International Journal of Food Properties

ISSN: 1094-2912 (Print) 1532-2386 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ljfp20

Specific Heat and Thermal Conductivity of the

Croatian Unleavened Dough

Sandra Budžaki & Bernarda Šeruga

To cite this article: Sandra Budžaki & Bernarda Šeruga (2015) Specific Heat and Thermal
Conductivity of the Croatian Unleavened Dough, International Journal of Food Properties, 18:10,
2300-2311, DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2014.971180

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2014.971180

Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Published online: 22 Jun 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1282

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ljfp20
International Journal of Food Properties, 18:2300–2311, 2015
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1094-2912 print/1532-2386 online
DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2014.971180

Specific Heat and Thermal Conductivity of the Croatian

Unleavened Dough

Sandra Budžaki and Bernarda Šeruga

Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Food Technology Osijek, Osijek,
Croatia

A line heat source probe method was used to determine thermal conductivity of the Croatian unlea-
vened dough in a temperature range of 27–125°C. For estimation of the specific heat of the Croatian
unleavened dough, a mixing method was used. The maximum value of 4.0 ± 0.8 kJ/(kg °C) was
determined at 57.1°C for the potato dough, and the minimum value of 1.4 ± 0.6 kJ/(kg °C) was
determined at 35.3°C for the Kroštula dough. Thermal conductivity first increased with temperature and
then decreased after reaching its maximum value. Minimum value of 0.29 ± 0.04 W/(m °C) was
determined at 123.8°C for the Kroštula dough. Further on, a set of empirical equations was established
using regression analysis to correlate the results and to predict the specific heat and thermal conductiv-
ity of the Croatian unleavened dough within the studied temperature range and moisture levels.

Keywords: Thermal properties, Specific heat, Thermal conductivity, Unleavened dough, Regression
analysis, Equation for prediction.

INTRODUCTION

Thermophysical properties are unique and influence the design of any thermal process. Those properties
include specific heat, thermal conductivity, and density. Individually, these properties may influence
evaluation and design process. Specific heat and density are important components of analysis involving
mass and/or energy balances. Thermal conductivity is the key property in the quantification of thermal
energy transfer within a conductive material. Combination of these three properties is a thermal
diffusivity, a key property in the analysis of unsteady-state heat transfer.[1] All thermal processes involve
changes in product temperature, and many also involve changes in product composition.
The specific heat of food is defined as the quantity of thermal energy associated with unit mass
of food and unit change in temperature. This is often referred to as the heat capacity and it
represents an essential component of the thermal energy analysis of a food product, a thermal
process, or the processing equipment used for the heating or cooling of food. Thermal conductivity
is a basic thermophysical property of any material, the magnitude of which expresses the rate of
thermal energy transfer within the material.

Received 21 March 2014; accepted 26 September 2014

Address correspondence to Sandra Budžaki, Faculty of Food Technology, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek,
Franje Kuhača 20, P.O. Box 709, HR-31001 Osijek, Croatia. E-mail: sandra.budzaki@ptfos.hr

