# Nice video of a commercial extracting operation



## BMAC (Jun 23, 2009)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eA30BfH6FBU


Jim did you post this video?


----------



## Honey-4-All (Dec 19, 2008)

That company is out of northern Europe although the do have a north american dealer. I personally have not seen or heard of anyone with that set up in the US.


----------



## Jon B (Apr 24, 2013)

This extracting system is very similar to the commercial equipment built by Cowen Manufacturing in Utah.

http://cowenmfg.com/


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Yes, it works on the same basic principle as the US systems. The load and unloading of the extractor isnt as quick and efficient though especially with no loading chains. A normal load/unload with a 120 Cowen is about a minute and a half (another 20 seconds or so from switch on to switch off) More significant to me, though, is that because the combs are pushed, not carried, up to the extractor the loading rack is of limited size and only holds enough for half an extractor load meaning the extractor would have to remain shut down until the additional combs are uncapped. The upside of this design would be that it would be more compact. Though it is a 120 it probably functions more at the capacity of a 60. The need for a large clarifying tank seems a bit odd as well. All in all it appears to be a pretty nice system though one that probably needs some improvements.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

jim lyon said:


> More significant to me, though, is that because the combs are pushed, not carried, up to the extractor the loading rack is of limited size and only holds enough for half an extractor load meaning the extractor would have to remain shut down until the additional combs are uncapped. The upside of this design would be that it would be more compact. Though it is a 120 it probably functions more at the capacity of a 60.


Yes noticed that also, there is a built in inefficiency there, at least in the way they are operating it.

Could be remedied at least a couple of ways I can think of, other thing to bear in mind is cost of bigger / better gear may be an issue, looks like this is a one man plant or maybe husband wife combo.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Yes, it's like they are 90% of the way to a really efficient system. Seeing an unattended extractor not spinning while the cutter is running is a pet peeve of mine. Far better to have a smaller extractor in use than a larger one waiting for frames.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I like the chain conveyor system Cowen uses. It spaces out the frames from the uncapper which allows a worker to touch up the frames before the extractor


----------



## VanIslander (Aug 19, 2013)

Is it common in setups like this, not to invert the frames? In the other extractors we see, the top of the frames is nearest to the center.


----------



## Honey-4-All (Dec 19, 2008)

VanIslander said:


> Is it common in setups like this, not to invert the frames? In the other extractors we see, the top of the frames is nearest to the center.



Say what? Since the cells angle are generally laid out about 10-15 degrees towards the top bar side of the frame it would be a little disconcerting to have the centrifugal force of extraction pressure being applied opposite of the design of the cell walls? Trying to push honey into the hole will not get it out.....???? Did I read you wrong?


----------



## VanIslander (Aug 19, 2013)

Honey-4-All said:


> Did I read you wrong?


Nope. I was definitely out to lunch on that one. inch:


----------



## jmgi (Jan 15, 2009)

jim lyon said:


> Yes, it's like they are 90% of the way to a really efficient system. Seeing an unattended extractor not spinning while the cutter is running is a pet peeve of mine. Far better to have a smaller extractor in use than a larger one waiting for frames.


Exactly, that's why I will be buying a second 20 frame Maxant next year to go along with the one I just bought this year. That way I can be spinning one while loading another as I uncap the frames.


----------



## BMAC (Jun 23, 2009)

jim lyon said:


> the loading rack is of limited size and only holds enough for half an extractor load meaning the extractor would have to remain shut down until the additional combs are uncapped. The upside of this design would be that it would be more compact.


Not really an upside when your extractor isn't running though. I did think about that while watching the video. Regardless of the flaws in that system its way more efficient than my current setup, though I do use 2 28 frame extractors so that while one is running the other is being uncapped and loaded. I have the routine down that when one starts the other ends. Still very inefficient compared to the video.


----------



## Ben Little (Apr 9, 2012)

I have looked at some different operations and noticed that some have incorporated a radial extractor beside the large 60-120 frame horizontal side load, it seems like a good way to keep things going if you have an uneven load for the horizontal or different size frames.
I like my 20 frame Maxant and hope to have a cowen system in the near future


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ben Little said:


> I have looked at some different operations and noticed that some have incorporated a radial extractor beside the large 60-120 frame horizontal side load, it seems like a good way to keep things going if you have an uneven load for the horizontal or different size frames.
> I like my 20 frame Maxant and hope to have a cowen system in the near future


We have a 20 frame Dadant radial extractor sitting alongside our Cowen for the occasional frame that won't go through the automated system. We do, however, run pretty much any frame that can make the trip up the conveyer through the Cowen. One of the many advantages of a horizontal loading machine as opposed to a radial is that as long as they don't end up on the outside of a rack, even badly damaged frames and foundation can be spun out without blowing out because they can draw support from the adjacent frames. Such is not the case with a radial extractor where you have much larger gaps on the top bars than inside on the bottom bars. Anyone who has run a radial knows the sound of a frame blow out and what a pain it is to fish out all the parts to keep the machine from plugging. With a horizontal it's a really rare occurrence.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

One gets to a point where efficiency and one's pocketbook divide. Can you afford to be as efficient as that system seems to be? Is there the demand or need? There are plenty of people who uncap by hand and do so for 1,000 colonies worth of frames and custom extracting. And put out 5 barrels per day. How many people do you have working the extracting room? How much of a hurry is there?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

You have a stronger hand than I.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Given that this thread is about a commercial extracting system, and speaking just for me, I would think efficiency would be a key element. We typically have 2 people working in our extracting room and run around 60 mediums an hour. A third person will max the system out at around 75 to 80 per hour. Yes, we are in a hurry. Mite treatment windows are closing.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I understand what you are describing, Jim. But all aspects of an operation have to fit the needs and the abilities and the pocketbook of the operation and those running it and working it, right? So if one owns 500 to 1,000 hives, maybe the system shown on the first post is not the right one. Maybe it is. Brian knows best what he can afford and has room for in his extracting room.

The operation I was describing is a commercial one.


----------

