Service
Every capital dollar your facility spends is either validated or wasted by the quality of its process engineering. DPS delivers fully integrated food process design — from initial P&ID development through utility load calculations and final facility layout — so your project hits production targets on day one, not month six. We engineer the process first, then build around it.
Schedule A Consultation
DPS · Process Engineering & Design
Construction Risk Factors
Most food and beverage facility projects do not fail during construction. They fail during engineering — or more precisely, because engineering was never done with sufficient rigor. When a mid-market processor expands without a complete process engineering package, the consequences compound quietly: equipment arrives and does not fit the allocated footprint, utility capacity falls short at peak production, CIP circuits cannot reach new process zones, and the contractor builds exactly what the drawings show — even when the drawings are wrong. By the time these gaps surface during commissioning, the budget has already absorbed six figures in avoidable change orders and the production launch date has slipped by weeks or months.
Challenge 01
Facility layouts created by one firm, equipment specified by another, and utilities sized by a third produce drawings that technically exist but do not actually coordinate. Pipe routes conflict with structural steel, electrical panels block maintenance access, and drain capacity is calculated against the wrong production volume.
Challenge 02
Without accurate thermal, electrical, refrigeration, and water demand calculations tied to real production schedules, utility systems are either chronically undersized or dramatically over-built. Both outcomes destroy your project ROI.
Challenge 03
When FDA, USDA, SQF, or BRC requirements are layered onto a design after the fact rather than engineered in from the start, the result is expensive retrofits — sanitary floor coatings ripped out and re-poured, wall panels replaced, drainage re-graded — that should never have been necessary.
Challenge 04
When P&IDs, equipment specs, utility diagrams, and control narratives live in separate files from separate vendors, no one owns the integrated process. Errors hide between scopes.
The DPS Solution
DPS approaches process engineering as the foundational discipline of every food and beverage capital project — not as a preliminary checkbox before construction begins. Our in-house engineering team spans six disciplines: structural, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, process, and controls. That means the engineer developing your P&ID design is working in the same office as the controls programmer who will write your PLC logic and the project manager who will oversee installation. There is no handoff gap, no translation layer, and no finger-pointing between firms.
Our Design-Build-Manage model means that process engineering is never an isolated deliverable. Every facility layout we produce accounts for the equipment we will fabricate, the piping our crews will install, the utilities our mechanical engineers will size, and the automation sequences our controls team will program. When DPS draws a P&ID, it is not a theoretical document — it is a construction-ready blueprint backed by a team that will be held accountable for the result on the production floor.
We also operate as a business advisor before we operate as an engineering firm. Capital planning, ROI analysis, and phased expansion roadmaps are built into our process engineering scope because a technically brilliant facility layout that does not pencil financially is a failed design. DPS has turned down profitable engineering contracts when our feasibility analysis showed the client’s project would not generate adequate returns. That same discipline led one client to discover that a simple PLC adjustment — delivered at no charge — resolved a $3M capacity constraint, eliminating the need for a capital project entirely. They later engaged DPS for a $6M facility relocation because they trusted our judgment.
Key Capabilities
Integrated engineering, operational, and project capabilities designed to support efficient, scalable, and reliable production environments.
Custom ladder logic, structured text, and function block programs developed on Allen-Bradley, Siemens, and other major platforms for process control, safety interlocks, and high-speed sequencing across food and beverage unit operations.
Full supervisory control and data acquisition architecture including server configuration, real-time process visualization, historical trending, and role-based access designed for multi-line F&B production environments.
ISA-88-aligned recipe structures that allow production teams to manage formulations, ingredient scaling, and batch sequencing directly from the HMI — reducing changeover time and eliminating manual transcription errors.
Automated clean-in-place and sterilize-in-place sequences with full parametric data logging for FDA and USDA compliance, integrated with process scheduling to minimize non-productive time between production runs.
Real-time monitoring and automated control of boiler, compressed air, glycol, refrigeration, and HVAC systems to reduce per-unit energy cost while maintaining critical environmental parameters in temperature-sensitive processing areas.