2300
 THERMAL PROPERTIES OF UNLEAVENED DOUGH 2301

Geometry of food material is generally irregular, and its composition heterogeneous. For the
reason of these constraints, measurement of its thermophysical properties demands innovation, as
well as the basic knowledge of heat transfer.[2–4] Specific heat is commonly determined using either
the mixing method or the differential scanning calorimeter. Selection of the proper measurement
technique for the specific heat of the bakery product should take into account the homogeneity and
size of the sample, as well as the target temperature range.[5–14]
A number of methods are available for the measurement of thermal conductivity. These are
classified as steady-state (guarded hot plate) or transient unsteady-state techniques (line heat source
probe, temperature history). In the steady-state method, measurement time can be much longer
(12 h or more, depending on the sample size) for poor thermally conductive samples than in the
transient methods. During testing, moisture migration, and property changes can occur due to
longer exposures to high temperature. Thus, this method may not be suitable for the measurement
of the thermal conductivity of bakery products. Transient techniques are considered more suitable
since the testing is very fast and yields (more) accurate results.[5,15–22]
Owing to the complexity of food physical structure, prediction models for the thermal con-
ductivity of food must account for the characteristics of the physical structure.[23] Prediction
models for thermophysical properties based on product composition have evolved. Many of
these models are based on property magnitudes for the basic food components of foods: proteins,
fat, carbohydrates, ash, and water. Knowledge of the thermal properties of these basic components
as a function of temperature, provides the possibility to develop prediction models that will
accommodate the needs of process design models. These models of thermophysical properties
represent a significant opportunity to improve the efficiency of thermal processes for food and the
ultimate design of equipment used for food processing. The models to be found in the literature
provide less acceptable results compared to regression equations as they do not take into account
the synergistic effect of all constituents of food.[5] The objective of this study was to determine the
specific heat and thermal conductivity as a function of temperature of the Croatian unleavened
dough at over 100°C and additionally to determine the correlation relationship between tempera-
ture, specific heat, and thermal conductivity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sample Preparation
The “Mlinci” Croatian unleavened flat bread is a type of flat bread produced from wheat flour
(68.2%), water (30.5%), vinegar (0.9%), and salt (0.4%). The dough is prepared by a method similar
to that used for “Chapati” (Indian flat bread), and the bread is baked on a hot plate for a few minutes.
Baked Mlinci can be stored for several months. Their final treatment includes cooking in water for
approximately 1–2 minutes, and the bread is traditionally consumed as a side dish to oven-roasted
turkey. Samples of Mlinci dough were prepared by mixing flour and salt with water and vinegar,
followed by kneading in a low batch mixer for 15 min then allowing it to rest for 15–20 min.
Fresh “Kroštula” dough samples were prepared by mixing egg yolks (14.8%) with sugar (3.6%) and
table salt (0.3%), after which soft wheat flour (59.2%), sour cream (16.9%), and rum (5.2%) were added.
All ingredients were mixed well and allowed to rest in a covered container for 60 min. Kroštula dough is
deep fried in fat in different shapes and is consumed as a dessert sprinkled with sugar. Samples of potato
dough were prepared from whole potato flour and salt (0.2%). The whole potato flour was prepared
before being added to half-white wheat flour; the whole potato flour was mixed with boiling water in a 1:5
ratio. Such mixtures of whole potato flour were added to half-white wheat flour in the ratio of 1:1. Potato
dough is used to make dumplings or may be fried and served as soup noodles. The moisture contents of
2302 BUDŽAKI AND ŠERUGA

the samples were determined using the HR 73 halogen moisture analyser (Mettler Toledo, Mettler Toledo
Croatia). The analyses were repeated three times.

Specific Heat Determination

Modified mixing method was developed by Kulacki and Kennedy[11] to determine the specific
heats of wheat, wheat flour, and cookie dough. The indirect method of mixtures based on literature
reports by Hwang and Hayakawa,[9] Gupta,[7] and Maisuthisakul[12] was used in the present work.
Calorimeter used in the experimental work was constructed[24] according to the mentioned
literature references.
Since the used calorimeter (ordinary vacuum thermo flask of 350 mL capacity) was a composite
of glass, plastic, and insulation material, it was easier to experimentally determine the heat capacity
of the calorimeter rather than determining the mass and specific heat of each material separately
and combining them. This method consisted of determining the temperature change of distilled
water contained in the flask calorimeter at high temperature when the known quantity of distilled
water at known lower temperature was added. The system was assumed to be adiabatic. Therefore,
the heat capacity of the flask calorimeter is given by:[14]
Mcw  cw  ðTe  Tcw Þ  Mhw  cw  ðThw  Te Þ
Hf ¼ (1)
ðThw  Te Þ
Samples of the Croatian unleavened dough for determination of heat capacity were prepared in
the homogeneous form at 17 g each, filled, vacuumed, and sealed in polyethylene pouches (Vaxsy
System, Zeptter, Zeptter Croatia) to prevent contact between the samples and the heat exchange
medium. Heat capacity of the polyethylene pouches was disregarded during the calculations of the
specific heat of the dough.
Pouches with dough samples at room temperature were dropped into the medium for heat
transfer (oil, INA Delta 5, SAE 15W-40, Croatia) contained in the flask calorimeter at the higher
uniform temperature (5°C higher than the desired experimental temperature).
Equilibrium was reached after 39 to 60 min, depending upon the characteristics of the sample
material and the temperature of determination. Measured equilibrium temperature was the tem-
perature at which the specific heat of unleavened dough was obtained. Considering the heat
balance during the process, specific heat of the Croatian unleavened dough was calculated using
the following heat balance equation:[14]


