profitability.

Presently no models exist or have been employed in

assessing aseptic systems versus the current processing

l9

methods which take into account all of the added shelf life
days on the distribution environment. Commonly both produc-
tion systems under analysis are compared and evaluated over
the shorter non-aseptic production system's shelf life.-7
Such assumptions destroy the study relevancy because aseptic
production's primary benefit to all channel members is an
extended shelf life at an equal or increased product qual-
ity. The value obtained from the economic model can be
visualized as a constant on a scale allowing easy comparison
to determine the most cost effective choice. Formula 1
collects system costs aggregating these among shelf life
days.

(1) 1°91 31““ C9311. a WWW Inmts “@211: product)
Shelf Life in Days Total Shelf Life Days

 

 

In Equation 1, resource inputs include those into and
during production as well as those inputs up until the
consumer consumes the product. Shelf life days is the time
span between production and consumption. The resource input
cost per unit values must be compared at equal output rates,
since differences in outputs would be incompatible. Incon-
sistent output variable costs per unit can be reconciled by
obtaining aseptic cost estimates at the company's present

non-aseptic output level, assuming an aseptic comparison to

 

7 Norm Kosaric, et a1, "UltrarHigh—Temperature Milk: Pro-
duction, Quality, and Economics," CRC Critical Reviews in
Food Science & Nutrition 14 (February 1981){l781

20
the current system. In any case, total costs per unit must
be determined at equivalent outputs before implementing the
model.

Formula 1's utility does not end here. The attainable
increase in profit at the present retail price per unit for
the least cost alternative is easily calculated from Formu-
las 2, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. The formulas are designed
to display aseptic production savings with a positive sign

and increased aseptic costs within parentheses as negative{

 

 

 

Aseptic Savings Present Total Aseptic Total
(2) (Cost)($/unit) System.Cost _ System Cost
Shelf Life Day =“Shelf Life Days Shelf Life Days
Total Aseptic Aseptic Savings
(3) Savings (Cost) 8 (Cost) x Aseptic Shelf
($/unit) Shelf Life Day Life Days
(4) Present Profit Present Average Present Retail.
($/unit) 3 Profit Margin x Price ($/unit)
(% of retail)'
(5) New Profit at 3 Present Profit + Aseptic Savings
the Same Retail ($/unit) (Cost) ($/unit)
Price H (Eq.#3)

In some instances where time is limited and some cost

data common to both alternatives is unattainable, Formula 2

can be modified to compare only differences between the two

choices as in Formula 6. The calculations then proceed
Aseptic Savings Present System Aseptic System

(6) (Cost)($[unit) 8 Differential Cost - Differential Cost
ShelfLife Day Shelf Life Days Shelf Life Days

 

 

exactly as above from Equations 3 to 5. If an increased

profit margin appears from Equation 5, then the total system

21

profit for the new system is improved over the present
system's profit by the indicated amount.I Whenever possible,
calculations should be performed on the total cost basis in
Equation 2 versus the differing cost basis in Equation 6. A
differing cost basis analysis compares only those costs that
differ between compared systems and ignores the costs common
and identical to both methods. Collecting all expenses for
each alternative may require more time, but it is usually
more accurate.

The validity of the obtained increased profit margin
is only as accurate as the expense and time value factors
composing the solution. The determination of relevant cost
data from all business areas requires the investigator's
ability to communicate effectively with all departments. In
addition to accurate cost definition and allocation, the
total system costs must be assembled from a total system
outlook and not a specific cost center minimization view-
point. The latter results in an unbalanced cost per output
evaluation, while the former allows the most cost effective
operation of all constituent processes together in harmony.
Only the total system cost minimization outlook can provide

an unbiased comparison.

Shelf life quantification

Accurate shelf life determinaiion is just as vital as
accurate cost collection for the economic model to provide
correct indication of the cheaper product/process/package

system. Presently three procedures exist for shelf life

22

measurement, two of which are precise enough, but only one
offering reduced time as well. Accelerated testing is
widely employed by those development engineers seeking a
quick solution. Accelerated testing attempts to determine a
correlation to real ambient shelf life from accelerated
storage conditions. Recent studies have proved the acceler-
ated procedure inadequate when comparing differing product
and package systems, which it is most commonly used for.

Many companies ignore this accelerated testing shortcoming
and continue to use it anyway because of its simplicity.
Normal storage stability 'testing is accurate, but time
constraints usually rule it out for product/package system
development. A relatively new technique shelf life simula-
tion modeling has proved timely and acceptable in accuracy
(1 10 to 15%). Dr. Steven Gyeszly refined the process and
describes the simulation model approach.9 This study
recommends utilizing the simulation model technique to
determine any product/package system shelf life during
product/package development. Once in production the actual
shelf life can be attained by normal storage stability

testing. The study's cost comparison in Section 4 assumes a

 

8 S.W. Gyeszly, W.H. Clifford, and V. Manathunya, "Acceler-
ated Tests Versus Calculations Based on Product/Package

 

Properties," Package Development & Systems (September/
October 1977):29.
9

S.W. Gyeszly, "Shelf Life Simulation," Package Engineer-
ing, 25 (June l980):70.

23
probable shelf life developed later in this section and in
Appendix 1 and Table. 9, because simulation modeling is

beyond the thesis's immediate scope.

FCOJ As A Viable Aseptic Target

This investigation considers the effect of aseptic pro-
cessing and packaging on frozen concentrated orange juice
(FCOJ). FCOJ is a high demand and a very competitively-
priced product thereby fitting the previous economic market
provisions. The present concentrate necessitates tempera-
tures near 00F. throughout its shelf life to prevent food
degradation. Aseptic production of FCOJ is not likely to
extend its shelf life, because 40°F refrigeration is still
required and no real incentive exists for the consumer to
shift purchase behavior (see COJ distribution discussion and
Appendix 1). The study assesses the cost implications of.a
complete conversion to aseptic concentrated orange juice
(ACOJ) production for a representative hypothetical Florida
manufacturer. The following discussion validates FCOJ as a

practical candidate for aseptic production.

FCOJ economics

From 1959 to present, over 90% of U.S. processing
oranges have been .grown and processed in Florida, because
Florida growers have continually expanded grove acreage and
yield, Figures 4 and 5. Also Florida processors test and
implement production with new technical developments. Since

over 90% of the nation's processing oranges are processed

2140
210
180
150

100

70

60

p

 

 

L

1955-55

/////A
//////A

Million Boxes

1

1960-61
Figure 1+: Orange Growth-U.S.A. Versus Florida

-. Per Cent (%)

24

 

 

Mm

 

 

Z

Z

1

1965-66

/ //////A

 

 

 

 

 

/

L

. 1970-71

harvested.

harvested.

7
é

 

 

1975-76

% FCOJ of total U.S.A.

% oranges processed a

' % FCOJ of total Florida
oranges processed as

 

r
E
\
\

 

/

\W

 

 

1973-?“

1974-75

1975-76

1976-7?

Figure 5: 95 FCOJ Portion of Oranges Processed 8c Harvested By Year

25
into juice and FCOJ in Fiorida, the aseptic production of
COJ provides an opportunity to enter the retail COJ process-
ing industry}O Regionally situated aseptic FCOJ plants
receiving bulk Florida or imported FCOJ could accomplish the
restructuring.- Fiorida began commercial packing of canned
pasteurized single strength orange juice (SSOJ) in 1929 and
FCOJ in 1945. Due to quickly adapted production innovations

and industry expansion. Figure 6 shows'Floridafs dominance

ROOF-
700-
600-
500-
4.0g-
300..

Qmufldty
(1,000,000.Liters)

 

200 I-
ma - ' Florida

 

l A l L l

M- 65- a- 611- is— c5;- 73- 73- 72‘- 7‘3- 94- 75"?6- I???
75 77 'n

q—wa-é-es-
so eI 626364-65666?68 6970?! 72 7374-75

UI

OnNEpIflmson

Figure 6. Packs of FCOJ - U.S.A. Versus Florida

in FCOJ . 11

Florida processors presently grow an? manufac-
ture oranges at high output and they should be interested in
technologies which could allow them to increase profits.
The Florida climate is specially'suited for cultivating
oranges which produce the highest juice quality, thereby

ensuring most domestic juice oranges are grown in Florida.

 

10 Dr. Phil Nelson, Fruit & Vegetable Juice Processing Tech-
nology. AVI Publishing Company, 1980, p. 11 and 12

11 Ibid., p. 17.

26
Florida orange juice and concentrate companies have further
strengthened their control of the orange juice and concen-
trate market by importing nearly as much Orange concentrate
as is produced in Florida. 12 Importation originates from
all other domestic orange producing states as well as

Brazil, Israel and other foreign countries.

FCOJ 8 ACOJ quality factors

The social environment participants will be largely
concerned whether the reconstituted aseptically produced
SSOJ will have equal product attributes to both pasteurized
and regular reconstituted four-fold (45°Brix) concentrate.
Thus concentrated orange juice's ability to be processed and
packaged aseptically at a saleable quality is now addressed

from a food science aspect.

Textural effects

A key aseptic concentrated orange juice (ACOJ) quality
factor is its textural or structural integrity. This is
commonly termed mouth feel. Unclarified COJ products con-
sist of non-Newtonian serum and particles. The serum is
composed of low and high molecular weight substances. The
serum's non-Newtonian flow behavior results from the high
molecular weight pectins within the serum. Thus depectin-
ized serum is a Newtonian fluid. The resulting texture of
FCOJ or ACOJ is largely influenced by these flow properties

during sterilization.

 

12 Private industry sources.

27

Mizrahi has investigated the effects of high shear
rates and high temperatures on FCOJ at 50 to 70°Brix. To
properly assess these two factors, he determined the shear
rate and temperature effects on reconstituted particle size
and viscosity as well as textural or "mouth feel" considera—
tions. The fine particles, pectin, in orange juice, 0.05 to
300um., make up the orange juice cloud. The cloud is re-
sponsible for the correct flavor, texture and color' of
orange juice. Thus aseptic production of orange juice
concentrate must not cause noticeable COJ cloud. Cloud loss
generally results in an almost clear, sour-sweet reconsti-
tuted orange juice of no sensory value. Mizrahi found four
types of particles in orange juice clouds under electron
photomicrography, Table 3. Mizrahi determined each par-

ticle's influence on the orange juice cloud stability.

Table 3. SSOJ Particles

1. Regular - intensely colored, smooth-surfaced parti—
cles, 1.0um. diameter, prdbably chromoplastids.

2. Irregular - light colored, rough-surfaced rag-like
particles, 2.0 to 10.0um. in size, pulp fragments.

3. Oil Spheres — attached to irregular particle sur-
faces, l.0um. diameter.

4. Needles - 0.5 to 10.0um. long and 0.05 to 0.5um.
thick.

The regular particles provide color to the cloud. Oil

spheres stabilize the particle cloud by lowering its density

closer to the serum density. The serum is composed of pure

liquid with no particles. The irregular and needle-like

28
fragments give the juice its viscosity. Heat treatment
stabilizes the juice cloud by increasing the serum viscos-
ity. The serum viscosity increases results from sanding
down the irregular and needle-like particles under high flow

rates.13 FCOJ has thin flexible particle dimensions up to

1mm., but almost all particles are smaller than 0.1mm.14
Differences in juice production techniques and oranges
themselves result in altering particle characteristics.15
To maintain a uniform juice product of stable cloud, produc-.
tion mechanisms must be adjusted to meet these variations.
Most liquid fOods, including citrus concentrate, con-
tain sizeable particulate matter producing a variable
viscosity and are classified non-Newtonian fluids. Non-
Newtonian fluids exhibit the characteristic pseudoplastic
properties of decreasing product viscosity with increasing
shear or flow rate. oBrix (total solids to liquids ratio)
and total pectin content are the two highest FCOJ factors in

determining concentrate viscosity or cloud.16 Mizrahi and

 

13 Shimon Mizrahi & Zeki Berk, "Physico—chemical Character-
istics of Orange Juice Cloud," Journal of Science in Food
Agriculture 21 (May l970):251.

 

 

 

14 Bela Buslig & Robert Carter, "Particle Size Distribution
in Orange Juice," Proceedings of the Florida State Horti-
cultural Society 87 (l9747:304.

15

Personal communication with Mr. Dave Meharg of BLOCPAK
INCORPORATED, February 15, 1983.

16 Rouse et al., "Viscometric Measurements & Pectic Content
of FCOJ for Citrus Futures," Proceedings of the Florida
State Horticultural Society 87 (l974):293.

29

Berk discovered three shearthinning, viscosity lowering at

high flow rates, mechanisms in 60 to 65°Brix FCOJ, Table 4.

Table 4. COJ Shearthinning Mechanisms
l. Thixotropic - reversible by rest.

2. Thermally' Reversible - pectin gel recovers
upon heating and resting.

3. Irreversible - viscosity loss due to irregular
coarse particle sanding down.

Irreversible destruction occurs only at relatively high flow
rates and stresses, while the other two happen over the
whole shear rate and stress range. Orange juice changes
from Newtonian to pseudOplastic at approximately 20°Brix.
Pseudoplastic or nonrNewtonian refers to viscosity lowering ‘
more dependent on shear forces and less on temperature. The
attainable irreversible destruction reaches a maximum value,
yield stress, for a given shear rate after which duration is
irrelevant.1|7 Aseptic production's thermal effect reduces
polymer fractioning in high sugar concentrations, a pectin-
ized serum, at high temperature lowering the pectin's, this
study's particulate, temperature/viscosity sensitivity.18
Summarizing shear rate does not effect the basic COJ medium,

but only the structure formed by the suspended particles or

pulp. Aseptic processing of COJ must not significantly

 

17 Shimon Mizrahi & Zeki Berk, "Flow Behavior of COJ,"
Journal of Textural Studies 1 (April 1970):347.

18 Elfak et al., "The Viscosity of Dilute Solution of Guar
Gum & Locust Bean Gum With and Without Added Sugar," Jour—
nal of Science in Food Agriculture 28 (l977):895.

3O

degrade these pectin and pulp fragments which directly

influence the reconstituted orange juice cloud properties.

Flavor factors

Juice flavor is measured by taste panels to discover a
target flavor composition. This composition can then be
quantified by measurement of juice maturity, the Brix-Acid
Ratio. Brix is determined by a Brix hydrometer or refracto-
meter. Brix is often temperature corrected. Degrees Brix
is Idirectly' proportional to the sugar' contect. Sugars
contribute 70% of the soluble solid material in concentrated
orange juice (COJ). Acidity is the total titratable acid
expressed as a percent of citric acid. Generally as a fruit
matures, the flavor rises from a low—bitter Brix/Acid(B/A)
ratio to a higher-sweeter B/A ratio.

After evaporation concentration, previously extracted
or commercially supplied orange essence is often added back
into the concentrate to replenish evaporation concentration
flavor loss. Since the processable oranges mature at diff
ferent time intervals with different flavors, orange juices

are blended together to provide uniform flavor prior to

concentration. Essence improves high quality concentrate
more than low quality concentrate.19 In 1974 50% of the
20

FCOJ manufactured contained aqueous essence. An optimum

eIsence addition level exists after which its benefits

 

19 Dr. Phil Nelson, p. 63.

20 Ibid., p. 64.

31

21 Thus blending of concentrate with recovered

diminish.
essence and cutback juice, the highest quality juice.
largely determines flavor quality along with the concen-
tration process. The addition of aseptic processing and

packaging on top of concentration must not cause a notice-

able loss of the aqueous and oil essences.

Color determinates

Color of the reconstituted orange juice is another
critical quality factor. The color of any citrus juice is
dependent on the amount of carotenoids present. Carotenoid
is chiefly contained within chromoplasts from the outer

flavedo. Figure 7 depicts the structural terminology of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pulp
Oil
Albedo-
V
the white 0 ( Gag? esicles
spongy .4' ‘ 9L Inner Magnified Endocarp-outaway
layer 839 § Flavedo -
8
I 1‘ *— “an
8 8 Cuticle
5} 9'
t I}
a o-
“ . Endocarp-the
8x J” fruit portion '1
t x
' . - ' Juice Vesicles
\ new!) ..4 " Outer Flavedo
Core
& Segmental
Seeds Wall

Figure 7. Orange Structure

 

21 Dougherty et al., "Effect of Essence Enhancement & Stor-
age 5n Flavor of FCOJ," Journal of Food Science 39 (1974):
855.

32
oranges. Juice color is corrected via juice blending prior
‘to concentration. Browning of the orange juice non-enzyma-
tically and enzymatically is the main color determinant and
often limits the overall shelf life of the juice or concen-
trate. Browning is accelerated by the higher orange juice
concentrations in FCOJ. Browning is reactivated after
sterilization by temperatures over 40°F. Addition of small
amounts of stannous ions can improve orange juice color

shelf life over 200% at 100°F. storage.22

If only a short
shelf life up to two months is desired, ambient temperature
distribution is acceptable for color. For additional time,
40-50°F refrigeration is necessary to obtain the six month

requirement (see Table 9).23

Nutritional content

Many consumers rely on orange juice as a daily vitamin
C, ascorbic acid, source. A six-ounce glass of SSOJ has 80
mg. of ascorbic acid. Critical factors in ascorbic acid
degradation are storage temperature, solids content, con-
tainer ‘barrier properties to light and oxygen, and the
amount of oxygen and water in the juice at ~packaging.24
Aseptic production must maintain most of the ascorbic acid

content. Vitamin C loss from flash pasteurization of SSOJ

 

22 J.K. P3111, p0 2000

23 Kanner et al., "Storage Stability of Orange Juice Concen-
trate Packaged Aseptically," Journal of Food Science 47
(l982):430.

24 Dr. Phil Nelson, p. 71-2.

33

is less than 1.5%.25

Thus aseptic processing is likely to
not effect the vitamin C concentration greatly. The common-
ly used aseptic surge tanks are advisable only if the tank
headspace is flushed with sterile nitrogen gas to prevent

reintroducing oxygen to the concentration and accelerating

vitamin C 1053. However, ACOJ again requires 40-50°F re-

frigeration to vitamin C loss for a six-month time frame.26

Table 5 lists the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowances «of

27

nutrients and their percent of this in SSOJ. Under the

Table 5. U.S.R.D.A. and Percent of R.D.A. in SSOJ

% of R.D.A. per

 

 

 

 

 

Nutrient Nutrients (mg.) 177ml. serving
Ascorbic Acid 60.0 131.0
Folic Acid 0.4‘ 20.3
Thiamin 1.5 9.8
Vitamin B 2.0 4.9
Magnesium 400.0 4.9
Copper 2.0 4.4
Pantothenic Acid 10.0 3.3
Phosphorus 1000.0 3.3
Riboflavin 1.7 2.4
Niacin 20.0 2.0
Calcium 1000.0 1.8
Vitamin A 3.0 1.4

Iron 18.0 1.1

Zinc 15.0 0.7
Potassium - _

25 I. Saguy, I.J. Kopelman, & S. Mizrahi, "Simulation of
Ascorbic Acid Stability During Heat Processing & Concen-
tration of Grapefruit Juice," Journal of Food Process
Engineering 2 (September 1978):222.

26 Kanner et al., p. 430.

27

Ting et al., "Nutritional Assay of Florida FCOJ For
Nutritional Labeling,” Citrus Science and Technology 1, AVI
Publishing Company, 1977, cited by Dr. Phil Nelson, Fruit
and Vegetable Juice Processing Technology. AVI Publishing
Company, p. 74.

 

34
U.S. nutritional labeling regulations (F.D.A. 1973), signif-
icant nutrients, those supplying greater than 10% of R.D.A.,
may be required on food labels sometime in 1984. Thus
suitable ‘package ‘printability' for’ labeling’ is important.
The low oxygen contents attainable in aseptic orange juice
concentrate 'by deaeration after sterilization, by a 0%
oxygen headspace content after packaging, and by a 40°F
distribution temperature will be assumed to prevent vitamin

C loss along with browning and flavor degradation.

Government regulations

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's Food
and Drug Administration has set standards of identity for
orange juice products. Table 6 lists the standards defining

28

single strength orange juice (SSOJ). Quality grades are

based on three factors: color, flavor and defects. Color

Table 6. U.S. Grade Standards for FCOJ

Grade Type Color Score . Defect Score Flavor Score

 

A Fancy—con-

 

sumer grade 36-40 18-20 36-40
B Choice 32-35 16-17 32-35
C Standard NONE NONE NONE
D substandard 0-31 0-15 0-31
28

Hendrix et al., "Quality Control, Assurance & Evaluation-
in the Citrus Industry," Citrus Science a Technology 2, AVI
Publishing Company, 1977, cited by Dr. Phil Nelson, Fruit
and Vegetable Juice ProcessinLTechnology, AVI Publishing
Company; p. 70.

35
is measured by U.S.D.A. Color standards or by the use of a
Hunter Citrus Colorimeter. Flavor score is founded on three
subfactors: °Brix, Brix/Acid ratio and taste evaluation.
Orange juice with a Brix/Acid ratio of 17 to 54:1 is accept-
able, below 14:1 gives a tart taste.29 Defects relate to
the deviations from pure juice due to additives. Common
additives are pulp content, minimum juice content, oil
content and certain juice blending agents. Most major fruit
processing areas have their own orange regulations too. The
industry regulations apply to incoming orange quality con-
trol factors and the government rules as juice quality
assurance. Fruit should be intact and not overly ripe.
Fruit should also be free of drops, splits, mold and in-

sects. Industries can always prevent excessive government

regulation by policing each other.

FCOJ target market
Table 7, established on data from Simmons Market Re—

search Bureau defines FCOJ's target market and the recent
market share of each FCOJ manufacturer.3o Brand loyal cus-
tomers always buy a specific brand regardless of other
factors. Table 7 indicates a large degree of brand substi-
tution 'in the retail FCOJ market. JOHANNA FARMS in New

Jersey is presently aseptically producing 45°Brix COJ into

 

29 J.K. Paul, p. 53.

3° SIMMONS MARKET RESEARCH BUREAU INC., 1979, FCOJ Section,
P-18' p0 3890

36

Table 7. FCOJ Target Market Demographics

1. 67% of all U.S.A. households use FCOJ.
2. Of total households there are heavy to light users.
' a. 17.1% use 4 to 10 glasseses per day
b. 25.5% use 2 to 3 glasses per day (Glass = 6 Ounces)c.
15.8% use 0 to 1 glasses per day
3. Psychographics

 

 

Characteristic. Heavy User (%) Medium User (%)
18 to 49 years old 69.1 55.3
Employed (full- part-time) 46.3 48.7
Married 76.1 70.9
Parents 60.4 39.2.
Children (any age & amount) 89.3 51.1
White 85.0 92.0
Regionality More in NE & S Less Pacific &
E Central

4. Market Breakdown: shows extensive brand substitution.

Total Market Brand Loyal
Brand Name Share (%) MKT Share (%)

Minute Maid
Others - each less than 1%
Treesweet
Tropicana
~Sunkist

Bel-Air (Safeway)
Snowcrop.

Donald Duck

A & P

Top Frost

Kroger

Pathmark

 

69.1

, 11.5

...;
O
p

meémmmom
equqmqmo

 

H
H.HHHNNwabU|UI

ommommooOmmw

37

one liter BRIK PAKs for institutional sale.31 SUN GLO POP
in Grand Rapids, Michigan is also aseptically producing
45°Brix COJ in one liter BRIK PAKs but for retail sale.
Based on all the previous evidence. this study assumes that
COJ can be aseptically processed and packaged'meeti‘ng all
social environment constraints and market needs through the
appropriate ACOJ system developments in Section 2 and 3.
The current FCOJ production techniques are documented next
as a basis for understanding the hypothetical Florida FCOJ
processor's cost estimation and comparison in Section 4.
FCOJ production factors

Production environment characteristics relevant to the
non-aseptic and to the aseptic COJ are illustrated in Figure
8. The COJ production process illustrates general system
adaptability to aseptic production. Large trailer trucks
containing 500 corrugated orange cartons dump their loads
down a chute. The cases are opened and a single layer of
fruit flows along an inclined roller conveyor providing hand
inspection at 30 fruit per second per grader.32 Mechani-
cally-assisted inspection methods have been. developed to
reduce the manual labor required and to accelerate fruit
grading. Once graded and separated by quality. the fruit is
conveyed to well ventilated storage bins. Storage time

varies between 12 and 72 hours before processing. The

 

31 JOHANNA FARMS & SUN GLO ACOJ sample products.

32 Dr. Phil Nelson. p. 45.

38

m30Hm coaasnahamdn d :oavonoonm_600< a Hook .m ondwdh

menace so u assesses:
_IIIe panama £3 meorm boom»

 

sneaks: opssaxonmm<
soapossmsoo Hmsomnom

qnlllu.

c

A . hoes mnoflmpoma Hmoon

 

A.e 03v anommhmse

8

races

measure soesoolllltwsamsz Hampom Hond: e

Hmsoamom s HsooA

mnoflsnoaoe: assoamom

 

coapmssmsoo assomhom

_ Anemonmv escapades
Asouonmv mnoadevom Meaghan sossoo
Hmooq Hanoamom.e_amoog

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mean: .msamez A.h osv PHoLmsmne Asoeonmv
wedwmxommnllllll .eooe.IIIIII. Odessa :ossoo Asououmv Puommsmns .wsame: Hdmvom
Odpmomd opdmIso OdessOdvmz Hedsumo sossoo Hand: e unmade
_ messe omssm soavsueadnopm ooA:Sdemz Ioaoe: Hesoawom
oonmsah Odpmom< woo msamsoeonm: memo opamooeoo
N2 oapmom< vsmsH .msoa_soom gauche opdmIso owsH msdwmxomm
IIII. I; IIII
ano< hmwe mound econommao
Incenseahvmdn a msawmxosm
. wsdmmooonm Hog . HH
4 ,
hho>ooom some ownsm
\\\\\.oocommm.///// opdhpsoosoo
. exams soavmnpsoosoo exude med seam
msasmasdhnll.msaosmam soapsnomm>m oeaalpnosm I opmnpsoosoo
ooafln ooasw IoopsnoaooosIoHsesnogsoe Manmwmd
soavomuvxa poommsH
mouse
PII \oomsu_/// mean a comma someone sons dsoavsood
ouam ems31luowsnopm .osoaso sodnoae ensue Isoaposeoum soasmuvsoosoo .H

39
oranges are a maximum of a few days old when received by the
processor. The oranges are then 2 to 6 days old when pro-
cessed into juice or concentrate.

