W LIV 0397 Addendum.
finalreport
Project code:
W.LIV.0397
Prepared by:
Paul Troja
Felix Domus Pty Ltd
Date published:
October 2013
ISBN:
9781741919721
PUBLISHED BY
Meat & Livestock Australia Limited
Locked Bag 991
NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2059
Improving Standing Stun
Restraint in Indonesia
Addendum Report
Meat & Livestock Australia acknowledges the matching funds provided by the Australian
Government to support the research and development detailed in this publication.
This publication is published by Meat & Livestock Australia Limited ABN 39 081 678 364 (MLA). Care is taken to ensure the accuracy of
the information contained in this publication. However MLA cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the
information or opinions contained in the publication. You should make your own enquiries before making decisions concerning your
interests. Reproduction in whole or in part of this publication is prohibited without prior written consent of MLA.
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Abstract
The installation of the Mark 1 restraining box conversion was completed in April 2012. When the
device was able to be viewed in operation at the Sinar Mulya abattoir in Jakarta Indonesia, it was
seen that further improvements could be made to meet with all of the DAFF and ESCAS
guidelines, and the OIE animal welfare standards for the slaughter of cattle with stunning. There
were a number of operational and design elements of the restraining box that needed to be
improved to facilitate a more consistent process and presentation of the animal at the point of
slaughter.
To address these issues, MLA requested that the service provider send a small team to
Indonesia to correct these prototype design issues and to improve the functionality of the
equipment. This report should be viewed as an addendum to the original report W.LIV.0397 Improving Standing Stun Restraint in Indonesia.
Page 2 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Executive Summary
During a review of the restraint box conducted in April 2012, various mechanical and operational
issues were identified. These were mainly associated with the presentation of the animal at the
point of slaughter and to minimise the animal’s stress levels during the restraining period just
prior to stunning. The aim is to provide a more consistent process.
The specific functionality issues of the proto type restraining box were:
The chin lift mechanism activation lever required the operator to stand in the animal’s line
of sight.
The side door latch and locking device was in the animal’s line of sight and required the
operator to stand on the dry landing area.
The belly plate that acts to move the animal’s centre of gravity towards the side door thus
providing quick and efficient discharge of the animal from the restraining device was not
reliable on larger animals.
The head bale mechanism exhibits excessive lateral movement during application.
Overhead lighting of the area affected the animal’s movement in the cattle race and into
the restraining box.
There is a step from the cattle race into the restraining box.
A further review of these issues has occurred with the exception of the overhead lighting and
cattle race. These were considered to be site related and can be corrected by the abattoir
operator. It should be noted that there was an obvious lack of basic maintenance of the
restraining box and its moving parts that, if attended to on a regular basis, would ensure reliable
and compliant outcomes.
Page 3 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Contents
1
Glossary of Terms .......................................................... 5
2
Background ..................................................................... 5
3
Project Objectives .......................................................... 5
4
Results and discussion .................................................. 6
5
Conclusions .................................................................. 12
6
Success in achieving objectives ................................. 12
7
Recommendations ........................................................ 12
8
Appendices ................................................................... 12
Page 4 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
1 Glossary of Terms
OIE
DAFF
ESCAS
MLA
Office Internationale des epizooties, world organisation for animal health.
The Australian Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries.
Export Supply Chain Assurance System.
Meat and Livestock Australia.
2 Background
The Australian Meat and Livestock industry acted to provide support to the Indonesian Meat and
Livestock industry in the form of advice and selected technical assistance for better handling and
processing of Australian livestock. One of the outcomes of this program was the development
and installation of Mark 1 boxes for the restraining of Australian cattle in abattoirs throughout
Indonesia. Due to non-compliant practices in relation to animal welfare emanating from the
operation of the Mark 1 restraining box, MLA commissioned Felix Domus consultancy (service
provider) to retro fit the existing Mark 1 box and to provide a prototype box with full operating
instructions and construction drawings. This service was provided in November 2011, but due to
timing and other administrative issues, the prototype restraining box was never commissioned
and tested.