Hf þ Mcw  cw  ðTe  Tcw Þ  ðTd  Te Þ
cp ¼  cpw (2)
Md  ðTd  Te Þ
Values of Hf used in the above equation were the average values of five replicates. The
temperature was measured during experimental work using a type T thermocouple with a diameter
of 0.0225 mm (Cole-Parmer, International, USA) in a temperature range of 34.3–95.8°C. The
calorimeter was tested with distilled water. The obtained specific heat of distilled water at 46.03°C
was 4.221 ± 0.025 kJ/(kg °C), which correlates well with the value found in the literature, 4.176
kJ/(kg °C);[25] this measurement represents an error of 1.07%. Specific heat of the Croatian dough
was determined for samples with different initial moisture contents in a temperature range of
34.3–95.8°C. The measurements were conducted in triplicate.

Thermal Conductivity Determination

Thermal conductivity of the Croatian unleavened dough was determined using the linear heat
source probe method. This method is convenient and rapid, suitable for small samples, and could
 THERMAL PROPERTIES OF UNLEAVENED DOUGH 2303

be developed into an accurate method for universal application. This method has frequently been
used for the determination of thermal conductivity[18,22,26–30] for food and biological materials.
Thermal conductivity measurements of the dough were performed using the probe method based
on the line-heat source approach developed by Sweat.[28]
The probe encloses a heater wire and thermocouple junction contained in a hypodermic needle
(D = 4 mm, L = 233 mm). The construction of the line heat-source probe was described in detail by
Sweat.[29] The cylindrical sample holder was a film capsule (81 mm in length and of 41 mm in
diameter) that was insulated at both ends. During the measurement of thermal conductivity, the
probe was inserted longitudinally into a sample placed in the sample holder. The sample was
equilibrated to the desired temperature using an oil (INA Delta 5, SAE 15W-40, Croatia) bath.
Then, a current was applied and time-temperature data were recorded. Thermal conductivity was
then calculated using the following equation:[29]
Q lnðte =t0 Þ
k¼  (3)
2π ðTe  T0 Þ
A short experiment time was chosen to avoid the edge effect caused by heat transfer at the outer
surface of the sample. To linearize the t-T plot, the initial time (t0) in the above equation was set
equal to the time when the non-linear portion of the t-T plot ends.[31] For each t-T plot, the slope
was found using a simple linear regression. Prior to the measurement of the samples, the probe was
calibrated with 99.5% glycerine. The measured average thermal conductivity (10 replicates) of
glycerine at 30.15°C was 0.291 ±0.049 W/(m °C), an approximate 0.62% deviation from the
expected value as the expected value of glycerine at 30°C was 0.289 W/(m °C).[32] The resulting
calibration factor for the probe was 1.006. Thermal conductivity of the Croatian dough was
determined for samples with different initial moisture contents in a temperature range of
27.8–124.2°C. Measurements were repeated approximately ten times for each sample.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Kroštula, Mlinci, and Potato dough samples used in this experiment contained 29.27, 37.15,
and 44.66% moisture, respectively. During the experimental determination of the specific heat and
thermal conductivity, the moisture levels of the dough samples were constant. During the determi-
nation of the specific heat, the samples were sealed in polyethylene pouches; when determining the
thermal conductivity, the samples were placed in a sample holder that was sealed at both ends with
no possibility of water migration out of the samples.
Specific heat of dough samples was determined as a function of temperature up to 95.8°C (the
temperature above the previously mentioned causes the leakage of polyethylene pouches due to
high pressure occurring). The thermal conductivity of dough samples was determined as a function
of temperature of up to 124.2°C (the temperature above the previously mentioned causes the
overflow of the samples over the edge of the sample holder). The thermophysical properties of the
dough being processed were changing as a function of temperature.
Variation of the average specific heat of the dough, estimated experimentally with temperature
at various moisture levels is shown in Fig. 1. It can be observed that the experimental specific heat
values of the dough increase with temperature, indicated by small peaks at 45–50 and 55–60°C.
Although this was not further investigated, according to the literature, the first peak can be
explained by the denaturation of the wheat and potato proteins.[33]
Temperature of denaturation decreased significantly in the case of the Croatian dough, where the
moisture of the raw material ranged from 29.27 to 44.66%. The temperature at which the change
took place ranged from 44.6 to 46.1°C (Fig. 1). Furthermore, the specific heat of the dough
samples started decreasing at temperatures between 55.6 to 58.8°C and maintained a nearly
2304 BUDŽAKI AND ŠERUGA