Actual processing starts when fruit is conveyed from
the bins to washing, grading and sizing areas. Fruit is
soaked in detergent for a short time, scrubbed with revol-
ving brushes and rinsed with water. Secondary inspection
occurs to eliminate any residual damaged or misgraded fruit.
Then fruit is automatically sized and then rolled to the
appropriate juice extractor.

Two types of extractors are commonly utilized, FOOD
MACHINERY' CORPORATION (FMC) Citrus Juice extractors and
BROWN Extractors. Figure 9 depicts the reaming action of
the FMC juice extractor cups.33 Juice yield and properties

Rnneam

Position Pwtm

Position

r_LL_l

Piston cuts the core
(hangs out&:remmsthe

‘\ orange , extracting
disauflei thelaw fines.

Outer tube for

raw juice flow:
<::a inner tube for
core, seeds, &.

1 cnherzefmuh

 

 

Figure 9. FMC Extractor Cup Reaming

-_

33 Ibid.. p. 54.

40

are controlled by prefiniShing strainer-tube holes and the
height to which the orifice tube rises within the strainer
tube. Peel oil and aqueous matter is rinsed away by sprayed
water to a finisher producing an oil emulsion. The volatile
essence containing oil is centrifuged from the emulsion for
later addition to the concentrate to replenish lost flavor.
Brown extractors tend to produce a high quality juice of
lower peel oil content than FMC counterparts. Upon extrac-
tion, juices are finished to remove seeds, peel, pulp and
reg particles. Finishing is accomplished by filters or
screens arranged in series through which the rough-juice is
refined. The actual juice quality achieved varies directly
with the operator's skill. For all extractor/finishers
squeeze or ream pressure is the critical operating para-
meter. Raising pressure releases increases juice quantity
and maintains quality up to a point. Excessive pressure
results in inadequate juice attributes. Fruit growers
desire excessive pressures, since this increases juice
yields thus increasing their payments from the processor.
Processors like the quantity extraction, but they must keep
the required consumer quality in mind. Regulations, based
on equipment guidelines, are generally followed to satisfy
everyone concerned.

Once finished, the juice is pumped to stainless steel
blending tanks. Typically juice is processed from a range
of’ orange species each. possessing differing flavor and

textural qualities as well as maturity variations during the

41
seven-month harvest period. The blending tanks allow some
degree of juice uniformity to be achieved.

Concentration is generally accompliShed by either low
temperature falling film or temperature accelerated short
time evaporators (TASTE). The low temperature evaporators
require plate or tubular heat exchangers prior to evapora-
tion to inactivate destructive enzymes, yeasts and molds.
The TASTE systems incorporate heating as part of its multi-
effect concentration process. Evaporators remove water to a
desired concentration or Brix level. As of 1977, all but
two Florida citrus plants operated TASTE units. TASTE
systems can pasteurize and concentrate the juice at 100°C.
Juice passes through TASTE units once within minutes versus
the low temperature cyclical concentration method's one to
two hours. TASTE equipment range in capacity from 9,000 to
36,000 Kg. of water vaporization per hour. The system is
very energy efficient necessitating only one kilogram of
steam to vaporize three kilograms of water. This study
assumes the use of the TASTE method. Table 8 describes the

advantages and disadvantages of TASTE systems.34

0
Table 8. TASTE Attributes

A. TASTE Advantages -
1. Short juice residence time
2. Evaporated juice of low micrdbe content
3. Low initial cost
4. Easily cleaned

B. TASTE Disadvantages -
1. Single cycle results in concentration variation
2. Concentrate blending must occur later
3. High temperature requires frequent cleaning.

 

34 Ibid., p. 61.

42

During any evaporation concentration process, volatile
essence flavor components are lost with water vapor. Vapor-
ization of the juice in the second stage of TASTE liberates
a water vapor containing oil and aqueous essences. These
oil and aqueous flavor components are condensed for later
addition to the concentrate in the concentrate blending
tanks .1 The blending tanks are kept at 35°F. Flavor can
also be;revived by adding cutback juice or addback concen-
trate to the concentrate in the blending tanks. Essence
recovery is most often used, because it is the cheapest
flavor restorer and is particularly suited to producng high
Brix frozen concentrate. Essence recovery is low cost,
since it is a natural byproduct of the TASTE concentration
process. Addback concentrate and cutback juice can compen-
sate for the variable Brix TASTE output. High Brix frozen
concentrate, greater than 57 oBrix, is shipped in 15,000
gaflon insulated common carriers to chilled juice processors
albgover the country. This would be the incoming raw pro-
duct. for a regionalized aseptic concentrate orange juice
manufacturer, and it is the incoming raw product for region-
alzchilled single strength orange juice (SSOJ) packagers.
“” Having corrected flavor and concentration variations,
the FCOJ is ready for retail packaging. The concentrate is
further chilled to betweei 24 to 20°F. prior to packaging
which is very costly. FCOJ freezes solid at 18°F. Packages
are produced in 6, 12, 16, and 32-ounce sizes. Since the

most recent available COJ processing cost data was collected

43

from the 1979-80 growing and processing season which includ-
ed only a small amount of 32—ounce packaging, only the 6, 12
and 16-ounce portions are investigated. in this analysis.
This research assumes the processor buys and does not make
the retail composite cans. Presently only a few of the
largest FCOJ processors fabricate their own packages and
cost information was not readily available for FCOJ process-
or composite can fabrication. Aluminum material costs have
led to adopting polyethylene (PE) inner-coated paperboard
bodies with aluminum ends. Plastic tear strips around the
aluminum to paperboard seam supposedly allow easy opening.

Filling of the viscous, small particulate is achieved
by piston fillers. Prior to sealing the second lid to the
package body, steam is injected to lower headspace oxygen
content, to sterilize the lid, and to form a partial vacuum.
The filled cans are then quickly frozen to 00F. for ware-

house storage.

Distribution environment

Aseptic and non-aseptic COJ distribution systems differ
slightly. Both originate at a Florida concentrate producer.
FCOJ in the unit packages at 45 oBrix is shipped in insul-
ated, freezer common carriers direct to regional wholesalers
and major retailer warehouses nationwide. ACOJ is identical
to FCOJ distribution except only 40°F. refrigerated trans-
port and storage is utilized. Oranges are harvested and
processed only seven months of the year, so the excess FCOJ

is stored in on-site freezer warehouses prior to nationwide

44
shipment. The maximum shelf life the FCOJ and ACOJ experi-
ences prior to shipping is approximately five months.
Appendix 1 illustrates the shelf life quantification for the

two systems. Table 9 summarizes the yearly average shelf

Table 9. COJ MKT Demanded Shelf Life Summary
Shelf Life in days demanded

at the environmental condition
by the distribution market

Percent of the Year

 

the Shelf Life is Refrig-
Acceptable Frozen erated Ambient

58.3 ( 7/12 months) 32 32 42

66.7 ( 8/12 months) 62 62 72

75.0 ( 9/12 months) 93 93 103

83.3 (10/12 months) 123 123 133

91.7 (ll/12 months) 154 154 164

100.0 (12/12 months) 184 184 194
Maximum Demanded = 670 months 670 months 674 months
Minimum Demanded a 1.0 months 1.0 months 1.4 months
Mean Demanded = 2.2 months 2.2 months 2.5 months

lives as well as their ranges over a season for each possi-
ble environmental condition. These are the shelf lives de-
manded by distribution channel members. Since browning
reactions cause unsatisfactory color and flavor after two
months time at ambient conditions, Table 9 eliminates un-
controlled environment distribution for the study's ACOJ
system. Thus ACOJ requires refrigeration to remain saleable
for the maximum off season shelf life, approximately 6.0
months. Identical shelf life values for the FCOJ and re-
frigerated ACOJ arise, because little incentive exists for
the consumer to alter FCOJ buyer behavior. COJ is likely

bought once a week on every grocery trip. Warehouse,

45
grocery and consumer COJ inventory turnover rates sum up
during the orange season to create the minimum 32-day shelf
life (Appendix 1). Because of the identical ‘full season
six-month shelf lives, the cost collection and comparison in
Section 4 need not follow the earlier developed model and

can be compared directly.

COJ outputpparameters

To facilitate the designation of an optimum ACOJ pro-
cessing and packaging operation as well as cost estimation.
an equal and representative output level of FCOJ is devel-
oped. Data from Kilmer and Hooks provides the basis for
aseptic and non—aseptic COJ production line development.35

Since oranges are harvested and processed seven months
of the year, this is the available yearly production time
frame. Assuming the common COJ processor six production
days per week with four weeks per month, 170 days of COJ
processing and packaging time per year is identified. The
COJ distribution time frame remains year around. The
1982-83 orange crop is estimated to be identical to the
1979-80 season's volume, so‘it is a good approximation of

36

the 1982-83 orange crop. The 1979-80 Season's average

Florida FCOJ processor created 4,527,915 gallons of 45 oBrix

 

35 Richard Kilmer 8. R. Clegg Hooks, "Estimated Costs of
Processing, Warehousing and Selling Florida Citrus Products,
1979-80 Season," Economic Information Report #144, Univer-
sity of Florida at Gainesville, May 1981, pp. 4-6.

36 Private industry estimates.

46

retail FCOJ. 1,816,029 gallons of bulk were also produced
for later reconstitution into single strength juice. Thus
26,635 gallons per day and 10,682 gallons per day of retail
and bulk COJ are processed respectively. Summing the two
daily rates and assuming a two shift 14 of 16 hours per
production day, the TASTE juice concentration unit processes
2,666 gallons per hour.

Retail FCOJ needs are filled in ten hours of production
with the remaining four .hours left for bulk production.
Table 10 describes the probable aseptic operation at this
early developnent stage. The FCOJ line is included for

comparison.

Table 10. Aseptic and FCOJ Operational Layouts

 

ACOJ FCOJ
l. TASTE Concentration Unit 1. TASTE Concentration Unit
2. Concentrate Blending 2. Concentrate Blending
Tanks Tanks
3. Concentrate Surge Tank 3. Concentrate Surge Tank
4. Aseptic COJ Sterilizer 4. Composite Can In-feed
Unscrambler and Cleaner
5. Aseptic Packaging. 5. Piston Filler
6. Package Checkweigher 6. Composite Can Seamer
7. Tray Erector/Packer/Sealer 7. Package Checkweigher
8. Tray Shrinkwrapping & 8. Case Erector/Filler/
Tunnel 0 Sealer
9. Palletization 9. Palletization
10. Finished Goods Storage 10. Finished Goods Storage
(40°F.) (0°F.)

This study's FCOJ line is specifically identified for
cost estimation purposes. Composite cans are assumed to be

bought from a supplier, the most common situation although

47

it is diminishing.37 Thus FCOJ packaging is a deposit-fill—
seal operation. A NEW ENGLAND MACHINERY COMPANY composite
can unscrambler and cleaner is specified along with a PACK
WEST MACHINERY COMPANY piston filler to deposit the FCOJ.
ANGELUS SANITARY SEAMER's Model 61-H seams the aluminum lids
with the pull tabs onto the filled composite cans. INTER-
NATIONAL PAPER COMPANY's Model CA-109 case erector/filler/
sealer is also designated for the study's FCOJ line. Two of
each. of the seamer and case erector/ filler/sealer are
necessary to handle the TASTE concentration output.

An additional ACOJ production line stipulation is made
now. Since a second set~ of aseptic surge tanks to buffer
the aseptic COJ sterilizer from the TASTE concentration unit
would be costly and concentrate blending tanks are already
there as a buffer, the ACOJ sterilizer is mated to the TASTE
output and not to the ACOJ packagers. This lowers the
operations overall labor requirements. This excess ACOJ is
accumulated in nitrogen-flushed aseptic surge tanks. Two
6,000 gallon aseptic surge tanks provide the necessary
accumulation capacity plus a 7.2 percent safety margin. The
slower operating ACOJ packagers gradually make up the dif-
ference once the upper line operations shut down for the
day. Section 2 can now address all sterilization systems
from an equipment standpoint to ident’fy the most currently

acceptable sterilizer for concentrate orange juice (COJ).

 

37 Dr. Hooks & Dr. Kilmer, pp. 4-6.

Section 2:
Determination of an Optimum

ACOJ Sterilization System

 

Before the paper investigates sterilization methods, we
need to discuss the most important factor inherent to all
these systems. What is sterility? Webster's New Collegiate
Dictionary' defines sterilization as, "to free from all

"38 This statement is an ideal goal.

living microorganisms.
but verification of total sterility on a commercial basis is
impossible. There will always be a very small percentage of
heat resistant spores which will survive most heat processes
(the Logarithmic Order of Death Concept). Marriner showed
another sterility concept, "to be free from microorganisms
which cause defects," to be unsatisfactory. The sterility
concept utilized for this project is that of Marriner, "The
product must be free of microorganisms which can cause

"39 Thus small numbers of

deterioration and/ or mul tiply .
nonreproducing , nondestructive mic roorgani sms are al lowed .
Our concept can be further defined as commercial sterility.
This analysis validates aseptic technology as the ‘best

sterilization operation for COJ, as well as identifies the

optimum ACOJ system.

 

38 W_e_bster'+s_ New Collegiate Dictionary, fifth edition
(1977), s.v. "sterilization."

 

48

49

COJ Sterilization Parameters
Now that the foundation of .the sterilization process
has been laid, the best COJ process methodology is construc-
ted around the necessary parameters. Table 11 identifies

these process goals. The most critical of the requirements

Table 11: COJ Sterilization System Goals

1. Rapid sterilization, low temperature load and minimum
particulate shear down.
2. High flow rates equivalent to TASTE output.
3. Compatible to current aseptic packaging units.
4. Simple design.
5. Automated controls, but some product flexibility.
6. Ability to handle concentrates and other citrus
fluids.
7. Low worker hazard.
8. Reliable manufacturing and proven aseptic integrity.
9. Acceptable investment and operating costs.
10. Long continuous sterile production without cleaning.

is rapid sterilization and cooling producing little perman-
ent product Idegradation. Processing towards this goal
results in a higher quality product than presently available
within most food product groups. To achieve high speed
sterilization, rapid rates of heat transfer into and out of
the product must occur. Heat transfer of semi-liquid par-
ticulates is basically a physical reaction, although some
chemical reactions do occur at higher temperatures. The
semi-liquid small particulate food product must be heated
quickly to sterilization temperatures, held long enough for
full particulate heat penetration and cooled rapidly pre-

venting product deterioration. This exposes the food to a

 

39 F.W. Marriner, "Aseptic Processing 8. Packaging Quality
Control," ‘The Australian Journal of Dairy Technology 32
(September 1977):102-103.

50

low temperature load. Also the COJ ”sterilizer must not
shear down or degrade the pulp fragments which form the
cloud structure.

For the system to be commercially acceptable, the
sterilization process should operate continuously at a high
rate approaching TASTE concentration volumes. Rapid
processing in the food sterilizer allows the sterilizer to
be mated to the high volume TASTE concentration system. The
economics of the sterilization process requires continuous
output, since repeated line stoppages are cost prohibitive.

Further economical considerations include an uncompli—
cated design. Lower maintenance costs and less operator
training result from design simplicity. The sterilizer
should be highly automated, so it requires fewer operators
or the same numbers present commercial processes (retorts
and pasteurizers) in a product class. With automation a
trade off exists between higher production speeds with low
labor costs and line flexibility to adapt to changing market
demands. The most efficient sterilizers handle a single
type of food class, so flexibility to sterilize a variety of
food classes is not recommended. Thus automation is not a
flexibility problem. Cleaning-In-Place (C.I.P.), automated
resterilization after sterility loss, greatly simplifies
procedures. 8

Last but not least, every sterilizer must be safe for
plant workers and assure sterile food processing. The

system must offer suitable safeguards against allowing

51

contaminated product passage to the filling station. Appro-
priate product sampling ports allowing quality control
measures can be incorporated into the system's design. For
line operators the sterilizer should run without undue
worker hazards requiring elaborate safety precautions like
clean rooms or gas masks. In other words the sterilization
medium must be easily containable within the sterilizer and
possess little operator risk if production leaks occur.
Incorporating automatic flow diversion valves. limiting the
amount of seals and utilizing sterile steam seals improves
sterility confidence. A sterilization process qualifying
under the previous constraints would be immediately accept-

able for present commercial sterile COJ production.

Available Food Sterilization Processes

Having determined the optimum sterilization character-
istics. all food sterilization processes are now considered.
All methods can be categorized by sterilization mechanism or
agent. The oldest method heat sterilization has' two main
sub-groups. The commonly used retort method differs from
the more recent aseptic method in that the retort system
sterilizes the food after filling and sealing into its
package. This is known as in-batch sterilization since in
at least one he ting procedure. sterilization, the food is
heated in a hermetically sealed package. Aseptic production
sterilizes the food before filling and sealing into its

package in a continuous process heating the food in many

52

thin layers.4o- This is termed in-flow sterilization. There
are advantages and disadvantages with each system.

Retorting developed out of Pasteur's and other's work
into actual production just prior to 1900. Retorting en-
tails packaging the preheated product and sealing it in.
Then the whole product/package system passes into an auto-
clave. The autoclave subjects the product to a high enough
temperature via ,steam or hot air pressure for sufficient
time duration to effect. proper microbial kill for a given
product. Finally the product/package system is cooled to
room temperature usually by a potable water bath. To avoid
severe product destruction. mainly (M1 outer layers and to
prevent insufficient time-temperature for microbial death.
complicated heat transfer properties and their equations for
each product/package system must be developed. implemented
and closely controlled.

The main disadvantage of retorting is the processing
time wasted waiting for the required heat transfer into and
out of the product and package. Modern innovations attempt

to reduce the dwell time.‘:1

Still the time required for a
single unit to be processed is excessive in comparison to
newly developed aseptic systems. Nickerson & Ronsivalli

tate. ”Commonly packages are heated for seven minutes at

 

40 B. von Bockelmann. Supplement to the Proceedings of the

International Conference» on ‘U-H-T Processing' and Asgptic
Packa in , North Carolina State Raleigh. November 27-29,
1979. p. 236.

 

 

41 John Nickerson & Louis Ronsivalli. Elementary Food

Science (second edition). AVI Publishing Company. Westport.
Connecticut. 1980. p. 152.

 

 

53

250°F. at the slowest heating point.42 Dwell time can
easily expand to 20 or 30 minutes for conductive particulate
products when the heating up and cooling down time is added
into processing time. Also high pressure. temperature and
relative humidity systems require metal and glass. usually
the most costly materials to acquire and ship. Retortable
pouches. multilayer high temperature stable coextruded
plastics and aluminum foil laminates can greatly reduce
retort dwell time. but the pouches are difficult to handle
without puncture and to seal hermetically on production
lines at high speeds.

High temperature short time (HTST) sterilization
occurs quickly like aseptic processing. but it is still a
retort method sterilizing after the food is hermetically
sealed in a metal or glass container. Commercial sterili-
zation is reached at 280°-300°F. in 15 to 45 seconds usually
with steam. HTST is the best retort method for homogeneous
liquid; Conductive particulate products cannot be steril-
ized by HTST because there is insufficient time for heat
penetration through the metal or glass and into the par-
ticles. Possibly retort pouches filled with semi-liquid
small particulate products could be sterilized by HTST. but

research was unavailable in this area.

 

42 T.R. Ashton. "The Ultra-High-Temperature 'Treatment of
Milk and Milk Porducts.‘ World Animal Review 23 (1977):38.

54

Single strength juices because of their 3.0-3.3 pH are
commonly packaged by hot-filling. Hot fill processes steri-
lize the juice continuously at 210°F. for 30 seconds and
fill the food into a metal can, glass bottle or plastic
'laminate pouch while still hot. The heat of the juice or
fruit drink is relied upon to sterilize the inside of the
package during filling. Cooling of the juice creates a
partial vacuum in the headspace as in retorting. The slow
cooling' after filling' can overcook ‘the product, causing
s'tackburn, and must be monitored closely. Cool potable
water baths are often used directly after filling and seal-
ing to accelerate the cooling process. Thus hot-filling

produces a shelf stable package.

Asgpticpprocesses

Ultra high temperature short time (UHTST) aseptic
systems, being continuous flow sterilizers, differ from in-
batch methods. Aseptic systems have three necessary compo-
nents: l. the food product is sterilized by itself, 2. the
package. and possibly lidding material are sterilized by
themselves, and 3. the presterilized product and package are
joined by filling and sealing within a sterile atmosphere at
room temperature. Aseptic food processing and packaging
originated in the U.S. in 1930, Europe in early 1950, but
only since February 1981 have plastic and paperboard-based
aseptic packaging systems been domestically legal due to
F.D.A. regulation. Quantum leaps in sterilization speeds

versus in-batch processes occur with aseptic technology,

55

since many small volumes of food product are heated to
284-302OF. in two or three seconds directly or in 15 to 20

43 Aseptic food processing allows fast

seconds indirectly.
sterilization with little product deterioration.

Other nonheating food sterilization systems are gener-
ally very expensive and difficult to operate at high volume.
Infra-red radiation is probably the best of these. Radia-
tion sterilization is costly to operate and will result in
chemical and physical product and package material altera-

44 Indepth testing is recommended to determine radi-

tion.
ation effects for each food product. Suitable worker pro-
tection from radiation is required by regulation. Thus,
infra-red radiation is not readily applicable to COJ steri-
lization. Microwave heating is the backbone of a non-
aseptic Alfa-Laval Inc. process under development.

Only aseptic food processing results in a sterile
product of highest quality. Commercial aseptic steriliza-
tion systems are available at efficient speeds with little
operator or consumer hazards. However, large particulate
food sterilization could be most quickly accomplished by
mating a hot sterilization, aseptic processing, and a cold

sterilization, microwave radiation. The food product would

be sterilized by components with the larger particulate

 

43 Ibid., p.38.

44 Joint F.A-O./I.A.E.A. Division of Atomic Energy in Food
and Agriculture, Proceedings on the Enz ological Aspects of
Food Irradiation, I.A.E.A., Vienna, 196 , p. 91.

 

56

matter sterilized by microwave and other homogeneous, liquid
ingredients sterilized by aseptic processing. The minute
particulate matter in COJ can be handled aseptically if the
sterilizer's equipment design incorporates highly turbulent
flows and high flow rates required for full particle steri-

lization.

Aseptic Food Sterilization
Aseptically sterilized food processing occurs in two
separate methods: direct and indirect. Direct heating
sterilizes by direct contact between the food and the steri-
lizing agent, usually steam. In indirect heating a heat
exchanger surface separates the food product from the steri-

lizing agent.

Direct methods

Direct heating is separated into two opposite proce-
dures: injection and infusion. With injection, culinary
steam is injected into the food product line, while with
infusion, the food product is pumped into the highly fil-
tered steam. A time-temperature plot for a direct-injection

method appears in Figure 10.45

 

45 H. Burton, "The Direct Heating Process for the Ultra-
Hflgh-Temperature Sterilization of Milk," International Food
Science and Technology_Proceeling§ 10 (March 1978):131.

57

16° F Temperature oc.
mo -

120 -
100 -
80 I.
60 -
no ' Total

20 - Process
' Time (seconds)

 

 

 

llLJlllLllLL-lJLl

 

5 101520253035404550556065707580

Figure 10. Direct Injection Sterilizer Time-Temperature Plot

Direct method products enter the processing equipment
at 39 to 45°F. In both direct systems, preheating occurs by
indirect plate or tubular heat exchangers raising the food
temperature to 176°F. Next the steam contacts the food
elevating its temperature to 284-3020F. causing sterilizing
in two to three seconds. Having reached the sterilizing
temperature, the food product traverses a holding tube of
sufficient length to ensure sterility. Time to travel the
holding cell is about another two or three second. Since a
10% product dilution occurs, the correct moisture content
and cooling is accomplished simultaneously by evaporation
cooling. Correct vacuum pressure control is actuated ac-
cording to product sterilization temperature and the induced
dilution factor thereby evaporating the excess water con-

tent .

58

All direct methods condense steam into the _food pro-
duct, so the steam must be sterile. The eventually sterile
steam starts from a potable water source and enters a
boiler. The boiler is only cleaned with certain chemical
solvents. The boiler's "dirty" steam enters a cyclon filter
and then is further cleansed by an active carbon filter.
The steam is now sterile enough for its intended use. All
piping materials for the food and the steam lines are stain-
less steel. Due to these constraints, sterile steam produc-
tion requires the purchase and installation of a separate
boiler system.

COJ does not require homogenization so its placement
and operation is not addressed.

A few further comments on the two direct sterilization
procedures. Steam is injected into the food either as small
bubbles through minute holes in'the injector or as thin
sheets through slices in the injector. Most infusers in-
corporate the food product falling in many thin layers down
through. a steam. chamber. Infusion systems achieve the
quickest sterilization of the aseptic heat processes.
Injected steam should separate the stainless steel injector
surface from the product. Otherwise food burn-on deposits
can develop at injector sites. These deposits block steam
condensation and reduce run time ‘between clean-in-place
(C.I.P.) stoppages. Sterile steam pressure must be
maintained ‘higher than the food. pressure, so the steam

temperature is significantly above the required product

59

sterilization temperature. In other words the steam cools
as it condenses into the product. The induced overheating
nearest to the injector is generally not a problem.4'6
However, injected steam results in high turbulence around
the injector, causing high heat transfer and some product
degradation texurally.

Direct infusion heating designs invariably result in a
pool of sterile products forming at the bottom of the steam
chamber. To prevent unnecessary temperature load on the
product, the heat process should allow a first in - first
out (FIFO) flow. Another infusion related problem emanates
from the high temperature, high pressure steam chamber.
Most products contain a few parts per million of air which
is released into the steam chamber upon heating. This adds
to the overall pressure resulting in a steam-air mixture.
The increased pressure causes an excessive processing tem-
perature. The situation can be normalized by careful con-
trol of the main food outlet valve at the bottom of the
steam chamber. The product .pool can be allowed to drOp
until small drops of the steam-air mixture are released into
the holding tube restoring proper pressure and temperature
conditions. Considering all the small design differences

between the injection and infusion methods, comparison is

 

46Ibid., p. 132.

