Introducing a Breakthrough Constant Pressure System: Transforming the Measurement of Clogging Potential in Wine Filtration

Abstract

The wine industry uses filtration systems to remove particles that could compromise the quality of wine before bottling. However, traditional systems present significant operational limitations, such as volume restrictions, intensive handling, and risks associated with high-pressure devices. This study addresses these challenges by proposing an innovative solution: a pneumatic pumping system that delivers a pulsed flow under constant pressure, replacing conventional pressurized tanks for clogging tests. This approach not only reduces analysis time by 66.2% but also improves operational safety and enables the development of new indicators that are not limited by tank volume. To validate this proposal, a robust methodological framework was developed, integrating techniques and methodologies typically addressed separately into a single comprehensive approach. This includes evaluating the reproducibility of measurements, performing a comparative analysis of hydraulic performance under standard conditions, quantifying the impact on processing times, and assessing user perceptions. This approach demonstrates that the proposed device contributes to faster operational decision-making without exposing workers to unnecessary risks while optimizing resource usage. It addresses a previously underexplored technical challenge and establishes a solid foundation for future research, highlighting its academic relevance and impact beyond a technical implementation.

1. Introduction

Within the wine supply chain, the bottling and packaging stage is crucial as it ensures that the product elaborated in previous phases is properly bottled, maintaining its quality, safety, and stability [1]. This stage enables the storage and transportation of the product under optimal conditions through national and international distribution and trade networks, thus providing a satisfactory experience for the end consumer. Additionally, this stage represents one of the highest costs within the supply chain, primarily influenced by energy, labor, and material costs [2].

The bottling process includes the final filtration of the wine, which, through mechanical techniques, retains or removes particles that could compromise the product’s organoleptic properties or microbiological stability [3]. This can directly affect the final wine quality and potentially consumer preferences toward certain brands [4]. Given the complexity of winemaking and the use of various stabilization methods, treatments, and additives, particles such as crystalline precipitates, colloids, or microorganisms (bacteria or yeast) can be identified, which vary significantly in concentration, size distribution, and mechanical properties [5].

To address this challenge, the industry employs filtration systems that use surface filters made from various synthetic materials [6]. These filters are organized in stages with different retention levels, allowing for the progressive reduction in solid content until the desired microbiological stability is achieved, often with pores as small as 0.45 μm. This systematic reduction process occurs continuously during bottling. However, the accumulation of particles on the filter surface gradually reduces the effective area available, negatively impacting both operations and process costs [7,8].

The reduction in the filtering area decreases the operational flow rate and increases the pressure differential between the fluid entering and exiting the filter, thus limiting the flow of bottled wine and extending batch processing times. This impacts production schedules and increases operating costs [9]. Depending on the degree of system blockage, it may even be necessary to interrupt the bottling line to clean the system or replace the filters [10].

Measuring the solid content is critical to ensuring operational continuity and controlling production costs [11]. Unfortunately, traditional methods, such as particle counting using optical techniques or turbidity measurement, do not provide sufficient information for operational decision-making, as they mainly capture particle size and concentration but not their mechanical properties, which can significantly impact filter performance [12].

The concept of clogging power, widely documented in the literature, measures the impact of particle content on the filter, considering not only its size and concentration but also its real effect on the process [4,13,14]. Several authors have developed quantitative methods to evaluate the clogging power of wine under laboratory conditions that simulate the industrial process [15,16]. These methods facilitate decision-making regarding the use of additives, reprocessing, and additional filtration stages. Moreover, they allow for better production planning, including filter maintenance and replacement, generating growing interest in their regular implementation, despite the operational and analytical limitations associated with their use [14,17,18].

To replicate the industrial filtration process in the laboratory, these tests use pressurized containers to maintain a constant pressure at the wine’s entry point to the filter, determining the flow rate reduction over time [5,19]. However, handling these devices exposes personnel to risks associated with the use of gases and pressurized systems, additionally requiring staff exclusively dedicated to these tasks due to the time required for cleaning and preparation between measurements [20]. The volume limitation of the containers used, generally less than 1000 mL, aims to avoid wine waste and simplify operations but restricts the possibility of developing more representative indicators or working with larger sample volumes [21].

In this context, this study proposes replacing traditional pressurized tanks with a pumping system activated by gas controlled via a pneumatic system. This design generates constant pressure but delivers a pulsed flow. According to the authors, previous efforts have not focused on contributions seeking to replace pressurized tanks while ensuring the operational conditions of the test and its representativeness but have instead emphasized developing methods to quantify the clogging power of wine.

This approach offers significant benefits, such as improved safety, reduced measurement process times, and simplified procedures, also minimizing errors associated with handling. Additionally, it eliminates the limitations imposed by the maximum volume of traditional containers, allowing for greater flexibility and representativeness in the tests conducted. Furthermore, it contributes to the development of new indicators that are not dependent on volume restrictions.