In April 2012, the Mark 1 restraining box conversion was viewed in operation at the Sinar Mulya
abattoir located in Jakarta. As a result, a list of design and functionality improvements was
presented to MLA for their consideration. This submission was subsequently considered by the
MLA office in Jakarta and approved by the R&D committee.
On 1 October 2012, representatives travelled to Indonesia and performed some of the works as
defined in the letter of offer dated 13 September 2012.
3 Project Objectives
During a review of the Mark 1 restraint conversion conducted in April 2012, various mechanical
and operational issues were identified. These were mainly associated with the presentation of
the animal at the point of slaughter during the restraining period just prior to stunning. The aim
was to fully comply with OIE animal welfare standards for the stunning and slaughter of cattle.
To that end the project objectives became:
1. The chin lift ratchet mechanism has the following design functionality issues:
The location of the lift device is inappropriate and needs to be repositioned outside the
animal’s line of sight.
The operational aspects of the ratchet are physically difficult resulting is a slow response
time in the application.
Screen the line of sight of the animal.
2. The side door latch needs to be relocated to a position under the chin lift line of operation
thus allowing the operator to stand at ground level rather than on the dry landing concrete
slab.
3. The belly plate needs to be extended and enlarged to ensure that the animal’s collapsed
body is pushed towards the door thus affecting a discharge upon opening the restraining box
door.
Page 5 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
4. The head bale mechanism needs to be braced more effectively to reduced lateral movement
and make the animal’s head more accessible to the operator.
5. The lighting configuration needs to be adjusted to eliminate shadowing on the restraining box
floor.
6. Attend to any other matter (within reason) that is of concern, that directly relates to the
functionality of the restraining box, and that can be completed within the period of mission.
The program of work was to include:
1. Reconfirm the principles of humane slaughter through past and existing designs but enhance
the application to ensure consistent and repeatable outcomes in presenting the animal for
stun and transfer to the dry landing area adjacent to the restraining box.
2. Complete the Mark 1 restraining box conversion modifications in a location nominated by
MLA.
3. In collaboration with MLA staff, conduct a stunning trial and make video and photographic
records.
4. Make refinements and re-trial if necessary.
5. Update fabrication drawings to reflect the final working version.
6. Provide a final report written description of the operation, drawings and photographs.
4 Results and Discussion
The task of implementing the changes to the restraining box was influenced by discussions with
the abattoir owners and operators who have a more comprehensive knowledge of the working
environment and more particularly the site layout and restraining box location.
1. Chin Lift Operation.
This lever and ratchet mechanism is located in front of the restraining box and in the direct
line of sight of the live animal.
Page 6 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 1: End elevation of the restraining box and lever arm and ratchet that raises the
chin restraint into place thus restricting lateral movement of the animal’s head.
The operational issue of concern is that if you reposition the lever mechanism to be at right
angles to the restraining box and out of the direct line of sight of the animal, you cut off the
operator access to the upper end of the cattle race and access to the stunning platform. After
some discussion with abattoir management it was decided to leave the lever mechanism in its
current location given that proper screening of the chin and head lift should adequately address
the ‘line of sight’ issue. A drawing has been included in the appendix to this report which outlines
the lever mechanism at right angles to the restraining box, out of line of sight of the animal.
Figure 2: The side elevation of the lever arm and chin lift mechanism.
The intention to lower the lever arm giving the operator the ability to push down rather then pull
down on the lever was discussed with the operators. It was concluded not to change the angle
of the lever arm given that it would limit operator access to the back of the restraining box and
upper end of the cattle race.
Page 7 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
To facilitate a quicker and easier response time in raising the chin lift, a little oil and grease was
applied to the guide rails and main support bearing thus reducing friction and improving
movement. It should be noted that the chin lift must fully engage the chin and head of the
animal, so extra effort should be exercised by the operator to ensure proper contact.