60

difficult between them. However, some advantages over

indirect heat exchangers are readily apparent.47

Table 12. Direct Heat Merits
1. Lowest possible temperature load on the food.
2. Least permanent burnt flavor.
3. Lowest final oxygen content, less than 1.0ppm.

4. Longest run time between C.I.P.

Indirect proceSses

Three methods of indirect heat sterilization exist in
the marketplace: plate heat exchangers, tubular (shell)
heat exchangers, and scraped-surface heat exchangers.
Figure 11 depicts the types of heat exchangers.48 Each
system's (name accurately describes the shape of the heat
exchanger surface. The plate heat exchanger has the highest
utilization of heat exchange surface per factory space of
the indirect units. The product passes in thin layers over
approximately 30 thinly spaced heat exchanger plates separ-
ated by rubber gaSkets. These gaskets provide easy inspec-
tion, but limit flow rates and are a possible source of con-
tamination. One trip through a single sandwich of plates
sterilizes the product. Unlike the plate system, the tubu-

lar and shell methods heat all around the product. In tube

 

47 Dr. Bernhard von Bockelmann, "Some Principles of U.H.T.
Processing," Tetra Pak International AB (in-house publica-
tion), 1978, p. 6.

48 Ibid., p. 7.

61

Tumflar

Scnuedéhuiama

Efieam

  

Prohnfi: lhfietor

 

 

Shell

Figure 11. Indirect Heat Sterilization Methods

units the food is pumped through the center of a heated
pipe. Shell systems heat products on the inner and outer
sides of the food line. The scraped-surface procedure takes
the tubular method one step further by adding extra agita-
tion. A curved stainless steel pinwheel, the mutator, spins
around the axis of the product flow direction like an auger.
Very high energy costs and excessive purchase prices limit
scraped surface use to sterilizing only large particulates
and highly viscous foods.

A time-temperature plot for an indirect plate heat

49

system is“ shown in Figure 12. The product enters the

processing equipment at 39 to 45°F., an" it is preheated

 

49 H. Burton, "The Direct Heating Process for the Ultra-
High-Temperature Sterilization of Milk," p. 131.

62

usually by the same later indirect sterilization method to
176°F. Like the direct methods. the indirect sterilizer
time-temperature plots differ: some products are processed
more efficiently with some indirect designs. In plate
methods. sterilization reaches the same sterility tempera-
tures as the direct systems but in 15 to 20 seconds. Hold-
ing tubes are then traveled for two to five seconds depend-
ing on product type and flow rate. The indirect systems
make better use of regenerative cooling and heating. because
of the exclusion of evaporation cooling. Sterile hot pro-
duct often indirectly preheats the nonsterile cool food
product. This regeneration of heat allows indirect aseptic
processing to be cost competitive with faster output direct

systems.

lalrlbmpnatunaoc.
140 '
120 '
IMJ’

 

23 £3 2? 2?
I

 

Total Process Time (seconds)

L_ A A A A l A A A A 4

5 101520253035404550556065707580

Figure 12. Indirect Plate Time-Temperature Plot

Product burn-on is a problem reducing the heat'exchang-
er efficiency. This requires more frequent C.I.P. and

resterilization than direct heating. However. indirect

63

heating and the three main heat methods have some general
advantages over direct heating and among each other. Table
13.

Table 13. Indirect Heating Merits
Lowest investment and operating costs.
Higher energy regeneration. 70-80% versus 50%.

Simplistic designs.
No heating agent requirements.

thI—a
O O O 0

Plate Heating Merits

Least acquisition cost.

Easier equipment inspection.
Easiest to clean.

Turbulent flow at lower velocities.
Highest indirect output rates.

U'IAUNH
so...

Tubular and Shell Heating Merits

Safest microbiologically.

Longest production runs.

Handles semi-liquid small particulates (up to 1500
centipoise).

Automatic C.I.P. easiest.

High flow rates and pressures.

Turbulent flow at only higher flow rates.

Output limits approximately 75 to 10.000 liters/
hour.

\lOlU'lub “NH

Scraped Surface Heating Merits

l. Handles highly viscous and large particulate foods.
Indirect processes result in higher oxygen content than
direct methods. because of the lack of evaporative cooling.
COJ is very oxygen sensitive. so a dearator is required to
retard browning and vitamin C degradation.

Currently 10 manufacturers marketing commercial aseptic
food systems exist in the U.S.A. Table 14 identifies these
producers. system types and investments associated with
these. The highest prices correspond to fully automated

systems.50

 

50 Private industry sources.

 

.ooo.oomo .ooo.oomw .
I.ooo.omao I.ooo.ommo
moumasoavnmm
msdmmxomm msooma>
eoaeuom .nro see
somehow
Hmaspsa Ioommnou
soundeeH sooneeeH
83 e .89

.ooms oer oz .
zzmzeHzo -zoeraozzmrs
.ooo.om~a
.ezo .ooo.oom» . -.ooo.mms«
are zoo are see are Her
cacao codaOOfica . Madonna
soonaeoH swoon.ooouso eoouaeeH
. cons e coo“ ooo e .oom
rears. oem oz .8« oer oz
-oeqemam. Io<> ore IrrarsezHom

 

.mmoo Qummmam Hammmc

.<zw

nooeaooaeneo

uncoud>
.nra Her

somehow
Ioommsom

8835

zmmmkzoo

58.83
are ase

madam
voondocH

ExamfiHmmam

.ooo.nnso
-.ooo.omso

nze sou.

madam
poondosH

285.5:
.ooo.oonw
I.ooo.oom
are Hue
coaaomnsd

eeoon nouns

mH9>

 

m< H4><A «mud

.ooo.ooo.so
moamHsOApHmm

msooua>
.umn HH<

somehow
Ioommnom

8885

marsh.

.ooo.onsm
I.ooo.o~s

mzm 30H

madam
pooHHocH

UHE<=HUHDH

.oooeoomo
I.ooo.ooso

are HH<

madam
eooaaosH

UHE<S

I<m9Q=ImmmDm

.ooo.oosm
I.ooo.omm

urn HH<
:Odaoonsd

swoon poohda

onB<NHmmmD

 

.00 BzmzmHsma >m<

 

nsoeoz_uoudaenoem ososoomm e muouoeoeooeez nonsHAAWom

neoonzm oesoeeassuoem eooa enamone otm.a.rro oHoeHAe><_zHHeoaonoeoo

onoo nonessuoom

zoaaspeoeo eooa

. one» dousflhoem

mews Hoooz

vmoc HONdeHOfim
zosfleoeoeo eooz

ooze Honssauoom

was: Hoooz

 

.2“ manna

moauuomoum_HONAHdHo¢m

.ooo.oom.se
wopmH50HpHmm
omega

.mmo HH<

Hoho>coo
Honsmco
swoon acumen

zmhmwm
BB<ADUHBm<m
UHBmmm<

.ooo.oomo
Hoop:

use 30H
:ofiuooncd
sebum
coma“:
zmemwm

===U<>
UHBmmm<

.ooo.oomo
-6869;
moamHsOHpHmm
msoomfi>

.mme sou
momensm
Iooomsom
vooafiocH

UHemmm<mn<Dd

.ooo.oomo
moumHSOHpHmn
msooun>

.nrn HH<

commune
Iooemnom

oooflefi

:msm»m
mmammmmm
OHBmmm<

 

.00 .92 4.93 25E

neoonzm eosoeeassuoom eooa ozonoee a:m.a.r.= oHoeHse><.zHHeosanoeoo

somehow

 

 

nsoeoz nonnasuoom odosommm e muoneeoeooeez nonaasuoom

Homcmcoxo
somehow Howsmcoxo vmoc ado: mo .ooo.oomm
so moM\.oomme zero noes N»O\.oooma -.ooo.oSs
noose =r\w e snazz<zqo euro medwexoeo
nanosecona> noses .nro Her are Her resumes
bonanza madam amazes»
neooeuoo soonsoeH soonseeH ooonsoeH
o8 zenL 8.2.81, 882.8 <8 88:
szo

commune Homsmcoxo Honaadnoau . .

some so moooM\.oommo I.ooo.oso .ooo.oomo
moons
=r\n a onsooseoeo

ooo.oos .uro Hue are Her are Her
scansmsa scansmsa
commune scope scope
leooeuon eoopaeeH eoouso soonso
qua .
-uzaog<z . zoo
ouezz<raonroe<eo> names zzzzzrzzno
.oo azmzmHoda mmmoozm‘zozazaro .ozH Hmeo .ozH ooemzmo

amoo Houdadhovm
zodssoeaeo eooz
ooze noueasuoem .

mes: Hoooz

pmoo Houaflahovm
zosssoeoeo eooa
ooze. nonsafloem

mam: Hoooz

 

.ea oases

oedeuooonm.ueusasnoem

66

.rzo nonflfloom

 

 

 

mfiwmxomm
e333 33388 seen
HmHSQSp
8835 2:» 98333....
Arenas? Hsz . .oeeo Hose:
.ooo.oono
.ezo £8983 68.88 onoo nonflfloem
nan Sr are a: are S... 33388 oooz
oodooonea
madam Haocm semen .
8883 8883 ooofio 25 nonfifloom
zozozoq
338$ 338$ 3338 men: Hoooz
.8 Boom .z E §§E< e88 538 e H88

 

 

n33 98 $3333

 

38oz 3.33.88 3388 e 3338882483331“

neooozm eoflenfifloom soon 3383. Salerno 39335 zfieofinoeoo r: 393

67

Having surveyed all the possible UHTST aseptic food
sterilizing systems, choices among these can be made to meet
our previously determined optimum system acceptability
criteria. All of the aseptic methods provide continuous
high speed sterilization of liquid products at economically
safe levels of efficiency. However, only two indirect'
processes, tubular and scraped surface, can handle semi-
1iquid particulates. Of these two, tubular heat exchange
best fulfills economic requirements. Two experienced sup-
pliers of tubular heat exchangers exist, the STERIDEAL

system and the SPIRATHERM process.

STORK-STERIDEAL Shell System

STORK-STERIDEAI. UHT tubular (shell) sterilizers are
produced by the GEBR. STORK & COMPANY'S APPARATENFABRIEK NV
of Amsterdam.51 All the shell heat exchangers are construc-
ted from stainless steel. The system's high degree of
induced turbulence and high pressure fluctuations result in
efficient ‘heat transfer. Since the tubing requires no
gaskets, the extreme turbulence and pressure changes can be
contained. The lack of gaskets necessitates all cleaning to
be carried out in the automatic mode- throughout the whole

system. The only indication of the need to switch to C.I.P.

is a gradual temperature decrease in the main sterilizer

 

51 H. Burton, "The STORK—STERIDEAL Process For Sterile Milk

Production," American Daigy Review 8 (1967), cited by Naim
Kosaric al., CRC Critical Reviews In Food Science And
Nutrition et14 (1981): 163.

68

shell section resulting from product burn-on. A pump or
homogenizer supplies the flow pressure. Early STERIDEAL
“units commonly operated at 2000 liter per hour.

Today these rates have increased to 8000 liters per
hour because of design innovations. The STERIDEAL unit is a
shell configuration in the final sterilization and cooling
phases while tubular heat exchange in all other areas. The
sytem consists of four distinct but completely integrated
sections, greatly simplifying installation. A unique capa-
bility of the STERIDEAL are variable speed motors and con-
trol systems allowing variable output ranges. The STERIDEAL
process was basically developed to sterilize milk products,
but has not as of this writing been approved by the F.D.A.
However, its approval is expected soon, because of the
STERIDEAL's proven record in Europe.

Figure 13 depicts a common STERIDEAL line layout.52
The product is pumped by a centrifugal pump (2) from the
main supply tank (1) to a five cylinder positive displace-
ment pump (3), by itself or as part of the homogenizer's
pumping system. Output pressure fluctuations originate here
from the low piston speeds of the multiple cylinder pump.
If pumps having four cylinders and less are utilized, then
excessively large pressure changes result. Air bottles,
which ,are difficult to sterilize, are presently used to
absorb the air pockets. The first tubular regenerator (5)

preheats the product to 149°F. before the food passes

 

52 Ibid., p. 164.

69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Steam In
_J
3:12:36 .. >7]
> 322.333.
222:“: .. , .
Food In
a 8 LOG-a Steam Out

 

 

 

Figure 13. The STERIDEAL System

through the first homogenizing valve (6) at 300 pounds per
square inch. A second regenerator (7) performs secondary
preheating raising product temperature to 248°F. Next the
food travels to the main shell heating area (8), where
indirect sterilization occurs at 275-3020F. The correct
indirect ‘heat exchanger temperature is maintained by a
pneumatically' controlled steam. inlet. valve. Temperature
sensors open a diversion valve transporting the semi-sterile
product back to the main raw product supply tank, ensuring

sterilization occurs. The now sterile product enters the

7O

cooling phase in the second regenerator (10). passing
through the second homogenizing valve (11). and traverSing
the first regenerator (12) at 750 pounds per square inch and
86°F.. Final cooling occurs indirectly via two chilled water
baths (13. 14) just prior to aseptic packaging machinery
entry.

The STERIDEAL system has been coupled to most current

53 Super-heated steam at 284-

aseptic packaging machines.
302°F. sterilizes the food indirectly and operates the
machine's C.I.P. capability automatically» Product diver-
sion valves in addition to their safety function are used to
automatically shift the STERIDEAL equipment into the rins-
ing. cleaning and sterilizing cycle. Assuming proper opera-
ting conditions are maintained. the system can operate con-
tinuously from six to twelve hours. Run times can be ex-
tended by incorporating forewarming at 176°F. for five

minutes with milk.54

COJ would likely experience some
forewarming benefits too.v Different forewarming conditions
can be determined for the COJ. thereby reducing the rate of
product burn-on and increasing continuous run duration. The
forewarming principle is incorporated in all indirect pro-

cesses to reduce the inherent product burn-on onto the heat

_exchanger surface.

 

53 H. Burton. "The Effect of Forewarming on the Formation of
Deposits from Separated Milk on a Heated Wire." 18th Inter-
national Dairy Congress Proceedings B:3 (1972):609.

5‘ Ibid.. p. 163

71

CHERRY BURRELL-SPIRATHERM Tubular System

The SPIRATHERM tubular heating process is manufactured
by CHERRY BURRELL. The SPIRATHERMS are a series of gasket-
1ess, concentric, stainless steel tubing arranged spirally
within heated chambers. SPIRATHERMS are termed NO BAC 100,
NO BAC 200, AND NO BAC 600. Only the NO BAC 600 applies to
the study's parameters, so the NO BAC 600 is addressed
below. The heat transfer agent is a bactericide containing
water completely separate frOm 'product's system thereby
eliminating, unlike the STERIDEAL unit, the possibility of
contamination via the Venturi Principle. The Venturi Prin-
ciple demonstrates that a leak of high pressure sterile
product into the lower pressure raw product line causes a
back suction. Thus contamination can occur when utilizing
sterile to raw product heat regeneration. Some regeneration
is lost by employing bactericide impregnated water. Heat
regeneration of approximately 70-75% is achieved. The
SPIRATHERM cylinders are fitted with baffles to direct water
flow maintaining high heat transfer rates. For efficient
high temperature sterilization the steam must. achieve and
hold its flow velocity from 18 to 22 feet per second. For
nonsterile SPIRATHERM areas, water flows from eight to
twelve feet per second are acceptable. SPIRATHERM tubing
can withstand 150 pounds per square indh. The schematic in

Figure 14 illustrates the SPIRATHERM process.55

 

55 H. Burton, "The STORK-STERIDEAL Process for Sterile Milk
Production," p.163. '

72

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Holder Strainer
[FLO—E3. (*4:
Food In
Deaerator 8 8
Tumflar
2 4. S Coolers 5
I
Centrifugal . _
Pump 3 r-OJ 6
. _ ' Aseptic
_, High P1333“? spiral Homogenizing
8——-— I lee value
P“1t1V°'—' Sterilizer .
I m ‘ Sterile
Food Out
.—.I

 

Figure 14. The SPIRATHERM NO BAC 600 System

Food product is pumped through a tubular or plate
preheater (1) elevating the temperature to 158°F. Deaera-
tion (2) occurs next allowing extended production time by
reducing the product's air and oxygen content to around the
level achieved by flash vacuum cooling in direct aseptic.
processing. Deaerating reduces the amount of product burn-
on like forewarming and rauoves some off flavors. A high
pressure pump (3) provides the system flow pressure. Steam
sterilized SPIRATHERMS (4) cause sterilization at 280-302°F.
A holding section of up to eight seconds ensures total heat
penetration. wa entering the coiling area (5), the product
temperature is lowered to 122°F. If the food requires
homogenizing. the homogenizer (6) interrupts the cooling

tubes where the product temperature is still 158°F. ACOJ

73

would not require homogenization. A strainer (7) is situ-
ated directly preceding the filler to filter out burned-on
particles and excessively large pulp fragments. In the case
of ACOJ, this improves filler operation when sealing through
the product.

The SPIRATHERM outlets have restricting orifices to
create backpressure in the food line keeping its line pres-
sure higher than the steam 1ine pressure. The extra turbu-
lence is required to effect efficient sterilization. The
SPIRATHERM design utilizes regeneration preheating and

cooling only with the NO BAC 600.

Optimum COJ Aseptic System Selection

Designation of the best aseptic system between the
STERIDEAL and SPIRATHERM units is founded on the predeter-
mined criteria. Both systems satisfy the sterilization with
low temperature load requirement, because this is the basic
design consideration for all aseptic systems. STERIDEAL and
SPIRATHERM ‘handle semi-liquid. small particulates. Each
design differs in relation to its components position which
eventually impinge on continuous run time and overall line
output. STERIDEAL employs a Single pump to create all line
pressure and turbulence, while SPIRATHERM utilizes two
pumps. STERIDEAL achieves a more compact arrangement with
the same output. Deaeration is required for ACOJ process-
ing, and is commonly a part of the NO BAC 600. STERIDEAL
and SPIRATHERM utilize two different. methods to. reduce

particle formation, forewarming and deaeration respectively.

74

Forewarming is less costly from an energy standpoint, but
not quite as effective as deaeration. The STERIDEAL design
could add a deaeration step prior to sterilization and after
homogenization for especially oxygen sensitive products.
SPIRATHERM'S product tubes can withstand only about one-
fifth as much pressure as STERIDEAL'S tubes, but the higher
flow rates would be detrimental to COJ's reconstituted
texture, color and flavor. STERIDEAL has a 70-80% heat
regeneration level versus SPIRATHERM'S 70%. The SPIRATHERM
NO BAC 600 has the greatest sterile integrity. Since this
achievement and maintenance determines the frequency' of
C.I.P. (the highest process expense), so the NO BAC 600 can
be operated cheaper than the STERIDEAL unit for aseptic
production of concentrate orange juice.

Thus this study selects CHERRY BURRELL'S NO BAC 600
ultra high temperature short time system to sterilize
45°Brix concentrated orange juice. Aseptic packaging Sys-
tems are now investigated to identify an optimum aseptic
concentrated orange juice (ACOJ) packaging system and to

mate it to the NO BAC 600.

Section 3:

 

Selection of an Optimum

 

ACOJ Packaging System

 

Package Development

Packaging allows the separation of manufacturing and
retailing creating a distribution environment between them.
Without packaging, mass production. would be impossible.
Maintaining the product in an acceptably saleable condition
throughout its distribution channel for a given length of
time or shelf life is the fundamental purpose for every
package. A systematic analysis of available package system
characteristics during developmental stages can achieve the
best match with product attributes and market needs. Most
product attributes and market needs place a specific array
of demands on the package. For each product/market need
relationship, these demands must be quantified as the first
step in package development. Upon prioritizing the demands,
the package engineer can easily compare proposed systems and

ascertain the optimum package system.

ACOJppackaging,requirements
Aseptic concentrated orange juice attributes (ACOJ) and
market needs appear in Table 15. Protection/ containment

factors entail the package's ability' to maintain a

75

76

sterile internal environment via a hermetic seal throughout

shelf life. To create a hermetic seal, the package material

Table 15. ACOJ and Market Demands on the Package System

I. Protection/containment

A. Barriers
1. Light-ultraviolet especially
2. water vapor
3. Oxygen
4. Organic volatiles
5. Micrdbes

B. Hermetically sealable

C. Machineable
1, Sterilizeable
2. Strong material

D. Distributable
1. Shock and vibration resistant

II. Utility/convenience
A. Channel member wants

1. Printability-labeling

2. Handleability

3. Safety-sterility integrity

4. Uniformity
and its final form must possess high barrier properties in
addition to providing effective closure. For the considered
aseptic materials, heat/pressure or induction sealing can
achieve closure. Aseptic packaging systems utilizing metal,
glass and composite can packaging materials are not consid-
ered, because their.higher cost and weight detract from
aseptic material and distribution savings. Aluminum foil
laminates and strong plastic coextrusions provide the neces-
sary aseptic package rigidity. Aluminum foil, Saran and
EVAL have low water and oxygen transmission rates. EVAL and
Al foil possess the necessary organic vapor flavor component

barrier properties. Saran can provide adequate protection

with certain volatiles. EVAL must be kept dry to maintain a

77

high barrier. Pinholding can render Al foil insufficient.
ACOJ requires a translucent to opaque light barrier. From
Section 1, COJ nutrient and quality retention requires these
barriers.

Aseptic packaging systems must fabricate distributable
packages. The package material and its package design must
be shock and vibration resistant to the likely trucking,
storing and handling inputs. Damage boundary determination
and resonant frequency' searches can. accurately' ascertain
product/package fragility assessment. The package and its
form-fill-seal or deposit-fill-seal machinery must be steri-
lizeable and provide effective sterility maintenance.
Prerun and interrun resterilizations are the most cost
intensive aseptic production operation. Production sched-
uling must minimize the frequency of line changeovers
between differently labeled packages. Preventative mainten-
ance, including processor safety factors on top of equipment
and material specifications, can achieve the maximum contin-
uous run times.56 The filled package must have little or no
oxygen in the headspace and in the sterile COJ as well. If
hydrogen peroxide (H202) is utilized, then residual chemi-
cals must be held to a tight minimum to prevent greatly

accelerated browning.57

 

56 Homgren, R., p. 63.

57 R. Johnson and R. Toledo, "Storage Stability of 55 oBrix
Orange Juice Concentrate Aseptically Packaged in Plastic and
Glass Containers," Journal of Food Science 40 (1975) :434.

78

Utility/convenience factors concern legal and sale-
ability package requirements. The material and its package
should allow distinctive graphics as well as fulfill legal
labeling regulations. The packaging process should not
needlessly endanger manufacturing personnel. Consumer
safety of aseptic products is fundamentally based on its
sterility. Package dimensions should provide easy handling
for intended use by all channel members. The process must
be capable of high speeds while maintaining package uni-
formity. All these factors must be attainable at an accept-
able expense to the food processor and to the consumer who
ultimately pays for the packaging system.

Assuming a company can afford the initial capital
outlay for aseptic packaging equipment, the major aseptic
packaging objective is achieving and maintaining package
sterility. Thus, verification of sterility is desired.
Incubation is the only widely accepted method, but is it
time consuming, costly and statistically uncertain. To
shOrten incubation. requirements, non-destructive finished
goods testing is desired. A recent article describes a
partial achievement of this goal. Specifically, the machine
identifies and rejects grossly improperly sealed or pinholed
packages by lack of sidewall deflection sooner than incuba-

58

tion. To reduce the possibility of shipping a contamin-

ated package, this study assumes the use of such a device.

 

58 Carl Andres, "NOn-destructive Inspection of Aseptic Pack-
aging," Food Processing 43 (January 1982):166.

79

Proper personnel training, preventative equipment mainte--
nance, building sanitation and limiting all raw material
contamination are also inherent to achieving and preserving
product/package sterility over extended, economical and

continuous runs.

Viable Aseptic Packaging Systems

Having constructed ACOJ packaging needs, the domes-
tically available aseptic packaging systems are surveyed.
These aseptic packaging methods meet ACOJ's needs in varying
degrees. All aseptic packaging processes can be divided
into two groups, paperboard-based and plastic-based. Within
each group a further subdivision exists between form-fill-
seal units and deposit-fill-seal systems. Tables 16 and 17
illustrate aseptic paperboard-based and plastic-based system
characteristics respectively. Sketches and summations of

these follow.

Aseptic paperboard-baaedppackagingpsystems
TETRA PAK systems

The most prominent a‘septic packaging systems are the
TETRA and BRIK PAKS produced by TETRA PAK INTERNATIONAL AB
of Lund, Sweden. TETRA PAK pioneered modern aseptic packag-
ing with the introduction of the TETRA PAK machine in 1952
which went aseptic in 1958.59 The TETRA PAK AT-500 is sold

in the U.S. by MILLIKEN PACKAGING of White Stone, South

 

59 Anonymus, "Persistent Development," Tetra Pak (in-house
publication)54:l2.

 

.mocacome N op a: w

.us so as .ooo.os

e .ooo.o Hc.8o.n.

more? son... 3 so

.nssoos.omu.o e .mao
.nssoom.smu.ooao

.uHI.Hsoom
..Hsonm
-oom .soon

.OfiXQKém
mhhz

o<log mm 03mm

.<Iomw mm seem
a s ox

ooo.os s

.ooo.o .ooo.m as
ooomamzoo

its}

.moudm Has
How .oowm

.nssooo.os

.os-.asoom
.oooIoHpso

.ouxexma
mam:

mo>oon scenes
oopcahmone hc<

.maas announce
mom seasons on

.hsc Ho enema

me

<Iomw
.Hx<mIHD HQ”

newsman

oe«soss\s

.cs cs
.ooom a .oonm
uasomm ea or

anoaoomr

.uoI.Hsoom
..Hsomm
..8m .38
.ofixnxb
maa>
.eem eHzm

a (mama
so ossm

.x<m MHmm
fl <mBHB
on mean

a s a a

oomm Hope:
. era—E58

mcamdxosm oavmou< oonsnIoHsooHommm

.mouau Has

.oomm a .oon:

.mosacome N op m: e

.ooms
"coozuon ca
328 .88
nosIHsoom

.AH oa

pom .ooo.o uHsonm on so .ooNauHsmmIn
.sssooo.os .nssoom.ss .nssoooo
.coosaon ca
.aHo> see .Hs .33 e .Hsoom
erImNsnmIme .asI.Heoom..Hsoom ..Hsoms
.os-.uoms Hsoom ..Hesom ..Hemm-n
ur-m< .rspm -rns .sssm. Hensossuooe
zemzasmzm .osxmsxms .nsxmsx
osHHImaa> maz> maa>.

