Bespoke industrial cleaning: why standard solutions often don't work (and how we approach it)

When was your organisation's cleaning system last reviewed? And does it still match how work is done today?

Cleaning plants are set up based on a specific situation: a certain number of users, a fixed production line or a limited cleaning time. As soon as that context changes - for example, due to growth in production or simultaneous use - bottlenecks arise. Pressure drops, cleaning takes more time or additional chemistry is needed to achieve the same result.

These signals usually point to a difference between how a system is designed and how it is used in practice.

So in this article, we will discuss:

• where industrial cleaning systems fall short in practice
• how to design a cleaning solution that fits the use
• which choices determine capacity and performance
• what the impact is on time, utilisation and cost over the lifetime

In practice, you often solve bottlenecks by adjusting settings. The temperature or pressure goes up, or the dose of chemistry is adjusted. Sometimes you extend the cleaning time to still achieve the desired result.

These are signals that the installation is not a good fit. They produce temporary results, but do not change the underlying cause.

That cause is usually in the basic assumptions of the system: capacity, concurrency and infrastructure do not align well with usage.

Dimensioning based on assumptions

Many installations are tuned for average usage, while the load is peak-driven.

A system designed for two simultaneous users but used by four people at the same time loses pressure at all take-up points. Mechanical force decreases and cleaning takes more time. Employees compensate with extra handling or chemistry, while the pump runs continuously at maximum capacity, leading to increased wear and tear.

A 'copy' of the existing situation

When replacing an installation, companies often opt for a similar configuration as before, without critically examining the current process and usage.

Think about

• higher production within the same cleaning time
• extra drain points or longer pipes
• a different type of contamination

The installation remains similar, but the boundary conditions have changed. As a result, a new installation immediately falls short in practice or does not come into its own - this is reflected, for example, in lower pressures and longer cleaning times.

Following the process

If capacity and utilisation do not match, the problem shifts to implementation.

A lower mechanical force leads directly to more working time. If a cleaning round takes 30 minutes longer daily, that adds up to dozens of extra hours per month.

In addition, physical strain increases. This is reflected in less consistent cleaning and lower system acceptance.

A well-functioning system starts with an understanding of usage and preconditions, not with the choice of machine.

Step 1: Analysis of utilisation and capacity

The capacity of a plant does not depend on the total water consumption per day, but on when demand is highest.

So a design starts by mapping:

• the number of cleaning points
• the number of users cleaning simultaneously
• the time available for cleaning within the process

In practice, the focus is on peak loads. If, at the busiest time, four employees are cleaning at the same time, the installation must be set up accordingly. Only then will pressure remain stable and cleaning time remain predictable.

Analysis in the design phase

The biggest gains arise when this analysis takes place as early as the design phase of a site or production line. Think of new construction, expansion or redesign. At that point, pipe routes, technical areas and off-take points are immediately positioned logically.

When an installation is only added afterwards, restrictions more often arise:

• piping follows existing routes instead of optimal routing
• distances become unnecessarily long, resulting in additional pressure loss and higher procurement costs
• capacity is tailored to what fits, rather than what is needed

These choices carry over into everyday use. A system tailored to the process from the ground up requires fewer retrofits and delivers more stable performance.

In practice, this also means that the system moves with usage. With fewer simultaneous users, the system runs at a lower power. This lowers energy consumption and reduces wear and tear on the installation.

Step 2: Technical infrastructure and pipeline losses

The performance of a pump says little without an understanding of the piping system. Part of the pressure is always lost between the technical room and the take-up point.

The most important factors are:

• length of piping
• diameter of piping
• number of branches and bends

A diameter that is too small increases resistance. The pump has to supply more energy to achieve the same pressure, while the effective pressure on the shop floor actually decreases. With longer pipe runs, this effect increases further.

In practice, this means that an installation has sufficient capacity on paper, but fails to deliver what is needed at the lance. A good design takes these losses into account and limits them where possible, for example by using a larger pipe diameter. This better preserves pressure at the take-up point.

Step 3: Matching to pollution type

Not every contamination requires the same approach. The combination of pressure, flow rate, temperature and chemistry determines how effectively dirt is loosened.

There are broadly two types of pollution:

• organic: fats, proteins, product residues
• industrial: oil, dust, process residues

The mechanical force and temperature required vary by type. In some situations pressure and flow are sufficient, while in others temperature plays a bigger role. Chemistry remains necessary in specific cases, but its deployment is directly related to the other factors.

A mismatch often leads to compensatory behaviour: higher chemical dosage or longer soaking time. This increases costs without solving the underlying problem.

Step 4: Choosing a mobile or stationary system

The choice between a mobile and stationary system has direct implications for capacity, usage and lifetime.

Mobile installations are flexible in use and require a lower investment. They are often used for smaller areas or situations where one user works at a time. Capacity and lifetime are usually lower, making them suitable for less intensive or variable use.

Stationary units are designed for situations where several users are working simultaneously and cleaning is a regular part of the process. They deliver stable pressure and a constant flow rate, even when used simultaneously. Due to their more robust construction, their lifetime is quite high, often in the order of 15 to 20 years, if properly maintained.

The choice determines not only how cleaning is done, but also how much time and labour is required and how the costs develop over the years.

Step 5: Use in practice (shop floor)

The performance of an installation is ultimately determined on the shop floor.

Convenience plays a direct role in this:

• how fast is the installation deployable
• how stable does the pressure remain during operation
• how much physical effort does the cleaning task require

If a system provides insufficient capacity or is awkward to use, employees start compensating. This leads to longer cleaning times and less consistent execution.

A facility that matches its use works the other way round: operations are predictable, the time required remains stable and the quality of cleaning is less dependent on individual working methods.

The purchase price of a cleaning system is usually the starting point in a decision. In practice, that price determines only a small part of the total cost. How a system is used on a daily basis has more influence on the cost over its lifetime:

• lower capacity leads directly to longer cleaning and more staff deployment
• inefficient equipment increases consumption per cleaning task
• systems under peak load wear out faster and require more frequent maintenance
• correct sizing leads to predictable costs and less unplanned downtime

Practice example: when an investment does not (yet) fit

At a bakery, cleaning took place for a maximum of two hours a day. The existing solution consisted of a simple mobile pressure washer, once bought at the hardware store. That provided limited capacity and required relatively a lot of manual work, but was sufficient only in the basics.

In practice, it did not fit well with usage. Its capacity was limited and working with it took a relatively long time and effort. Employees did not always use the cleaner in the same way as a result. This affected the speed and consistency of cleaning.

A stationary installation speeds up cleaning and simplifies operations. Pressure remains stable, multiple users work simultaneously and operations are more predictable. This reduces the time required and makes the work less stressful.