5
Mlinci dough
4.5
4
3.5
Cp (kJ/kg°C)

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
34.3 43.5 57.2 70.1 95.8
Temperature (°C)

4
Kroštule dough
3.5
3
Cp (kJ/kg°C)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
35.3 44.3 55.6 67.6 78.2
Temperature (°C)

4.5
Potato dough
4
3.5
3
Cp (kJ/kg°C)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
34.8 44.2 57.1 74
Temperature (°C)

FIGURE 1 Experimental specific heat as a function of temperature at different moisture levels; (○) Kroštula dough,
(◊) Mlinci dough, and (Δ) Potato dough.

constant value with the increasing temperature from 66.3 to 74°C (temperatures of gelatinization of
wheat and potato starch, respectively). According to the literature,[34,35] it can be concluded that the
decrease in cp values was actually the result of gelatinization.
The highest values of cp over the investigated temperature range occurred in the dough with the
highest moisture content (potato dough; 4.04 ± 0.76 kJ/(kg °C) at 57.1°C), while the lowest values
 THERMAL PROPERTIES OF UNLEAVENED DOUGH 2305

were recorded for the dough with lowest moisture content (Kroštula dough; 1.42 ± 0.61 kJ/(kg °C)
at 35.3°C). It is interesting to note that the peaks corresponding to the denaturation of proteins and
to the gelatinisation of starch were slightly shifted toward higher temperatures as the moisture
content of the dough increased.
Figure 2 presents the variation of the average thermal conductivity estimated experimentally on
the dough samples with temperature at various moisture levels. The highest values of k over the

0.6
Mlinci dough
0.5

0.4
k (W/m°C)

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
29.6 37.4 48.6 54.7 64.3 77 88.3 93.9 100.9 108.9 116.6 124.2
Temperature (°C)

0.6 Kroštule dough

0.5

0.4
k (W/m°C)

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
31.4 38.2 45.8 52.1 64.2 76.2 88.4 102.3 114.4 123.8
Temperature (°C)

0.6 Potato dough

0.5

0.4
k (W/m°C)

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
27.8 35.1 43.3 51.8 61.5 71.7 83.6 95.5 110.1
Temperature (°C)

FIGURE 2 Experimental thermal conductivity as a function of temperature at different moisture levels; (○) Kroštula
dough, (◊) Mlinci dough, and (Δ) Potato dough.
2306 BUDŽAKI AND ŠERUGA