This study focuses on validating that the developed device can replace the use of pressurized tanks, ensuring the statistical representativeness of the measurements and meeting user requirements in the wine industry. The main objective is to demonstrate, through a comprehensive and robust methodological framework, that the new pneumatic pumping system meets operational expectations while also improving the safety, efficiency, and flexibility of filtration processes. This methodological approach includes the statistical evaluation of clogging indicators to ensure the reliability and representativeness of the results, the analysis of the hydraulic performance of the system under controlled and standard conditions, and the study of the impact on processing times to optimize operations and minimize costs. Additionally, user perception is evaluated by incorporating their experiences to validate the system’s usability and effectiveness. This rigorous work provides practical tools to support operational decision-making and establishes a solid foundation for future research and applications in the field of clogging indicator development and use in the wine industry.

2. State of the Art and Theoretical Framework

2.1. Measurement of Clogging Potential in Wine

To address the challenges associated with the variability in particle content and its impact on the entire bottling process, various methods are employed to measure clogging potential, replicating the operational conditions of industrial filtration [14]. The most common methods, such as the Laurenty Filtration Index (FI), the Modified Filtration Index (MFI), and the Maximum Filterable Volume (Vmax), are conducted under standardized conditions: constant pressure of 30 psi, a temperature of 20 °C, and the use of a 25 mm diameter membrane with a pore size of 0.65 µm. Although these methods share these testing conditions, they differ in how they calculate the level of filter obstruction [15].

The Laurenty Filtration Index (FI), represented in Equation (1), measures the time difference between filtering two known volumes of wine (200 mL and 400 mL). Meanwhile, the Modified Filtration Index (MFI), expressed in Equation (2), introduces an additional 300 mL volume to reduce variability in the results and provide more accurate measurements. Finally, the Maximum Filterable Volume (Vmax), represented in Equation (3), estimates the maximum volume that can be filtered before significant clogging occurs, providing a measure of filter performance under constant pressure [14].

Figure 1 presents the function that describes the relationship between processing time and total volume filtered under these standardized testing conditions. Although the three methods share the same operational conditions, their differences in calculating clogging potential make them complementary tools for operational decision-making, enabling better planning and control of filtration processes [12].

$$FI=T_{400}-2T_{200}$$

(1)

$$MFI={(T}_{300}-T_{100})-2{(T}_{200}-T_{100})$$

(2)

$$\mathrm{V}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{x}={\displaystyle \frac{{(T}_{200}-T_{100})}{\frac{T_{400}}{V_{400}}-\frac{T_{200}}{V_{200}}}}$$

(3)

Despite the standardization of conditions for clogging measurement methods, such as pressure, temperature, and membrane type, intrinsic variability persists due to factors such as sample heterogeneity, slight fluctuations in testing conditions, and result interpretation [14]. This variability poses challenges in assessing the reproducibility of the methods, as differences in initial conditions or operation can influence the outcomes. However, under strictly controlled conditions and with the use of statistical tools, it is possible to establish error margins that characterize the accuracy and reliability of each method, enhancing their utility for operational decision-making [22].

While it is true that the clogging indices used in the wine industry share the same operational conditions for measurements, such as pressure, temperature, and membrane type, they differ both in their calculation methods and in their interpretability, which is often based on abstract numerical scales. Previous research has highlighted the limited ability of these indices to directly contribute to operational decision-making, as their interpretation in the industry is often discrete, focusing on establishing minimum or maximum values to determine whether a wine is suitable for bottling [23]. Furthermore, since these indices use volume as an independent variable, their precision and resolution can be affected by the hydraulic properties of the wine, such as viscosity, which influences each method differently. This can lead to variations in the evolution of measurement curves depending on the type of wine, further limiting their standardization and interpretability. Despite these limitations, there is a consensus that, regardless of scale or interpretation, these indices remain useful tools for operational decision-making. Their value lies in their ability to provide information based on historical behaviors specific to each company, as well as to allow comparisons with reference parameters established in the industry [24].

2.2. Description of the Systems Used in the Industry

The device used to perform clogging tests at constant pressure consists of several components described in Figure 2. They replicate operational filtration conditions in a controlled laboratory environment. The equipment consists of a 1 L pressure tank (a) that holds the wine sample. This tank is connected to a pressure regulator valve (b), adjustable between 0 and 5 bar, ensuring that the pressure remains constant during the test. A gas shut-off valve (c) controls the supply of inert gas, such as nitrogen or compressed air (d), which pressurizes the system [16]. Additionally, the device is equipped with a pressure relief valve (e) to ensure system safety by preventing the pressure from exceeding set limits. A top connection (f) facilitates the opening of the tank to introduce the wine sample. At the bottom of the tank, a connection (g) allows for the installation of the filtration medium, which is held by a 25 mm filter holder (h). To regulate the start and end of the test, a ball valve (i) is used to control the flow of the wine sample. The system includes a stopwatch (j) to measure the filtration times, and a graduated cylinder (k) to measure the volume of filtered wine. These components enable precise, controlled testing, providing reliable data on clogging potential under standardized conditions.

