See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/297377814

Energy balances in dough mixers, part III: Cooling of the mixer

Article  in  Cereal Foods World · January 2003

CITATIONS READS

0 341

1 author:

Leon Levine
leon levine & associates
134 PUBLICATIONS   340 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

cfw series View project

extruder instabilities View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Leon Levine on 16 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Energy Balances in Dough Mixers, Part III:
Cooling of the Mixer
I n my last two columns in CEREAL FOODS WORLD (July-August
and September-October 2002), I began a discussion of the sig-
uificance of energy balances for dough mixers. A number of simple
conclusions were drawn from examination of the energy balances
for a mixer. Among the conclusions
was the obsen,ation that temperature
control for high-speed dough mixers
and large dough mixers becomes prob-
lematic and that, for moderate require-
ments of cooling. it is probably sim-
pler to reduce the temperature of the
fonnula water rather than the tem-
pernture of the flour.
In this column, and the next, I would
like to continue illustrating some of
the significance of the energy balances
• of dough mixers and detail some of
Jl the important and interesting points
that can be derived from them. In this
LEON LEVINE column, I will concentrate on the en-
ergy balance and cooling of the mixer
by substituting ice for part of the for-
Leon Levine & Associates mula water or using a coolant in the
mixer jacket.
Albuquerque, NM First, I'll quickly review what was
covered in my previous columns. The
governing energy balance around the
mixer is defined by
t,(enthalpy of ingredients)= I(energy inputs or losses from other sources)
The enthalpy of an ingredient is defined by
h=CpT
where h is the enthalpy, T is the temperature, and CP is the heat
capacity of the ingredient. The heat capacity of water is :,,4.18
kJ/kg-°C, and the heat capacity of flour is :,,2.02 kJ/kg- 0 ~ .
The chief sources of energy inputs (the right side of the first
equation) are the energy input from the mixer motor, which is on
the order of 10 W·hr/kg, and the heat of wetting the flour, which is
on the order of 15 J/g of flour. The major method of removing heat
involves cooling the jacket. Heat removal by the jacket is de-
scribed by
heat removed by jacket= UAtm;,, L'.Taverage
where U is the heat transfer coefficient (:,,200 W/m2- 0 C), A is the
cooled smface area, tmix is the mixing time, and tJ.Tamaee is the av-
erage temperature difference of the dough coolant during the mix-
ing process.
To be rigorous, the iiTarernge should be defined as a log mean
temperature difference, but to simplify the calculations, we will
use a simple average, which has only a small effect on the calcula-
Publication no. W-2002-1115-01C.
I COLUMN
ENGINEERING
tions. There is little good data on the value of the heat transfer co-
efficient, U. A low-end estimate would be :,,200 W/m2 ·°C, which
has been given above.
The equation given for the enthalpy of the ingredients is suffi-
cient if there are no phase changes occurring. This is clearly not
the case when one substitutes ice for some of the formula water to
reduce the temperature of the final mix. In this case, one needs to
incorporate an enthalpy change associated with the melting of the
ice and the subsequent warming of the water that results from the
melting of the ice.
Assuming that the ice is pure ice, that it does not can-y any
"free" water along with it, and that the temperature of the ice is
0°C, the enthalpy change associated with the ice is
where}, is the heat of the fusion of the ice (:,,334 J/g), and Tr is the
final temperature of the batch ( 0 C).
Because of the low heat capacity of the water and flour and the
high heat of fusion of ice, the addition of a small quantity of ice
has a large effect on the final temperature of the mixture. Table I
shows the results for a dough whose final composition is 100 parts
flour to 60 parts water, if we neglect jacket cooling and use the en-
ergy input and heat of wetting given above and assume the water
