Dairy | Dapp
settings-icon meer inzicht more insight and movement in your factory? +31(0)345 50 52 56

projects - Dairy

Last pro­ject

Pilot data analysis at a cheese processor Dapp

Pilot data anal­y­sis at a cheese pro­ces­sor

For a client in the cheese pro­cess­ing in­dus­try, Dapp par­tic­i­pat­ed in a pilot re­gard­ing data anal­y­sis. The client in­vit­ed Dapp to help solve a mild mold prob­lem in the ripen­ing process. The sus­pi­cions were that this prob­lem could be pinned down to a par­tic­u­lar sup­pli­er. Since the sup­pli­er was not the only vari­able (think also of tem­per­a­ture, lo­ca­tion, type of cheese, treat­ment plans, age, etc.), the client could not make sense of it this time. Through ex­ten­sive data anal­y­sis and sta­tis­tics Dapp was fi­nal­ly able to con­trib­ute with sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sup­port­ed con­clu­sions. These con­clu­sions were clear­ly pre­sent­ed in the nec­es­sary in­ter­ac­tive graphs, his­tograms and ta­bles. To­geth­er with a third party, a dash­board was de­vel­oped to mon­i­tor cer­tain trends and apply fil­ters.


more projects

Layout design and visualization new dairy factory Dapp

Lay­out de­sign and vi­su­al­iza­tion new dairy fac­to­ry

A major play­er in the dairy mar­ket ap­proached us with plans for a brand new dairy plant. In this new state-of-the-art plant, tech­nol­o­gy, lo­gis­tics and or­ga­ni­za­tion will reach the high­est level imag­in­able. Our client knows that this ef­fi­cient dairy plant will add great value for its re­tail cus­tomers, who will ben­e­fit from a wider prod­uct range and a cost ad­van­tage. The dairy pro­duc­er would like to con­vince its re­tail cus­tomers of this added value with a vi­su­al­iza­tion of the new plant. Dapp was com­mis­sioned to come up with a plan for the de­sired lay­out and to work out the vi­su­al­iza­tion of the new fac­to­ry. One of our ex­pe­ri­enced project man­agers, a spe­cial­ist in ware­hous­ing and sup­ply chain man­age­ment, su­per­vis­es the en­tire project, tak­ing into ac­count the prod­uct and cus­tomer port­fo­lio of the dairy pro­duc­er. In the new plant, not only the pro­duc­tion flows, but also the lo­gis­tics flows must be well con­nect­ed. The same ap­plies to all util­i­ties, such as elec­tric­i­ty, water and air. There must also be a log­i­cal flow through the en­tire plant: from goods re­ceipt to pro­duc­tion and de­liv­ery of the fin­ished prod­uct. Fur­ther­more, suf­fi­cient space must be planned for of­fices, park­ing lots and the load­ing and un­load­ing docks. In ad­di­tion, our cus­tomer con­sid­ers it very im­por­tant that semi-fin­ished and fin­ished prod­ucts move through var­i­ous de­part­ments with dif­fer­ent types of cli­mate con­trol, where prod­ucts must also be able to be repack­aged. The chal­lenge for our project man­ag­er is to en­sure that this busi­ness case is well ex­plained with op­ti­mal vi­su­al­iza­tion: both for the dairy pro­duc­er it­self and for its re­tail cus­tomers. Our project man­ag­er knows how to trans­late the idea into a de­sign with a sin­gle image that says more than a thou­sand words. Our client im­me­di­ate­ly un­der­stands the lay­out of the new dairy and can eas­i­ly con­vince his re­tail cus­tomers of the ben­e­fits and added value. Dairy
Engineering & Project Management Leakage CIP Installation Dairy Company Dapp

En­gi­neer­ing & Project Man­age­ment Leak­age CIP In­stal­la­tion Dairy Com­pa­ny