2.3. Limitations of Current Constant Pressure Systems

The use of the constant pressure device presents significant limitations that impact both efficiency and safety in industrial environments. Due to the nature of the current test, it is necessary to extract a sample from the finished product tank and transport it to the laboratory for analysis. The device allows for a fixed volume of sample as it needs to fill the pressurized tank independently and cannot be connected to the production line. This is particularly important as it imposes a limitation in dynamic processes, wherein a single 500 mL sample may not accurately represent the entirety of a lot that can exceed 100,000 L [14].

Additionally, the use of a pressurized tank at 30 psi poses safety risks for the operator, such as potential hazards from pressure release or handling errors. If the procedure for relieving pressure is not properly followed or if any part of the system fails or becomes dislodged, the operator could suffer serious injury due to the sudden release of pressure. This inherent risk in handling pressurized systems requires careful operation to prevent accidents [20].

Lastly, the required time to perform an analysis with this device is considerable, as more than 70% of the total time is spent on setup tasks such as cleaning, depressurizing the tank, and preparing the next sample. This reduces efficiency in production environments where fast, continuous measurements are needed, limiting the ability to frequently analyze during the filtration and bottling process [16].

3. Development of a System for Clogging Tests at Constant Pressure Without the Use of a Pressure Tank

The development of a novel device designed to measure clogging potential in wine production processes is presented. It considers a constant pressure system that does not require the use of a pressurized tank. This innovation contributes to reducing operational risk, enables direct analysis of samples from the production line, and optimizes the time required for analysis by simplifying cleaning and handling processes. The following sections discuss the fundamental design principles, provide a detailed breakdown of the device’s parts and components, and describe its operation. A statistical comparison, based on experimental methods, is conducted for the obtained results with the proposed device and those generated by the conventional system used in the industry. Finally, a user-level evaluation is provided regarding the performance and usability of the new device in comparison with the pressurized tank system.

The developed device consists of a support structure and a cabinet housing the pneumatic pumping system and the control system, which is composed of valves and pressure and flow regulators. This design allows for direct suction of a sample under atmospheric conditions and increases its pressure to the required test level, facilitating the filtration of wine samples while maintaining the pressure conditions necessary for clogging tests, equivalent to those of a pressurized tank. The pressurized liquid passes through a filter disc, and the evolution of the filtered volume over time is recorded using a graduated cylinder. This allows for the calculation of the clogging indicator based on the parameter to be evaluated Figure 3 presents a schematic view of the different elements that internally configure the device and ensure its proper functioning. Figure 4 shows the device integrated with the peripheral components. A more detailed overview of the design characteristics, functionality, and usage procedures of the device is presented below.

3.1. Design Considerations

The design of the device considered a set of key factors, widely addressed in previous studies, ensuring stable and safe operation. These factors guarantee that the device operates efficiently under various operational conditions. Additionally, they focus on aspects that facilitate the achievement of reproducible and reliable results, meeting necessary technical requirements for the filtration process and ensuring the safe handling of the system [25].

• Hydraulic factors: For the development of the device, critical hydraulic aspects were considered to ensure continuous flow and maintain constant pressure throughout the entire filtration process. To achieve this, a propulsion system powered by a compressed gas is controlled by a pressure regulator [26].
• Ergonomics and safety: The device was designed to be easy to operate. The height of the equipment was calculated to facilitate handling by the operator, reducing physical effort and fatigue during operation. Additionally, permanent connections were implemented in the system, eliminating the need for frequent reconnections of hoses and accessories, which reduces the risk of leaks and improves overall process safety [27].
• Durability and material compatibility: The materials used in the construction of the device were selected for their durability, ensuring resistance in use-intensive operating conditions. Additionally, the chemical compatibility of the components with the various fluids passing through the system was evaluated, ensuring that no degradation or unwanted reactions occur [28].
• Maintenance and accessibility: The modular design of the equipment facilitates access to its components, simplifying maintenance tasks and reducing downtime. This modular structure allows for quick and efficient replacements and repairs, ensuring continuous operation without extended interruptions.
• Control and monitoring: The device’s control system is designed to be accessible, with a clear display of key parameters such as pressure and flow rate. This enables real-time monitoring, making it easier for the operator to supervise the process without requiring complex interventions.

3.2. Principles of Operation and Functionality

The proposed device allows for the measurement of filtration indices without the need for a pressurized tank. To achieve this, the propulsion system is powered by compressed gas, integrated with a pneumatic control system housed within a control panel. Through flexible connections, the system is linked to both the analyzed liquid and the gas supply. The pneumatic system operates by using compressed air or gas to generate mechanical energy, which drives the liquid through the device. This process is controlled by valves and regulators that ensure constant pressure, while the resulting flow is delivered in pulses due to the cyclical design of the pneumatic mechanism. This configuration eliminates the need for electrical equipment or pressurized tanks, simplifying operation and enhancing safety [29]. In this context, it is important to consider that the use of a pneumatic system introduces variables related to gas pressure and flow conditions, as well as the hydraulic properties of the liquid, which can influence the measurements. To ensure accurate results and minimize flow variability, a control system is incorporated, and the necessary and sufficient conditions are established to prevent potential deviations that could affect the interpretation of the filtration indices. In this context, the hydraulic design was based on the selection and use of a pumping system capable of operating efficiently at a flow rate exceeding 80 mL/s under open flow conditions, maintaining a working pressure of 30 psi. This range falls within the operational limits of the system, which supports a minimum pressure of 20 psi (1.4 bar) and a maximum pressure of 80 psi (5.5 bar).

