-
In search of a bottle filling and labeling machine
We are in need of an accurate bottle filler that can be easily operated by monkees
Also interested in a powered bottle labeler- must be able to apply a 7″x10″ partially transparent label. Contact me if you have one you are trying to sell or if you know of a good supplier. -
8 Replies
-
We are in need of an accurate bottle filler that can be easily operated by monkees
Also interested in a powered bottle labeler- must be able to apply a 7″x10″ partially transparent label. Contact me if you have one you are trying to sell or if you know of a good supplier.We just ordered our 6 filler bottling machine from St. Paticks of Texas online. Don’t know how it works yet but the service was good, so far. Nice to chat with you today about Thomas McKenzie. Thank you and Good luck! Diane Paulson, President, Cascade Peak Spirits email
-
We just ordered our 6 filler bottling machine from St. Paticks of Texas online. Don’t know how it works yet but the service was good, so far. Nice to chat with you today about Thomas McKenzie. Thank you and Good luck! Diane Paulson, President, Cascade Peak Spirits email
Diane, thanks but I don’t think my coworker Doug will let me order from St. Pats again. He called them ready to spend a few thousand last fall, asked evidently one too many questions (this was a five minute conversation) and the person on the order end told him it was their busy season and she was too busy to answer any more of his questions and hung up! We’ve had better luck with GW Kent.
Aside from that, I think all St. Pats sells is gravity fillers, and some TTB field agents have not found those acceptable for spirits. In theory they are not as accurate as a volumetric filler. While fine for wine, spirit fill levels are very tight on the tolerences and I was told by our field agent that we couldn’t use a gravity filler. I have a 4 head volumetric filler that never worked as advertised, I’m sure the gravity filler you bought will be more accurate than my original filler- can’t get any consistency with it, thus I’m looking for a replacement. I may put my old one on Ebay soon.
-
Aside from that, I think all St. Pats sells is gravity fillers, and some TTB field agents have not found those acceptable for spirits. In theory they are not as accurate as a volumetric filler. While fine for wine, spirit fill levels are very tight on the tolerences and I was told by our field agent that we couldn’t use a gravity filler. I have a 4 head volumetric filler that never worked as advertised, I’m sure the gravity filler you bought will be more accurate than my original filler- can’t get any consistency with it, thus I’m looking for a replacement. I may put my old one on Ebay soon.
Guy, while I dig around in the Regs for the actual tolerances, maybe we could talk about what kind of fill type we mean. As a chemist, I use the terms a bit differently.
Mostly fillers I’ve seen are what I would call fill-by-height. Gravity filled with or without gas pressure pushback, they all fill to a constant height in the bottle. So fill variation sources are the error in that height and the error in the bottle volume to that height. Bottlers with a snifter leg (I think that’s what it’s called) and gas pushback might be more repeatable than a simple GAI table top filler – but I have my doubts (based on having one of each).
Your filler, if I understand it, is fill-by-time. It runs a motor for a certain time interval. Fillers like that can pump either liquid direct , or gas to displace liquid either by pressure or vacuum. You might be able to time that pump closely and repeatibly, but you can get error in flow and/or total displacement. I wouldn’t call it volumetric by a long shot.
In chemistry, ‘volumetric’ and ‘gravimetric’ are used slighly differently. ‘Gravimetric’ would refer to putting the bottle on a scale and dispensing until a certain weight was reached. How the dispensing is done is immaterial. For a volumetric fill, you dispense to a known volume and any excess simply overflows. I have seen fillers that would do that by filling a piston (like a syringe) and then dispensing that to the bottle. Sold for thick liquids like shampoo. There the trouble is with the transfer – did you get the measuring volume all the way empty? Is any left in the lines? If the lines are kept liquid full, did they stay that way, or did any extra drip into the bottle?
I wonder what standards agents in other parts of the country hold people to?
Update 1: 27 cfr 19.632 points to 25 cfr 5 subpart E for standards of fill.
27 cfr 5.47a (
says:The following tolerances shall be allowed:
(1) Discrepancies due to errors in measuring which occur in filling conducted in
compliance with good commercial practice.
(2) Discrepancies due to differences in the capacity of bottles, resulting solely
from unavoidable difficulties in manufacturing such bottles to a uniform capacity:
Provided, That no greater tolerance shall be allowed in case of bottles which,
because of their design, cannot be made of approximately uniform capacity than
is allowed in case of bottles which can be manufactured so as to be of
approximately uniform capacity.
(3) Discrepancies in measure due to differences in atmospheric conditions in
various places and which unavoidably result from the ordinary and customary
exposure of alcoholic beverages in bottles to evaporation. The reasonableness of
discrepancies under this paragraph shall be determined on the facts in each
case.