.nHHou .Has oowcdumoam co
oacmsnmoxoam Ho ous>msmopom

r s .n .sa m e an
m s o as mums oomIse
era amaze. .. .. ... . can fies. .. A 55m. H.§....Iw

.uHsaHoams nonsense a
.nrroooos\oou seasons
.tho acosmfisdo emcee

.wfi canoe

.mvco50Hdswom
Hoamuomo

.36: Rom.
moamm ommxomm

.srmso=_sosnzm

.momacm ommxosm

.asOth
.wcaaonma

.oamm mo memos

.moohsom

.Hocssz Hooo:
.osmz Seaman

81

. 63:38.: in cars no .833: see .3. r3: soSeoBsEoo 8.833 .r
.RIoa .8 £82 .35 page... composer ...zoss ops: coders 8383.. 5338: .z 4.
.ozH x<mooam.mo muons: o>sn .H: new: couamOHcsssoo announce .w

 

.oo mmm<m A<on9<zmflszH Ho Eons: mHmHom .m: sud: seaweedcsesoo Hmsomuom .m
.UzH .<.m.= x<m memnmo Houdm uOHHmco..Hn cw“: cedamodcseeoo Hmcomuom .

s

.wcammxosm :oxaaau: mo Munoz panama 3H: can: sodvmodcsssoo Hmcomuom .m
.msoaas0dmuoomm <Iomw x<mTHadHH ..ozH q<one<zmmth x<mIH=aBH .N
.m e m sameness .Nama .osmmam.:.xa«= 91=I= so cesumocoz hues: accedeosuoacmg .oxuvaoz .< a sopcn< .9 .u .uoonsom

 

.hudaonoam omsxosm assumes“ madamono.NON= monaaonw> awn OHeHovm pop msfimmxoma
oaauoam Hashes Moos: .;\mxm: oovnooon waOOHm .coavmafiaahoam cswoun Mom crown on: HH<

.wmru.o«ao ocoz . ocoz. one: 6202 ocoz
.ommuo s .mao
.EosmuoEo .
. . . . . Esau £35 .zzzm
N O .s
38%? ”Norm“ 8.8 5.8-88 .83 so can .ooorsIm
o.§u.oEo .

w e mono s .mao r; r; on . ssoz
.Hmioo o .oowuormo .HE om . 43 no 38.3-8 Amoco
.nouoao .Rnfiao o s o E o m: o no

.2 e ..o :36 <88 88 Hope: a e r12 n12 8a-:
".8388 . . 5.on 5 388.26 , era as . . 5E some 5E <58.

sanctum mesons—sea 3382 88-38388 .8 cases.

Aims:

on: smoam

:68
one H333

.soavmssmcoo
\rofivooccoo

Hsoflsooas

.Ach\Hmwv
Hopm3.msaflooo

.AEHOV on:
a: commonsense

.Hopssz Hoooz
.osmz seesaw

 

.mcchME\Nw::qz
mqazoms\fiufiuqm

.nn\ooo.mfi-ooo.ofiuo-a=
.u;\ooo.mfiuoommuauq=
..u ooomuoomfiufi-Am
.osaa madafldm ommamnm

.mnaooo.omu::qx
.mnflooo.:fiufi-nm

.=w.:-m.fiuanm«mn

fi . 3m .MHQWMQ

. .:m.nuuo»osadc
.Ho»o>:oo an umpusdq

.mxmfin.nxm«u:nqz
.mxmxufiuwnflm
mm:

.9m<mmozoo oxaauvdg
capmmam umnmmumozpfia
Ho dmucdhnmnmlmsu

.mh U<>mmm oxdfl
:Ifiz a «law

 

AHHhmmmm& xOmHA<Bm=

ofifig\m..&~<
andsoma\fiu~<

.aoeaoo Hemmm
.hmHHd 3x0 d :« .Hn
\ooo.dm cmoazmndzm

..H:\moao%o coma

.mnflooo.muam<
.mpaooo.mu~<

. ..fifimfion 398
fighngfifig

.mxaxmm
may:

.em<hhozoo oxfiaucaq
.momdnm canon £
.Hd>o .douumn: Mom
Hogan ficsondndnz
co¢ndnmounlmzo

.mHaa amazonsm
a .modwadaon o:
.maado owned Ho ham

3N Q N
M0<mmm<

msopmhm madmaxodm oaaAom<.uomdnno«adem

0:H:Oda\u

.gm*.ooo.mfi-muaamma

a ..ooo.cmuofiuaamm~
..ooo.wmu:«uaamfifi
..ooo.om-omwaam~
muc\moHOho coma .MUdo:
madaaam mg op a:

.mpdooo.mfi

. ..MIMflflfiw.“ 0:

a .:cn unmpoadau

. ..Wunmlfiunfiflmmg

.med caoa hp Umpaada

.mxwxmm
was:
.ocmnnaoa

mandadom paw: hadncaa
.Hdom coxodgnomom

Ho Honda odeHdom.

. puma dmunahmonalnao

.maaa andsohsm
.pcoamuzdo :o a
.mflva :o moupadhou
.ucosmazuo emcee

coo: adamom<
engages

madnom5\m

.Aamv pfiafia oaaosooo
on“ ma .Haoon
.ooo.moudan« .3“;
\moHOho acme .mcdm:
mzflaaam m: o» a:

.mnaoom.n:

.m‘\a4_nom =m.« a

Q no.“ ..m.mu2m3:
a .gm.m«uno¢QEdfiu

...méwuomfi 388

.uaoa an umpaafin

.axwwxmm
mkfi:

.nMdn gwhkno>o
coananmonn .mmam:
Ldaua odumuam\adom
copzdhmonnuhano dad

.maaa omdnpnzm a
.movaamhon o:
.wzoamazdm ham

mgxg< a m<
mN u<>mmm

.ma OHAdB

 

"manmsoudsdmm
Hopmnomo

5:0: Mom
mmpmm mmdxomm

.asmam:.sopmhm

«mommnm mmdxomm

«azoadg

$5393

.owdm Ho memos

.Hmnazz Hove:
.oadz amamhm

83

 

6318139.: 3388

gamma $33.23. .3832. 33.8... ... fit. 9.8.. 02.8»... .8383: :83; £68 .m
.02H vflamd Ho :omHHdo .m .> .H: zed: =0aauou==esoo chomnom .w

 

.378? A83 .2638

among mfimmxomm .3832. oZim... u 5:. 9.8.. was... 63384.. .8558: ....fi... .N.
Q12. .mmzmmm. :53 28:532.... ...?am mg: 83.8 8332.. ...ufiwamos ... .m.
.UZH wmazH=o<= vzHu<xo<m =omom.ao someox son 9“: av“: :oagdoacsesoo Hdcomucm .m
.qu .<. m. a oczmm mzaawacmmmnmon cmu>fi> aeoow .H: cw“: :Oaawoacszsoo Hdcomuwm .2

 

 

.378. . A82 3:38.

p33: “Hammad: gangs... 33.8.. a .5: 9.3m oflufim 62135. £55 ... a 35.3 .n ..m
223.8339... 9. ...: ... 3 on 95% .Emszofi "52.8.: .58.. .m

.mcoaaaouwao

 

mfiqz 8 “new Ragga... Rom ASE: . .05 02.9. .3
.nwlmw.nmwau hstcwev

madnmmzdmzm mmmxowm :.mx0dm oahvmnnso .oaamwfim :o maven menomma onvnmm<z .cowauwo .> .aw .mmonaom

 

. . . .hvfifiuumam wwwxo¢n
Hushmfica madawmuo New: mouuuomw>_Haw oaahmam eon .wcdwaxOGA oHuHoam daemon Hows:
.mn o<>mmm ms» How .;\wxom cmeuommH :omom .coaadsdsahovm asumum How swmam om: HH<

 

.Ecsm
- - - . .Ecam .
.... .E ... EST. .5 :35. £26.83: £55. .
.owuzLE ... $9.18 ....N ma magi: a mgum.‘
SARI... ... SumuTAm . . AER .3.um<\g< « .waum...
£28 £\ 8% w an. . .Hmmminmw.
.1: a 7.8 ..N ... N 8°: 3E8... 2x: ... m<
Saga... Sm gm: .855... ems—828 mm 3..QO

EBRm mfiwfioam 3392 Emfiuodpmfim .2 03a...

.2}...

mm: Ewmfim

.coavmesmcoo
\:0aaom::ou

Hmoflvoma

.AcaE\mev
H0963 mcdflooo

.Asmov mm:
HH< wmmmmhmsoo

.Hmpssz Hmuoz
..oEaz_Emamhm

84

Carolina. This tetrahedron was the first successful flexi-
ble aseptic package and continues to perform well in small
portion packaging applications. The tetrahedral shape takes
a minimum of package material for a given volume of product.
TETRA PAK's package material comes in two varieties as in
the other BRIK PAK systems. The first a polyethylene/paper/
polyethylene laminate is for non-aseptic applications. The
second includes an aluminum foil layer for aseptic barrier
needs. The process that creates this material is kept
secret and is the subject of very intensive research by many
companies. EXFCELL’O CORPORATION is presently producing the
nearest polyethylene/paper/polyethylene/al uminum foil/poly-
ethylene laminate to the BRIK PAK material. Hermetic seals
are induction on all TETRA PAK sides with the side incorpor-
ating a plastic strip to prevent contaminant osmosis.
Package material is sterilized by a 35% H202 waterbath which
is evaporated off the inside of the tubed material. Auto-
matic case packers and pull tab and straw applicators are
also available from TETRA PAK INTERNATIONAL AB. Low to high
pH foods have been successfully packaged aseptically by the
AT-SOO. Figure 13 describes the tetrahedron's vertical

form-fill-seal (VFFS) process.

BRIK PAK AB-3
In 1952 the BRIK PAK, or as it is known outside of the
U.S., the TETRA BRIK, was designed. The BRIK PAK went

aseptic in 1967. The AB-3 is marketed domestically by BRIK

85

 

 

 

Sterile Area.
Within Black
Outline

/‘ @2

Roll Feed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

K Final
Cut

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 15. The TETRA PAK VFFS Process

PAK U.S.A. INCORPORATED of Dallas, Texas. TETRA PAK INTER-
NATIONAL sold more than 30 billion cartons in 1981, 17
billion of these aseptic. Also in 1981, 2,201 aseptic

units, BRIK PAK and TETRA PAK, were operational warldwidefio

 

60 Hellmut Kirchdorfer, "The Brik Pak-Age A New Era." The‘
Brik Pak-Age l (in-house publication), Summer 1982, p. 3.

86

The BRIK PAK was developed for efficient handling. Hermetic
sealing and package sterilization occurs identically to the
AT-SOO system. BRIK PAK makes tray erectors, shrink wrap-
pers, shrink tunnels and straw applicators available. The
AB-3 has aseptically packaged .lmm particulate low to high

pH. foods. The rectangular BRIK PAK VFFS system appears in

 

Figure 16.
Sterile l
Within Black
Outline ./ Bending Rollers
Strip — Sterile Food Fill

Applicator 9

./
Code/ .
Date '0"

 

*¢-—— Longitudinal Seal Jaws

 

Imprinter ‘ o—— Inside Tube Heater.
c 2’
rease
F1attene\‘-—ILiquid Level

 

‘ _.._ ..JTran/iverse Seal,

Roll u we a.
Feed )i Cutter
.L____/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 16. The BRIK PAK VFFS System

87

BRIK PAK AB-8 and AB—9

In October of 1983, the AB-3 systems will no longer be
sold. Replacing the AB-3 are two similar units, the AB-8
and the AB-9 which seal and sterilize as well as use the
identical packaging material as the AB-3 system. The first
U.S. equipment will be installed in January 1984 with ma—
chine and material construction at the Denton, Texas facil—
ity originating in April 1984. Both systems are rated at
6000 units per hour, while achieving the same cost per
thousand as the AB-3 systems. The AB-8 handles volumes from
12 ounces to one liter. Portions between 125ml and 284ml
are slated for the AB-9. Jumbo rolls hold three hours of
production capacity. Improved automatic C.I.P. requires
only 40 minutes. Special package volumes are available for
the first time by special order. These design modifications
make BRIK PAK much more competitive with higher output
aseptic packaging units.61 Approximate acquisition and
installation is $281,000 per unit with a cost per thousand

packages of $47.98.62

INTERNATIONAL PAPER Model 3500 SYSTEMPAK
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY purchased patents and

worldwide marketing rights to SYSTEMPAK, developed by

 

61 Personal communication with Mr. Ron Miller of BRIK PAK
Inc.

62 Private industry sources.

88
BUITONI of Perugia, Italy.63 The Model 3500 went aseptic in
1977 in Italy. SYSTEMPAK's strengths are its compact size.
fin seals and low H202 consumption. The fin seals reduce
the possibility of microbial contamination because there are
no external or internal. paper' edges exposed. BRIK PAKS
utilize an internal plastic strip and COMBIBLOCS employ
shaving, a longitudinal shaving of the internal surface
material, to prevent contaminant osmosis. SYSTEMPAK util-
izes a very similarly composed packaging material like the
BRIK PAK material. Figure 17 depicts the SYSTEMPAK VFFS

operation. A PE/Paper/PE/Al foil/PE laminate paperboard

 

Forming

[—— Scoring

Evaporation- __ Sterile
heated rollers‘ St 1:11 Air
e e

"" Food Fill

 

___— Short Seal

H202 Cut Off
\ Sterile

 

 

 

 

 

Scoring Within Black
Outline
Web
Feed

 

Figure 17. The SYSTEMPAK VFFS Operation

 

63 Marty Westerman, "Aseptics Choice Made Easy," Beverage
World (July 1982):72.

89

specifically designed for aseptic packaging will be produced
at a Raleigh, NOrth Carolina plant starting in 1984.64 This
material is applicable to the EXrCELL-O and IJQUI-PAK sys-
tems described later. Currently available aseptic paper-
board stock is actually designed for hot fill application.
Thus INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY will be the first domestic
supplier of aseptic paperboard. A low 17.5% H202 water bath
sterilizes the material with hot drums to score and create
the sterile inner package atmosphere. The available auxil—

ary equipment and previously aseptically packaged products

are similar to the BRIK PAK and TETRA PAK systems.

EX-CELL-O PURE-PAK N-LONG LIFE

The remaining paper-based systems are preformed blank-
fed methods (deposit-fill-seal). EX-CELL-O CORPORATION'S
PURE—PAK gable-top cartons are preformed and ethylene oxide
sterilized after case packing at materials plants. This
system is not aseptic, since a completely sterile environ-
ment is not maintained within the EX-CELL-O equipment. How-
ever, the clean .EX-CELL-O packagers extend product shelf
lives. As the cartons are opened by the user, 35% H202 is
sprayed into the erected side sealed carton. The bottoms
are heat sealed by natural gas, while the top is heat and
pressure sealed after steam flushing the filled carton
headspace. Residual H O is evaporated by heat. Changeover

2 2
is only five to ten minutes tooling. Hot fill grade PE/

 

64 Anonymus, "A Big Vote for Aseptic Paperboard," Packaging
Digest (March 1983):6.

9O

Paperboard/ PE/Al foil/PE gable-top blanks are available
from INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, CHAMPION INTERNATIOme and
WEYERHAUSER COMPANY. A new web-fed block of brik style
machine may be under developnent. Approximately 100 PURE-
PAK N-LONG LIFE machines are operating worldwide since their

65

introduction in 1967. Figure 18 illustrates the clean

PURE PAK NLL system.

 

 

Precrease
Clean Within . [-1.5% 511:1): tt
Black Outline Sterile __ e 0 on
H 0 Food I ‘ Sealing
ngpor \1 F111 0' l // \
Electric _ ' ‘</ \ Sleeves In
Top Seal 1 A _ \ \\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

y.—

 

 

 

 

 

 

1n r111 r n
_ 11L 11 UIFHIFI \\ fixative

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 18. The PURE PAK NLL System

LIQUI-PAK 820-A

LIQUI-P‘AK INTERNATIONAL BV produces the LIQUI-PAK
aseptic packager which is marketed in the U.S. by LIQUI-PAK
INTERMTIONAL INCORPORATED of St. Paul, Minnesota. Ultra-
violet light accompanying a low 0.1% 3202 concentrate spray.

has a synergistic microbial killing effect. This is an

 

65 James Russo and Robert Bannar, "Aseptic Packaging: How
Far Will It 60?," Food Engineering 53 (March 1981):7.

9].

important technical advance making the 8209A the only paper-

board-based aseptic packager to meet H residual guide-

202
lines prior to package sterilization. A hermetically
sealed, plastic positive displacement bellows accomplishes
filling into bottom-sealed, aluminum foil/polyethylene/

paperboard. gable top cartons. The bellows are easily

 

Sterile Within Black Outline

  
      

 

 

U V Prebreaker H202 Spray
. . U.V. Lamp |

 

 

 

Bottom-
Saded<kumon
Inflet

//

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

’/< Outlet

 

Figure 19. The LIQUI-PAK HFS Process

92

replaced and the system has full C.I.P. (clean-in-place)
capability. A sterile steam flush is available. The 820-A
went commercially aseptic in 1981. Only low acid products
are presently being aseptically packaged with the 820-A.
Figure 19 outlines the LIQUI-PAK horizontal fill-seal~pro—

cess .

COMBIBLOC cF 5.000, 6.000 and 10.000

Blocpak Incorporated, a division of PKL PAPIER-UND
KUNSTSTOFFAWERKE LINNICH GmbH of West Germany, manufactures
an array of horizontal-form-fill—seal HFFS equipment. The
packages produced tend to be square on length and width
dimensions. The PE/Aluminum fbil/PE/Paperboard/PE material
is supplied by PKL, but will soon be domestically available
under license from RJR ARCHER INCORPORATED in Columbus,
Ohio. High speeds up to 10,000 BLOCPAKS per hour are
attainable even for one liter sizes. Very amenable paper-
based system terms of sale and operation are BLOCPAK system
ingredient. .Available aseptic package equipment suppliers
are becoming negotiable on certain terms of sale in order to
remain competitive with BLOCPAK. The BLOCPAK cF 10.000
aseptic operation appears in Figure 20. Since this system
does not seal through the product, larger particulates can
be packaged than with the BRIK PAK machines. BLOCPAK is
second behind BRIK PAK in operational aseptic units world-
wide. Acquisition and installation including tax, duty and
freight charges run about $436,000 with a cost per thousand

packages of $50.30 for the cF 6.000 model.66

 

6 Private industry sources.

93

Sterile Within.Black Outline
Sleeve Feed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doflxmmr Cokvbate
W» Sterile Imprinter
"I HFood Fill Ultrasonic
quSeal

 

 

 

 

 

Carton \
Erector— '\ , Hot Air
6 Prefold Dryers
v:
/

Bottom /' / U T=T

Preheated I Q

Bottom |
SeaLmi

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 20. The BLOCPAK cF 10.000 Operation

Aseptic plastic—based packaging systems

The domestically available plastic-based aseptic pack-
aging systems are now assessed. Table 17 exhibits their
characteristics. Since all these systems do not seal
through the product, small particulates can be hermetically
heat sealed inside the thermoforms as long as the particles
can be kept out of the heat sealing area. High barrier co-
extruded plastic is supplied by BALL PLASTICS CORPORATION.

COBELPLAST (CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY U.S.A.) AND COMPOSITE

94

CONTAINER CORPORATION. As before the web—fed processes are
discussed first.

SHASTA BEVERAGES CAPRI SUN Fruit Drink is produced
under license from Germany's DEUTSCH SI SI-WERKER. The
pouch is a free-standing gusset-bottom AMERICAN CAN CO.
design. The material is a PE/Al foil/PP laminate akin to
retort pouch material.67 This is a hot fill system utili-
zing similar U-H-T-S-T food sterilization systems, but then
the hot filled fruit drink to sterilize the inner pouch

surface achieving a shelf stable product.

BOSCH SERVAC 78 AL/AS

BOSCH PACKAGING MACHINERY'S HOFLIGER & KARG division
'manufactures two aseptic thermoform-fill-seal machines and
is sold in the U.S. by BOSCH PACKAGING MACHINERY in Pisca—
taway, New Jersey. Both systems are operationally identical
but are designed for different materials. The SERVAC 78 AS
handles plastic coextrusions and the SERVAC 78 AL fabricates
aluminum foil/plastic laminates. BOSCH went aseptic with
the SERVAC in 1980 but had previous aseptic packaging sys-
tems on the market since 1975. The-SERVAC is nearly mainte-
nance free and fully enclosed streamlining operational
procedures. All other aseptic packaging equipment surveyed

is electro~mechanically and pneumatically actuated; only the

 

67 James Peters, “Cost, Consumer Appeal Spur Development of
Flexible, Foil Laminated Packages," Food Product Development
(November l979):34.

95

SERVAC is hydraulically driven. Nitrogen headspace flushing

is available. A 50% 8202 50°C water bath sterlizies cup

body material while onLy a 35% H202 water bath sterilizes
the lidding material. Figure 21 outlines the SERVAC 78

AL/AS process. The SERVAC is the largest and also the fast—

68

est aseptic packager currently available. Shrink wrapping

and case packing equipment is also available from BOSCH.

Acquisition costs are in the $1,000,000 neighborhood.69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lidstock
Stertha l
FoaiFflll
Thermoforming <:::)
Air Preheating\. ‘ *-
Knives 7 1 H202 k:\ Waste
inflice;\\\. [:JEJ [E] [:1 ' Wind
\. \‘ C] E] DU
Evy m \ / I l J
' I Die-cutting
ET , SeaLum;
“202
Roll Feed Sterile Within.Black Outline

 

Figure 21. The SERVAC 78 AS and 78 AL/AS Process

 

 

68 BOSCH PACKAGING MACHINERY SERVAC 78 AS and 78 AL/AS
specifications.

69 Private industry sources.

96

CONTINENTAL CAN CONOFFAST unit

CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY U.S.A. introduced the French
ERCA NEUTRAL ASEPTIC SYSTEM (NAS) in 1982 although a nearly
identical system has packaged aseptically in Europe since
1965. NAS refers to sterilization without chemical steril-
ents. The CONOFFAST system receives a coextruded web from
which a single layer, usually polypropylene (PP), is delamr
inated and wound up onCe entering the sterile environment.
This exposes a sterile surface created during coextrusion by
the extreme coextrusion temperatures. The other aseptic
packaging system available in the U.S. that meets the FDA
chemical residual regulation prior to sterilization is the
LIQUI-PAK 820-A.' FDA regulations limit residual H202 to 0.1
parts per million on the package material and to 1.0 parts
per million in the surrounding work area atmosphere.70' 71
‘Only plastic coextrusions can be packaged aseptically on the
CONOFFAST system. Induction sealing is available via the
aluminum foil/plastic laminate lids. Nitrogen flushing can
also be accomplished. The CONOFFAST system possesses the
high thermoforming rates and a wide range of package dimen-

sional guidelines. Nonaseptic clean and normal packaging

modes are available with little downtime on the CONOFFAST as

 

70 George Allan, "Aseptics: Sterile Packs with a Fertile
Future," Packaging Digest 19 (September 1982):68.

71 V.R. Carlson, "METAL BOX FRESHFILL Aseptic Packaging
System," paper presented at the National Food Processors
Association meeting on February 7, 1983 in Los Angeles, CA.,
p. 5.

97

on most other aseptic units. Limited downtime is substanti-
ated by performance in Europe. More than one flavor of
product can be packaged at the same time, and die cutting
the lidding material creates multiple packs. The CONOFFAST
system is extremely complicated making'proper mechanic and
operator training a must. Figure 22 shows the CONOFFAST
HTFS procedure. Acquisition costs are also in the

$1,000,000 renge.72

 
  
 
  

Lflmflstmfl:
RoIthed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.Die-cutting

UV

 

 

Outlet

 

 

 

Figure 22. The CONOFFAST HTFS Procedure

BENCO ASEPACK Systems

BENCO U.S.A. markets two aseptic units, the ASEPACK 2
and the ASEPACK 24, for its parent company, BENCO of Italy.
Mr. Scott Vivian is the U.S. BEN’ZO representative. The

ASEPACK went commercially aseptic in Europe in 1977 and has

 

72 Private industry sources.

98

not yet sold a unit in the U.S. The ASEPACK model numbers
refer to the package output per hour as multiples of 1000.
The ASEPACK 2 is limited to low quantity production, most
likely research and developnent. An ASEPACK 2 can be ac-
quired for approximately $250,000 versus the one million

dollar investment required for the ASEPACK 24.73

Any roll
fed thermoformable plastic sheet can be used. The lid and
cup materials are sterilized in a 35% H202 75°C water bath
with hot sterile air creating a H202 vapor Which sterilizes
inner machine surfaces. The cups are sealed with heat and
pressure after nitrogen flushing the headspace. BENCO
guarantees high outputs, 24,000 units per hour, as a term of
sale and slightly reduced factory space is also an ASEPACK
forte. Automatic case packers, straw and spoon applicators

are available. Figure 23 outlines the ASEPACK 24 packaging

system.