The system consists of several components. Figure 3 shows the diagram with the involved components. The system includes a membrane gas pressure regulator (a), which adjusts the gas pressure to the required level through the activation of a valve, allowing the value to be displayed on the control pressure gauge (b). The gas supply (c) can be a pressurized cylinder or a compressed gas line, which contains a primary pressure regulator (d) set at a pressure higher than the one required for the test. The compressed gas used may be nitrogen, CO₂, compressed air, or another gas that can be safely released into the environment without posing a risk to the operator.

The pressure regulator (a) controls the working pressure of the pneumatic pump (e) through hoses or pipes. The pump is connected to a container (f) holding the liquid to be analyzed, using both flexible and rigid hoses (g). The flow rate of the fluid is controlled by a mechanical ball valve (h), ensuring quick opening and closing. Once the valve (h) is opened, the fluid flows into the filter holder (i) and is collected in a graduated container (j).

Figure 3. Diagram of components of the proposed system based on the use of a pneumatic pumping system with constant pressure.

Figure 3. Diagram of components of the proposed system based on the use of a pneumatic pumping system with constant pressure.

3.3. Description of the Procedure for Filtration Testing and Sample Change

For the utilization of the filtration device, the compressed gas supply (a) and liquid inlet (b) are connected to the control panel (c), ensuring that both connections are properly sealed to prevent leaks. Once the system is connected, the compressed gas supply valve (d) is opened, ensuring setting the initial pressure to a higher level than required for the test. Using the regulator valve (e), the pressure is then adjusted to the specified test level, being monitored by the value on the pressure gauge (f) until the desired pressure is reached.

Subsequently, the liquid inlet hose is inserted into the container holding the sample (h). The filter holder (i), which contains the filtering medium, is connected to the control panel, ensuring proper installation. With the system ready, the valve (k) is opened to start the test, and the time is recorded from the first drop of filtrate, a key parameter for evaluating filtration efficiency under the established conditions.

If a sample change is required, the residual volume of wine in the system, which is less than 80 mL, must be removed. This procedure is performed by opening the ball valve (k), which automatically activates the pump, allowing air to enter by suction and emptying the system in approximately 2 s.

To clean the system, water at room temperature is passed through for 5 s, followed by repeating the air suction process (o). This cycle ensures that the system is free of residues, leaving it ready to process the next sample without risk of contamination.

Figure 4. Functional prototype of the proposed system.

Figure 4. Functional prototype of the proposed system.

4. Materials and Methods

The methodology developed in this study stands out for its integrative approach and novelty, combining various methods and analytical strategies within a general framework designed to comprehensively validate the proposed device. This approach includes the statistical evaluation of analytical results obtained from real wine samples, ensuring the reliability and representativeness of measurements through rigorous tools. Additionally, the hydraulic performance of the system was assessed by comparing the distributions of accumulated volume over time, which required the development of specific techniques for real-time data capture using tools designed to accurately record and analyze flow behavior. Furthermore, the processing time of each system was analyzed, quantifying differences in operational efficiency between the proposed device and traditional systems. Finally, operator perceptions were incorporated through structured surveys, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data to validate the functionality and practicality of the equipment in a real industrial environment [30]. This methodological framework, which integrates statistical, operational, hydraulic, and user experience aspects, represents a rigorous and innovative approach that ensures a thorough evaluation of the device, demonstrating its validity and functionality to produce reproducible, reliable results in a safer manner for operators [31]. For this, the following metrics are established:

(a)

Reproducibility of Measurements: The ability of the device to generate statistically similar results under a set of uniformly defined samples, covering the range of values for clogging indicators.

(b)

Accumulated Volume Distribution: The ability of the device to produce accumulated volume distributions over time that are statistically equivalent to those generated by the traditional equipment.

(c)

Testing Time: The total time required to perform each measurement of a wine sample, evaluating the efficiency of the device compared to the traditional equipment.

(d)

User Perception: The users’ evaluation in terms of ease of use and safety, comparing the operational experience with both devices.

4.1. Comparison of Analytical Results

To determine whether the analytical results obtained using both systems are statistically similar, consecutive measurements were taken from a set of samples under controlled conditions. The results were analyzed using statistical tests, including the median and data distribution. Additionally, the paired Student’s t-test was applied to evaluate whether the observed differences between the two systems were statistically significant. Since previous studies suggest that these results follow a normal distribution, the t-test was deemed appropriate for this comparative validation [32].

4.2. Evaluation of the Accumulated Volume Distribution over Time

Given that the indices used in the wine industry are based on similar measurement conditions, but differ in their calculation, an analysis of the performance of the function describing the relationship between time and filtered volume is proposed [7]. To assess whether the distribution of accumulated volume data over time is statistically similar in both systems, measurements were obtained using a calibrated balance connected to a computer via an RS232 interface. Since the balance measures weight, while the test focuses on volume, an adjustment was made by applying the density and temperature of the wine sample to convert the weight values into volume. A graphical application was developed in Visual Basic to record and plot the accumulated volume at 1 s intervals, with the data exported for further analysis in R. The graphical interface used for this process is shown in Figure 5. The resulting distributions were compared using statistical tests, including the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, to validate whether the two curves follow a statistically similar distribution [33].