Figure 3: Depicts the fixed screen that limits the animal’s vision
With the introduction of the end screen, the operator of the chin lift lever can no longer see the
head and will have to rely on the stunner operator’s signal to lift the chin lift and to engage the
head sufficiently to restrict lateral head movement.
Figure 4: An internal view of the chin lift, head bale and blocking screen.
2. Side door latch relocation.
In the original design, the door locking device was positioned at shoulder height for an
operator standing at ground level. However, in this particular application, the restraining box
Page 8 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
is fixed to a concrete slab 30 centimetres above the ground proper thus positioning the latch
handle higher and in line with the extended chin lift.
Figure 5: Side elevation of the side door handle and latch.
In Figure 5, a locking pin (not inserted) can be seen in the top right of the frame. This pin has
been fitted by the operators to stop the animal’s head from accidentally opening the door
during stunning. To further restrict the accidental opening of the side door by the lateral
movement of the animal’s head, the handle of the latch was bent from the chin lift as depicted
in Figure 6.
Figure 6: End elevation of the bent door handle.
Page 9 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 7: The side elevation of the relocated locking latch and side screen completely
enclosing the head capture area and restricting vision of the animal.
The side door handle and latch relocation and the additional fixed U shaped handle under the
opening device now allows the door to opened at ground level and without any interference from
the live animal’s head movement.
3.
Belly Plate Modification.
The original design and trialling of the restraining box in Australia tested cattle that were
approximately 450 kg live weight so the belly plate was fitted toward the front of the box with the
expectation of engaging the belly of the collapsed animal and forcing its weight against the side
door. It became evident that the belly plate required modification for cattle above 450kg. Figure
8 shows the wear marks on the belly plate and rear end of the box floor which indicates that the
animal in a collapsed position is not engaging the belly plate properly.
Figure 8: Side elevation of the restraining box depicting the original belly plate as
described above.
The belly plate has been doubled in width and on a similar incline to the original fitting enlarging
the area making it more suitable for all class and weight ranges of cattle.
Page 10 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 9: Side elevation of the restraining box with an extended belly plate insert.
4.
Head Bale.
Upon proper examination of the device it was clear that the problem of lateral movement is
simply a lack of maintenance and regular adjustment of the fittings. The device is simple and
easy to maintain, so any further refinement would provide little improvement and introduce a
more complicated device in terms of operation and maintenance. It was therefore agreed to
leave the device unaltered and reduce the lateral movement by adjusting the fittings.
Figure 10: The head bale mechanism and ratchet in a closed position.
5. Cattle race floor levels.
The step in the cattle race into the restraining box may intermittently cause the animal to
hesitate prior to entry into the restraint box; however this was not considered an issue by the
abattoir operators.
Page 11 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 11: The step into the restraining box
6. Light Fittings Location over the Restraining Box.
The light intensity inside the restraining box and adjoining cattle race is lower than the
surroundings. This will have an impact on the animal’s vision and ability to move forward.
The solution to this issue lies with the local operator and can be fixed by repositioning the
overhead lighting.
5 Conclusions
The W.LIV.0397 project objectives and deliverables have been fulfilled by the completion of
these modifications and design adjustments and explanations as required. The conclusions and
comments made in the original report, with the exception of the issues addressed in this work,
are still relevant.
Proper training in the operation of this box is important and will greatly assist in improving the
animal welfare standards and hygiene.
Proper maintenance is important so that the equipment can continue to work effectively. The
restraining box is simple with very few moving parts so a monthly check and lubrication is
recommended to ensure reliable operation.
6 Success in achieving objectives
The project’s primary goal of correction and improvement of specific operational issues that were
identified as necessary to achieve overall compliance has been achieved.
7 Recommendations
The head bale restraining device modification has achieved the desired outcomes of adjusting
existing infrastructure to allow for humane stunning and slaughter of cattle.