(*pho­to is not cur­rent sit­u­a­tion). Our cus­tomer had been hav­ing a prob­lem with his CIP (Clean­ing In Place) in­stal­la­tion for some time now. The in­stal­la­tion leaked di­lut­ed caus­tic soda and ni­tric acid due to a mal­func­tion­ing valve. The prob­lem was ex­ac­er­bat­ed by foam to which the level de­tec­tor was not re­spond­ing. For ex­am­ple, it could hap­pen that CIP liq­uid from a tank over­flowed the floor. In this case, the prob­lem owner was the plant man­ag­er and, be­cause the CIP in­stal­la­tion in the pre-plant is an in­stal­la­tion that is used daily, he want­ed to have that prob­lem solved per­ma­nent­ly. An ex­ter­nal project lead­er was ap­point­ed via DAPP. Our project lead­er im­me­di­ate­ly start­ed mak­ing an in­ven­to­ry of the prob­lem and the re­sult­ing risks. The CIP in­stal­la­tion turned out to be on a mez­za­nine floor, above the pro­duc­tion. This meant that solv­ing this prob­lem, es­pe­cial­ly in the prepa­ra­tion phase, re­quired a lot of at­ten­tion for the ar­chi­tec­tural side of the as­sign­ment. The mez­za­nine floor of the CIP in­stal­la­tion had a mem­brane in the floor and this was leak­ing in a num­ber of places. As a re­sult, a dan­ger­ous sit­u­a­tion could arise on the ground floor. This led, among other things, to ar­chi­tec­tural fail­ures: fall­ing stuc­co and tiles and the crum­bling of con­crete lin­tels. This nat­u­ral­ly had a major im­pact on the gen­er­al hy­giene in this part of the fac­to­ry. This prob­lem was men­tioned sev­er­al times dur­ing au­dits. This nui­sance meant that extra rounds had to be sched­uled for clean­ing and re­peat­ed re­place­ment of stuc­co and tiling. Last but not least, the ex­ist­ing sit­u­a­tion led to the dan­ger of leak­age of lye and acid so­lu­tions down the wall where elec­tri­cal switch boxes were hung. In short, a very un­de­sir­able sit­u­a­tion. The project de­ci­sion is nor­mal­ly com­plet­ed with a busi­ness case or a cost cal­cu­la­tion on the basis of which a go - no go de­ci­sion can be made. That was not the case in this project: the project had to be car­ried out any­way. What mat­tered in­stead was how it was per­formed. The cen­tral ques­tion was how the floor could be made com­plete­ly liq­uid-tight. After the in­ven­to­ry of all al­ter­na­tives, it was de­cid­ed to â??liftâ? the CIP in­stal­la­tion con­sist­ing of 4 tanks and place it in a metal drip tray. Our project man­ag­er had to take a num­ber of pre­con­di­tions into ac­count. For ex­am­ple, in ad­di­tion to ar­chi­tec­tural as­pects, safe­ty risks, pro­duc­tion down­time and fu­ture ex­pan­sions in this zone of the fac­to­ry had to be taken into ac­count. In this phase he ex­plic­it­ly in­volved the QHSE de­part­ment in plan­ning. The choic­es made in the project had to be able to count on the full sup­port of that de­part­ment. In the project prepa­ra­tion phase, our project lead­er and his 4 project em­ploy­ees worked with the Early Equip­ment Man­age­ment (EEM) method. This work­flow sys­tem con­tains all man­age­ment as­pects that are nec­es­sary to en­gi­neer a project. If han­dled prop­er­ly, it en­sures a ver­ti­cal start-up and a rapid com­ple­tion of the project. It rais­es ques­tions such as which ma­te­ri­als are re­sis­tant to the ac­tion of ni­tric acid and caus­tic soda. An ar­chi­tec­tural chal­lenge turned out to be the extra sup­port of the roof con­struc­tion nec­es­sary to be able to lift the tanks dur­ing the project ex­e­cu­tion. The re­sult of the project is a liq­uid-tight floor and a leak-free CIP in­stal­la­tion, cre­at­ing a sus­tain­ably safe en­vi­ron­ment for the em­ploy­ees and for the in­stal­la­tion it­self on the first floor and on the ground floor. The plant man­ag­er was ex­treme­ly pleased that the project had fi­nal­ly put a stop to a re­cur­ring prob­lem. It was nice that the project could be com­plet­ed with­in the pre-al­lo­cat­ed bud­get. The QHSE de­part­ment was also very sat­is­fied. The project passed their strict re­quire­ments with fly­ing col­ors. Dairy