ASTEC METAL BOX FRESHFILL

ASEPTIC TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING COMPANY, ASTEC, of Cedar
Rapids, Iowa, markets the METAL BOX FRESHFILL System devel-
oped by METAL BOX P.L.C. of the United Kingdom. The pack;
ager utilizes any preformed coextruded or single component
plastic or aluminum cups with membrane lids. Because of
operational simplicity and lower cost, this deposit-fill—

seal system will likely be implemented before the previously

 

73 Scott Vivian, "Aseptics: Sterile Packs with a Fertile
Future-Part 2,” Packaging Digest (Octdber 1982):123.

99

 

 

Lid
Drying

   

Thermoforming Food fill R° Feed

Sterile Die-cuttin?
Steam

. ' Sealing I {1
Film 1 .
Drying— 1:] EM 6:13 3%?
D II! [33L a) C—

, Outlet

 

 

 

Preheating
Sterile Within Black Outline

 

 

 

Roll Feed. .3202
Figure 23. The BENCO ASEPACK 24 Unit

discussed plastic thermoform—fill-seal (TFS) units. Thirty-
five percent (35%) 3202 and hot air dryers achieve commerci-
al sterility of the cup body, lidding and internal equipment
surfaces. The system has been tested since 1972 to reach
the ultimate metal canning failure rate of one in 10,000
units. Most of the other aseptic systems on today's market

only one to three failures in 1000 units.74

The sealing
process utilizes a plastic bead which when debossed during
heat sealing greatly increases the lid to cup seal strength.
Impulse heat sealing debosses the head from the lidding
material and requires polymer to polymer contact. Sterile

steam flush and air filtration systems are available too.

Single to multiple lane versions, 1, 4 and 6 lanes, are.

 

74 ASTEC INCORPORATED, METAL BOX FRESHFILL Aseptic System
Specifications (inshouse publication), 1983.

100

available. Moderate operating rates and quick changeovers
are its strengths.75 Cup and membrane responsibilities are
shifted to the supplier. A unique particulate food product
actuated filler' developed along with Raque, Inc. allows
packaging viscous particulate-matter food up to 5/8 inch

cubes on the FRESHFILL system. The METAL BOX FRESHFILL

horizontal deposit-fill-seal system appears in Figure 24.

 

Sterile Within Black Outline

 

Lidstock '

Indexing Conveyor 3202 Roll Feed
H“ Al: Sealing a. I

I{202 Spray Dryers Die-cutting SCH-P Wind

  

 

 

 

 

1 A 3:28:11

 

 

~. (hfiflst
@‘U‘L \JLJ) 4U

 

 

 

 

Figure 24. The METAL BOX FRESHFILL HDFS System

Miscellaneous aseptic packaging_systems
Aseptic bulk methods are available from Scholle Corpo-
ration. Bulk packaging systems receive previously formed,

sealed and sterilized plastic bags which are then opened,

 

75 V.R. Carlson, "Aseptic Processing and Packaging, A Short
Course," Igternatigpal Food Technologist Presentatigg Uni-
versity of Florida, Gainesville, 14-16 September, 1982, pp.

. 1-20

101

filled and resealed in a sterile atmosphere. Typically bag-
in-box product/package systems are economical only for bulk
sizes. Aseptic pouch and composite can systems are also

entering the market, however, these lack the necessary

operational experience. Pouch and bag-in-box systems are
not applicable to this research, so further discussion is
not warranted. The DOLE aseptic packaging system Operates
at such high temperatures that only metal cans can be util-
ized. The metal can's heavy weight and high material cost
detract from distribution savings, so the DOLE system is not
viable for this COJ application. The DOLE/BOISE CASCADE
aseptic composite can system. is an innovative and. very
compatible method which may be implemented for ACOJ pack-
aging once operational modifications can tightly control
residual headspace oxygen levels. However, the aluminum
foil layer containing composite can material cost presently
makes this system too costly versus the previous paperboard

aseptic packaging units.

ACOJ Package System Selection

The viable domestically available aseptic packaging
systems have now been investigated. An optimum method can
be ascertained from the ten choices upon consideration of
ACOJ requirements. The number one objective is a sterile
final product/package unit. Only systems with extensive
Operational experience and intimate processing knowledge of
ACOJ can ensure maximum continuous manufacturing. Secondly,

it has been shown that little or no oxygen in the headspace

102

can be tolerated by the ACOJ nutritional, flavor or odor
characteristics.76 Thirdly, residual H202 levels must be
held to extremely small margins to meet legal regulations
and to preserve vitamin C and color content. Fburthly, the
system must have published operating and acquisitional
expense data that is available for reference. Currently
ACOJ is being aseptically packaged in one liter BRIK PAKS on
an AB-3 by JOHANNA FARMS for institutional sale and by

77 On

BROOKS PRODUCTS SUN GLO POP COMPANY for retail sale.
the basis of this fact and the previous objectives, the BRIK

PAK AB—8 and AB-9 packaging systems are the logical choice.

The ACOJ BRIK PAK Line

The selected BRIK PAK system is now developed in detail
for ACOJ packaging. The models utilized are two AB-Bs and
one AB-9. Since the study's proposal is a new product in-
troduction, the product mix should be limited. 'The present-
1y available U.S. BRIK PAK sizes are 236.5ml., 250ml.,
940ml. and one liter. HOwever, by early 1984, the identical
6, 12, 16, and 32-ounce sizes seen in the FCOJ market will

78

be available from the Denton, Texas facility. Thus the

same portions and production size mix as those in FCOJ

 

76 Kanner et al., p. 429.

77 Personal conununication with Rita Simpson of BRIK PAK INC.
on March 15, 1983.

78 Personal communication with Mr. Ron Miller of BRIK PAK
INC.

103

processing and packaging are available for ACOJ packaging.
From Eboks and Kilmer, the COJ production size mix is 21.6%
for six ounce, 52.9% for 12 ounce and 25.5% for 16 ounce.79
As mentioned earlier, 32-ounce FCOJ production cost data was
not available, so it is not assessed in the study's model.
'Further product introductions are beyond the scope of this
thesis, so only portion variations are considered.
Production output is limited by. the BRIK PAK fillers
(6000 units per hour), so more than one aseptic filler is
required. Aseptic surge tanks provide a buffer, so that
some deviation in ACOJ processing and packaging is toler-
able. Previously the ACOJ sterilizer, the CHERRY BURRELL NO
BAC 600, was matched to the estimated TASTE concentration
output, 2,666 gallons per hour for ten hours per day. The
extra daily production time left is another buffer for this
highly seasonal industry. Utilizing the aforementioned

production. size :mix, Table 18' delineates the number' of

aseptic packaging units necessary. The four-hour excess

Table 18. Number of Erik Pak Packaging Systems

0 6000
Unit/ Adjusted
Produc- Required Required Hr Pro- Hours of
tion Output Output duction Production
Portion Size Mix (gal/day) (units/day) Hours [PKGG Unit

 

6 oz. 21.6% 5,753 122,731 20.45 21.0
12 oz. 52 9% - 14,090 150,293 25.0 21.0
16 oz. 25.5% 6,792 54,336 9.0 14.0
79

Dr. Kilmer and Dr. HOoks, pp. 4-6.

104

requirement on the 12-ounce AB-8 system is handled on the
remaining capacity on the 16-ounce AB-8 unit. Two AB-Bs and
one AB-9 are needed to package the NO BAC 600's daily out—
put. However, two 6,000 gallon aseptic surge tanks allow
this matching.

Secondary packaging systems employed are traywrapping,
shrinkwrapping, automatic palletizers and forklift_handling.
The traywrappingg and shrinkwrapping systems utilized are
produced by A-B-C Packaging Machine Cbrporationt Multipack
shrinkwrapping is not utilized, since many people will not
wish to purchase ACOJ in multiples of three. Each AB pack-
ager requires a traywrapper. . Their ten tray per minute
capacity is adequate. Since the 16-ounce AB-8 line is off-
line on third shift, the best operation is to have a separ-
ate line for it from this point on. The other two lines
converge through a single shrinkwrapper, a shrink tunnel, an
autopalletizer and a forklift takeaway. The single ACOJ
BRIK PAKs are checkweighed on RAYMOND AUTOMATION check-
weighers prior to tray and shrinkwrapping. Figure 25 illus-
trates the entire packaging line layout.

The trays are shrinkwrapped in one mil low density
polyethylene (LDPE) film. Two B-flute corrugated partitions
are inserted prior to tray shrinking to increase tray
strength. The B-flute trays are stacked ten layers high.
Six-ounce BRIK PAKs result in a pallet load of 150 trays.
Twelve and sixteen-ounce BRIK PAKs equal pallets of 120 and

80 trays, respectively. Warehoused 40 inch x 48 inch

105

needing
e noeeeoinm
odeeeoen<

.mOMfiHEHo&
e nooeeofiem
enumeoas<

 

 

 

 

 

 

emcee

 

Hoses 23 883.er 83 .mm 98mg
H233 seesaw s 883385. nonmeozsoono .83
8888252..“ II o- m..< zoEezoSe llllumumzl.
cum: nzozsé can. Ema
. .8an 93.88 . some
H manzhmH
7 o cum...“ oneezoesellllosne
8858 a: Ema
Hoodoo 882m at
Hommmnzxcaucmll
"I:
Hocmaozxoocu .uow
Hommmsths
l "Tm...” 833.23 .Illnmlai
920:»;

. can SEE

 

omnsm edpmom<
eoHHom ooooum

o8 35 oz
Seaman Exes

exams
mcfipflom a mcdpcoam
massacoocoo

 

was:
coapmuacoocoo

mBm<B

106

pallets are stored two high. Intransit pallets are not
stacked since load weigh out occurs before the floor area is
covered. Twenty six-ounce, 13 12-ounce and 14 l6-ounce
pallets can be shipped in a 40,000 pound tare weight common
carrier.

The corrugated trays support the BRIK PAK sidewalls
enchancing stacking heights and lowering overall brik fra-
gility. Plastic banding around traylayers of the pallets
increases load stability further. Shrink film and the
partitions prevent inter-BRIK PAK abrasion from vibration.
BRIK PAK's surprising shock strength arises from the zero
headspace created at sealing. Since package failure via
shock or vibration input requires an increase in package
volume, which is available only when a headspace exists, the
headspace-free BRIK PAK cannot be readily expanded by shock
or vibration inputs.

Further recommendations for retailing the ACOJ BRIK
PAKs are possible. The BRIK PAKs utilize rotogravure print-
ing and a special point-of-purchase display to stimulate
sales. The display is situated as near as possible to the
ready-to-serve SSOJ refrigerators with the actual ACOJ
placed next to the SSOJ in the refrigerators. The display,
television and womens' magazine advertising should educate
the consumer on the new product and package. HOw to Open
the package, mix the product and nutritional statements

should be stressed. The above system is partially adapted

107

from the present distribution environment of the HI-C BRIK
PAK.80 Appendices 4 and 5 demonstrates the quantification

Of pallet load and shipping weights for the ACOJ and FCOJ
Operations.

Having developed the current optimum aseptic process-
ing/packaging system for ACOJ and investigated current FCOJ
processing and packaging methods, ACOJ's economic advantages
are calculated versus the predominant FCOJ system in July

1983 dollar terms in Section 4.

 

80 Personal communication with Mr. BOb Halladay of ASSOCI-
ATED GROCERS in Holt, MI., on March 29, 1983.

Section 4:
Frozen and Aseptic
Concentrate Orange Juice

Total System Cost Comparison

Actual cost implications are now investigated over a

single year at July 1983 prices. These calculations are
based on the previously determined production parameters in
Section 1. Total system costs are the sum of investment and
operating expense throughout production and distribution
activities. Table 19 reviews the main production param-

eters.

Table 19. ACOJ and FCOJ Productions Parameters

 

 

ACOJ Parameter FCOJ
26,634 gal/day Output/Day 26,634 gal/day
Three Shifts/Day Two
7 of 8 hours Actual Output 7 of 8 hours
Time/Shift
170 days Production Year > 170 days
4,527,915 gal Output/Year 4,527,915 gal

Source Justification
Two key publications are utilized along with assorted

industry sources to produce meaningful cost figures. Wood's

108

109
study, a cost estimation for selected model fluid UHT milk
plants, contained many figures helpful to this research.81
NO BAC 600 operating, aseptic surge tank, corrugated tray,
shrink wrap and building costs are developed from Thomas
Wood. The validity of these values are sound, since identi-
cal output rates and balancing differences exist between the
two systems. A less severe processing temperature is re-
quired by the concentrate orange juice's pH (approximately
210°}? for 30 seconds) thereby ensuring a cost estimate on

the conservative side.82

These Wood study January 1981
costs are brought up to July 1983 values by appropriate
1981-1982 and 1982-1983 producer price index rates.

The second main expense source dealt with FCOJ proces-
sing, selling and warehousing (inbound only) costs. Kilmer
and Hooks published the 1979-1980 season costs which are
acceptable, since it was the last undisturbed orange crop
from freezes. This weather votality is dissipating with the
importation of Brazilian FCOJ. 1983 costs are reached by
applying a trend analysis on 48 Geounce cases of FCOJ over

83

the 1978-1979 and 1979-1980 seasons. Each cost area

variation is summed and divided by two producing an average

 

81 Thomas Michael Wood, "Estimated Costs for Selected Model
Ultra-High-Temperature Fluid Milk Processing Plants," M.Sc.
thesis, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, 1981.

82 Robert Ellis, "Ocean Spray Pioneers in Aseptic Packing of
Juices," Food Processing, 43 (January 1982): 104.

83 Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, p. 16.

110
cost area increase per year. Each 3 year inflation adjust-
ment value is multiplied by its corresponding 1979-1980
value resulting in a July 1983 figure (Appendices 5 and 6).

FCOJ costs were reported in Kilmer and Hooks in dollar
per case expense area figures. Fortunately the production
volumes indicated the production size mix among portions to
be: 980,906 gallons for 6 ounces, 2,393,734 gallons for 12
ounces, and 1,153,275 gallons for 16 ounces annually of
450 Brix retail packs. Assuming this mix is relatively un-
changed, the portional breakdown provided a method to cal-
culate a total dollar cost for every functional area.
Appendix 10 analyzes both FCOJ and ACOJ production lines
verifying each daily production time requirement.

The study makes the assumption that an immediate 100
percent conversion to aseptic production is under consid-
eration. Ini this manner, the entire effect of its intro-
duction is quantified. As developed in Section 1, the
actual shelf life of the FCOJ and ACOJ is likely to be
identical on a yearly average during introduction. Consumer
buyer behavior is never altered easily, and so retail cus-
tomers would probably purchase only enough ACOJ to last
until the next shopping trip. Since this final consumption
point drives the distribution channel, no increased savings
accrue from an available extended shelf life. raving ad-
dressed these factors, the thesis turns to the bottom line

or actual cost elements under consideration.

111
Capital Investment

Land and building

 

Capital investment subsists of acquiring and installing
new land, building and equipment. For this analysis, the.
acquisition and development of new land is deemed unneces-
sary because of the little extra space needed. Aseptic

84 Wood

85

building space modifications are calculated in Wood.

also reported these construction costs as $38/square foot.
By adjusting for inflation, 1983 costs are estimated at

 

 

$44.3/square foot.86 Table 20 enumerates the construction
outlays.
Table 20. Building Modification Costs

Functional Area Space Modified or New (ftz)

Processing 1129.

Filling 2010.

Clean-In-Place Room 288. 2 2

Total 3427. ft x $44.3/ft = $151,800.
Equipment

 

The majority of investment and installation arises from
new equipment expenditures. A summary of equipment costs

appears in Table 21 along with their various sources. Used

 

84 Thomas WOod, p. 69.

85 Ibido I p. 68.

86 Econom.c Report of the President to Con ress, by Martin
Feldstei-n, Chairman of the President's Council of Economic
Advisors, Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office,
February 1983, p. 232.

112

Table 21. Total Aseptic Equipment Cost

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aseptic Equipment Needs Dollar Value
NO Bac GOO-UHTST Spiratherm87 $ 250,000

2-6,000 gal Aseptic Surge Tanks88 330,000

Filling and Tray Line89 1,069,000

Aseptic Total less installation 1,649,000

Installation at 25 percent 412,200

Aseptic Total with installation 2,061,200

Less Excess FCOJ Equipment

2-Used 61-H Seamers90 (47,700)

l-Used Composite Can Unscrambler/

Cleaner91 (20,000)
2-Used CA9109 Case Packers92 (22,500)
l-Used FCOJ Piston Filler93 (15,000)
Total Aseptic Equipment Cost 1,956,000

 

87 Private industry sources.

88 Thomas Wood, p. 71.

89 Private industry sources.

90 Personal communication with Mr. Harry Nelson of ANGELUS
SANITARY SEAMER in Los Angeles, CA.

1 Personal communication with Mr. Joe Miller of NEW ENGLAND
MACHINERY, INCORPORATED.

92 Personal communication with Sue Neets of INTERNATIONAL
PAPER COMPANY of Miami, FL.

93 Personal communication with Mr. Bill Ellison of PACKWEST
MACHINERY COMPANY.

113
FCOJ seamers and case packers are shown because they are
subtracted from the new aseptic machinery cost to arrive at

total equipment cost. Twenty-five percent of 1983 prices

are utilized for the good condition used machinery.94

Installation costs are assumed to be 25 percent of entire

new equipment cost.95 Aseptic surge tank cost is inflation

adjusted by values from the president's economic report.96

Capital investment costs must be transformed into
equivalent uniform annual costs to allow inclusion in yearly

operating expenditures. A capital recovery formula utilized

97

by Wood accomplishes this. The study's interest rate is

_ (in +1“)

- P((l + i)" -1)

Equivalent Uniform Annual Cost (EUAC)
Total Investment Cost

Interest Rate

Economic Life of the Asset

 

Where:

:nmnav 3!
II II II II

estimated as 13 percent, which is a few points above the

current rate. Building and equipment generally have a

98

useful economic life of 20 years. To best determine

profitability, the 20-year period is utilized.99 Table 22

 

94'Private industry sources.

95 Thomas Wood, p. 71.

96 Council of Economic Advisors, p. 232.

97 Ibid., p. 33.

93 Ibid., p. 33.

99 Ibido I p. 340

114
outlines the total aseptic investment cost and reports the
equivalent uniform annual cost (EUAC) of the aseptic

conversion.

Table 22. Total Aseptic Capital Investment and EUAC

Land . ---

Building 5 151,800
Equipment 1,956,000
Total Capital Outlay 2,107,800
EUAC $ 300,100

Operating Costs

Operating costs include all costs (excluding investment)
incurred in getting a finished good out of raw material and
to the point of sale. These values tend to vary with out-
put, but our sample compares on an equivalent yearly output
rate. This allows valid yearly cost comparisons. All costs
are collected for comparison on a dollar per gallon and a
dollar basis. Orange costs are not included in the analysis
because of wide price fluctuations and commonality to both

compared systems.

Labor

100 The FCOJ

FCOJ labor figures are readily available.
16 packaging line operators are freed to be applied to the
aseptic processing and packaging line. The FCOJ operation
only operates two shifts per day, eight hours per shift on a

yearly average. ACOJ labor requirements are 17 workers for

two shifts and eight on a third shift. Both lines are

 

100 Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, pp. 4-6.

115
assumed to operate six days per week on the average. Table
23 shows direct labor hour (DLH) per week estimates for the

101

NO BAC 600. Table 24 describes the ACOJ labor cost

addition to existing FCOJ labor developed in Table 25. An

Table 23. NO BAC 600 Labor Requirements

 

Functional Area DLH/Week

Clean up 20

Sterilizing 252

Relief 40

Overtime (5%) 15

Total 307 at 6 days/week at 16

hours/day = approxi-
mately 3 persons/
hour.

Table 24. Aseptic Labor Cost Addition

 

Number of Extra Workers DLH/Year
l for 2 shifts = 1 * 16 * 6 * 170 = 16,320
8 for 1 shift = 8 * 8 * 6 * 170 = 65,280
Aseptic Addition Total DLH 81,600
Wage and Benefit Rate ($12/Hour) 979,200
Cost per COJ gallon $ 0.2162

hourly wage rate of $12/hour (including benefits) is utili-
zed for estimating ACOJ sterilizer and packaging operator
wage rates.102 Table 25 compares ACOJ and FCOJ labor needs
across operational layouts. Each system utilizes two roving

quality control inspectors. No difference exists in the

amount of labor required for all COJ processing activity up

 

101 Thomas Wood, p. 73.

102 Private industry estimates.

116

 

adv nodasuoa
e 83233
oaeeeoen<

Aav «unannoe

. a HONHOOHHOTIHOmmgzxcfiHcmL,

oaooeoena

Adv amasseoa
e nooeeoaaed
oeeeeoenei

Adv emanaeoe
a eoneeoaaod
"swung-0954

 

a; 3 3 .

 

 

 

 

 

Hogans aeannm a Adv nonmaozsoono .noofi
noooeunseennmlunu.noooonzsone oneazoe=<.|nnuamae>v mumenul
oumwa onnw< ozozsam sad eHmm
E E
C v nonmaOszOcU . NON“
.:.nooann=sene onsezoe=<.|||:Amas>v mum<.|. Adv oases
. o-mm< ozozw<m was same omenm oaoooo<
Am.v eoflaom oooonm
Hoodoo sedenm a _
ANV coo can oz
« Ho: Oxxooc .uow
elunooennxsene oneazoeseqllunAmea>v o-m<.|.i neememmmwmwmm
oumwe ozozsae med xHem oenneeooeoo

 

Adv nonmaozxoono amaze .omn no m a needed N not maueoo<

202.559: getwg
.OHoaOOmOe—d Homecoo TEASE MOTOR N +

 

a
Hoamom\noxos Hopoonm OOOO HOEOOMNW—nuw ANV as
do? as mem<m aaone<zmmezH smasnzam magmuz< uoaaaa noneoao a someone
sown—am Heaps—daemon «Ho:
3V In:
l8OHOO.M\.HOO_OO. Hoaomfifl Ommb ANV Mag—0.3.. NEHZHESE a wcdpcOHm

uoaeom muse Ema: moan oz<3uze 3m: oennenooooo
ooT an maeam:aaonsazmaean—uwmaeezam msaauza

Adv weaknessoono
oneezoe=< ozozsam

 

see new outage m not Hence o~-eooe

noooz gonna one: cosponooum aoo< a woos .mm oases

117
to steps following the concentrate blending and holding
tanks, so these laborers are ignored. Table 26 indicates
FCOJ labor costs as reported by Kilmer and Hooks.103 No
additional indirect or payroll taxes and insurance is

assessed. The weighted average cost is determined via the

1979-1980 production mix mentioned earlier.

Table 26. FCOJ Labor Costs
Portion S/gallon Gallons/Year Yearly $

A. Direct Labor

6 oz. 0.1278 980,906 125,360
12 oz. 0.1279 2,393,734 306,158
16 oz. 0.1281 1,153,275 147,734
Direct Labor Total 579,300
B. Indirect Labor
6 oz. 0.0615 980,906 60,326
12 oz. 0.0617 2,393,734 147,693
16 oz. 0.0629 1,153,275 . 72,541
Indirect Labor Total 280,600
C. Payroll Taxes
and Insurance
6 oz. 0.0324 980,906 31,781
12 oz. 0.0326 2,393,734 78,036
16 oz. 0.0329 1,153,275 37,943
Payroll Taxes and -
Insurance Total 147,800

D. Total FCOJ Labor Cost = $1,007,700/year

Total FCOJ Labor $/gal = 0.2226/year
.Material

Materials mainly consist of packaging material and other
miscellaneous items. FCOJ pa‘kaging requires premade com-
posite cans, corrugated cases, pallets, strapping material

and glue. ACOJ packaging necessitates roll-fed BRIK PAK

 

103 Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, pp. 4-6.

118
material, tape, H202, and corrugated trays with partitions,

low density polyethylene (LDPE) shrink wrap, pallets and

glue. Table 27 estimates ACOJ material costs.104’ 105

Appendix 7 itemizes ACOJ packaging material costs on a daily

 

basis.
Table 27. ACOJ Material Costs
Material Yearly Cost ($)
BRIK PAKs (4t/Brik) $ 2,227,400
Corrugated Trays (24.4t/tray) 479,500
Shrinkwrap (l.6¢/tray) 31,200
Wasted BRIK PAKs 5,100
Other Waste and H 0 7,600

2,750,800
0.6075/ year

Total ACOJ Materi§12Cost
Total ACOJ Material Cost $/gal

106 Each

Table 28 describes current FCOJ material costs.
unit cost is multiplied by its portion's yearly volume to

develop a total yearly FCOJ material cost.

Table 28. FCOJ Material Costs

 

Composite Cans Shipping Cartons Other
Portion §/gal szyear S/gal S/year S/gal S/Xear
6 oz. 0.7943 779,100 0.0632 62,000 0.0044 4,300
12 oz. 0.5431 1,300,000 0.0605 144,800 0.0035 8,400
16 oz. 0.5201 599,800 0.0529 72,500 0.0039 4,500
Subtotals 2,678,900 279,300 17,200

Total FCOJ Material Cost
Total FCOJ Material Cost S/gal

s 2 [975 '400/Year
0.657l/year

 

104 Thomas Wood, p. 76.

105 Private industry estimates.

106 Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, pp. 4-6

119

Other Processing Costs

In addition to labor and material, other processing
inputs consist of the following items: utilities, mainten-
ance and repairs, depreciation and rent, machine royalties,
taxes and insurance, and miscellaneous costs. In order to
ascertain actual ACOJ other processing costs, overlapping
outlays between the ACOJ and FCOJ systems must be subtracted
out of each effected FCOJ other processing value. Then
total additional ACOJ expenses can be added to the uncommon
FCOJ category cost (which is the ACOJ cost base) producing

total ACOJ costs.

Utilities
Utilities include electricity, water compressed air, and

natural gas produced steam. Cost values are $.O6/KWH and

107

$.02/m3 of compressed air. Water expense is set at $1.00

per 1000 gallons and natural gas (for steam production and
plant heating) at $2.7464 per million cubic feet (MCF).108
Eliminated cooling costs arise from the NO BAC 600 accepting
70°F. COJ versus the previous -5°F. FCOJ filling tempera-
ture. Aseptic production still requires cooling from 70°F.
to 40°F. after packaging. Mr. Carlson provides the cooling
costs in Table 29.109 From Appendices 2 and 3, 450 Brix COJ

is known to weigh 0.0752 1b/fluid ounce.