4.3. Measurement of Processing Time

To evaluate the processing time associated with each system, a detailed work protocol was developed and provided to three laboratory operators, each with over 10 years of experience in filtration analysis. Each operator was tasked with processing five different samples using both systems, carefully recording the time taken for each stage of the process. The recorded times were then subjected to a comparative analysis to identify any significant differences in the temporal performance of the two evaluated devices.

4.4. User-Level Validation

To evaluate the system from the users’ perspective, a structured survey was designed and administered to operators who had been previously trained in the use of the proposed device. The survey included closed-ended questions and questions based on the Likert scale, as well as open-ended questions, with the goal of capturing both quantitative responses and more personal, detailed perceptions of the user experience [34]. These operators used the equipment for a period of 15 days, replacing the pressurized tank filtration system. The survey was administered to operators from four different wine production companies in order to evaluate various aspects of the device’s design and gather suggestions for potential improvements [35].

5. Results

In this section, the obtained results are presented and a critical analysis is performed, with the aim of determining whether the evidence supports that the use of a device without a pressure tank can be a viable alternative to replace the pressurized tanks used in laboratory tests to estimate the clogging potential of wine.

5.1. Comparison of Analytical Results

The results obtained from the analysis of 10 different wine samples, in which the measurement was repeated eight times, are presented in

Table 1. Comparative analysis of the wine samples analyzed by Vmax, FI, and FMI.

		Vmax				FI				FMI
#	Device	Mean	Std Dev	Range	T-Student p-Value	Mean	Std Dev	Range	T-Student p-Value	Mean	Std Dev	Range	T-Student p-Value
1	A	334	48.5	170.6	0.989	60	6	16.6	0.79	53	7.8	26	0.772
	B	333	33.8	104		61	7.7	26.6		52	4.4	14.8
2	A	887	78.8	291.7	0.982	54	6.9	23	0.094	46	4.2	14.1	0.991
	B	886	81.4	263.9		46	9.6	35.8		46	5.5	18.4
3	A	1598	188.6	485.1	0.991	44	6.7	20.2	0.096	39	3.8	13.5	0.994
	B	1599	142.9	406.6		39	3.2	10.1		39	2	6
4	A	1607	301.6	951.8	0.987	37	2.5	7.7	0.302	35	3.6	11.3	0.596
	B	1605	92.8	316.2		35	4.3	13.8		34	3.3	11
5	A	1104	109	398.5	0.986	31	6.3	17.1	0.743	29	2.1	6.1	0.331
	B	1105	103.4	302.8		30	4.8	15.1		28	1.5	4.9
6	A	1791	122.6	344	0.989	27	2.9	9.6	0.126	25	2.2	7	0.984
	B	1790	150.9	501.2		24	3.9	12.5		25	2.7	8.2
7	A	2267	218.1	571.1	0.984	20	2.9	10.8	0.262	19	1.6	4.8	0.988
	B	2265	138.3	385		18	3.5	11.2		19	1.9	6.5
8	A	1949	257.1	844.3	0.995	19	3.3	11.7	0.069	16	1.5	5.5	0.999
	B	1948	287.6	944.1		16	2.2	7.3		16	2	6.5
9	A	2430	228.8	750.4	0.994	18	2.7	7	0.137	16	2.1	6.1	0.997
	B	2431	282	767.8		16	2	6.6		16	0.9	2.7
10	A	2783	249.7	724.5	0.995	10	0.9	2.9	0.076	8	0.6	1.9	0.999
	B	2782	297.9	776.4		9	1.1	3.5		8	0.7	2.3

. In this table, device A corresponds to the conventional system that uses a pressure tank, while device B is the equipment under evaluation that does not require a pressure tank. To determine whether the results of the consecutive measurements followed a normal distribution, the Shapiro–Wilk normality test was applied. The p-values obtained were greater than 0.05, the expected range to confirm the normality of the data, which allowed for the use of parametric tests in the subsequent analysis. Subsequently, the Student’s t-test for independent samples was used with the aim of establishing whether there were significant differences between the results obtained with devices A and B in the 10 samples studied. The samples were selected considering the entire range of values typically used in the industry for the clogging indicator, thus guaranteeing the representativeness and applicability of the results. Statistical analyses revealed that there are no significant differences between devices A and B in the evaluated parameters (Vmax, FI, and FMI), as the p-values obtained in the Student’s t-test were greater than 0.05 in all cases (see Table 1). This indicates that, from the point of view of the results, both methods provide statistically similar analytical results.

5.2. Valuation of the Accumulated Volume Distribution over Time

The results obtained, presented in

Table 2. Result of the KS statistic and p-value for the 6 samples.