Integration of new automation layers into existing brownfield facilities — migrating legacy relay logic or outdated DCS platforms to modern PLC/SCADA infrastructure without extended production shutdowns.
The DPS Integrated Advantage
Every DPS process engineering engagement produces a defined set of deliverables scoped to the project’s complexity, regulatory environment, and production objectives.
Scroll horizontally to compare every column on smaller screens.
| Scope Area | DPS Deliverables |
|---|---|
| Process Flow & P&ID Package | Process flow diagrams (PFDs), piping and instrumentation diagrams (P&IDs), equipment data sheets, line lists, and instrument index — all formatted to ISA-5.1 standards |
| Facility Layout | Dimensioned floor plans with equipment placement, personnel flow paths, utility routing corridors, maintenance clearance zones, and phased expansion boundaries |
| Utility Load Analysis | Peak simultaneous demand calculations for steam (BTU/hr), refrigeration (tons), compressed air (CFM), electrical (kVA), process water (GPM), and wastewater (GPD with BOD/TSS projections) |
| Sanitary & Compliance Design | Zone classification maps, material finish specifications (wall, floor, ceiling), drainage slope calculations, CIP circuit coverage diagrams, allergen control zoning, and USDA/FDA/SQF/BRC design compliance narratives |
| Controls & Automation Specification | Control system architecture, I/O point schedule, PLC/SCADA hardware specification, network topology diagram, control narrative descriptions for all automated process sequences |
| Capital Budget & ROI Model | Engineer’s opinion of probable cost, phased capital expenditure schedule, production capacity modeling, and ROI projection tied to throughput and labor assumptions |
| Project Coverage | All 50 U.S. states and Canada — with DPS offices in Cary, NC and Lake Forest, CA providing East Coast and West Coast project coordination |
Project Planning Guide
A food or beverage process design starts with the product, not a list of machines. Batch size, viscosity, temperature sensitivity, allergen profile, shelf-life strategy, and packaging format can each change how a system should operate. The aim is to make these requirements explicit before layout and procurement decisions become expensive to change.
The engineering solutions overview connects this technical work to capital planning, construction, and startup. DPS’s company overview explains the integrated engineering and operational approach behind that sequence.
Build a design basis that distinguishes normal operation from peak demand, cleaning, maintenance, and future expansion. A target hourly rate alone is not enough: a line may spend a large share of its available time changing products, preparing ingredients, or waiting for packaging.
For an existing plant, the expansion and scale-up guide explains how to compare this future basis with measured current performance.
Process flow diagrams establish how material moves through preparation, processing, holding, filling, and downstream handling. Piping and instrumentation diagrams then define equipment connections, valve functions, measurements, and control interfaces. Equipment specifications should follow the agreed operating envelope rather than vendor catalogue assumptions.
The layout needs to accommodate operators, cleaning access, maintenance removal, drainage, and safe movement of materials. Check transfer distances, elevations, pressure losses, and hold-up volumes alongside the visible equipment footprint. A compact arrangement is not useful if it prevents access or creates a cleaning problem.
Identify cleanability requirements early, including access for inspection, compatible materials, drainage behavior, and cleaning circuits. Determine which interfaces require food safety review and which verification records the quality team needs. The hygienic facility upgrade guide separates engineering decisions from the site-specific validation and regulatory work that remains necessary.
Specify operating modes, permissives, interlocks, recipe parameters, alarm priorities, and recovery behavior before software development. The automation and controls guide describes the questions to resolve with operations and maintenance teams. Mechanical and software design must agree on valve states, sensor locations, and failure responses.
At each design review, assign ownership of equipment connections, utility demand, electrical supply, control signals, and installation tolerances. Confirm which drawings are approved for procurement and which remain provisional. Include a change log so commercial assumptions and technical revisions remain connected.