and flour both begin at 20°C. The results indicate that addition of
ice is a very effective method for cooling dough mixers.
Now let's consider not adding ice, but instead cooling the mixer
with a jacket. Let's assume that the coolant is either chilled water
(5°C) or a brine (-20°C). To perform the calculations, we need to
provide some information about the time it takes to mix the dough
and the available jacket area. Pyler (1) gives a jacket area of 38 ft 2
for a horizontal bar mixer with a capacity of 1,600 lb. I should
point out that these numbers can vary considerably. For a given
mixer design, the area goes up with the square of the mixer diame-
ter, while the capacity goes up with the cube of the diameter, so
small mixers have a disproportionate amount of surface area for
cooling (the smface area per unit volume is inversely proportional
to the mixer diameter). As a consequence, small mixers are much
Table I. Effect of replacement of water with ice
Parts Flour/Water/Ice Final Temperature (°C)
100/60/0 36.0
100/50/10 26.8
100/40/20 17.6
100/30/30 8.4
100/20/40 oa
a Ice not completely melted.
(continued on page 31)
CEREAL FOODS WORLD / 29
manner that the soybean has enjoyed. Nevertheless, recent research
eff01ts are leading to improved commercial methods for obtaining
lupin protein isolates, for example, based on protein extraction
from defatted lupin flakes (13). Other recent research has indi-
cated the potential of protein isolates from Jupin to compete with
those of soy and other legumes for use in meat and baked products
(11). The rheological properties of lupin protein isolates can be
further enhanced by chemical modification (4).
To continue the analogy with soy, lupin varieties have been de-
veloped to a limited extent as a starting material for fermented
foods. Part of the Australian lupin crop is exported to Indonesia
for fermentation into a product similar to tempeh (traditionally
made from soybeans). Lupin has also been used as a substitute for
soybeans in other soy-fermented products, such as miso, a fermented
paste made from soybeans mixed with rice. Lupin is also being
used as the basis for the traditional soy sauces of Japan (shoyu),
China (jiang-you), and Korea (kangjang) (7).
Nutritionally, the bioavailability of lupin protein is high and has
been demonstrated to be equivalent to that of purified soy protein
in the human diet (5). Even if included in fiber-rich flour, lupin
protein could be used with the same efficiency as soy protein to
achieve postprandial protein gain in healthy human subjects. In
studies of multigrain pastas, lupin-containing spaghetti showed
higher in vitro protein digestibility than did other composite samples
(10). The lupin-containing spaghetti also showed the highest lysine
values compared with other composite pastas.
In the diet of feedlot and milking cattle, Jupin grain may be used
at up to 40% of the ration (6). The grain must obviously be at least
cracked to provide access for the rumen microflora. Alternatively,
lupin grain can be incorporated into rations after steaming and
rolling into flakes or after grinding and extruding. For nonrumi-
nant and aquaculture diets, removal of the testa is obviously advis-
able (12).
Modem commercially grown lupin varieties differ greatly from
their ance~tral genotypes, because modem lupins have been selected
for much lower levels of the many bioactive agents that limited
the traditional utilization of lupin. Lupins were grown as a food
source as long ago as 6,000 years ago in the Andes of South Amer-
ica (7,14), where the pearl lupin (L. mutabilis) was soaked in run-
ning water to remove the bitter alkaloids before toasting or boiling
and drying. In Europe and the Middle East, grain from L. a/bus
has traditionally been boiled whole and spiced, after which the
testa is removed and the kernel is eaten as a snack food. Alterna-
tively, it is made into a paste similar to falafel, which is normally
made from faba beans.
This interesting grain is the subject of considerable international
research, as can be seen in the diversity of presentations at the re-
cent 10th International Conference of the Lupin, held in Iceland