 

107 Private industry estimates.

108 Thomas WoOd, p. 78.

109 V.R. Carlson, "Aseptic Processing and Packaging, a Short
Course," p.2. ‘

120
Table 29. Production Cooling Costs

A. Cooling Cost from 70°F. to 40°F.

Ounces COJ wt Cost Yearly_
Portion COJ/yr (lbs)/xr Factor Cost (5)
6 oz. 1.2556 x 108 9.442 x 106 $0.0056/1b 52,876

.7

12 oz. 3.0640 x 108 2.3041 x 107

8 0.0056/1b 129,031
16 oz. 1.4762 x 10 1.1101 x 10

0.0056/lb 62,166
ACOJ Cooling Cost Total = 244,000

B. Cooling Cost from 70°F. to -5°§.

6 oz. 1.2556 x 10: 9.442 x 103 50.0112/15 105,752
12 oz. 3.0640 x 108 2.3041 x 107 0.0112/1b 258,080
16 oz. 1.4762 x 10 1.1101 x 10 0.0112/1b 124,331
FCOJ Cooling Cost Total = 488,200

Final ACOJ Cooling Savings 244,200

Table 30 illustrates ACOJ and eliminated FCOJ utility expen-

888.

Table 30. Additional ACOJ and Eliminated FCOJ Utility Costs

 

 

 

ACOJ Utilities Yearly Cost (5) S/Qal/yr
Electricity 65,100 0.144
Water 13,800 0.0030
Compressed Air 7,500 0.0016
Steam (natural gas) 91,800 0.0203
Nitrogen Gas 91,800 0.0203
Subtotal Additional ACOJ

Utilities 211,200 0.0466
Overlapping FCOJ Utilities
Electricity 8,800 0.0019
Compressed Air 14,800 . 0.0033
FCOJ Cooling Elimin1ted 244,200 0.0539
Common FCOJ Utiliti 3 267,800 0.0591
Total Additional ACOJ Utilites <56,600> <0.0125>

121
FCOJ utilities published by Kilmer and Hooks and adjust-

ed to 1983 values appear in Table 31.110

FCOJ utility costs
uncommon to the aseptic production line are also shown,
which are added to total additional ACOJ utilities in Table
30 to collect total ACOJ utility expenses. Appendix 4
itemizes the additional ACOJ utility requirements on a daily

basis. FCOJ utilities are on for 13 hours per day.

Table 31. FCOJ & ACOJ Total Utility Costs

 

Portion Yearly Cost (3) S/Qal/yr
6 oz. 83,400 0.0850
12 oz. 207,100 0.0865
16 oz. 101,400 0.0879
Total FCOJ Utilities 391,900 0.0866
Plus Total Additional
ACOJ Utilities < 56,600> <0.0125>
Total ACOJ Utilities 335,300 0.0731

Maintenance and repairs

Maintenance and repairs consist of supplies, mechanics,
service contracts, emergencies, and parts for production
machinery. These estimates arose from Kilmer and Hooks,
A-B-C PACKAGING MACHINERY, INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY,
ANGELUS SANITARY SEAMER, PACKWEST MACHINERY, NEW ENGLAND

MACHINERY, RAYMOND AUTOMATION , and private industry

 

110 Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, pp. 4-6.

122

-111-117
sources.

Table 32 describes additional ACOJ main-
tenance and repair costs. Appendix 8 itemizes additional
ACOJ maintenance and repair costs on a daily basis.

Table 32. Additional ACOJ and Eliminated FCOJ Maintenance
and Repair Costs

 

 

 

 

 

ACOJ Maintenance and Repair Yearly Cost (S) S/Qal/year
Supplies 36,900 0.0081
Mechanics 12,200 0.0027
Service Contracts 6,300 0.0014
Emergencies 3,000 0.0007
Parts 13,500 0.0030
Subtotal Additional ACOJ

Maintenance and Repair 71,900 0.0159
Eliminated FCOJ Maintenance

an Repair
61-H Parts 16,000 0.0035
CA-109 Parts 8,000 0.0018
Eliminated FCOJ Maintenance and

Repair 24,000 0.0053
Total Additional ACOJ

Maintenance and Repair 47,900 0.106

 

111

Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, pp. 4-6.

112
PACKAGING MACHINERY, INC.
113

PAPER COMPANY, INC.

114

SANITARY SEAMER, INC.

115 Private industry estimates.

Personal communication with Sue Neets of INTERNATIONAL

Personal communication with Mr.

116
MACHINERY, INC.

117

ENGLAND MACHINERY, INC.

Personal communication with Mr.

Personal communication with Mr.

Personal communication with Mr.

Michael McKee of A-B-C

Harry Nelson of ANGELUS

Bill Ellison of PACKWEST

Joe Miller of NEW

123
FCOJ maintenance and repair costs along with uncommon
maintenance and repair are listed in Table 33. Again, the
total additional ACOJ maintenance and repair costs from
Table 32 are added to the total FCOJ maintenance and repair

costs developed in Table 33.

Table 33. FCOJ and ACOJ Total Maintenance and Repair Costs

 

Portion Yearly Cost (S) $/gal/yr
6 02. 75,000 0.0765
12 02. 179,300 0.0749
16 oz. 83,000 0.0720
Total FCOJ Maintenance

and Repair 337,300 0.0745
Plus Total Additional ACOJ

Maintenance and Repair 47,900 0.0106
Total ACOJ Maintenance and

Repair 385,200 0.0851

Remaining processing costs

Remaining processing costs are a summation of deprecia-
tion and rent, machinery or production royalties, taxes and
insurance, and miscellaneous items. BRIK PAK U.S.A., INC.
charges a variable production rental of two percent upon the
material cost of every BRIK PAK filled creating a $44,600.
increase in machine and product royalties. No other appre-
ciable differences were identified in these areas. Thus
other processing costs, less utilities and maintenance and
repairs and the BRIK PAK royalty are depicted in Table

34.118

 

118 Dr. Kilmer and Dr. Hooks, pp. 4-6.

124

Table 34. ACOJ and FCOJ Remaining Processing Costs

 

Depreciation Machine Taxes and

and Rent Royalties Insurance Miscellaneous
$/ga1 $/ga1 S/gal $/9a1
/yr $/yr /yr S/yr lyr S/xr /yr S/yr

 

6 oz. Portion
0.0507 49,700 0.0345 33,800 0.0146 14,300 0.0514 50,400
12 oz. Portion
0.0511 122,300 0.0347 83,100 0.0136 32,600 0.0526 125,900
16 oz. Portion
0.0506 58,400 0.0348 40,100 0.0144 16,600 0.0504 58,100

Sub

Totals 230,400 157,000 63,500 234,400
Yearly Total Cost = $685,300

Yearly Total Cost $/ga1 = 0.1514

Transportation costs

Transportation costs seen here are outbound freight
charges on finished goods. Inbound charges are contained in
on-site warehousing expense. A geographic breakdown of the

national FCOJ market published in Simmons 1979 Consumer

 

Market Surveys is utilized to direct the processor's ship-

 

ments to consumer markets. The market mix shown in Table 35

is assumed to have not changed significantly since 1979.119

Table 35. Transport Parameters

 

 

 

Distance
Centrally From Intraregional

USA Sales Located Tampa, FL Travel
Region Distribution City (miles) (miles)
Northeast 23.8% Albany, NY 1242 200
East Central 15.2% Chicago, IL 1118 300
West Central 18.8% Omaha, NE 1411 400
South 23.6% Jackson, MS 968 300
Pacific 18.6% Reno, NV 2717 300

 

119 Simmons Consumer Market Surveys, Simmons Market Research

Bureau, Inc., 1979, FCOJ Section, p. 390.

 

125
The representative city areas are picked to allow mileage
estimation. Intraregional transport distances provide for
deviations in destinations within a single region and vary
according to regional size. Our product requires refrigera-
tion in the ACOJ case, and frozen conditions under the
present system. Thus, only refrigerated and frozen trans-
port costs are collected. Data from the truck weight
analysis (Appendices 2 and 3) provides the estimated number
of shipments per year based on the .quantity of units per
40,000 pound truckload. Transportation truckload rates are
supplied by RYDER RANGER TRUCKS for July 1, 1983. Yearly
cost variance is assumed to vary equally for frozen and
refrigerated shipments. RYDER RANGER TRUCKS is a major
hauler of FCOJ and refrigerated products making them a fine
cost source. Tables 36 and 37 display FCOJ and refrigerated

ACOJ transportation figures respectively.120

Table 36. FCOJ Transporation Costs

 

 

 

Total # Shipments 5 Rate/ Yearly

Tampa to Distance pgr Year TLL mile Cost (S)
Albany, NY 1442 miles 301 . 1.15 499,148
Chicago, IL 1418 miles 192 1.15 313,094
Omaha, NE 1811 miles 238 1.20 517,222
Jackson, MS 968 miles 298 1.15 331,734
Reno, NV 3017 miles 235 1.20 850,794

Total FCOJ Transportation Cost = $2,512,000
Total FCOJ Transportation Cost $/ga1 = 0.5548/yr

 

120 Personal communication with RYDER RANGER TRUCKS in
Jacksonville, FL.

126

Table 37. ACOJ Transportation Costs

 

 

 

Total # Shipments $ Rate/ Yearly

Tampa to Distance per Year TLL mile Cost (S)
Albany, NY 1442 miles 274 1.00 395,108
Chicago, IL 1418 miles 175 1.00 248,150
Omaha, NE 1811 miles - 216 1.05 410,735
Jackson, MS 968 miles 272 1.00 263,296
Reno, NV 3017 miles 214 1.05 677,920

6 1,995,200
0.4406/yr

Total ACOJ Transportation Cost
Total ACOJ Transportation Cost $/ga1

Warehouse expense

 

Warehouse expense includes raw material transport-in,
storage, handling, labor, taxes and material handling equip-
ment. These values are reported by Kilmer and Hooks.
Warehouse expense must also address finished goods storage
and handling throughout distribution channels. CHERRY
CENTRAL COOPERATIVE in Traverse City, Michigan supplied
refrigerated and frozen storage and handling estimates that
they see in public warehouses on a yearly average nation-
wide. Storage costs at wholesalers and retailers is assumed
to be relatively the same.

To quantify outgoing warehouse costs, FCOJ and ACOJ
shelf life data from Section 1 is applied. These figures
provide each truckload's duration at each storage stage. To
simplify cost estimation, truckload's are assumed intact to
the retai‘er. Since this is done for both systems, accept-
able error is introduced by the method. Storage and
handling cost estimates are attained in dollars per hundred
weight for the first month. A fractional rate is applied

for additional duration over a month's time at a channel

127
level. Data from the truckload analysis is also utilized.
Tables 38 and 39 report the storage parameters for FCOJ and

ACOJ respectively.121

Table 38. FCOJ Warehouse Parameters

Pallets Shipments Pallet $/100 wt $/100 wt
Portion Truckload /Year Wt (lbs) lst Month 2nd Month

6 oz. 29 278 1366 1.38 0.70
12 oz. 22 670 1763 1.14 0.56
16 oz. 17 314 2319 0.84 0.40

Table 39. ACOJ Warehouse Parameters

Pallets Shipments Pallet $/100 wt $/100 wt
Portion Truckload /Year Wt (lbs) 1st Month 2nd Month

6 oz. 20 254 1964 . 0.75 0.32
12 oz. 13 604 3076' 0.51 0.26
16 oz. 14 291 2746 0.51 0.26

30.4167 days per month is employed (365/12). The fraction
of this month in a storage stage sets the cost. Plant shelf
life originates from the yearly average developed in Appen-
dix 14 ‘Wholesaler and retail fractions arise from current

FCOJ inventory turnover data from ASSOCIATED GROCERS.122

 

121 Personal communication with Mr. Steve Eisler of CHERRY
CENTRAL COOPERATIVE, INC. in Traverse City, MI.

122 Personal communication with Mr. Bob Halladay of ASSOCI-
ATED GROCERS of Holt, MI.

128
Tables 40 and 41 depict the estimated warehouse costs for

FCOJ and ACOJ respectively.

Table 40. FCOJ Finished Goods Warehouse Costs

Plant Wholesaler Retail
35 Days 14 Days 7 Days

Portion $(gal/yr Syr S/gal/yr Syr S/gal/yr Syr
6 oz. 0.1668 163,591 0.0713 69,950 0.0356 34,975

12 oz. 0.1329 318,176 0.0570 136,355 0.0285 68,178
16 oz. 0.0099 111,443 0.0415 47,860 0.0208 23,930
FCOJ Total Finished Goods Warehousing Costs = $ 974,500

Table 41. ACOJ Finished Goods Warehouse Costs

Plant Wholesaler Retail

35 Days 14 Days 7 Days
Portion Szgalzyr $yr $/gal(yr Syr $(ga1lyr Syr
6 oz. 0.0812 79,639 0.0351 34,441 .0.0176 17,221

12 oz. 0.0554 132,642 0.0237 59,696 0.0118 28,348
16 oz. 0.0533 61,438 0.0228 26,261 0.0114 13,130

ACOJ Total Finished Goods Warehousing Costs = $ 449,800

The addition of each frozen and refrigerated finished,
goods warehousing cost to incoming and processing warehouse
expense seen in Table 42 describes total warehouse out-

lays.123

 

123 Dr. Hooks and Dr. Kilmer, pp. 4-6.

129
Table 42. Additional and Total Warehouse Expenses

A. Raw Material and Work-In Process Warehousing

 

Warehousing, Shipping,

Labor and Taxes Other Warehousing
Portion S/gal/yr S/yr $/ga1/yr S/yr
6 oz. 0.0372 36,500 0.0691 67,800
12 oz. 0.0349 83,500 0.0669 160,100
16 oz. 0.0331 38,200 0.0627 72,300
Subtotal
Warehousing 158,200 300,200

Total Section A = $ 458,400/yr
B. FCOJ Total Warehousing Cost
Finished Goods Total

Base Warehouse Total
Total Warehousing

974,500
458,400
$ 1,432,900 /yr or $0.3165/ga1/yr

C. ACOJ Total Warehousing Cost

449,800
458,400
5 908,200 /yr or $0.2006/gal/yr

Finished goods Total
Base Warehouse Total
Total Warehousing

Remaining operating expense

Remaining operating expense consists of administrative,
selling and miscellaneous costs. These values are assumed
the same for the two systems under comparison. Kilmer and
Books report the unit costs which have been adjusted for
inflation to mid-1983 figures.124 As before, the unit costs
are multiplied by each portion's yearly gallon output pro-
ducing dollar per year figures. Table 43 outlines the final

operating expenses.

 

124 Ibid., pp. 4-6.

130
Table 43. Remaining Operating Expenses

A.Administrative

 

6 ounce 12 ounce 16 ounce
$/ga1/yr $/x£, S/gal/yr S/yr S/gal/yr S/yr

Administrative 0.0747 13,300 0.0747 178,800 0.0708 81,700
Subtotal = $ 333,800/yr or $ 0.0737/gal/yr

B.Se11ing

Brokerage Fees 0.0600 58,900 0.0584 139,800 0.0554 63,900
Other Selling

Expense 0.0405 39,700 0.0430 102,900 0.0422 48,700
Subtotal = $ 453,900/yr or S 0.1002/ga1/yr

C.Other Expense

 

Advertising, Tax
and Quality

Control 0.1003 98,400 0.1001 239,600 0.1001 115,400
Miscellaneous

Deductions 0.0721 70,700 0.0677 162,100 0.0705 81,300
Subtotal = $ 767,500/yr or $ 0.1695/ga1/yr

D.Tota1 Remaining Operating Expenses

 

A + B + C = $ 1,555,200/yr or $ 0.3435/gal/yr

Total System Costs Compared
Having estimated all relative operating costs for each
alternative, the overall cost effects of switching to ACOJ
from FCOJ is addressed in Table 44. Table 44 sums all the
previous cost elements and determines the less expensive

choice.

131
Table 44. ACOJ and FCOJ Total System Costs

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cost % of’Total % of Total
Center ACOJ ($/yr.) ACOJ Dollars FCOJ (s/yr.) ECOJ Dollars
Capital ,

Investment 300,100 2.7 --— 0.0
Labor 1,986,900 18.2 1,007,700 9.2
Material 2,750,800 25.1 2,975,400 27.3
Other ‘3,“lr,

Processing

- Utilities 335,300 3.1 391,900 3.6

- Maintenance &

Repairs 385,200 3.5 337,300 3.1

- Depreciation &

Rent 230,400 2.1 230,400 2.1

- Machine

Royalties 201,600 1.9 157,000 1.5

- Taxes &

Insurance '63,500 0.6 63,500 0.6

- Miscel-

laneous 234,400 2.2 234,400 2.2
Transporta-

tion 1,995,200 18.2 2,512,000 23.0
Warehouse 908,200 8.3 1,432,900 13.1
Remaining

Operating

- Administra-

tive 333,800 3.0 ' 333,800 3.1

- Selling 453,900 4.1 453,900 4.2

- Miscel-

laneous 767,500 2.0 767,500 2.0
Total System

Costs = $10,946,800 100.0 . $10,897,700 100.0

Aseptic

Expense = $49,100/yr. or a 0.04% increase in Total System Costs

The aseptic conversion produces a 0.04 percent total system cost
increase equivalent to a 1.1 cent rise in cost per gallon of concentrated
orange juice (COJ). The ACOJ operation has substantial increases in
labor, capital investment and machine/production royalties, while de-
creasing‘material, transportation and warehouse expenses. Cost portion
shifts of 1.0 percent or greater are deemed significant in this study.
Although not considered as significant, a $47,900 rise in maintenance

and repairs and a $56,600 decrease in

132

utilities occur. .A $44,600 increase in machine/production
royalties is created by the BRIK PAK variable production
rental charges. Thus, a $49,100 increase in yearly total
system costs is estimated for the conversion to aseptic
processing and packaging of concentrated orange juice (COJ).

The effect of the aseptic COJ production conversion upon
the per gallon and per unit costs by portional volume
appears in Table 45. The production size mix of 21.6%
6-ounce, 52.9% 12-ounce, and 25.5% 16-ounce is again util-
ized to assign the total system costs by portion. Table 45
illustrates the 1.16t per 6-ounce portion total system cost
increase upon conversion to aseptic COJ production. A 0.18¢
per gallon 12-ounce portion decrease is estimated for ACOJ
production. A 1.64t per 16-ounce portion total system cost
decrease occurs in aseptically packaged COJ. Thus, the
estimated costs for the two compared systems have been

calculated for analysis and recommendation in Section 5.

133

 

 

mamm.o oH-.o mums.o
.oom.om~.m .moa.mmm.n~ .nmm.mmm.om
somm.m ssmm.m mmoo.m
.ms~.nmfi.a .sms.mom.m .moa.omm
.mmm.moo.m .Hrs.nsw.n .wms.mmm.~
.NEAE .moooos ; 6389
.mss.nsa .maa.osm .mso.rm
.msa.mm .omm.oss .aoa.~s
.omm.mom .soo.mms .oon.mom
.8038 .rsrdmm; .NRJsm
.omo.om .mmm.mma .omo.om
.Noa.os .Non.mm ..was.ma
.mmo.os .mmo.mr .Nfia.mm
.an.rm .Nrm.sms .mos.as
.Huo.om .Nms.mss .smr.~s
.firs.am .rmm.wom .smn.mr
68.8% 63.32; 63.9%
.som.mnm .mso.mnm .mow.s-

ummflfl .uomu .noc

sous
9552/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mnsm.o maa~.o mnma.o .aa\.Hnm\s anon Hosoaeaom
.oo~.o~m.m .mo«.mmm.m~ .mmm.mmm.om aaos.aom noes: Hesodeaoa
ssom.~ firmm.~ wmmm.~ .aa\.Hoa\s anon Hasoaoaoa
.msm.nms.a .sms.mam.~ .mom.orm snow aoa [soHHou Hosoaeaom
.Nms.msm.~ .Nmm.omn.m .smo.som.~ aaoeoe Hosoaeaom
.mas.nms .roo.mos .om~.wmfi noseo
.mss.nss .mss.osm .mso.mo asaflaom
.msa.mr .orn.wsa .«oa.ms o o>aeoaeosaso<
.som.am~ .mms.ors .Hss.oafi meanaosoaos
.mss.rom .aos.mno.H .mom.oms soaeoeaoansoas
.Nss.am .mom.mms .omm.om asannoooaa nsoosaHHoona:
.Nma.oa .Nmm.mm .cfis.ma oosoasnsa a noses
.mos.am .wsm.on .wsm.ns aoaaansom osaeooz
.Nms.rm .mwm.am« .mms.ms asom a soaeoaooaaon
.omm.mm .«ss.mom .mo~.mm naaoaom a oossaoesfisz
.aom.mm .ssm.ssa .mms.ms noaeaaaea
.Nss.mms .oom.aom.a .oms.mmo.« assumes:
.ooo.oom .oso.smo.a .os«.mms noses
.smm.ms .mns.rms .aNr.so esoseno>sH Hosanna

. now“ . now.“ “Malone. 99280 $00

Hoo< Hmoh\9

omnxomm hm coagaom comrades—co anon 332nm H309

.ms oases

Section 5:

 

Discussion of Results,

Recommendations and Conclusions

The study's estimated slight 0.04% total system cost
increase for an aseptic concentrated orange juice. (ACOJ)
changeover form the model Florida frozen concentrated orange
juice (FCOJ) processor indicates the importance of aseptic
processing and packaging developments to FCOJ processors.
An explanation of the estimated cost shifts for ACOJ pro-
duction, of this study's shortcomings, and of further recom-
mended areas of research can best exemplify aseptic technol-

ogy's cruciality to FCOJ processors.

Cost Shift Explanation

The cost element increases and decreases arise from
specific factors. The capital investment increase emanates
from aseptic building and equipment acquisition. The rise
in labor expenditures occurs because the aseptic packaging
units cannot keep pace with the higher output composite can
fillers and seamers. Thus, more aseptic packaging systems
are necess-tated each with its corresponding auxiliary
equipment requiring more operators. The reduced-material
outlays arise from the basic BRIK PAK's 4t/unit cost versus

the composite cans 3.7é, 5.1é and 6.5t unit cost for the 6,

134

135

12 and 16-ounce composite cans, respectively. These primary
package cost differences between the BRIK PAKs and composite
cans are the major determinant creating ACOJ's portionally
allocated cost reductions in the 12 and 16-ounce portions,
while causing ACOJ's portionally' allocated cost increase
versus the FCOJ six-ounce package. Increased machine royal-
ties are the result of BRIK PAK's terms equipment use. The
decreased transportation and warehousing charges 'occur
because of the refrigerated storage temperature and the BRIK
PAK's lighter weight.

Probable future developments could very' well negate
this study's current slight increase in total system costs
upon conversion to ACOJ production. Since a need for higher
output aseptic packaging systems which can effectively
control headspace oxygen content to a minimal concentration
exists, such a system will be developed to fill the market
demand for it. This type of aseptic packager able to equal
or even surpass present FCOJ filling lines could greatly
reduce aseptic labor requirements. Secondly, the current
process differential between aseptic packages and composite
cans could expand further. Thirdly, the newly developed
aseptic packaging systems mentioned above may have reduced
or no production royalties, since many currently do not
require royalty payments. Increased ACOJ savings could
occur from the frozen versus refrigerated temperature dis-
tribution cost difference increasing. This is likely to

happen via rising energy costs.

136
Model Limitations

Further cost reducing factors could arise which were
not accounted for by this research. The study assumed a one
step entire conversion into ACOJ production. Even though
this is extremely unlikely, it provided an immediate indica-
tion .of the maximum savings condition versus the current
FCOJ production methods once the total conversion was com-
pleted. .A more gradual conversion might identify unknown
cost. saving «opportunities (available from fine tuning the
aseptic changeover to better fulfill market needs. Another
factor that could not readily be addressed by this study is
that aseptically packaged COJ will likely have a reduced
spoilage and damage rate versus the current FCOJ system.
Less spoilage arises, because the ACOJ is sterilized and
refrigerated. Therefore, the concentrate will not fail as
often via microbes, color or flavor degradation. The BRIK
“PAKS do not see quite as severe a handling and warehousing
environment as do FCOJ composite cans. The composite cans
are stacked much higher and handled on the production line
much rougher. Also the zero headspace makes the BRIK PAKS
surprisingly strong. Thus the previous factors will tend to
expand the slight total system cost reduction indicated by

this study for conversion to ACOJ production.

Recommendations and Conclusions
A further decrease in total system cost may be achieved
by decentraliziwg the aseptic production facility from the

nationwide Florida FCOJ processor. Five or six regional

137

aseptic production facilities, owned or subcontracted, could
each receive FCOJ in bulk via tanker trucks from the Florida
processor to be distributed within every plant's region.
Lowering storage, handling and transportation costs would
probably result from this modification. By developing a
direct COJ importation routing by passing Florida processors
and mixing its own juice and concentrate blends, the region-
a1 ACOJ processor could reduce COJ product costs and.obtain
a direct control over the level of juice or concentrate
quality packaged. Also the shelf life requirement may be
reduced below two months so that ambient temperature storage
transportation and warehousing can be utilized. The ambient
temperature distribution capability alone could 'make this
recommendation very cost efficient.

An ongoing research and development program including
participation by aseptic production equipment manufacturers
is recommended in: direct future aseptic equipment develop-
ments. An intimate research and development program can
keep a FCOJ processor one step ahead of other FCOJ proces-
sors when eventual ACOJ production implementation occurs.
Also by communicating interest in future aseptic production
equipment development towards ACOJ applications, Florida
FCOJ processors can hasten these developments.

From these arguments, this study concludes that even
though current costs calculated in this model indicate a
slight 0.04% total system cost increase upon converting to

aseptic production of COJ, typical future developments could

138
easily reverse the cost increase and expand the cost savings
greatly towards aseptic processing and packaging of retail
portion COJ. Thus, at this time an actual conversion to
this study's ACOJ production model is not recommended, since
expected near-future developments may provide increased cost
reduction incentives for conversion to ACOJ production for
Florida FCOJ processors. In order to capitalize on future
aseptic technological improvements as they occur, FCOJ
processors must initiate and continue to monitor and test
aseptic processing and packaging equipment developments for
possible application to retail portion ACOJ production.
(Therefore, current and probable aseptic processing and
packaging developments are extremely critical to the highly
.price competitive retail portion frozen concentrate orange

juice industry.