8 Appendices
Page 12 of 12
Project code:
W.LIV.0397
Prepared by:
Paul Troja
Felix Domus Pty Ltd
Date published:
October 2013
ISBN:
9781741919721
PUBLISHED BY
Meat & Livestock Australia Limited
Locked Bag 991
NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2059
Improving Standing Stun
Restraint in Indonesia
Addendum Report
Meat & Livestock Australia acknowledges the matching funds provided by the Australian
Government to support the research and development detailed in this publication.
This publication is published by Meat & Livestock Australia Limited ABN 39 081 678 364 (MLA). Care is taken to ensure the accuracy of
the information contained in this publication. However MLA cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the
information or opinions contained in the publication. You should make your own enquiries before making decisions concerning your
interests. Reproduction in whole or in part of this publication is prohibited without prior written consent of MLA.
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Abstract
The installation of the Mark 1 restraining box conversion was completed in April 2012. When the
device was able to be viewed in operation at the Sinar Mulya abattoir in Jakarta Indonesia, it was
seen that further improvements could be made to meet with all of the DAFF and ESCAS
guidelines, and the OIE animal welfare standards for the slaughter of cattle with stunning. There
were a number of operational and design elements of the restraining box that needed to be
improved to facilitate a more consistent process and presentation of the animal at the point of
slaughter.
To address these issues, MLA requested that the service provider send a small team to
Indonesia to correct these prototype design issues and to improve the functionality of the
equipment. This report should be viewed as an addendum to the original report W.LIV.0397 Improving Standing Stun Restraint in Indonesia.
Page 2 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Executive Summary
During a review of the restraint box conducted in April 2012, various mechanical and operational
issues were identified. These were mainly associated with the presentation of the animal at the
point of slaughter and to minimise the animal’s stress levels during the restraining period just
prior to stunning. The aim is to provide a more consistent process.
The specific functionality issues of the proto type restraining box were:
The chin lift mechanism activation lever required the operator to stand in the animal’s line
of sight.
The side door latch and locking device was in the animal’s line of sight and required the
operator to stand on the dry landing area.
The belly plate that acts to move the animal’s centre of gravity towards the side door thus
providing quick and efficient discharge of the animal from the restraining device was not
reliable on larger animals.
The head bale mechanism exhibits excessive lateral movement during application.
Overhead lighting of the area affected the animal’s movement in the cattle race and into
the restraining box.
There is a step from the cattle race into the restraining box.
A further review of these issues has occurred with the exception of the overhead lighting and
cattle race. These were considered to be site related and can be corrected by the abattoir
operator. It should be noted that there was an obvious lack of basic maintenance of the
restraining box and its moving parts that, if attended to on a regular basis, would ensure reliable
and compliant outcomes.
Page 3 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Contents
1
Glossary of Terms .......................................................... 5
2
Background ..................................................................... 5
3
Project Objectives .......................................................... 5
4
Results and discussion .................................................. 6
5
Conclusions .................................................................. 12
6
Success in achieving objectives ................................. 12
7
Recommendations ........................................................ 12
8
Appendices ................................................................... 12
Page 4 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
1 Glossary of Terms
OIE
DAFF
ESCAS
MLA
Office Internationale des epizooties, world organisation for animal health.
The Australian Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries.
Export Supply Chain Assurance System.
Meat and Livestock Australia.
2 Background
The Australian Meat and Livestock industry acted to provide support to the Indonesian Meat and
Livestock industry in the form of advice and selected technical assistance for better handling and
processing of Australian livestock. One of the outcomes of this program was the development
and installation of Mark 1 boxes for the restraining of Australian cattle in abattoirs throughout
Indonesia. Due to non-compliant practices in relation to animal welfare emanating from the
operation of the Mark 1 restraining box, MLA commissioned Felix Domus consultancy (service
provider) to retro fit the existing Mark 1 box and to provide a prototype box with full operating
instructions and construction drawings. This service was provided in November 2011, but due to
timing and other administrative issues, the prototype restraining box was never commissioned
and tested.