investigated temperature range occurred in the dough with the highest moisture content (potato
dough; 0.5308 ± 0.0114 W/(m °C) at 56.7°C), while the lowest values were found in the dough
with the lowest moisture content (Kroštula dough; 0.2853 ± 0.0416 W/(m °C) at 123.8°C). In
Fig. 2, it can be observed that the experimental thermal conductivity of the dough increases with
temperature, and small peaks (the first at 43–46°C and the second at 55–58°C) are evident as for
the specific heat of the dough samples. The temperature at which the changes took place ranged
from 44.6 to 46.2°C. The thermal conductivity of the dough started decreasing at temperatures
from 57.7–57.8°C, then remained nearly constant with increasing temperatures of up to 90–95.5°C,
where they were approximately equal to the values at the start of the investigation (27.8–31.4°C;
Fig. 2). All of these temperature-dependent changes in the experimentally determined thermal
conductivity were also evident in the experimentally determined specific heat values. It can be
concluded that the thermal properties of the Croatian dough, that is, the specific heat and thermal
conductivity, were greatly affected by the physico-chemical changes that took place at ≈50°C and
between 55 and 70°C, and in addition assumed according to the literature[34,35] that the changes are
denaturation and gelatinization.
Thermal properties (specific heat and thermal conductivity) greatly depend on the temperature,
state (frozen or unfrozen), composition parameters (moisture content, fat content, protein, and ash),
and fiber orientation. However, many food and agricultural products contain individual constitu-
ents; hence, their thermal properties are also different. Choi and Okos[36] developed a general
model to predict the thermal properties of each specific food material based on its composition (fat,
protein, water, carbohydrate, and ash) and temperature. It was assumed that each component has
the same thermal properties regardless of its structure in different food materials. This, however, is
not always true.[1,37] The mass fraction model, in general, satisfactorily predicts the value; how-
ever, several authors have reported significant disagreements between the calculated and measured
values.[5] It has been reported that the calculated values were lower than the measured values. This
difference was explained with bound water. The specific heat of various undried foods is greater
than that calculated from the specific heat of the dry solid and the moisture content. This is thought
to be an effect of bound water, which may have a higher specific heat than the free water.
Since the porosity significantly affected thermal conductivity, the mass fraction model was
not suitable for the estimation of the thermal conductivity of bakery products. As mentioned
earlier, during processing, there are great structural changes due to chemical and physical
reactions, where these changes often interact, strongly affecting the thermal properties. Thus,
the regression model based on experimental data is applied more often than the structural
model. Calculated specific heat values of dough obtained from models developed by Choi and
Okos[36] and Heldman and Singh[37] were compared with the experimental data for dough
investigated in this study. Composition of the Croatian dough was determined by standard
AOAC method repeated in triplicate[19] and presented in Table 1. Additionally, the experi-
mental values of cp and k obtained in this study were compared with the calculated values
from models proposed by Gupta[7,18] for the Indian unleavened bread Chapati. The values
obtained from the mentioned models were found to have the highest mean percent error and

TABLE 1
Composition of Croatian dough expressed as mass basis percentages

Sample dough Water (%) Ash (%) Protein (%) Fat (%) CHO (%)

Kroštule 29.27 1.5474 8.09 6.65 42.35

Mlinci 37.15 1.2845 6.66 − 48.53
Potato 44.66 2.1384 6.32 − 35.05 (wheat)
35.57 (potato)
 THERMAL PROPERTIES OF UNLEAVENED DOUGH 2307

Mlinci_exp
4.5
Mlinci_C&O
4 Mlinci_H&S
3.5 Mlinci_predict
Cp (kJ/kg°C)

3 Mlinci_Gupta

2.5

1.5

1
20 40 60 80 100
Temperature (°C)

4 Kroštule_exp
Kroštule_C&O
3.5
Kroštule_H&S
3 Kroštule_predict
Cp (kJ/kg°C)

Kroštule_Gupta
2.5

1.5

1
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Temperature (°C)

Potato_exp
4.5
Potato_C&O
4
Potato_H&S
3.5 Potato_predict
Cp (kJ/kg°C)

3 Potato_Gupta

2.5

1.5

1
20 40 60 80 100
Temperature (°C)

FIGURE 3 Specific heat data obtained in this work plotted with the data calculated from equations proposed by
Choi and Okos [36], Heldman and Singh [37], and Gupta [7] for Croatian unleavened dough.
2308 BUDŽAKI AND ŠERUGA

Mlinci_exp
0.50
Mlinci_C&O
0.45 Mlinci_predict
Mlinci_Gupta
k (W/m°C)

0.40

0.35

0.30

0.25
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Temperature (°C)

0.55

0.50
Kroštule_exp
0.45
k (W/m°C)

Kroštule_C&O
0.40 Kroštule_predict

0.35 Kroštule_Gupta

0.30

0.25
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Temperature (°C)

0.65
0.60
0.55
Potato_exp
k (W/m°C)