Sample	KS Statistic	p-Value
M1	0.16	0.549
M2	0.18	0.396
M3	0.16	0.549
M4	0.16	0.549
M5	0.18	0.396
M6	0.16	0.549

, show that the distributions of accumulated volume over time generated by both devices (device A and device B) are statistically similar. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov (KS) statistic values range from 0.16 to 0.18, with p-values greater than 0.05 in all samples evaluated (M1–M6), indicating no significant differences between the compared distributions. These results establish that both measurement systems produce statistically similar results under the same operating conditions.

The analysis of the accumulated data distributions provides a foundation for exploring new indices in the wine industry, beyond those commonly used such as Vmax, FI, or FMI. The fact that both devices (A and B) yield comparable results in terms of the relationship between time and accumulated volume suggests that it would be feasible to evaluate other combinations of these variables. This could lead to the development of new indices that contribute to operational decision-making based on analytical evidence, allowing for a more comprehensive approach to process analysis and quality control.

5.3. Measurement of Processing Time

Through the analysis of the process described in Figure 6, four necessary stages were established to process the sample and measure the processing time.

The first stage, called device preparation, encompasses the set of steps required to connect the equipment to the compressed air network, place the filter medium, and enable the valves and connections required for the test.

The second stage corresponds to the preparation and introduction of the sample. In this phase, the sample is introduced into the equipment for analysis. This involves opening valves, preparing the device, and all necessary actions to have the system enabled and ready to start the test.

The third stage is the measurement, which extends from the opening of the start valve until the end of the test. During this phase, the corresponding measurements are taken, recording the data necessary for subsequent analysis.

The fourth and final stage is the cleaning. This stage begins with the removal of the wine from the internal circuit of the equipment and continues with the cleaning of all parts and components involved, in order to leave the device ready to be used again.

The results presented in Figure 6 show an average reduction of 52% in the total processing time, considering all stages of the process. However, if the measurement stage, which does not depend on the device and is subject to the sample being analyzed, is excluded, the reduction in processing time increases to 66.2%. This significant improvement in processing time increases the laboratory’s capacity to handle higher demand for analyses or allows the current laboratory operators to be reassigned to other complementary tasks.

The cleaning stage is the most impacted by the change to a device without a pressure tank, with a time reduction of 86.2%. The sample preparation and injection stage experiences a 64.9% reduction, while device preparation is reduced by 55.2%. On the other hand, the measurement stage does not show statistically significant differences.

5.4. User-Level Validation

The results obtained from the evaluation of user perceptions, presented in Figure 7, show a significant improvement in most stages of the process associated with the use of the new device. These findings are consistent with the expectations and the value proposition of the developed device, compared to the previous method used in the industry, which relied on a pressure tank. Regarding the ease of device preparation, 80% of respondents reported a significant improvement, rating this aspect as “Much better”, while 20% rated it as “Better”. This result suggests that the new system has greatly simplified the initial configuration procedures, contributing to a reduction in non-productive time in routine processes. The evaluation of the time required for preparation revealed that 100% of operators perceived a substantial improvement, rating it as “Much better”. This finding reinforces the operational efficiency of the new device by reducing the time needed for setup, thereby maximizing productivity. As for the speed of sample preparation and injection, 60% of operators rated this process as “Much better” and 40% as “Better”. While the improvement is clear, the distribution of responses suggests that further improvements to the device may still be possible. However, in its current state of development, it already makes a significant contribution.

Additionally, the efficiency of sample preparation and injection was positively evaluated, with 60% of users rating it as “Better” and 40% as “Much better”. This indicates that the new device has significantly improved consistency in these stages, although the balance of responses suggests that the perception of efficiency may be influenced by external factors, such as the sample type or the operator’s experience.

Regarding the measurement time, no significant differences were observed, as 100% of respondents indicated that this stage is “The same” compared to the previous method. This result could be explained by the fact that measurement time depends more on the intrinsic properties of the sample than on the device itself.

Important improvement was seen in the ease of cleaning, with 100% of operators rating this aspect as “Much better”. This result suggests that the design of the new device has significantly simplified the cleaning process, which is essential for maintaining high hygiene standards and reducing downtime between analyses. In line with this, the cleaning time was unanimously rated as “Much better”, confirming the new system’s efficiency in reducing the time allocated to this stage. This is key for optimizing workflow in laboratories with high operational demand.

Regarding safety conditions, 80% of users rated them as “Much better” and 20% as “Better”, indicating a general perception that the new device is safer and more reliable, reducing risks associated with handling the equipment and contributing to a safer working environment.

The total processing time was unanimously rated as “Much better” by 100% of respondents. This reflects an overall optimization of the process, from device preparation to the completion of cleaning tasks. This finding highlights that the new device has not only improved individual process stages but has also had a positive impact on overall efficiency, increasing the laboratory’s processing capacity.

Lastly, users provided several suggestions to further improve the design and operation of the device. A recurring recommendation was the incorporation of a computer connection for automatic data capture during analysis, which would streamline data recording and allow for calculations to be performed immediately. This type of improvement would not only reduce the risk of manual data entry errors but also optimize the time spent evaluating and analyzing results, further maximizing process efficiency.