APPENDICES

1.
2.

139

Appendix 1: COJ Shelf Life Quantification

COJ is processed from oranges only 7/12 months of the year.

On a yearly basis the average shelf life is the seven months product-
ion spread over twelve months plus each system's distribution time
table.

 

 

Months/Year Storage Time Prior To Shipment
1 0.
2 0.
3 00
4 0.
5 00
6 0.
7 0.
8 1.0
9 2.0
10 3.0
11 4.0
.12 510.
12 months = 1 Year 1 0 15.0 months/Year
Primary 0n-site Shelf Life = -i=- = 1.25 months = 35 days

12.0
Considering the remaining FCOJ distribution system:
a. Common carrier transport, 1-3 days/shipment.
b. Warehousing at regional wholesalers & major retailers nationwide,
14 days/shipment.
c. Retailer transport, 1 day/shipment.
d. Retailer shelf and warehouse storage, 7 days/shipment.
6. Home storage, resupply once a week, 7 days/unit.
f. Secondary distribution.shelf.life.sum = 32.dags.
FCOJ Total Shelf Life = 32 days + 35 days = 67 days.

Considering the remaining refrigerated ACOJ distribution system:

a. Common carrier transport, 1-3 days/shipment.

b. Warehousing at regional wholesalers & major retailers nationwide,
14'days/shipment.

c. Retailer transport, 1 day/shipment.

d. Retailer shelf and warehouse storage, 7 days/shipment.

e. Home storage, resupply once a week,'7 days/unit.

f. Secondaryodistribution shelf life sum = 32 days. .

ACOJ Total 40 F. Shelf Life = 32 days + 35 days = 67 days.

Considering the remaining ambient ACOJ distribution system:

a. Common carrier transport, 1-3 days.

b. Warehousing at regional wholesalers & major retailers nationwide,
14 days/shipment.

c. Retailer transport, 1 day/shipment.

d. Retailer shelf and warehouse storage, 10 days.

e. Home storage, resupply once a week, 7 days/unit.

f. Secondary distribution shelf life sum = 42 days.

ACOJ Total Ambient Shelf Life = 42 days + 35 days = 77 days.

Note: a . One month = 30.4167 days (365/12).

b . COJ inventory turnover rates estimated by ASSOCIATED GROCERS.

1.

2.

30

140

Appendix 2: Truck Weight AnalysiséBRIK PAK ACOJ

General . -
a. All weighing by a top-loading METTLER balance on a marble

b.

isolation table.
BRIK PAK dimensional data based on BRIK PAK specifications.

Primary Packgge Weight

8.-

be
Co
do
6.

One 250ml. BRIK PAK = 12.37g. and has 67.125in2 material surface
area (surface areas were figured on a flattened BRIK PAK with
seal area included). 2

Aseptic BRIK PAK material = 0.184g/in .

12 ounces of MINUTE MAID 45"an FCOJ = 409.9g.

FCOJ = ACOJ = 34.2g/ounce = 0.07521b./ounce.

6, 12, and 16 ounce BRIK PAK surface dimensions are extrapolated
from BRIK PAK specifications.

 

 

 

Package BRIK PAK
Portion Dimensions (lxhxd) Material Surface Area
6oz.(178ml. 2.5x3.0x1.6" 56.in§
1202.(355ml. 2.5x4.3x1.85" 72.1n2
16oz.(473m1. 3.75x3.45x2.5" 105.in
BRIK PAK ACOJ Filled
Portion Material Weight Weight BRIK PAK Weight
602. 10.35. 205.23. 215.3.
1202. 13.2g. 410.4g. 424.g.
16oz. 19.4g. 547.2g. 567.g.

Shrink Film Weight

a.
b.
C-
d.
e.

f.
S-

HI-C BRIK PAK shrink film is identified through infra-red
spectrophotometry as heat shrinkable low density polyethylene
LDPE .

Automatic micrometer identifies thickness as 1.0mil.

Store bought HI-C BRIK PAKs in a 3x1 matrix come shrink wrapped
in'LDPE. ' '

This'LDPE weighs 2.86g.: has a shrunk surface area (SA) =
96.675in .

Assumiag a shrinkage factor of 20%, preshrink area (PSA) =
116cm 0 ~ 2

Thus, this LDPE weighs 0.02465g/1n .

Nine rows of the 3x1 matrix are shipped in a wraparound tray
shrinkwrapped in this LDPE.

Tray Shrinkage Tray Tray LDPE
Portion SA (inz) Factor PSA (inZ) We t
602. 68. 1.2 81.6 13.3.

12020 970 1.2 116.9 150580
1605. 134. 1.2 160.6 24.3g.

141

Appendix 2:

4. Wraparound Corrugated Tray Weight

Truck Weight AnalysiséBRIK PAK ACOJ

a. Tray measurements are extrapolated from the current 250ml.

B-flute BRIK PAK tray.

b. 250ml. tray SA = 355.3125in2 and weighs 143.3g.
0. Thus, the corrugated tray board = 0.4044g/in .

 

 

 

.i.2rpartétion Base Blank 4-side2
Portion SA (in ) SA (in 2 SA (in 2
602. 47.9375 139.5 113.75 .
16oz. 80.475 298.125 196.1
Portion Total Tray SA (inzj Traj Weight '
602. 301.2 122.g.
1202. 410. 166.g.
1602. 575. 232-So

5. Truck Weight Calculations

a. Assuming the common 40 x 48" pallet and HI-C's current 10 layers
per pallet 0f BRIK PAKs, weigh out occurs before cube out.
b. These results are then compared versus the FCOJ composite can

system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weight/ Tray Trays/ Layers/
Portion Filled.Tray Dimensions (lxhxd) Pallet‘Layer Pallet
602. 13.093lbs. 15.5x3.375x7.75" 15 10
1202. 25.6341bs. 17.17x4.71x7.75" 12 10
1602. 34.321lbs. 23.6x3.825x11.25" 8 10
Pallet Truck Tare Pallets/Truck Total PKG Weight/
Portion We ht Weight (lbs .) (weigh out) Palletload(lbs.&%)
602. 1964.1bs. 40,000. 20. 136.61/1964=6.95%
1202. 3076.1bs. 40,000. 13. 142.31/3076=4.62%
1602. 2746.1bs. 40,000. 14. 125.94/2746=4.59%
c. TLL = truckload limit. % Increase in Units/
. ACOJ Wt. / ACOJ Volume/ Units/ TLL-BRIK PAK vs. the
Portion TLL (lbs.) TLL (02.) TLL Composite Can
602. 37,268. 495,578. 82,596. 9.6%
1202. 38,150. 507,306. 112,275. 10.9%
1602. 38,237. 508,463. 31,778. 7.9%
Portion Gallons ear Units flear Units TLL Shipments /Year
602. 980,906. 20,925,995. 82,596. 254.
1202. 2,393,734. 25,533,163. 42,275. 604.
1602. 1,153,275. 9,226,200. 31,778.

Total ACOJ Shipments in a Year =

fit

142

Appendix 3: Truck Weight Analysis-FCOJ Composite Can

1. General

a. All weighings by a top-loading METTLER balance on a marble
isolation table.

b. Composite can dimensions come from current MINUTE MAID FCOJ.

c. Layers/pallet, case counts, and other data are those seen by
ASSOCIATED GROCERS for MINUTE MAID.

d. Corrugated container dimensions are calculated from a
summation of the primary package dimensions.

 

 

FCOJ Composite Composite Can .Composite.Can

Portion Weight Can Weight Dimensions (hxd), Filled Weight
602. 205.25. 22.55. 4 x 2.25" 227.73.
1202. 410.43. 33.75g. 5 x 2.75" 444.1g.
1602. 547. 2g. 41.6g. 6.5 x 2.75" 588.8g.

2. Cgiiggated Case Weight
a. Assume same board weight as the BRIK PAK tray = 0. 4044g/in2 .

b. Assume the use of a Center'Special Slotted Container (CSSC).

 

 

 

 

Primary Carton Carton2 CSSC
Portion PKG Matrix Dimensions (lxhxd) SA (in 1, Weight
602. 6 x 8 18.5 x 4.5 x 14.” 1355. 548.g.
1202. 6 x 4 17.0 x 5.5 x 11.5" 1100. 445.g.
1602. 6 x 4 17.0 x 7.0 x 11.5" 1180. 477.g.

3. Truck Weight Calculations
a. Assume a 40 x 48 inch pallet and 9 layers/pallet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . Cartons/ Layers/ Pallet Truck Tare Pallets/
Portion Pallet Layer Pallet Weight Weight (lbs,), TLL
602. 6. 9. 1366. 40,000. 29.
12°20 80 90 1763. £20,000. 220
1602. 8. 9. 2319. 40,000. 17.
Total'PKG Wt./ FCOJ Weight FCOJ Volume/ Units/
Portion Palletload (1bs.&%)r TLL (lbs.) TLL goo.) TLL
602. 194/1366 = 14.2% 34,005. 452,194. 75.365.
1202. 199/1763 = 11.3% 34,396. 457,394. 38,116.
1602. 234/2319 = 10.5% 35,438. 471,250. 29,453.
Portion” Gallons/Yeag Units/Yea; Units/TLL Shipments/Year
692‘. ’ 980.906. 20.925.995- 75.365. 278.
1202. 2,393,734. 25,533,163. 38,116. 670.

1602. 1,153,275. 9,226,200. 29,453. 314.
Total FCOJ Shipments in a Year = 12 .

143

Appendix 4: Itemized ACOJ Utility Requirements

Additional Daily ACOJ Utilities

 

Electrical Compressed Water
Consumption(KWH) Air(m3) (ga1.)
N0 BAC 600 & 2- 800. ____ 68,000.

Aseptic Surge Tanks
3+BRIK PAK AB Fillers 1,152.
3-AéB-C Traywrappers 256.
2-AéB-C Shrinkwrapper/

Tunnels 3'696'
1-RAYMOND AUTOMATION 225.
Checkweigher ‘.

New Lighting(3W/ft.2) 247.
Subtotals 6,376.
Dollar Subtotals $383.

Nitrogen.Gas for
Flushing A. Surge Tanks $192.

Eliminated FCOJ Daily Utilities

1-NEW ENGIAND Comp. Can 234
Unscrambler/Cleaner '

1-PACK WEST Comp. Can 273
Piston Filler '
2-61-H Model Comp. Can 231
Seamers '
2-CA-109 Case Erector/ 130
Packer/Sealers '
Cooling ----

Subtotals 868.
Dollar'Subtotals $52.

Final Totaligg

Total Additional.Daily ACOJ Utilities
Total Daily FCOJ Utility Cost

Final Total Daily ACOJ Utility Cost

1,9570 139241400
131. ----

57. ----

35. -----

2,180. 81,440.

 

 

$44. $81.
1,149. . ----
2.673. ----
340. ----
177. --r-
.2222 ,112291129-

”93390 13u36,l+700
$870 ' $1.436.

($335.)
$2.305.
$1.970.

Natural Gas
(Steam)(MCF)

195.
1.5

196.5

 

144

Appendix 5: Itemized Total System Cost Inflation Adjustment Values

FCOJ System Cost Adjustments

1. Most FCOJ cost areas utilize cost adjustment values from Kilmer &
Hooks, p. 16.

2. Each 1979-80 season cost area must be brought_forward three years to
July 1983 (end of the 1982-83 season) dollars.

3. The 1978-79 and 1979-80 trend for each cost area is summed together.
This two year increase is divided by two and then multiplied by
three to calculate the below adjustment values.

 

 

Two year 1978-80 - Calculated July 1983
Cost Area % Cost increase Cost Adjustment Value
Packaging Materials 7.6 11.4
Labor 2.9 4.35
Other Processing 0.8 1.2
Warehousing 2.4 3.6
Administrative 7.4 11.1
Selling 0.5 0.75
Other'Fixed 0.5 0.75

ACOJ:§ystem Cost Adjustments

1. Aseptic Surge Tanks-utilize the inflation adjustment value for
capital equipment in "The Economic Report of the President to
Congress," February 1983, p.232.

a. Capital equipment averaged an 8.0% increase across the entire
1981 and 1982 period.

b. The January 1981 aseptic surge tank cost needs to be brought
forward two and one half years to mid 1983 dollars.

0. Therefore, the aseptic surge tank cost adjuster equals:

8.0% x _27— x 2.5 years = 10.76 rise to July 1983 dollars.

2. Corrugated Trays 8 Plastic Shrinkwrap-utilize the inflation
adjustment value for paper and plastic products in the "Statistical
Abstract of the U.S. 1981," p.464.

a. Paper and plastic products averaged a 13.0% increase across the
entire 1981 and estimated 1982 period.

b. The January 1981 corrugated tray and plastic shrinkwrap costs
need to be brought forward two and one half years to July 1983
dollars.

c. Therefore, the corrugated tray and plastic shrinkwrap cost
adjuster equals:
13.0% x 1

m X 2.5 years = 16.2% rise to July 1983 0.0113138.

145

Appendix 5: Itemized Total System Cost Inflation Adjustment Values

3. Aseptic Equipment Supplies-utilize the inflation adjustment value

'for maintenance supplies in "The Economic Report of the President to

Congress,” February 1983, p.229.

a. Maintenance supplies averaged a 10.65% increase across the entire
1981 and 1982 period.

b. The January 1982 aseptic equipment supplies cost needs to be
brought forward two and one half years to July 1983 dollars.

0. Therefore, the equipment supplies cost adjuster equals:

1 =
10.65% x 2 years x 2.5 years 21.3% rise to July 1983 dollars.

146

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 6: FCOJ Cost Conversions
602.July 1983 1202.Ju1y 1983 1602.July 1983
chkaging Materials $/case $/gal. §anse a1. $/case $/gal.
Composite Cans 1.7872 .7943 1.2220 .5431 1.5604 .5201
Corrugated Cases .1446 .0623 .1361 .0605 .1704 .0568
Other .0099 .0044 .0079 .0035 .0117 .0039
Total FCOJ materials 1.9417 .8610 1.3660 .6071 1.7425 .5808
Processing Labor 5’ r
Direot .2875 .1278 .2878 21279 .3842 .1281
Indirect .1384 .0615 .1389 .0617 .1888 .0629
Payroll taxes & insur. :9728 .0324 .0734 .0326 .0988 .0329
Total FCOJ Labor .4987 .2217 .5001: .2222 .6718 .2239
Other'Processigg Eipgnse
Electric, Water, Comp-
ressed.Air, Nat. Gas .1912 .0850 .1946 .0865 .2638 .0879
Maintenance & Repairs .1722 .0765 .1685 .0749 .2161 .0720
Depreciation & Rent .1140 .0507 .1149 .0511 .1517 .0506
Machinery Royalties .0777 .0345 .0780 .0347 .1044 .0348
Taxes 8 Insurance .0329 .0146 .0306 .0136 .0432 .0144
Miscellaneous .1157 .0514 .1184 .0526 .1515 .0504
Total FCOJ Other-Proc..7037 .3127 .7050 .3134 .9305 .3101
Warehouse Eipense (raw mtls)
thing, Shipping In, .
Labor, & Taxes .0838 .0372 .0785 .0349 .0993 .0331
Other'thing Expense .1555 .0621 .1505 .0669 .1881 .0627
Subtotal FCOJ thing. .2393 .10 3 .2290 .1018 .2874 .0958
Remainipg ngratinngxpense
Administrative Expense .1680 .0747 .1681 .0747 .2123 .0708
Brokerage Fees .1350 .0600 .1315 .0584 .1661 .0554
Other Selling Expense .0912 .0405 .0967 -.0430 .1267 .0422
.Advertising, Taxes,
& Quality Control .2257 .1003 .2253 .1001 .3003 .1001
Miscellaneous Deduction.1622 .0721 .1523 .0677 .211 .0705
Total Remaining Operat.7821 .3476 .7739 .3439 1.0169 .3390

Note:

$/case t0 $/gal. conversion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

602. = divide by 28802./case and multiply by 12802./gal.
1202. = divide by 28802./case and multiply by 12802./gal.
1602. = divide by 38402./1ase and multiply by 12802./gal.

147

Appendix 7: Aseptic Packaging Material Cost Calculations

Lump Sum.Packaging Material Costs Dollars PepiYear

1. BRIK PAKs (Lia/BRIK) 55,685,000 BRIKs/yr. 2,227,400.
2. Corrugated Trays (Wood thesis) 20¢/tray x 16.25%

= 23.25¢/tray x 2,062,419. trays/yr. = 479,500.
3. LDPE Shrinkwrap (Wood thesis) 1.3¢/tray x 16.25%

= 1.511¢/tray x 2,062,419 trays/yr. = 31,200.

4. BRIK PAK Waste
a. Splicing<§ 4vBRIKs/Splice, 1 splice/18,000 BRIKs
Daily-1st.9hrs. = 9 splices
' ' 2nd.lhr. = 2 splices

 

 

 

 

3rd.5hrs. - 4 splices
4th.6%hrs.= 7-splices
Total of 22 splices per day 600.
b. Problems @ 2 problems/shift, 3o BRIKs/problem
8 shifts/day = 3,300.
c. Starts<§ 6 starts/day, 30 BRIKs/start = 1,200.
5. Other'Waste of Corrugated Trays & LDPE Shrinkwrap
a. Corrugated Trays<§ 20 trays shift = 6,300.
b. LDPE Shrinkwrap<@ 40 trays shift = 800.
6. , Hydrogen Peroxide is recycled into the 35% H 02 hot
water bath, so less than $1.00/day/BRIK PAK gystem = 500.
‘Lump Sum Yearly ACOJ Packaging Material Costs = $2,750,800.
Yearly ACOJ Packaging Material Costs Allocated By Portion
602. 1202. 1602.
775.037.trays/yr. 945.673.trays/yr. 34.171.trays/yr.
Material 20,225,225.BRIKS[E. 5,533,163.31mcs7m 9,226,200.1anncsm.
BRIK PAKS $837,040. $1,021,327. $369,033.
Corrugated Trays $180,196: $219,867. $79,435.
LDPE Shrinkwrap $11,711. $14,289. $5,200.
#‘s 4-6 Allocated
By Volume $41,773. $5,823. $2.104.

 

 

Allocated Totals$1,033,720. $1,261,306. $455,772.

148

Appendix 8: Itemized ACOJ Maintenance & Repair Costs

 

 

Additional ACOJ Maintenance & Repair Costs Dollars Per'Day
1. Supplies (Wood) $891..x 21.3% = $1080.78/5 day

work week divided by 5 = 217.
2. Mechanics<§ $18./day x 4 hours/day = 72.
3. Service Contracts<§ $2100./yr x 3 contracts

divided by 170 days per year = 37.
4. Evergencies<§ $1,000./filler x 3 fillers

divided by 170 days per year = 18.
5. Parts @ $4,500./yr. x 3 fillers

divided by 170 days per year = 72.
Subtotal Additional Daily ACOJ M & R Costs = $423.

Eliminated Daily FCOJ Maintenance & Repair Costs
1. 61-H Composite Can Seamer Parts @ $16,000./yr.

divided by 170 days per>year = (94-)
2. CA-109 Case Erector/Packer/SealerIParts<0 $8,000./yr.

divided by 170 days per year = 4 . _ 7
Total Eliminated Daily FCOJ M a. R. Costs -. . ($141.);
Total Additional Daily ACOJ Maintenance & Repair Costs $282.
Total Daily FCOJ Maintenance & Repair Costs $1,984.

Total Daily ACOJ Maintenance 2 Repair Costs $2,266.

149

Appendix 9: Itemized ACOJ Equipment Costs
Additional ACOJ Equipment Needs Dollar Value
1. N0 BAC 600 U-H-T-S-T Sterilization System 250,000.

2. 2-6,000gal. Aseptic Surge Tanks with nitrogen flushing
(Wood) 1-5,000gal.= $125,000. = $25,000./1,000ga1. , thus

 

2 x 6 x $25,000. = $300,000. x 10% = 330,000.
3. 3- BRIK PAK AB Systems<a $281,000. x 3 = 843,000.
4. 3-AéB-C Traywrappers<d $50,000. x 3 = 150,000.
5. 2- AéB-C Shrinkwrapper/Tunnels<a $27,000. x 2 = 54,000.
6. 1-RAYMOND AUTOMATION Checkweigherwa $22,000. x 1 = 22,000.
7. Installation<§ 25% of this total = 412,200.
Subtotal Additional ACOJ Equipment Costs $2,061,200.

Less Eliminated FCOJ Equipment

1. 1-Used.NEW ENGLAND MACHINERY Composite Can
Unscrambler/Cleaner<§ $20,000 x 1 = (20,000.)

2. 1-Used.PACK WEST Piston Fillerwa $15,000. x 1 =(15,000.)

3. 2-Used 61-H ANGELUS SANITARY Composite Can
Seamers<§ $23,850. x 2 = (47,700.)

4. 2-Used CA-109 Case Erector/Packer/Sealers
@’$11,250 x 2 = (22,500.)

Total Eliminated FCOJ Equipment Value ‘ ($105,200.)

Total Additional ACOJ Equipment Cost $1,956,000.
Plus Total ACOJ Building Cost 151,800.
Total ACOJ Capital Investment $2,107,800.

Total ACOJ Capital Investment as an Equivalent
Uniform Annualized Cost (EUAC) = $300,100.

150

.Uofladmasm soon as: psosoufiswon soaposeond sawed m.codphom
mean some Haves hamsoosmpassam Hoo< mo.sofipnom omen ano>o :0 mopsnomo osda soaposeonm hoo< oss**

.Uofladmasm soon we: psosohdsvon sodnoseonm adamem.sodphom onam m:0«>ohm on» :03: mean axon on» 0»
Ho>o ponopdzm we as use .osap s pd hook mo sodvnom mean 020 so mopsuomo mafia soaposeonm Hook 039* .0902

 

 

 

 

.maso.ca .maso.sm .maao.sm osaa soaeoseoaa fiasco .nas o.na

_ eases Hence
.866 .256 ....an mean. some H33 .82 ed
. £229 . mass. 3 . mass. 2.. 25. e383...

. a
omHSOo¢ cane-WN egg-ON ”9%” OMHMMHH. 0%..“ case.“ oESHQ:
. «swim 63 .03 586$ .2232: . «swim £2 .03 $8.82
.oom.em~.a .mos.mmn.mm .mdm.nmm.om .sa\meass .oo~.omm.m .mea.mmm.mm .mmm.m~m.om
18$ .83 jauom «aimed .noms ..aoo

.oassas nos mess: so” as roman made
or» museums .sosemaoao emoaoam map as ass eHmm_soom

eoHHoa\moessas o«-m.m
.sas\mamse omums
.aas\mamae mflnms

.sas\me«ss omn-o02

nonaeoaaaaoes< some
Hossaexaoaamaaxsaasm soda
Hommmnshmna comm

aosmaoasooso some

soapmnvsoosoo msm<a u .Hc\.Hsm www.m meoow 04m oz

 

**hoo<

mamhdds< mean coaposoonm noo< a hook

.sas\meass com as seeds mesa
one pom hon» om.sofivmuogo pmozoam on» one nnosdom

coo opfimoasoo

eoHHoA\.sdsm.an.H. muonaeoflaaaoess
.sas\meass coo“. maommo
sas\mpass cos . maosuaoaaoosu

.aas\neass coo . assess seemed
.sds.mpdss cow .Hosdoflp\noHnsmnomsa

*hooh
.ofi Kapsomm<

 

1.

2.

151

Appendix 11: Aseptic Surge Tank Volume Requirements

Two smaller aseptic surge tanks are desired over one large aseptic
surge to provide operational flexibility.

TASTE concentration & N0 BAC 600 concentrated orange juice (COJ)

sterilization operates for ten hours per day at 2,666 gallons per hour.

Calculate the required sterile COJ accumulation necessary for the
BRIK PAK AB aseptic packagers.

a. For the first nine hours of production, all three BRIK PAK fillers

each Operate at 6,000. units per hour.

6,000.-6oz.units = 281.25-602. gallons

6,000.-1202.units= 562.591202. gallons

6,000.-1602.units= 750.0—1602. gallons

Subtotal volume = 1,593.75 gallons per hour

First 9hr; Total= 14,343.75 gallons
Thus as BRIK PAK's package 1,593.75 gal./hr., 1,072.25 gal/hr.
accumulate (2,666. - 1,593.75). After nine hours, 9,650.25
gallons collect.

b. For the next half hour of production only the 6 and 12 ounce

BRIK PAK packagers are on-line, while the previous 16 ounce unit
is converted and resterilized for 12 ounce packaging.

3,000.-6oz.units = 140.625-602. gallons

3,000.-12oz.units= 281.25-1202. ggilons

Subtotal Volume = 421.875 gallons per one half’hour
Thus as BRIK PAK's package 421.875 gal./%hr., 911.25 gallons
accumulate (1,333. - 421.875).

0. For the final one half hour of N0 BAC 600 production, all three
BRIK PAK packagers operate at 6,000 units per hour producing
6 and 12 ounce ACOJ portions.

3,000.9602.unit8'=‘140.625+602..gallons

3,000.-1202.units= 281.25-1202. gallons

3,000.-1602.units= 281.25-1202. gallons

Subtotal Volume = 703.125 gallons per one half hour

Thus as BRIK PAK's package 703.125 ga1./%hr., 629.875 gallons
accumulate (1,333 - 703.125).

d. Since the TASTE orange juice concentrator and the N0 BAC 600
UsH‘T-S-T sterilizer now shut down for the day, this total is
the bare minimum COJ accumulation required.

9,650.25 + 911.25 + 629.875 = 11,191.25 gallons.

e. By raising the required tank volume to 12,000 gallons, 8 7.2%
safety margin is available. The 808.75 gallon safety margin
corresponds to anywhere from 26 .0 45 minutes onBRIK PAK

packaging down time.

L IS'I' 05‘ REFERENCES

LIST 05' REFERENCES

Anonymous, ”A Big Vote for Aseptic Paperboard,“ Packaging
Digest 20 (March 1983):6.

