CITY MILK PLANTS: CONSTRUCTION AND ARRANGEMENT. 



15 



and the milk spilled. A comparison of the economy of the three 

 systems is shown in Table 2. 



Table 2. — Comparison of men and time required to receive and dump the milk 

 and wash the cans at three different types of plants. 



Type of plant. 



A (pump). . 

 B (conveyer) 

 C (elevator). 



Number 



of 

 plants. 



Average 

 cans of 



milk 



per 

 plant. 



1,034.7 

 845 

 825 



Average 



time 



spent 



per 



plant. 



Hours. 

 4.9 

 4.9 

 8.1 



Average 

 number 



of men 

 per 



plant. 



4.3 

 5.7 



5.8 



Average 

 hours 



of labor 



per 

 plant. 



26.2 

 30.8 



58.4 



Average 

 hours 

 of labor 

 per 100 

 cans re - 

 ceived. 



2.5 

 3.6 

 7.1 



Average 



time 

 per 100 

 cans re- 

 ceived. 



Hours. 

 0.47 



.58 

 .99 



Average 

 cans re- 

 ceived 



and 



dumped 



per 



hour. 



212.6 

 1"2.0 

 101.5 



Fig. 4. 



-Gravity conveyers bringing cans of milk from trucks to power conveyer, which 

 carries them to top floor where milk is dumped. 



From the data in this table it is apparent that the system of pump- 

 ing the milk from the ground floor rather than elevating it in cans 

 is much more economical in the use of labor. At these plants the 

 pumping system was more than twice as efficient as the elevator and 

 much more efficient than the conveyer system. The conveyer system, 

 however, is more economical in the use of labor than the elevator 

 system and requires only about one-half as many man hours to 

 handle 100 cans of milk. Of course, other factors enter into this 

 problem, but these figures will illustrate the general tendency. 



In some plants it may be necessary to have the receiving room on 

 the top floor because of lack of space on the ground floor, but that is 