Testing requirements should appear in specifications. Define what can be checked at the supplier, what must be checked after installation, and what requires product trials. Equipment approval is not the same as acceptance of the complete production process.
Prepare the following for an engineering discussion:
If the project’s capacity target or product mix is still uncertain, return to capital planning and feasibility before treating a preliminary equipment list as a final design.
A new product introduction should identify gaps between the required process and the existing line. Review hygienic design and changeover boundaries alongside equipment and control requirements, then define the commissioning evidence needed to accept the change.
Project Verification Questions
Quick answers to the questions we hear most often from prospective clients evaluating automation partners.
Before anything else. Process engineering should be the first investment in any food or beverage facility project — before equipment is quoted, before architects draw elevations, and before general contractors submit bids. At DPS, our process engineering package defines the scope that every other discipline builds from. Starting here prevents the most expensive category of project errors: building the wrong facility correctly.
Absolutely. A significant share of our process engineering work involves retrofit and expansion projects inside operating facilities. We survey existing conditions, verify as-built accuracy against actual field installations, calculate remaining utility capacity, and design the expansion to integrate with current infrastructure. Every P&ID we produce for an expansion project shows both existing and new systems on the same drawing so nothing falls between scopes.
We design for the most stringent applicable standard at every point in the facility and clearly delineate jurisdiction boundaries in the layout and compliance documentation. Our engineering team has direct experience with dual-jurisdiction facilities and builds zone separation, sanitary finishes, and CIP coverage to satisfy both USDA-FSIS and FDA requirements without redundant construction. SQF and BRC audit readiness is layered into the same design package.
For a mid-market project in the DPS range of $400K to $5M+, the process engineering and design phase typically runs six to twelve weeks depending on facility complexity, number of process lines, and regulatory scope. We front-load this investment deliberately — a thorough engineering package compresses the overall project timeline by eliminating design-driven change orders during construction. Clients who skip or compress process engineering routinely lose more weeks during construction than they saved during design.
No. Our process engineering deliverables are complete, construction-ready packages that any qualified contractor can execute. That said, our Design-Build-Manage model exists because project outcomes measurably improve when the team that engineered the process also builds and commissions it. The integration eliminates the interpretation errors that occur when a separate contractor builds from drawings they did not create.
Connect Planning With Production
Compare these decisions with the relevant industry requirements and published project examples. A case describes its own scope and outcome, not a performance commitment for a different facility.
Industry Requirements
DPS engineers juice and functional beverage facilities with coordinated ingredient handling, batching, thermal or HPP processing, filling, CIP, and automation.
Review Deliverables for Juice & Functional BeveragesIndustry Requirements
DPS engineers prepared food and ingredient facilities, coordinating receiving, batching, cooking, cooling, packaging, sanitation, equipment, and process controls.
Review Deliverables for Prepared Foods & IngredientsPublished Case
DPS delivered a 350,000 lbs/week ground beef line in an active Los Angeles plant, coordinating 12 subcontractors and early production by Week 11.
Review Project ContextConnect The Next Decision
Scenario
Increase usable capacity by connecting demand and process constraints to equipment, utilities, layout, construction phases, and the realities of live production.
Key decision: Identify the limiting system before deciding where to add capacity.
Planning Checklist for Expansion & Production Scale-UpScenario
Translate food safety and operational findings into a controlled engineering scope covering product flow, cleanability, facility interfaces, and verification.
Key decision: Define the site-specific risk and verification requirements before describing a construction change as a compliance solution.
Planning Checklist for Hygienic Facility & Compliance UpgradesSolution
Define how the process should behave before developing control software, then connect recipes, alarms, interlocks, operator workflows, and testing to that intent.
Key decision: Clarify the operating sequence and failure response before choosing a software feature or control platform.
Planning Checklist for Automation & ControlsFrom Planning To Execution
Share your product mix, capacity targets, current constraints, and project timeline. Start a conversation about the scope and decisions your project needs.
Discuss your engineering, equipment, or facility plans with the DPS team.
Contact Our Team