Allan, George, 'Aseptics: Sterile Packs with a Fertile
Future," Packaging Digest 19 (September l982):60-82.

Andres, Carl, ”Non-Destructive Inspection of Aseptic Packag-
ing," Food Processing 43 (January 1982):166-167.

Anonymous, ”Aseptic Efforts Focus on Plastic, Cup-Style
Packs,” Package Engineering 28 (January 1983):63-68.

Anonymous, “Aseptic Packaging,” Food Engineering 55 (January
l983):107.

Anonymous, ”Aseptic Packaging of Foods: The Neutral Aseptic
System,” Verpackungs Rundschau 31 (February l980):l35-
138, 140.

Anonymous, ”Aseptic Packaging: What's In Store?" American
Dairy Review (October l979):24-27.

Anonymous, 'Aseptics Scores at Dutch Dairy,” Packaging
Digest 19 (October 1982):154.

Ashton, T.R., ”Aseptic Packaging of Milk: Container Handling
and Transportation,"- International Dair Monograph on
Ultra-High-Temperature Milk (Prague 1972):100-116.

 

 

., ”The Ultra-High—Temperature Treatment of Milk
and Milk Products," World Animal Review 23 (l977):37-42.

 

ASTEC INCORPORATED, METAL BOX FRESHFILL Aseptic System
Specifications (In-house publication), 1983.

Atomic Energy Commission of the United States, Proceedings
Ji§_ the Sixth Annual Atomic Ener Commissigg__§99g_
Irradiation Contractors Meeting, DiVIsTon of Isotopes
Development, October 3-4, 1966.

 

Anonymous, “Automated Order Picking in Chain's Freezer
Expedites Service to Super Markets,”_guick Frozen Foods
40 (January l978):42-43.

 

152

153

Ball, C., Olin, Sterilization i_n Food Technology, McGraw-
Hill Book Company, Incorporated, 1957.

 

 

 

BALL PLASTICS INCORPORATED, Coetrusion Materials for aseptic
packaging (in-house publication), 1982.

BENCO U.S.A. INCORPORATED, ASEPACK 24 Specifications (In-
house publication), 1982.

Benson, G.A., ”Economic Feasibility of Ultra-High-
Temperature Processing and Aseptic Packaging,” Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference on Ultra-High-
Temperature Processing 222 Aseptic Packaging of Milk and
Milk Products, North Carolina State University at
Raleigh, November 27-29, 1979, pp. 169-182.

 

 

 

 

Blanc, B. and Ruegg, M., "Influence of Pasteurization and
Ultra-High-Temperature Processing Upon the Size Distri-
bution of Casein Micelles in Milk," Milchwissenschaft 33
(l978):364-366.

BLOCPAK INCORPORATED, cF 5.00, cF 6.00 and cF 10.000 Aseptic
Specifications," (In-house publications), 1982.

von Bockelman, 8., ”Some Principles of .Ultra-High-
Temperature Processing,” Supplement to the Proceedings
of the International Confgrence on U-H-T Processin and
Aseptic Packaging, North Carolina State, Raleigh, 21-29
November, 1979.

., "Some Principles on Aseptic Packaging,” TETRA
PAK INTERNATIONAL AB (In-house publication), 1978.

 

BOSCH PACKAGING MACHINERY INCORPORATED, SERVAC 78 AS/AL and
78 AS Specifications (In-house publication), 1982.

BRIK PAK U.S.A. INCORPORATED, AB 3, AB 8, and AB 9 Specifi-
cations (In-house publications), 1983.

Anonymous, “BRIK PAK Breaks Ground for Its First U.S.
Plant,” Packaging Digest 19 (December l982):5.

Brody, Aaron, L., "Aseptic Packaging of Foods," Food Tech-
nology 26 (August l972):70-74.

., ”Food Canning in Rigid and Flexible Packages,"
CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science (July 1972):187-

 

., "Updates Aseptic Packaging," Food Engineering
46 (February/March 1973):

 

154

Burton, 8., ”The Direct Heating Process for the Ultra-High-
Temperature Sterilization of Milk,” International Food
Science Technology Proceedings 10 (March 1978). 130-136.

., "The Effect of Forewarming on the Formation of
Deposits from Separated Milk on a Heated Wire,” 18th

 

 

International Dairyy Congress Proceedings Section B: 3

(1 972 5: '607- 611.

., “The STORE-STERIDEAL Process for Sterile Milk
Production,“ American Dairy Review 8 (1967), cited by
Naim Kosaric et a1, CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science
and Nutrition 14, p.I63, I981. '—

 

Busling, Bela and Carter, Robert, “Particle Size Distribu-
tion in Orange Juice,” Proceedings of the Florida State
Horticultural Society 87 (19744): 302-305.

Carlson, V.R., "Aseptic Packages - A Present Synopsis,”
Package Engineering 1982 Encyclopedia 27 (1982):l31-l34.

 

., ”Aseptic Processing and Packaging Overview, A
Short Course,” International Food Technologist Presen-
tation, University of Florida, Gainesville, 14-16 Sep-
tember, 1982. '

 

., "METAL BOX FRESHFILL Aseptic Packaging System,”
National Food Processors Association Presentation, 7
February, 1983.

 

Carter, . Robert, 'Reconstituted Florida. Orange ,Juice-
Production/Packaging/Distribution, a Technical Manual,”
Florida Department of Citrus, Lakeland, Florida.

Chandan, R.C., ”Considerations in the Manufacture of Frozen
and Soft-Serve Yogurt," Food Product Development 2
(April 1977):118-119, 121.

CHERRY BURREL INCORPORATED, Ultra-High-Temperature Food
Sterilization System Information (In-house publication),
1982.

Anonymous, ”Conference on Aseptic Processing and the Bulk
Storage and Distribution of Food, Purdue University at
Indianapolis, March 15-16, 1978. .

CONTINENTAL CAN COMPANY INCORPORATED, CONOFFAST System
Specifications (In-house publication), 1982.

COMPOSITE CONTAINER CORPORATION, Coextuded Material for
Aseptic Packaging Specifications (In-house publication),
1982.

155

Anonymous, "Container Technology Cuts Food Packager's
Costs,” Package Engineering 28 (April 1983):68.

 

Anonymous, ”Controversy Over Flow Diversion Valve in Aseptic
Processing,“ Food Engineering 50 (April 1977):67-79.

 

DASI INCORPORATED, FREE-FALLING-FILM Direct Infusion Infor-
mation (In-house publication), 1982.

Anonymous, ”Developments in Preservation," Food Manufacture
54 (September l979):21, 23, 27.

 

Anonymous, ”Development of High Barrier/Multi-Layer Stretch
Molded Containers by Toyo Seikan Kaisha Ltd.,' Packaging
Japan 3 (October l982):47-51.

 

Anonymous, ”DOLE/BOISE CASCADE Hot Air Composite Can Aseptic
System,” Package Engineering 28 (April 1983):68, 71.

 

Dougherty, et. al., ”Effect of Essence Enhancement and
Storage on Flavor of FCOJ,“ Journal of Food Science 39
(l974):855.

Downes, T., 'A Procedure for Estimating the Retention of'
Components of Thermally' Conductive Processed Foods,”
Lebensmittel-Wissenchaft und-Technologie 10 (May

1977):§5€-259.

Economic Report gf the President to Congress, by Martin
Feldstein, Chairman of the President‘s Council of Eco-
nomic Advisors, Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing
Office, February 1983.

 

 

 

Eisler, Steve, CHERRY CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE INCORPORATED:
Traverse City, Michigan, July 1983 warehousing costs.

Elfak et. al., ”The Viscosity of Dilute Solution of Guar Gum
& Locust Bean Gum with and without Added Sugar," Journal
gf Science £3 Food Agriculture 28 (1977):895-899.

 

Ellis, Robert, "OCEAN SPRAY Pioneers in Aseptic Packing of
Juices," Food Processing 43 (1982):lO4-105.

Ellis, T.G., ”Aseptic Processing and Packaging of Milk,"
Journal of the Society of Dairy Technology 30 (March

Ellison, Bill, PACKWEST' MACHINERY’ COMPANY, piston filler
specifications, Pasadena, CA.

Anonymous, ”Energy Savings Inflicts Quality Losses in Frozen
Foods," Food Product Development 13 (July 1979):56-57.

 

156

EX-CELL-O CORPORATION, PURE PAK N-LONG LIFE Packaging Speci-
fications (In-house publication), 1982.

Anonymous, "Express Dairy Speeds up Cream Packaging,: Food
Processipg Industry 49 (October l980):26-27.

Farooqi et. al., "Effects of Polyethylene and Some Other
Lining Materials on the Shelf Life Extension of Citrus
Fruits," The Citrus Industry 60 (May l979):14-20.

 

Feldstein et. al., "Laboratory Evaluation of Paperboard
Cartons for Nonrefrigerated Storage of Sterile Milk,"
Journal of Food Process Engineering 1 (November

l977):241-258.

Flora, L.F., "Optimum Quality Parameters of Muscadine Grape
Juices, Beverages and Blends,” Journal 23 Food Quality 2
(June l979):219-229.

 

 

Flink, James, ”Energy Analysis in Dehydration Processes,"
Food Technology 31 (April l977):77-84.

 

FRANRICA MANUFACTURING INCORPORATED, Quadraseptic and
Scraped Surface Heat Exchanger Information (In-house
publication), 1982.

Gur-Arieh, Chaim, "Heat Processed Yogurt Salad Dressing
Products,” Food Product Development 2 (January l977):34-
36. '

 

Guyon, Janet, ”Rising Concern over Salt's Effects Stirs
Debate," The Wall Street Journal, 17 December, 1982, pp.
19’ 37.

Gyeszly, S.W., "Shelf Life Simulation," Package Engineering
25 (June 1980):70-73.

Gyeszly, 8., Clifford, W. and Manathunya, V. "Accelerated
Tests Versus Calculations Based on Product/Package
Properties,” Package Development 229 Systems (September/
October l977):29-32.

Halladay, Robert, ASSOCIATED GROCERS INCORPORATED, Holt,
Michigan, Interview, March 29, 1983.

Hallstrom, "Thermodynamic Relationships in Milk Heat Treat-
ment Systems of Steam Injection Type,” 18th Interna-
tional Dairy Congress Section B:3 (1972): pp. 601-603.

Harris, et. al., "Sterile Acceptable Milk: A Major Energy
Saving Technology,” Maryland Agricultural ‘Experiment
Station and U.S. Department of Energy Report, October
1980.

 

157

Hartwig, Bob, RAYMOND AUTOMATION COMPANY, Checkweigher
specifications, Norwalk, CT.

Hendrix, et. al., ”Quality Control, Assurance & Evaluation
fix: the Citrus Industry,” Citrus Science JL Industry 2,
AVI Publishing Company, 1977, cited by Dr. Phil Nelson,
Fruit and Vegetable Juice Processing Technology, p.10,

AVI Publishing Company 1980.

 

Holmgren, R. Bruce, ”Going Aseptic Demands Total Control of
Sterility," Package Engineering 28 (February 1983):63-
65.

Houk, et. al., ”Color Changes in Orange Fruit Stored in High
Concentrations of Oxygen and in Ethylene," Proceeding_s_
of the Florida State Horticultural Society 87
7T§74‘Y":297-—T‘30 ._ —‘

International Atomic Energy Association, Food Irradiation,
IAEA, Vienna, 1966.

International Dairy Federation, IDF Monograph pp Ultra-High-
Temperature Milk 1972 Annual Bulletin, Part 5.

 

Anonymous, International‘ Conference pp_ Ultra-High-
Temperature Processing 32g Aseptic Packaging g£_Milk gpg
M11k Products, North Carolina State University at
Raleigh, November 17-19, 1979.

INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, CA-109 Specifications, Miami,
Florida.

., MODEL 3500 SYSTEM PAK Aseptic Packaging System
Specifications, Extended Shelf Life Division, New York,
NY.

 

Ito, K. and Bee, G., "Microbial Hazards Associated with New
Packaging Techniques,” Food Technology 34 (October
1980):78-80.

Johnson, Fred, 'Is .Aseptic Packaging Significant?" Paper
presented to Pack-Info, Washington, DC, October 11,
1979.

., "Status and Needs for Aseptic Packaging in the
U.S. Dairy Industry," Paper presented to American Dairy
Science Association, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, Michigan, July 10, 1978.

 

., “Sterile Milk Is Now,” Paper presented to the
Dairy Marketing Forum, Champaign, Illinois, February 16,
1977.

 

158

Johnson, R. and Toledo, R., "Storage STability of 55 oBrix
Orange Juice Concentrate Aseptically Packaged in Plastic

and Glass Containers," Journal of Food Science 40 (Feb-
ruary 1975):433-434.

 

Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Atomic Energy in Food and Agri-
culture, Proceedings on the Enzymological Aspects of
Food Irradiation, IAEA, Vienna, 1969.

 

 

Kanner, et. al., Storage Stability of COJ Packaged Asepti-
cally," Journal pf Food Science 47 (1982):429-43l.

 

Kilmer, Richard and Hooks, R., ”Estimated Costs of Proces-
sing, Warehousing, and Selling of Florida Citrus Pro-
ducts, 1979-1980 .Season,” Economic Information ‘Report
#144, University of Florida at Gainesville, May 1981.

King, C., “Energy Consumption and Conservation in Separation
Processes,” Food Technology 31 (April l977):85-87.

Kirchdorfer, Hellmut, "The Brik Pak-Age: .A New Era," The
Brik Pak Age 1 (In-house publication), Summer 1982.

Kleter, G., "The Ripening of Gouda Cheese Made Under
Strictly Aseptic Conditions and the Comparison of the
Activity of Different Starters and the Influence of
Certain Lactobacillus Strains,” Netherlands Milk. and
Dairy Journal 31 (May 1977):177-187.

Kornman, Wilco, "Aseptic Processing," Food Engineering 50
(May l977):90-91.

Kosaric et. al., 'Ultra-High-Temperature Milk: Production,
Quality and Economics,” CRC Critical Reviews in Food
Science and Nutrition 14 (1981):153-l99.

Krockta, Hohn and Rumsey, Thomas, "Solar Energy Cooling and

Freezing of Food: A Computer Analysis," Food Technology
31 (1977):61-66.

Lemaire, William, ”Aseptic Packaging Draws Beed on U.S. Milk
Market," Food Engineering 50 (November l977):76-78.

 

LIQUI-PAK INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED, 820-A Specifications
(In-house publication), 1982.

Lucus, Edward, ”Freezing System Saves Expansion Cost for
Iceland's U.S. Processing Plant,"_ggick Frozen Foods 40
(April 1978):20, 22, 25-26, 63, 64.

McKee, Michael, A-B-C PACKAGING MACHINERY Aseptic Package
Traywrapper and Shrinkwrapper System Specifications,
Tarpon Springs, Florida, 1983.

159

Malm, Duane, ”Regional Warehouses Can Save Money and Preci-
ous Fuel," Dairy and Ice Cream Field 162 (September
1979):94-96.

 

Mann, Ernest, J., "Aseptic Filling, Part 1," Dairy Indus-
tries International 45 (May 1980):37, 38, 64.

 

., "Aseptic Packaging, Part 1,” Dairy Industries
International 42 (December l977):46-47.

 

 

 

., ”Aseptic Packaging, Part 2,” Dairy Industries
International 43 (January l978):19, 26.

 

 

., ”Aseptic Packaging of Milk and Milk Products,"
Dairy Industries International 47 (May 1982):29, 31.

 

Marriner, F., "Aseptic Processing & Packaging Quality Con-
trol," The Australian Journal of Dairy Technology 32
(September 1977):102, 103.

Maunder, Duane, "Possible Use of Ultraviolet Sterilization
of Containers for Aseptic Packaging," Food Technology 31
(April l977):36, 37.

Mechura, Frank, “Sterile Packs with a Fertile Future, Part
2," Packaging Digest 19 (October 1982):107-126.

 

Meharg, Dave, BLOCPAK INCORPORATED in Toronto, Canada.

Anonymous, ”Milk the PARMALAT Pay Off," Food Manufacture 52
(March l977):44-46.

Miller, Joe, NEW ENGLAND MACHINERY INCORPORATED, Composite
Can Unscrambler/Cleaner Specifications..

MILLIKEN PACKAGING CORPORATION, TETRA PAK Specifications,
Mr. Gerald Nehr, White Stone, South Carolina, 1983.

Mizrahi, Shimon, 'A Review of the Physiochemical Approach to
the Analysis of the Structural Viscosity of Fluid Fruit
Products,” Journal of Texture Studies 10 (September
1979):67-82.

 

Mizrahi, Shimon and Berk, Zeki, ”Flow Behavior of COJ,"
Journal 23 Texture Studies 1 (April 1970):342-355.

., ”Flow Behavior of COJ, A Mathematical .p‘rea-
tment,” Journal of Texture Studies 3 (January 1972}:69—
79.

 

 

., ”Physio-Chemical Characteristics of Orange
Ju1ce Clouds," Journal pg Science £2 Food Agriculture 21
(May l970):250-253.

160

Mizrahi, Shimon and Firstenberg, R., "Effect of Orange Juice
Composition on Flow Behavior of Six-Fold Concentrate,"
Journal pg Texture Studies 6 (June 1975):523-532.

Mogenson, G. and Poulsen, P., "Quality of Ultra-High-
Temperature Milk, Stored at Refrigerated and Ambient
Temperature as Compared to High-Temperature-Short-Time
Pasteurized Milk," Milchwissenschaft 35 (l980):552-554,
556.

Morley, Robert G., "New and Versatile Fluid Dairy Product,
Yogurt Drink,“ American Daippreview 40 (May 1978):28,
30.

Nahra, John and Westhoff, Dennis, ”Direct Sterilization of
Heat-Sensitive Fluids by a Free-Falling—Film Steril-
izer,” Food Technology 34 (September l980):49-55, 57.

Nakanishi, T. and Ito, R., ”A Study on Milk Deposit For-
mation on Heat Exchange Surfaces in the Ultra-High-
Temperature System,” 18th International Dairprongress
Section B:3 (1964):613-615.

Neitzke, A., "Marketing and Economic Aspects,” International

Dairy Monograph on Ultra-High-Temperature Milk (Prague

Nelson, Harry, ANGELUS SANITARY SEAMER INCORPORATED, Model
6l-H Specifications (In-house publication) Los Angeles,
California, 1983.

 

Nelson, Philip E., "Aseptic Bulk Storage," Trends in
Packaging Proceedings_Ninth Annugl_Symposium, New Yerk
State AgriculturaI Experiment Station, November 21,
1974.

 

., Fruit and Vegetable Juice Processing Tech-
nology, AVI Publishing Incorporated, 1980.

Anonymous, ”New Aseptic Filling Line for Dairy Crest,” Dairy
Industries International 45 (September l980):27, 31.

Nickerson, John and ~Ronsivalli, Louis, Elementary Food
Science, (Second Edition), AVI Publishing Company,
Westport, Connecticut, 1980.

Niles and Ward, ”Using the FCOJ Futures Market to Reduce
Price Uncertainty," Proceedin s of the iFlorida. State
Horticultural Society : 89-292.

O'Connor, Carl, "A Cost Analysis of Alternative Fluid Milk
Packaging Systems," Journal of Food Protection 41 (July
l978):538-543.

161

Okos, M.R. and Chen, C.C., ”Aseptic Processing and the Bulk
Storage and Distribution of Food,“ Purdue University,
March 15-16, 1978, pp. 91-95.

Anonymous, ”One Half a Million Creams a Day,” Food Manufac-
ture 55 (July l980):57, 58.

Orbell, James A., "Aseptic Bag-in-Box Packaging," Food
Technology 39 (September l980):56, 57.

Orloski, Arnie, 'Aseptics: .Sterile Packs with a Fertile
Future Part 1," Packaging Digest 19 (September 1982):60-
82.

 

<_., 'Aseptics: Sterile packs with a Fertile Future
Part 2,‘ Packaging Digest 19 (October l982):107-127.

Opila, Robert L., “Design Equipment Selection to Achieve
Maximum Low Temperature Energy Savings,” Quick Frozen
Foods 40 (February l978):50, 52, 54, 61.

Paul, J.K., Fruit and Vegetable Juice Processing Noves Data
Corporation, 1975.

 

Anonymous, ”Persistent. DeveIOpment, "TETRA. PAK" (In-house
publication) 54, 1982.

Peters, James, ”Cost, Consumer Appeal Spur Development of
Flexible, Foil Laminate Packages,” FOod Product
Development 13 (November 1979):34, 36, 39.

 

Anonymous, ”Prefab Panels Get Tank Farm on Stream at H.P.
Hood,” Daipy Field 162 (October l979):130-132.

Anonymous, Present State in Techniques on the Sterilization
of Foods Through the Use of Ultra-Violet Light and
Radiative Rays in Japan,” Packaging Japan 3 (October
1982):41-45.

Private Industry Sources.

RAQUE FOOD SYSTEMS INCORPORATED and ASTEC INCORPORATED,
Large Particulate Filler Specifications, (In-house pub-
lication), 1982.

Regez, Walter, “The Future of Ultra-High-Temperature Milk
and Milk Products in Europe,'_gourna1 of the Society of
Daipy Technology 30 (March 1977):164-168.

Richmond, Mike and Stine, Robert, "Aseptic Packaging,"
Journal 23 Daipy Science 65 (August l982):1668-1672.

Robe, Karl, "External Heat Exchangers on Retorts Save TVG
$59,000/Year,” Food Processing 40 (May l979):156-157.

 

162

Roberts, A. W., "Quality Assurance of Ultra-High-Temperature
Products,” Journal of the Society of Dairy Technology 30

(March 1977):157-1160.

Rouse, et. al., 'Viscometric Measurements and Pectic Content
of FCOJ for Citrus Futures,'_groceedings of the Florida
State Horticultural Society 87 (1974):293-296.

Russo, James and Bannar, Robert, "Aseptic Packaging: How
Far Will It Go?" Food Engineering 53 (March l981):49-58.

 

RYDER RANGER TRUCKS INCORPORATED, Jacksonville, Florida,
July 1983, Transporation Costs.

Saguy, I., Kopelman, I. and Mizrahi, 8., "Simulation of
Ascorbic Acid Stability During Heat Processing and
Concentration of Grapefruit Juice,” Journal of Food
Process Engineering 2 (September 1978):213-225.

SCHOLLE CORPORATION, Aseptic Bag-In-Box Information (In-
house publication), 1982.

Schwartzberg, Henry, ”Energy Requirements for Liquid Food
Concentration,“ Food Technology 31 (April 1977):67-76.

 

Shipe, et. al., "Off Flavors in Milk: Report of the Com-
mittee on Flavor Nomenclature and Reference Standards,"
Journal pf Daisy Science 61 (July 1978):855-869.

SIMMONS MARKET RESEARCH BUREAU INCORPORATED, 1979 Nationwide
Consumer Surveys, FCOJ Section P-18, p. 389.

Singh, R., "Energy Consumption and Conservation in Food
Sterilzation,” Food Technology 31 (April 1977):57-60.

Speck, Marvin L., l'Heated Yogurt - Is It Still Yogurt?"
Journal pf Food Protection 40 (December l977):863-865.

Statistical Abstract of the U. S., 1981, by the Bureau of the
Census, U. S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D. C.

Stumbo, C. R., Thermobacteriology In Food Processing, Academ-
ic Press, 1965.

Swords, B.J., ”Status of Aseptic Processing Systems for
Rigid Metal Containers, Reviewing Operating and Quality
Effectiveness, the Range of Container fypes and Energy
Considerations," Proceedings of _t__he Conference _o_n
Aseptic Processing and the Bulk Storage and Distribution
of Food, Purdue Un1versity, March 15_16, 1978, pp.

 

Tamime, A. and Robinson, R., ”Some Aspects of the Production
of a Concentrated Yoghurt (labneh) Popular in the Middle
East," Milchwissenschaft 33 (April 1978): 209- 212.

163

Anonymous, "Techniques for Measuring Viscosity," Food
Processing Industry 47 (January 1978):34.

Anonymous, "The Growth of Ultra-High-Temperature,” Food
Manufacture 55 (July l980):53, 55.

Thijssen, H. and Kerkhof, P., ”Effect of Temperature and
Water Concentration During Processing on Food Quality,"
Journal of Food Process Engineering 1 (June 1977):129-
147.

Thompson, David, ”Energy Analysis in Heating and Cooling
Processes," Food Technology 31 (April l977):51-56.

 

Tillotson, James, E., ”Presentation on OCEAN SPRAY'S Experi-
ence in Aseptics,' Packaging Expo 1982, McCormick Place,
Chicago, Illinois, November 17, 1982.

Ting, et. al., ”Nutritional Assay of Florida FCOJ for Nutri-
tional Labeling," Citrus Science and Technology 1, AVI
Publishing Company (l977):20, cited by Dr. Phil Nelson,
Fruit and Vegetable Juice Processing Technology, p. 74,
AVI Publishing Company, 1980.

Vivian, Scott, ”Aseptics: Sterile Packs with a Fertile
Future, Part 2," Packaging Digest 19 (October l982):107-
126.

Wang, L. and Randolf, H., "Activation of Lipolysis: Distri-
bution of Lipase Activity in Temperature Activated
Milk," Journal 23 Dairy Science 61 (July 1987):874-879.

Ward, Ronald and Kilmer, Richard, "The United States Citrus
Subsectomw Organization, Behavior ‘and Performance,“
North Central Regional Research Publication 263 of
Project NC-ll7, December 1980.

Wardowshk and Ismail, "Survey of Water Usage and Treatment

 

in Florida, Citrus Packinghouses,' Proceedin s of the
Florida State Horticultural Society 91 (l978):139-131.

Westerman, Marty, 'Aseptics Choice Made Easy,” Beverage
World (July 1982): 68, 70-72.

Westhoff and Doores, "Milk Processed by a Falling Film
Pastourizer-Sterilizer, Microbial Stability at Various

Processing Temperatures," Journal of Dairy Science 59
(June 1976):1003-1009.

Wiles, R., "Aseptic Packaging and Processing of Products,”
Journal of the Society of Dairy Technology 30 (March