Cleaners/Sterilisers/Sanitisers Confusion

[pyrobrewer]

Hygiene and sanitation

What is hygiene? It can be defined as

"The use sanitary principles for the preservation of health and well being, and product quality."

What is sanitation? (the principle not the action of Sanitising or the products called Sanitisers)

•The creation and maintenance of conditions favourable to good health. That is, conditions free of pathogens (disease causing organisms) and other harmful substances.
•The creation and maintenance of conditions favourable to high product quality, i.e. conditions free of spoilage causing organisms and other harmful substances and flavour active elements
•Sanitation is the use of procedures and chemicals to cause a general reduction in the microbial count.

However, Sanitation is a waste of time and money if soils are not properly/efficiently removed first. This means Cleaning

What is cleaning?
â– Removal of soils from the surfaces that come into contact with beer or beer making equipment
â– Separation of soil by mechanical action - scrubbing
â– Aided by dissolving in water
â– Use of surfactants
â– Use of acids
â– Use of alkali
â– Dispersion of soil in an aqueous solution enhanced by use of appropriate detergents and decreased particle size.
â– Prevention of re-deposition of dispersed soil

•Water - most frequently used cleaning medium ( the universal solvent)◦

Functions - Pre rinse of large soil particles, wetting agent, solvent for cleaning and sanitising agents, solvent for soils, final rinse to remove sanitising agents
â—¦Must be free of microorganisms, foreign colours and odours, minerals and other dissolved matter.

•Soils may consist of, but not limited to, Scum, Grease, Dust, Burnt material, Cleaning agents, Rust, Food residues, Beerstone, You.

Cleaning agents - Detergents

•Emulsifiers compounds with emulsification power have both hydrophobic and hydrophilic part - break down fats and oils into small particles that are dispersed and suspended in an aqueous solution
•Surfactants are compounds that lower the surface tension of water. Also called wetting agents or surface active agents. Allows closer contact with soil deposit and water
â—¦Cationic surfactants
â– Ineffective as detergents and effective bactericides

â—¦Anionic surfactants
◦■Very effective detergents and ineffective bactericides

â—¦Non ionic surfactantsâ– 
◦■Excellent wetting power and ineffective bactericides

Soils are classed as

•Organic - Best removed by acid type cleaners

Food Deposits
Lubrication oils and grease
Fats
Biofilms

•Inorganic - Best removed by Water, solvents and alkaline cleaners

Hard water deposits - magnesium and calcium carbonates
Metallic deposits - Rust and other oxides
Alkaline deposits - films left after improper rinsing

•Factors effecting cleaning performance

1. Time â—¦Contact time with surface being cleaned
2. Action •Physical force exerted on surface - Elbow grease or other
3. Concentration •The amount of cleaner used More is not always better
4. Water •Quality of water
5. Nature •Composition of soil •Surface -What material is being cleaned

Sanitation methods

1.Thermal Sanitation

Expensive in energy consumption - Requires long holding times - 20mins or longer in some cases

Heat has to be able to reach all areas
•Steam - most expensive, water vapour often mistaken for steam. You see steam (condensed water vapour) you can't see water vapour
•Water - Held at 80�c plus and requires long holding times

2. Radiation sanitation Rarely used even commercially and never (?) at home

3. Chemical Sanitation
Wide range available - Effectiveness depends on
•exosure time
•Temperature
•Concentration
•pH
•Equipment cleanliness
•Water hardness

Desired properties for a sanitiser

•Rapid kill
•Microbial destruction range
•Soluble in water
•Non toxic - non irritating ( to humans)
•Easy to use - Application and removal
•Inexpensive and readily available
•Stable both concentrate an in use form
•Be food Grade

Hygiene should not be looked at in isolation, it is an integration of
•Personal Hygiene
•Workroom Hygiene
•Plant and Equipment Hygiene
These different areas should be understood and taken seriously by the competent brewer

Different surfaces and applications require different cleaning method and or products There in no such thing as a single product or method of cleaning that is right for all applications, any more that there exists a one-size fits all t-shirt. Molten iron is an effective sanitizer but is harmfull to plastics. Many products are effective cleaners or sanitisers but have an adverse effect on beer quality.

[boingy]

<sigh>

[AnthonyUK]

Get over it boingy. The world has moved on and people are much more technically aware and as such like to use the correct terminology.

[boingy]

< S I G H >

[Wolfy]

Sigh x3

[pyrobrewer]

< S I G H >

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

[Wolfy]

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

Have you never seen the cartoon "The Simpsons" where Homer smacks his head and says "Doh!" ... that expression conveys many things, including that if you are going to provide information that 'looks' scientific that it should first be correct.

[crafty john]

I use bleach for cleaning and Sod. met for sterilisation purposes, although it's also useful in neutralising the chlorine in bleach.