In April 2012, the Mark 1 restraining box conversion was viewed in operation at the Sinar Mulya
abattoir located in Jakarta. As a result, a list of design and functionality improvements was
presented to MLA for their consideration. This submission was subsequently considered by the
MLA office in Jakarta and approved by the R&D committee.
On 1 October 2012, representatives travelled to Indonesia and performed some of the works as
defined in the letter of offer dated 13 September 2012.
3 Project Objectives
During a review of the Mark 1 restraint conversion conducted in April 2012, various mechanical
and operational issues were identified. These were mainly associated with the presentation of
the animal at the point of slaughter during the restraining period just prior to stunning. The aim
was to fully comply with OIE animal welfare standards for the stunning and slaughter of cattle.
To that end the project objectives became:
1. The chin lift ratchet mechanism has the following design functionality issues:
The location of the lift device is inappropriate and needs to be repositioned outside the
animal’s line of sight.
The operational aspects of the ratchet are physically difficult resulting is a slow response
time in the application.
Screen the line of sight of the animal.
2. The side door latch needs to be relocated to a position under the chin lift line of operation
thus allowing the operator to stand at ground level rather than on the dry landing concrete
slab.
3. The belly plate needs to be extended and enlarged to ensure that the animal’s collapsed
body is pushed towards the door thus affecting a discharge upon opening the restraining box
door.
Page 5 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
4. The head bale mechanism needs to be braced more effectively to reduced lateral movement
and make the animal’s head more accessible to the operator.
5. The lighting configuration needs to be adjusted to eliminate shadowing on the restraining box
floor.
6. Attend to any other matter (within reason) that is of concern, that directly relates to the
functionality of the restraining box, and that can be completed within the period of mission.
The program of work was to include:
1. Reconfirm the principles of humane slaughter through past and existing designs but enhance
the application to ensure consistent and repeatable outcomes in presenting the animal for
stun and transfer to the dry landing area adjacent to the restraining box.
2. Complete the Mark 1 restraining box conversion modifications in a location nominated by
MLA.
3. In collaboration with MLA staff, conduct a stunning trial and make video and photographic
records.
4. Make refinements and re-trial if necessary.
5. Update fabrication drawings to reflect the final working version.
6. Provide a final report written description of the operation, drawings and photographs.
4 Results and Discussion
The task of implementing the changes to the restraining box was influenced by discussions with
the abattoir owners and operators who have a more comprehensive knowledge of the working
environment and more particularly the site layout and restraining box location.
1. Chin Lift Operation.
This lever and ratchet mechanism is located in front of the restraining box and in the direct
line of sight of the live animal.
Page 6 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 1: End elevation of the restraining box and lever arm and ratchet that raises the
chin restraint into place thus restricting lateral movement of the animal’s head.
The operational issue of concern is that if you reposition the lever mechanism to be at right
angles to the restraining box and out of the direct line of sight of the animal, you cut off the
operator access to the upper end of the cattle race and access to the stunning platform. After
some discussion with abattoir management it was decided to leave the lever mechanism in its
current location given that proper screening of the chin and head lift should adequately address
the ‘line of sight’ issue. A drawing has been included in the appendix to this report which outlines
the lever mechanism at right angles to the restraining box, out of line of sight of the animal.
Figure 2: The side elevation of the lever arm and chin lift mechanism.
The intention to lower the lever arm giving the operator the ability to push down rather then pull
down on the lever was discussed with the operators. It was concluded not to change the angle
of the lever arm given that it would limit operator access to the back of the restraining box and
upper end of the cattle race.
Page 7 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
To facilitate a quicker and easier response time in raising the chin lift, a little oil and grease was
applied to the guide rails and main support bearing thus reducing friction and improving
movement. It should be noted that the chin lift must fully engage the chin and head of the
animal, so extra effort should be exercised by the operator to ensure proper contact.