Ah, ‘good commercial practice’ – how concise.
For comparison, the wine equivalent (27 cfr 4.37) says:
Tolerances.
Statement of net contents shall indicate exactly the volume of wine within the
container, except that the following tolerances shall be allowed:
(1) Discrepancies due exclusively to errors in measuring which occur in filling
conducted in compliance with good commercial practice.
(2) Discrepancies due exclusively to differences in the capacity of containers,
resulting solely from unavoidable difficulties in manufacturing such containers so
as to be of uniform capacity: Provided, That no greater tolerance shall be allowed
in case of containers which, because of their design, cannot be made of
approximately uniform capacity than is allowed in case of containers which can
be manufactured so as to be of approximately uniform capacity.
(3) Discrepancies in measure due to differences in atmospheric conditions in
various places and which unavoidably result from the ordinary and customary
exposure of alcoholic beverages in containers to evaporation. The
reasonableness to discrepancies under this paragraph shall be determined on
the facts in each case.
Hmmm. I thought it was specific for wine – %ages and mL. Let me look elsewhere…
Well, I find references to 1% for wine – but without TTB reference. Beer in kegs has a 2% allowance, built into the CFR.
TTB form 5640.8 shows how to calculate fines for beer and wine deliberately overfilled more than 0.5% – but I can’t find the spirit equivalent.
Update 2 1/4/08
Still haven’t found a written policy, but google does locate a partial quote that I’m trying to track down the version of. This wine journal article ( http://www.ajevonline.org/cgi/content/citation/32/1/86 )looks like it quotes just the item I’ve seen somewhere else. It specifes in part ‘as many overfills as underfills’ i think the rest of the paragraph quotes has the tolerances – but i can’t find the original.
Numerous clips from treasury decisions on beer and wine list +/- 0.5% tolerances, without specifying an underlying reg or decision.
-
Update 2 1/4/08
Still haven’t found a written policy, but google does locate a partial quote that I’m trying to track down the version of. This wine journal article ( http://www.ajevonline.org/cgi/content/citation/32/1/86 )looks like it quotes just the item I’ve seen somewhere else. It specifes in part ‘as many overfills as underfills’ i think the rest of the paragraph quotes has the tolerances – but i can’t find the original.
Numerous clips from treasury decisions on beer and wine list +/- 0.5% tolerances, without specifying an underlying reg or decision.
Ok, take a look at 19.386 http://tinyurl.com/2kk7rn
B (2) iii states that fill tolerance is .15% of alcohol. On a 750ml bottle at 80 proof that means (Doug did a quick calc -so accuracy is questionable
) tolerence is about 1.13ml! I think I know why they told me gravity fill won’t be accurate enough. -
Ok, take a look at 19.386 http://tinyurl.com/2kk7rn
B (2) iii states that fill tolerance is .15% of alcohol. On a 750ml bottle at 80 proof that means (Doug did a quick calc -so accuracy is questionable
) tolerence is about 1.13ml! I think I know why they told me gravity fill won’t be accurate enough.I think you’re mis-interpreting those paragraphs. 19.386 (1) deals with quantity/fill and (2) deals with alcohol content/concentration. 1.1mL is the product of the two – but I don’t think you have to do that multiplication.
Grrr… don’t you love reading the CFR in a vacuum? Someone at the TTB has decided how to interpret those paragraphs. Actually given what I’ve heard, more than one someone – and they’ve come up with different answers.
-
We are in need of an accurate bottle filler that can be easily operated by monkees
Also interested in a powered bottle labeler- must be able to apply a 7″x10″ partially transparent label. Contact me if you have one you are trying to sell or if you know of a good supplier.We use an Enlomaster with a glass cylinder. It is a vacuum filler and has proven quite accurate – 300-400 bottles per hour. We also use an inline filter and the small filler attachment to do 50ml bottles.
-
We use an Enlomaster with a glass cylinder. It is a vacuum filler and has proven quite accurate – 300-400 bottles per hour. We also use an inline filter and the small filler attachment to do 50ml bottles.
Don, is this the unit you’re using?
http://www.durfo.com/eng/enomaster_eng.asp
How is the consistency of fill? Can trained monkey’s operate with little supervision?
-
Don, is this the unit you’re using?
http://www.durfo.com/eng/enomaster_eng.asp
How is the consistency of fill? Can trained monkey’s operate with little supervision?
That is it. Works great for us, and according to our wives we are barely above the monkey level.
Log in to reply.
English 
Spanish 
German 
French 
Russian