6. Discussion

This study was initiated from the identification of relevant problems in the industry and focused on the development and validation of a device designed to replace an existing one that, due to its inherent characteristics, required long preparation times and exposed workers to significant risks during its operation and cleaning. An integral methodology was adopted, including critical aspects of design, use, and exhaustive validation, based both on analytical results and the perception of the end users. This methodology not only improved the operational characteristics of the device but also provided a deep understanding of its safety, efficiency, and practical applicability in work environments. Thus, the approach taken not only solved a specific problem but also established a precedent for the future evaluation of similar technologies, constituting a significant contribution to the design of equipment and systems. This work demonstrated how the practical application of scientific knowledge can generate tangible solutions that meet the current needs of the industry.

6.1. Validation of the Performance of the New Device

The results of the comparative analysis between the proposed new constant-pressure system and the traditional method based on a pressure tank demonstrate that, under the standard conditions established in the measurement procedure, there are no statistically significant differences in the evaluated parameters (Vmax, FI, and FMI). The statistical tests applied, including the Shapiro–Wilk normality test and Student’s t-test for independent samples, yielded p-values greater than 0.05 in all cases, indicating that the null hypothesis of equality between the methods is not rejected [36]. This confirms that both devices provide equivalent analytical results when operated under controlled and standardized conditions. This evidence validates the capability of the new device to replace the conventional method without compromising the precision or reliability of the measurements in the context of standard operating conditions. The successful replication of traditional clogging indices further suggests that the new system is suitable for implementation in the analysis process of the clogging potential of wine before bottling.

It is important to highlight that the standard conditions include critical parameters such as a constant pressure of 30 psi, controlled temperature, and the use of specific filtration membranes, which were strictly maintained during the tests [37]. Rigorous adherence to these parameters ensures that the comparisons between both methods are valid and that any potential differences are attributable to the device and not to variations in experimental conditions.

However, it is essential to consider that this validation was carried out under standardized and controlled conditions. Therefore, the extrapolation of these results to different operational conditions should be approached with caution. It is important to note that the traditional system based on a pressure tank has also not been widely studied in terms of the variation in test conditions. Factors such as temperature variations or different pressures could influence the performance of both the new device and the traditional system in scenarios not contemplated in this study [4].

Additionally, the evaluation of the distribution of accumulated filtered volume over time showed that the curves generated by both systems are statistically similar, with Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic values and p-values greater than 0.05 in all analyzed samples. This similarity indicates that the dynamic behavior of the filtration process is consistently replicated by the new device. The implications of this finding are significant, as they allow for the consideration of developing new clogging indicators based on different combinations of time and volume variables [21]. These new indicators could provide a more detailed understanding of the clogging process and offer additional tools for operational decision-making based on analytical evidence.

The analysis of processing times revealed an average reduction of 52% in total time when using the new device, increasing up to 66.2% when excluding the measurement stage, which is independent of the equipment used. The cleaning stage benefited the most, with an 86.2% decrease in the required time. These improvements in operational efficiency are especially relevant in industrial environments with high analytical demand, as they allow for increasing the laboratory’s processing capacity and optimizing the allocation of human resources [6]. Specifically, the significant reduction in processing time enhances the laboratory’s analytical capacity and improves the response time to internal demands.

The user-level validation showed high satisfaction with the new device, reporting significant improvements in ease of preparation, configuration time, ease and time of cleaning, and safety conditions. All users (100%) positively rated the reduction in preparation and cleaning time, while 80% perceived improvements in safety conditions. These perceptions are fundamental for the successful adoption of new technologies in industrial environments, as operator acceptance directly influences the effectiveness and sustainability of their implementation. Additionally, the suggestions received, such as the integration of an automatic data capture system, indicate clear opportunities for future improvements to the device, which could further optimize analytical procedures and reduce the risk of errors in manual data recording.

The implementation of the new constant-pressure system effectively addresses the cost and efficiency challenges faced by the wine industry. By reducing processing times and the use of human resources, the device increases the laboratory’s analytical capacity, allowing for a higher volume of analyses in less time and improving the response to internal demands. Additionally, by providing precise measurements of a fluid’s clogging potential, the equipment not only benefits wine bottling companies but also has the potential to be applied in other industries that require this type of analysis for informed decision-making. This versatility makes the device a useful and potentially valuable tool for improving productivity, reducing operational costs, and strengthening competitiveness across various industrial sectors.

The proposed device has broad application potential across various industries, standing out for its ability to operate without a pressurized tank and its versatile design that ensures safety and efficiency. Its use is particularly relevant in situations where samples cannot be handled under atmospheric conditions due to the risk of contamination or hazards to operators. For example, in industrial processes such as gas sweetening in refineries, it allows for samples to be extracted directly from the process line to monitor amine fouling levels, improving efficiency and reintegrating the filtered fluid into the system [38,39]. Similarly, in bioprocesses [40], the device protects sample integrity, enabling reliable analysis of larger volumes without compromising quality or increasing cleaning efforts. In the beverage industry, such as beer production [41], it offers significant advantages, as it does in wine filtration, to ensure microbiological and sensory standards [13]. These applications, combined with the ability to develop indicators tailored to the specific needs of each process, establish the developed device as a versatile solution that not only enhances operations but also drives innovation in decision-making and industrial planning. Furthermore, the methodological framework developed in this work contributes a robust and replicable structure for the evaluation of new indicators and different applications, strengthening the capacity for adaptability and continuous improvement across various industries.