0.50
Potato_C&O
0.45 Potato_predict
0.40 Potato_Gupta
0.35
0.30
0.25
20 40 60 80 100 120
Temperature (°C)

FIGURE 4 Thermal conductivity data obtained in this work plotted with the data calculated from equations
proposed by Choi and Okos [36] and Gupta [18] for Croatian unleavened dough.

were lower than the experimental data over the first part of temperature range, the part at
which chemical and physical changes take place (up to 60°C). The experimental specific heat
of the dough was higher than those predicted by theoretical models based on food
 THERMAL PROPERTIES OF UNLEAVENED DOUGH 2309

TABLE 2
Specific heat and thermal conductivity of Croatian dough as functions of temperature in the range of 27.8–124.2°C

Square of
Temperature Regression equation for specific heat (kJ/(kg °C)) correlation
Sample dough interval (°C) and thermal conductivity (W/(m °C)) coefficient Standard deviation

Kroštula 35.3 – 45.2 cp = –4.97849 + 0.18391 T 0.99708 0.66557

45.2 – 58.3 cp = 22.58630 – 0.82389 T + 0.00864 T2 0.79805 0.33159
58.3 – 86.1 cp = 2.03068 + 11102∙103 exp ((–0.28346 T) 0.97659 0.51749
Mlinci 34.3 – 44.6 cp = 0.58604 + 0.07138 T 0.99708 0.27579
44.6 – 56.2 cp = 41.67779 – 1.55354 T + 0.01574 T2 0.80828 0.31743
56.2 – 95.8 cp = 1.77318 + 170.7269 exp ((–0.09439) T) 0.97196 0.46816
Potato 34.8 – 46.1 cp = –4.69161 + 0.19532 T 0.91684 0.81787
46.1 – 57.1 cp = 38.42389 – 1.35044 T + 0.01310 T2 0.91554 0.14828
57.1 – 94.3 cp = 2.18027 + 736.2355 exp ((–0.10353) T) 0.98736 0.72670
Kroštula 31.4 – 43.8 k = 0.17520 + 0.00641 T 0.99315 0.02308
43.8 – 57.8 k = 4.80495 – 0.17724 T + 0.00177 T2 0.90789 0.03680
57.8 – 123.8 k = 0.28712 + 7.81453 exp ((–0.06782) T) 0.98756 0.04157
Mlinci 26.9 – 46.2 k = 0.13910 + 0.00782 T 0.99430 0.04651
46.2 – 55.7 k = 6.91785 + 0.25405 T – 0.00249 T2 0.95593 0.02062
55.7 – 124.2 k = 0.30070 + 16.43008 exp ((–0.07883) T) 0.99019 0.02047
Potato 27.8 – 44.6 k = –0.01148 + 0.01257 T 0.98205 0.06411
44.6 – 56.7 k = 2.30844 + 0.07250 T + 0.00073 T2 0.95149 0.01148
56.7 – 115.1 k = 0.32161 + 4.94903 exp ((–0.05445) T) 0.99741 0.06078

composition. None of these models were found to be adequate for the whole investigated
temperature range (Figs. 3 and 4).
The multiple peaks appearing in the specific heat and thermal conductivity curves of the
Croatian dough make it difficult to reproduce cp and k over the entire studied temperature range
using a single equation. Several functions were chosen to fit the data. For the specific heat, the
temperature range of 34.3–94.3°C was divided into three sections to fully describe the behavior of
the different dough formulations and moisture levels. The first temperature interval was chosen to
cover the region leading to the first peak (linear increase). The second temperature interval
extended from the onset of the first peak to the top of the following peak (polynomial regression).
The third temperature interval extended from the top of the last peak to the finish stage (exponen-
tial regression). The same was performed for thermal conductivity. The temperature range of
27.8–124.2°C was divided into three sections: linear increase, polynomial regression, and expo-
nential decline. Table 2 lists the regression equations found for the dough as a function of
temperature, for specific heat and thermal conductivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The line heat probe method and the mixing method were effective in measuring the thermal
conductivity and specific heat of dough, respectively, at temperatures between 27 and 125°C.
The results of the investigation clearly show the significant variation in the specific heat and
thermal conductivity of different Croatian unleavened dough with temperature at different moisture
levels. The developed models can be used to satisfactorily predict thermal conductivity and specific
heat within the range of input variables studied, with a standard deviation of 0.2219 and an error of
5.83%.
2310 BUDŽAKI AND ŠERUGA

