You are on page 1of 5

FST 202

FOOD QUALITY CONTROL

TITLE : MEASUREMENT OF TEXTURE IN


FOODS BY MEANS OF
TEXTURE ANALYSER

NAME : NURFADHILAH BINTI JAAFAR

MEMBERS NAMES: SITI FATIMAH BT SHAIKH ABDUL


MUNAIM

RAFIDAH BT MOHD SHAHRUN

WAFA ATIQAH BT AMAN MAAMOR

NURSABRINA BT ROSLI

ID NUMBER : 2013698078

GROUP : AS 1165A2

SUBMITION DATE : 8TH JULY 2015


LECTURERS NAME : MADAM MARDIANA BT AHAMAD
ZABIDI

INTRODUCTION

Texture was originally used to describe the structure, feel and appearance that are
sensed by touch with the application of force. Food is described based on its specific quality of
the textural properties and terms that are used to describe the food product. A high performance
food texture analyzer known as Lloyd Instrument is used for the measurement of texture
analysis. The textural properties of food can be determined by a popular double compression
test known as Texture Profile Analysis. The parameter of the texture profile analysis is classified
into two which are primary parameters and secondary parameters. The examples of primary
parameters are hardness, cohesiveness, viscosity, elasticity and adhesiveness. In instances,
the secondary parameters are to look out for the brittleness, chewiness, gumminess and
greasiness of the food products. The fruits and vegetables freshness and texture is the
attributes that play as important role for a functional performance during the processing stage to
produce a quality finished food products.

RESULTS

Chips Cracker

Sample Load (g) Probe Fracturability (kg)

Chipster chips 5 HDP/CFS 0.409

Jacker chips 5 HDP/ CFS 0.208

Buns

Sample Load Pro Hardness Springiness Cohesiveness Gumminess Chewiness Resilience


(g) be (g) (g) (g) (g) (g) (g)

Gardenia 5 P/25 430.087 0.911 0.677 290.968 265.040 0.205


Dailys 5 P/25 229.263 0.998 0.836 191.570 191.096 0.354

Candy jelly

Sample Load (g) Probe Hardness (g) Stickiness (g)


Miow Miaow 5 P/2 85.404 -2936
Fantasi 5 P/2 60.905 -0.761

DISCUSSIONS

Textural properties of different type of food are determined widely by Texture Profile
Analysis. The test parameter needs to be set up first depending on the type of food need to be
tested as the parameter may affect the TPA results. In this experiment, the baked goods,
confectionary, and crackers are used for the findings of the TPA results for each brand of the
food products. Based on the results, Chipster brand (0.409 kg) has the higher value of
fracturability compared to Jacker (0.208 kg). It proves that Chipster cracker brand is easier to
break with low force. Probe HDP/CFS is being used for the TPA of cracker products.

Next, the Texture Profile Analysis for bakery products with Gardenia and Dailys brands
are identified with the use of probe P/25. The primary and secondary parameters are being
identified for the TPA value of bakery products. The primary parameters identified for the bun
are the hardness and springiness. Gardenia brand has the higher value of hardness but lower
value of springiness compared to Dailys brand. The hardness of the bread is related to
processing stage. In instances, the firmer texture can be improved during the manufacturer of
the bread. Springiness is referring to the breadcrumb texture. The lower value of springiness is
might due to the time storage of the product that causes the strength of the crumbs cell wall
network become loosens. The secondary parameters recorded are cohesiveness, gumminess,
chewiness and resilience.

Overall, Dailys has the higher cohesiveness and resilience while Gardenia has higher
value for chewiness and gumminess. Resilience is energy used by the bun to partially return to
its original shape. Cohesiveness character in food is defined to the energy required to break
down the product until it become palatable and can be swallowed. Cohesiveness of the bun is a
positive characteristic for bakery products instead of gumminess effect which are the mutually
exclusive with chewiness since product would not be both a solid and semi-solid at the same
time.

The confectionary products such as candy gum, jelly and chewing gum are very popular
these days. Candy gum is made up from glucose syrup, sugar, and inverts sugar with distinct
type of gelatine. Miaow Miaow and Fantasi candy gum brands of TPA are conducted with probe
P/2. Miaow Miaow has slightly higher value of hardness with 85.404 g while Fantasi Candy is
60.905 g. The secondary parameter which is stickiness characteristics of the candy gum
shown that Miaow Miaow brand has lower value with -2936 g compared to Fantasia brand (-
0.761 g).

When using the texture analyzer, make sure to use the appropriate probe for a specific
product, so that the probe can be properly compressed and contact with the product surface.
Besides that, set the appropriate parameter and ensure that there is no vibration surrounds the
texture analyzer as it may affect the TPA readings.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the Chipster and Jacker have fracturability values of 0.409 kg and 0.208
kg respectively. Gardenia has a firm texture with the hardness value 430.087 g compared to
Dailys however it has higher value of chewiness (290.968 g) and gumminess (265.040g).
Candy jelly of Miaow Miaow brand have lower stickiness (-2936 g) compared to Fantasia Brand.
The Miaow Miaow and Fantasia brand has slightly differ in values of hardness which are 85.404
g and 60.905 g respectively.

QUESTIONS

1. Besides using instrumental methods to measure food texture, what are other
ways to measure food texture?
The other ways to measure the texture of the food is by fundamental, imitative and
empirical methods. Fundamental method is based on measurement of physical
properties such as stress and rheology while imitative method is to simulate the chewing
mechanically. Empirical methods tend to use specific devices to give specific
measurements which have been found to have practical value
2. Compare your results with other groups and you will find that even the same type
of food product can have texture differences among each other. In your opinion,
what could possibly be the reason for this?
In my opinion, the results could be differences due to the samples height and the contact
area of the food with probe. Besides that, the different percent of compression used in
replication may also cause the textural differences values.

REFERENCES

1. Kilcast, D. (2004). Improving the Texture of Bread. In Texture in Food Solid Foods (p.
437). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press;
2. Bourne, M. (2002). Principle of Objective Texture Measurement. In Food Texture and
Viscosity Concept and Measurement (2nd ed., pp. 181-184). San Diego: Academic
Press.
3. Rosenthal, A. (2010). Texture Profile Analysis - How Important Are The Parameters?
Journal of Texture Studies, 672-684.