I think it's down to personal preference, there are so many products on the market and I have used a lot of them but my choice is simple soda crystals for cleaning, for sanitising I use thin bleach, rinse 3 times with water then swill with sodium met to sweeten things up and remove any traces of chlorine. The only infection I have had was down to a dodgy batch of Nottingham that didn't start. I'm with you TC642 the cheaper the better.

[Graham]

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

Wow! How pretentious! How arrogant! I can assure you that very little goes "over the head" of most regulars that contribute here. Sorry, but most members here would expect more than merely copy and pasting stuff from the Interweb, and then positioning yourself as some sort of expert. Believe it or not , most people can "Google" for themselves. You call yourself pyrobrewer, so why do you not set fire to yourself and put everybody else out of your misery, unless you have something to say that is based upon personal experience

[pyrobrewer]

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

Wow! How pretentious! How arrogant! I can assure you that very little goes "over the head" of most regulars that contribute here. Sorry, but most members here would expect more than merely copy and pasting stuff from the Interweb, and then positioning yourself as some sort of expert. Believe it or not , most people can "Google" for themselves. You call yourself pyrobrewer, so why do you not set fire to yourself and put everybody else out of your misery, unless you have something to say that is based upon personal experience

You are correct it was a cut and paste from aussiehomebrewer to exact, but as I wrote that article, I gave myself permission for its use here! Enough personal experience for you, you clearly did not read my first post. I wonder how many members here are fed up with other members going of the deep end without knowing all the facts. Or by members posting sighs and dohs thinking that somehow that adds to the fund of information rather than their post count. Sounds pretentious and arrogant to me...

[TC2642]

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

Wow! How pretentious! How arrogant! I can assure you that very little goes "over the head" of most regulars that contribute here. Sorry, but most members here would expect more than merely copy and pasting stuff from the Interweb, and then positioning yourself as some sort of expert. Believe it or not , most people can "Google" for themselves. You call yourself pyrobrewer, so why do you not set fire to yourself and put everybody else out of your misery, unless you have something to say that is based upon personal experience

You are correct it was a cut and paste from aussiehomebrewer to exact, but as I wrote that article, I gave myself permission for its use here! Enough personal experience for you, you clearly did not read my first post. I wonder how many members here are fed up with other members going of the deep end without knowing all the facts. Or by members posting sighs and dohs thinking that somehow that adds to the fund of information rather than their post count. Sounds pretentious and arrogant to me...

It's more down to the fact that this has been done to death for lack of a better phrase, I think there's a seven page post on this topic, even going into the etymology of the words used and it's history.

Edit: Boingy does mention this, me not reading through the thread! It should explain the current situation.

[Graham]

I wonder how many members here are fed up with other members going of the deep end without knowing all the facts. Or by members posting sighs and dohs thinking that somehow that adds to the fund of information rather than their post count. Sounds pretentious and arrogant to me...

No! No! Don't take everybody on here as being stupid. Did that post that you kindly provided elucidate, educate, inform? Probably not; the old hands know more about the subject than that document provides, and newbies would be totally confused if not frightened by it.

I must admit that something like 80% of home brewing failures are caused by infection, and more attention should be paid to it (by Brits at least), and it has thus become one of my soap-box pedestals, so I apologise for that.

[Wolfy]

I must admit that something like 80% of home brewing failures are caused by infection, and more attention should be paid to it (by Brits at least), and it has thus become one of my soap-box pedestals, so I apologise for that.

If you classify 'failure' as producing something un-drinkable, what is the other 20%?

[boingy]

< S I G H >

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

If you wind your neck in a bit and bother to read the previous posts in this thread you'll see that I was merely attempting to redirect the sanitise/sterilise discussion into a previous thread. The discussion has been done to death, with no clear outcome, and it's one of those subjects that just swamp other threads if you let it, as has been amply illustrated by your good self.

And, yes, you are being a bit of a pretentious tw@t....

[pyrobrewer]

< S I G H >

Sorry new to this forum does this emoticon "mean over your head"?

If you wind your neck in a bit and bother to read the previous posts in this thread you'll see that I was merely attempting to redirect the sanitise/sterilise discussion into a previous thread. The discussion has been done to death, with no clear outcome, and it's one of those subjects that just swamp other threads if you let it, as has been amply illustrated by your good self.

And, yes, you are being a bit of a pretentious tw@t....

And a sigh and a doh achieves this how?

The post i made was in response to the OP question A new thread! A thread on cleaners/sterilisers/sanitisers confusion, it could have died there, if you had not wanted to grandstand. The legitimate exchange of information gets lost in this pointless flaming - post a rebutal not insults if you dont agree.
In your opinion it may have been done to death but clearly not resolved. Perhaps unresolved because real disscussion is squashed by the typical ludite, forum bully attitude you seem have in spades.
And why get personal, what do you fear? or is that all you have...