REFERENCES

1. Heldman, D.R. Prediction Models for Thermophysical Properties of Foods. In Food Processing Operations Modeling,
Design, and Analysis; Irudayaraj, J., Ed.; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, 2001; 1–24.
2. Mahapatra, A.K.; Lan, Y.; Harris, D.L. Influence of moisture content and temperature on thermal conductivity and
thermal diffusivity of rice flours. International Journal of Food Properties 2011, 14 (3), 675–683.
3. Perussello, C.A.; Mariani, V.C.; Camargo do Amarante, A.C. Thermophysical properties of okara during drying.
International Journal of Food Properties 2014, 17 (4), 891–907.
4. Tansakul, A.; Kantrong, H.; Saengrayup, R.; Sura, P. Thermophysical properties of papaya puree. International Journal
of Food Properties 2012, 15 (5), 1086–1100.
5. Baik, O.D.; Marcotte, M.; Sablani, S.S.; Castaigne, F. Thermal and physical properties of bakery products. Critical
Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 2001, 41 (5), 321–352.
6. El-Bushra, S.E. Construction of an isoperibol calorimeter to measure the specific heat capacity of foods between 20 and
90°C. Journal of Thermal Analysis Calorimetry 2001, 64, 261–272.
7. Gupta, T.R. Specific heat of Indian unleavened flat bread (Chapati) at various stages of cooking. Journal of Food
Process Engineering 1990, 13, 217–227.
8. Hu, J.; Sari, O.; Eicher, S.; Rakotozanakajy, A.R. Determination of specific heat of milk at different fat content between
1°C and 59°C using micro DSC. Journal of Food Engineering 2009, 90, 395–399.
9. Hwang, M.P.; Hayakawa, K.A. Specific heat calorimeter for foods. Journal of Food Science 1979, 44, 435–438, 448.
10. Kemp, R.M.; North, M.F.; Leath, S.R. Component heat capacities for lamb, beef, and pork at elevated temperatures.
Journal of Food Engineering 2009, 92, 280–284.
11. Kulacki, F.A.; Kennedy, S.C. Measurements of the thermo-physical properties of common cookie dough. Journal of
Food Science 1978, 43, 380–384.
12. Maisuthisakul P.-O. 6th ASEAN Food Conference, Singapore, Singapore, November 24–27, 1997; Kong, L.K.; Yok
Seng, L.Y., Eds.; Institute of Food Science & Technology: Singapore, 1997.
13. Razavi, S.M.A.; Taghizadeh, M. The specific heat of pistachio nuts as affected by moisture content, temperature, and
variety. Journal of Food Engineering 2007, 79, 158–167.
14. Shrivastava, M.; Datta, A.K. Determination of specific heat and thermal conductivity of mushroom (Pleurotusflorida).
Journal of Food Engineering 1999, 39, 225–260.
15. Buhri, A.B.; Singh, R.P. Measurement of food thermal conductivity using differential scanning calorimetry. Journal of
Food Science 1993, 8 (5), 1145–1147.
16. Coimbra, J.S.R.; Gabas, A.L.; Minim, L.A.; Garcia Rojas, E.E.; Telis, V.R.N.; Telis-Romero, J. Density, heat capacity,
and thermal conductivity of liquid egg products. Journal of Food Engineering 2006, 74, 186–190.
17. Gratzek, J.P.; Toledo, R.T. Solid food thermal conductivity determination at high temperatures. Journal of Food Science
1993, 58 (4), 908–913.
18. Gupta, T.R. Thermal conductivity of Indian unleavened flat bread (Chapati) at various stages of baking. Journal of
Food Process Engineering 1993, 16, 227–235.
19. AOAC Official Method of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 2002, 17th ed. AOAC, 10. Arlington,
VA.
20. Rahman, M.S.; Chen, X.D.; Perera, C.O. An improved thermal conductivity prediction model for fruits and vegetables
as a function of temperature, water content, and porosity. Journal of Food Engineering 1997, 31, 163–170.
21. Schmalko, M.E.; Morawicki, R.O.; Ramallo, L.A. Simultaneous determination of specific heat capacity and thermal
conductivity using the finite-difference method. Journal of Food Engineering 1997, 31, 531–540.
22. Tansakul, A.; Chaisawang, P. Thermophysical properties of coconut milk. Journal of Food Engineering 2006, 73 (3),
276–280.
23. Carson, J.K. Measurement and modelling of thermal conductivity of sponge and yellow cakes as a function of porosity.
International Journal of Food Properties 2014, 17 (6), 1254–1263.
24. Šeruga, B.; Budžaki, S. International Congress “Flour-Bread ‘03” and 4th Croatian Congress of Cereal Technologists,
Opatija, Croatia, 348–353, 2004; Ugarčić-Hardi, Ž., Ed.; Faculty of Food Technology Osijek: Osijek, 2004.
25. Ražnjević, K. Toplinska svojstva vode (H2O) pri tlaku zasićenja [The thermal properties of water (H2O) at a pressure of
saturation]. In: Termodinamičke tablice [Thermodynamic tables]; Ražnjević, K., Ed.; Školska knjiga: Zagreb, 1974; pp.
110.
26. AbuDagga, Y.; Kolbe, E. Thermophysical properties of surimi paste at cooking temperature. Journal of Food
Engineering 1997, 32, 325–337.
27. Marcotte, M.; Taherian, A.R.; Karimi, Y. Thermophysical properties of processed meat and poultry products. Journal of
Food Engineering 2008, 88, 315–332.
 THERMAL PROPERTIES OF UNLEAVENED DOUGH 2311