6.2. Limitations of the Study and Future Research

The results of this study validate the device and demonstrate its effectiveness under the standard conditions defined for the tests used in measuring clogging potential. These conditions include specific parameters of pressure, temperature, filter medium, and type of fluid, which were strictly maintained during the trials. While the proposed device is suitable for replacing the pressurized tank under these standard conditions, it is important to recognize that this study is limited to this specific set of variables. Therefore, variations in these parameters are not considered in this study, and additional research is required to validate the device’s performance, the validity of the results, and its repeatability under different operational conditions.

Future research should focus on developing new indicators to measure clogging potential by incorporating additional variables that affect the filtration process. It is essential to consider the actual conditions of the bottling process in laboratory tests to increase the representativeness of the measurements. Adjusting test parameters, such as pressure, flow rate, and the specific characteristics of the wine used in production, would help ensure that the measurements more accurately reflect behavior under real operational conditions. Furthermore, it would be important to study how variations in measurement conditions affect the repeatability of the measurements and the values obtained. Additionally, establishing the optimal measurement conditions that minimize variation in analytical results would significantly contribute to the accuracy and reliability of the developed indicators.

Associated with the current analytical methods and their limited capacity to provide directly interpretable values for decision-making, new lines of research could explore the development of measurement scales that are both interpretable and tied to the performance of the production process. This is particularly important given that these indicators are measured using a 25 mm diameter disc, whereas, at the industrial level, the filtration area can vary significantly from one bottling line to another. This discrepancy creates a scenario of uncertainty regarding the real-world application of these indicators for industrial planning. Addressing this gap would contribute to the development of more practical and representative tools for evaluating filtration performance in diverse industrial contexts.

Furthermore, exploring the use of this device in filtration tests across other industries, such as bioprocessing, refineries, and other processes where studying clogging potential and using pressurized tank systems for measurement is necessary, could offer similar advantages in terms of safety, operational efficiency, and analytical precision. Expanding the scope of application would validate the versatility of the device and contribute to technological advancements in areas where optimizing filtration processes is critical.

7. Conclusions

The statistical analysis conducted confirms that the proposed device based on the use of a pneumatic pumping system produces statistically similar results to those obtained with conventional pressure tank systems, as evidenced by the comparisons of the distributions and analytical results. These findings indicate that the device can be used as a reliable alternative for measuring clogging potential in the wine industry, while maintaining the accuracy of current methods.

The developed device has demonstrated a significant reduction in operation times, particularly in the sample preparation and introduction stages (64.9%) and cleaning (86.2%), leading to an overall reduction of 52% in total processing time. When excluding the measurement stage, the total reduction increases to 66.2%. Additionally, the elimination of the pressurized tank enhances safety by minimizing the risks associated with high-pressure systems. This improvement frees up operational time, increasing the laboratory’s analytical capacity and allowing personnel to be reassigned to other critical tasks. These factors make the device a more efficient and safer option for implementation in industrial environments.

The results of the user survey show a high level of satisfaction with the proposed device in terms of handling, design, and safety. Additionally, the evidence obtained indicates that the majority of users believe that incorporating an automated data reading and capture system would improve the process by enabling continuous recording and immediate calculation of key indicators. This evidence is important to consider in future developments or improvements to the device, as it would help enhance accuracy, reduce manual errors, and improve decision-making based on real-time data.

The results of this study clearly demonstrate how the application of science to industrial challenges can generate innovative and effective solutions. In particular, this work establishes a solid technical and methodological foundation for future advancements in the measurement of clogging potential in different fluids. In this context, it is essential to emphasize the importance of integrating scientific knowledge with a deep understanding of industrial processes and challenges, as this facilitates the development of tools and solutions designed to effectively support operational decision-making. This approach contributes to operational efficiency while simultaneously enhancing process safety and fostering value creation in the industry.

The developed device presents significant potential for adaptation to various applications beyond those evaluated in this study. Its flexible and safe design allows for its implementation in processes requiring the handling of sensitive liquids under controlled conditions, such as sample extraction in refineries to monitor contaminants, liquid filtration in bioprocesses to ensure product purity, and the optimization of filtration processes in the food and beverage industry, including beer production. Additionally, its capacity to handle larger volumes and develop customized indicators positions it as a versatile and efficient tool with potential applications in pharmaceutical and chemical industries. These characteristics expand its utility across different industrial contexts and, in combination with the methodological framework developed in this study, also provide a robust foundation for the evaluation and validation of its performance in diverse scenarios, promoting adaptability and contributing to the advancement of technological solutions across multiple sectors. In this context, future research should focus on the development of new analytical methods based on this device, ensuring their applicability across various industries. These methods should aim to validate the optimal measurement conditions and evaluate the indicator’s contribution to decision-making processes, further strengthening the device’s relevance and impact in industrial applications.