(www.rala.is/lupin ).
So, is starch the universal storage carbohydrate of edible grains?
The lupin proves that starch is not quite universal and that a grain
can thrive and be usefully processed and eaten despite the absence
of starch.
Acknowledgments
David Petterson provided valuable information and the photo of lupin
flowers. The photo of lupin grain was provided by Jon Clements.
References
I. Clark, R., and Johnson, S. Sensory acceptability of foods with added
Jupin (Lupinus a11gustifolius) kernel fiber using pre-set criteria. J.
Food Sci. 67:356, 2002.
2. Doxastakis, G., Zafiriadis, I., Irakli, M., Mariani, H., and Tananaki,
C. Lupin. soya and ttiticale addition to wheat flour doughs and their
effect on rheological properties. Food Chern. 77:219, 2002.
3. Gladstones. J. S.. Atkins, C.. and Hamblin, J., eds. Lupin as Crop
Plants: BiofogY. Pmducrion and U1iftazion. CAB International, Wal-
lingford. L'K. 1998.
View publication stats
4. Krause, J. P., Bagger, C., and Schwenke, K. D. Rheological proper-
ties of modified lupin proteins. Nahrung 45:412, 2001.
5. Mariotti, F., Pueyo, M. E., Tome, D., and Mahe, S. The bioavailabil-
ity and postprandial utilisation of sweet lupin (Lupinus albus)-flour
protein is similar to that of purified sbyabean protein in human sub-
jects: A study using intrinsically 15N-Iabelled proteins. Br. J. Nutr.
87:315, 2002.
6. Petterson, D. S. The use of lupins in feeding systems-A review.
Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 13:861, 2000.
7. Petterson, D.S. Lupins. Encyclopedia ofGrainScience. C. W. Wrig-
ley, C. Walker, and H. Corke, eds. Elsevier Science, London. In press.
8. Petterson, D. S., Sipas, S., and Mackintosh, J.B. The Chemical Com-
position and Nutritional Value of Australian Pulses. 2nd ed. Grain
Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, Australia, 1997.
9. Pollard, N. J., Stoddard, F. L., Papineau, Y., Wrigley, C. W., and
MacRitchie, F. Lupin flours as additives: Dough mixing, breadmak-
ing, emulsifying, and foaming. Cereal Chem. 79:662, 2002.
IO. Rayas-Duarte, P., Mock, C. M., and Satterlee, L. D. Quality of spa-
ghetti containing buckwheat, amaranth, and lupin flours. Cereal Chem.
73:381, 1996.
I l. Tomoskozi, S., Lasztity, R., Haraszi, R., and Baticz, 0. Isolation and
study of the functional properties of pea proteins. Nahrung 45:399,
2001.
12. Van Barneveld, R. J. Understanding the nutritional chemistry of lu-
pin (Lupinus sp.) seed to improve livestock production efficiency.
Nutr. Res. Rev. 12:1, 1999.
13. Waesche, A., Mueller, K., and Knauf, U. New processing of lupin
protein isolates and functional properties. Nahrung 45:393, 200 l.
14. Wink, M., Meissner, C., and Witte, L. Patterns of quinolizidine alka-
loids in 56 species of the genus Lupinus. Phytochemistry 38: 139,
1995.
(Levine-continued from page 29)
easier to cool. The results shown in Table II are based on Pyler's
(1) numbers, an assumed mix time of 10 min, and the composition
and initial temperature used in the previous example.
It appears that although jacket cooling can have a significant ef-
fect on the mix temperature, it is not as powerful a tool as replac-
ing some of the formula water with ice. Jacket cooling also be-
comes less effective as the mixer gets larger. Table III shows the
effect of chilled water for different mixer sizes. I have assumed
that the jacket area per unit capacity is inversely proportional to
the mixer diameter.
There are still two questions that I haven't dealt with. The first
is the combined effect of the addition of ice and jacket cooling.
The second is quantification of the effect of mixer speed (dough
mixing time) on final dough temperature. I will deal with these
issues in my next column.
Reference
1. Pyler, E. J. Baking Science and Technology. Vol. 2. Sosland Publish-
ing Company, Kansas City, MO, 1988.
Table II. Effect of jacket cooling on final dough temperature
Jacket Coolant Final Temperature (°C)
None 36.0
5°C chilled water 31.7
-20°C brine 27.l
Table III. Effect of mixer size on final dough temperature
Batch Size (lb) Final Temperature (°C)
800 30.7
1,600 31.7
2,400 32.2
CEREAL FOODS WORLD / 31