28. Sweat, V.E. Experimental values of thermal conductivity of selected fruits and vegetables. Journal of Food Science
1974, 39, 1080–1083.
29. Sweat, V.E. Thermal Properties of Foods. In Engineering Properties of Foods; Rao, M.; Rizvi, S.; Eds.; Marcel Dekker,
Inc.: New York, 1986; p. 99–112.
30. Tansakul, A.; Lumyong, R. Thermal properties of straw mushroom. Journal of Food Engineering 2008, 87, 91–98.
31. Murakami, E.G.; Sweat, V.E.; Sastry, S.; Kolbe, E.; Hayakawa, K.; Datta, A. Recommended design parameters for
thermal conductivity probes for nonfrozen food materials. Journal of Food Engineering 1996, 27, 109–123.
32. Sweat, V.E.; Haugh, C.G. Thermal conductivity probe for small food samples. T ASAE 1974, 17 (1), 56–58.
33. Šeruga, B.; Budžaki, S. Determination of thermal conductivity and convective heat transfer coefficient during deep fat
frying of “Kroštula” dough. European Food Research and Technology 2005, 221, 351–356.
34. De Graaf, L.A. Denaturation of proteins from a non-food perspective. Journal of Biotechnology 2000, 79, 299–306.
35. Kovacs, M.I.P.; Fu, B.X.; Woods, S.M.; Khan, K. Thermal stability of wheat gluten protein: Its effect on dough
properties noodle texture. Journal of Cereal Science 2004, 39, 9–19.
36. Choi, Y.; Okos, M. Effects of Temperature and Composition on the Thermal Properties of Foods. In Food Engineering
and Process Applications—Transport Phenomena; Le Maguer, M.; Jelen, P.; Eds.; Elsevier: New York, 1986;
p. 93–101.
37. Heldman, D.R.; Singh, R.P. Food Process Engineering; Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, 1981.

ABBREVIATIONS

cp Specific heat (kJ/(kg °C))

cw Specific heat of water (kJ/(kg °C))
Hf Heat capacity of flask calorimeter (kJ/°C)
k Thermal conductivity (W/(m °C))
M Mass (kg)
Q Heat generation rate per unit length (W/m)
T Temperature (°C)
Te Final temperature (°C)
T0 Initial temperture (°C)
t Time (s)
te Final time (s)
t0 Initial time (°C)
Subscripts
cw Cold distilled water
d Dough sample
e Equilibrium condition of mixture
hw Hot distilled water