Figure 3: Depicts the fixed screen that limits the animal’s vision
With the introduction of the end screen, the operator of the chin lift lever can no longer see the
head and will have to rely on the stunner operator’s signal to lift the chin lift and to engage the
head sufficiently to restrict lateral head movement.
Figure 4: An internal view of the chin lift, head bale and blocking screen.
2. Side door latch relocation.
In the original design, the door locking device was positioned at shoulder height for an
operator standing at ground level. However, in this particular application, the restraining box
Page 8 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
is fixed to a concrete slab 30 centimetres above the ground proper thus positioning the latch
handle higher and in line with the extended chin lift.
Figure 5: Side elevation of the side door handle and latch.
In Figure 5, a locking pin (not inserted) can be seen in the top right of the frame. This pin has
been fitted by the operators to stop the animal’s head from accidentally opening the door
during stunning. To further restrict the accidental opening of the side door by the lateral
movement of the animal’s head, the handle of the latch was bent from the chin lift as depicted
in Figure 6.
Figure 6: End elevation of the bent door handle.
Page 9 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 7: The side elevation of the relocated locking latch and side screen completely
enclosing the head capture area and restricting vision of the animal.
The side door handle and latch relocation and the additional fixed U shaped handle under the
opening device now allows the door to opened at ground level and without any interference from
the live animal’s head movement.
3.
Belly Plate Modification.
The original design and trialling of the restraining box in Australia tested cattle that were
approximately 450 kg live weight so the belly plate was fitted toward the front of the box with the
expectation of engaging the belly of the collapsed animal and forcing its weight against the side
door. It became evident that the belly plate required modification for cattle above 450kg. Figure
8 shows the wear marks on the belly plate and rear end of the box floor which indicates that the
animal in a collapsed position is not engaging the belly plate properly.
Figure 8: Side elevation of the restraining box depicting the original belly plate as
described above.
The belly plate has been doubled in width and on a similar incline to the original fitting enlarging
the area making it more suitable for all class and weight ranges of cattle.
Page 10 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 9: Side elevation of the restraining box with an extended belly plate insert.
4.
Head Bale.
Upon proper examination of the device it was clear that the problem of lateral movement is
simply a lack of maintenance and regular adjustment of the fittings. The device is simple and
easy to maintain, so any further refinement would provide little improvement and introduce a
more complicated device in terms of operation and maintenance. It was therefore agreed to
leave the device unaltered and reduce the lateral movement by adjusting the fittings.
Figure 10: The head bale mechanism and ratchet in a closed position.
5. Cattle race floor levels.
The step in the cattle race into the restraining box may intermittently cause the animal to
hesitate prior to entry into the restraint box; however this was not considered an issue by the
abattoir operators.
Page 11 of 12
Mark 1 restraining box conversion – Addendum
Figure 11: The step into the restraining box
6. Light Fittings Location over the Restraining Box.
The light intensity inside the restraining box and adjoining cattle race is lower than the
surroundings. This will have an impact on the animal’s vision and ability to move forward.
The solution to this issue lies with the local operator and can be fixed by repositioning the
overhead lighting.
5 Conclusions
The W.LIV.0397 project objectives and deliverables have been fulfilled by the completion of
these modifications and design adjustments and explanations as required. The conclusions and
comments made in the original report, with the exception of the issues addressed in this work,
are still relevant.
Proper training in the operation of this box is important and will greatly assist in improving the
animal welfare standards and hygiene.
Proper maintenance is important so that the equipment can continue to work effectively. The
restraining box is simple with very few moving parts so a monthly check and lubrication is
recommended to ensure reliable operation.
6 Success in achieving objectives
The project’s primary goal of correction and improvement of specific operational issues that were
identified as necessary to achieve overall compliance has been achieved.
7 Recommendations
The head bale restraining device modification has achieved the desired outcomes of adjusting
existing infrastructure to allow for humane stunning and slaughter of cattle.
8 Appendices
Page 12 of 12