PACKAGING TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE VOL 4 81-90 (1991)

The Effect of Temperature and Vibration

on Emulsion Stability of Mayonnaise in
Two Different Package Types

Jeffery P. Mackson
Graduate Student, North Carolina State University, NC, USA
S. Paul Singh
School of Packaging, Michigan State University, MI, 48824-1 223, USA

Mayonnaise in t w o different packages was compared f o r i t s susceptibility t o vibration-

induced breakdown. The researchers investigated t h e effect of truck vibration on
emulsion stability and compared t w o different package systems.
The containers were 32 oz glass and 32 oz polyethylene terephthalate (PET). Mayon-
naise was conditioned a t three different temperatures (40". 72" and 100°F). f o r three
time periods (21,26 and 36 days), and vibrated a t normal and worst-case transportation
g levels. Emulsion stability was quantified by specific gravity, percentage o f surface
oil, and qualitatively rated by a visual pass/fail test. The specific gravity measure
positively correlated to surface oiling. Glass containers showed a higher rate o f
emulsion failure a t the worst-case vibration levels. No consistent difference in emul-
sion breakdown was found between plastic and glass at the normal transportation g
levels.
Keywords: Mayonnaise; emulsion; vibration; temperature; stability

INTRODUCTION

The researchers hypothesized that the physical
differences between glass and plastic containers
could cause variation in the emulsion stability of
mayonnaise when the two types of package are
subjected to identical vibration and storage condi-
tions. Temperature and vibration have an influence
on mayonnaise stability, but it is the visual implica-
tions seen on the surface of the product that directly
affect the consumer and make the product accept-
able. This study was conducted to discover if these
influences have discernable differences when ap-
plied to identical mayonnaise packaged in glass
and plastic packages.
The objectives of this research were:
(i) to compare differences in mayonnaise emulsion
stability by measuring the product's specific
gravity taken from the top surface of identically
vibrated and temperature-conditioned poly-
ethylene terephthalate (PET) and glass con-
tainers.
(ii) to compare the percentage of visible oiling of
mayonnaise packaged in identically vibrated
and temperature-conditioned glass and PET
containers.
(iii) to qualitatively compare the mayonnaises'
visual acceptability between identically vi-

0894-32 14/91/02OO8 1 10$05.OO

~ Received I2 Seprember 1990
01991 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Accepted 10 October 1990
82
brated and temperature-conditioned glass and
PET containers.
Many variations exist in emulsion science ter-
minology. Sutheim’ gives one of the most appro-
priate definitions: an emulsion is a heterogeneous
system, consisting of at least one immiscible liquid
intim-ately dispersed in another in the form of
droplets, whose diameters, in general, exceed 1 pm.
Such systems possess a minimal stability, which
may be accentuated by such additives as surface-
active agents and finely divided solids. Emulsions
are classified as being oil in water (O/W) or water
in oil (W/O). Mayonnaise is an O/W emulsion, the
dispersed phase is oil and the continuous phase is
water. Through mechanical input and chemical
emulsifiers the two immiscible liquids in mayon-
naise may exist as one system.
Any emulsion is inherently unstable and will
eventually break down to form two layers. Mayon-
naise is a particularly delicate food emulsion be-
cause? for an O/W system, it contains a very large
amount of oil. High amounts of oil d o not favour
0,W emulsions.2 Considerable research has been
devoted to theoretical considerations of emulsion
stability in general, but in comparison little has
been published concerning practical aspects of
mayonnaise stability. One of the few papers of this
type was published by C ~ r r a n who
, ~ reported on
the effect of product formulation on the stability of
mayonnaise.
Separation mechanisms for emulsions
Over time any emulsion will deteriorate. Tempera-
t ure changes, transportation and packaging all play
a role in how the deterioration of emulsions pro-
gresses. The phenomenon of emulsion can be cate-
gorizcd broadly under three headings:2 sedimenta-
tion. inversion and demulsification. These three
categories do not always occur exclusively in rela-
tion to one another. Demulsification, for instance,
often occurs after sedimentation or inversion.
Sedimentation, or creaming, is a process where
one emulsion is separated into two emulsions.
There is no change in the basic droplet size, similar
sized droplets simply move to their own level
forming a droplet concentration gradient. This
phenomenon is not the result of a breaking of the
emulsion, but it can result in the consumer assum-
ing the product has lost its quality.
Phase inversion occurs when an O/W system
changes, or inverts, to a W/O system. Similarly, this
J. P. MACKSON AND S. P. SINGH
occurrence is not a breaking of the emulsion where
oil separation is clearly evident, but it can result in
visual and/or functional problems.
Demulsification is a true breaking of an emulsion
and occurs in two stages; flocculation and coales-
cence. Flocculation is the build up of aggregates of
droplets within the emulsion, the indivi-dual drop-
lets still retaining their identity. In the second stage,
two or more droplets combine forming a larger
droplet. The decreased number of droplets (result-
ing from coalescence) leads to coagulation of the
dispersed phase (in mayonnaise this is oil) and
hence separated (surface) oil.
It is difficult to describe or define the exact nature
of breakdown or separation mechanism in food
emulsions. One major obstacle in the experimental
study of emulsion breakdown is the isolation of the
phenomenon described above. In practical systems,
two or more processes may occur simultaneously
or sequentially depending on the rate constants for
each individual p r o c e ~ s . ~
LITERATURE REVIEW
In our review we found that no previous studies
examine or describe the effect of vibration on
mayonnaise in glass or PET packages. Owing to
the complexity of typical food systems and the
relatively low level of basic research in this area,
little information exists in the literature about
mayonnaise, salad dressing and low calorie
dressings.’ Similarly, little information exists about
the effect of transit level vibration on food emul-
sions. Richmond’ investigated the effect of vibra-
tion and the role of secondary packaging on yogurt.
The effect of plastic packaging on mayonnaise
has been restricted to the study of oxidation rates
and plastic deformation resulting from adsorption
of oil from an O/W emulsion.
Bennett6 lists the major factors that could affect
emulsion failure as:
(i) improper ratio of oil and water phases;
(ii) incorrect choice or amount of emulsifier;
(iii) improper mixing;
(iv) impurities in oil, water, or emulsifier;
(v) reaction between two or more components
and/or the container;
(vi) temperature extremes;
(vii) mechanical shock or vibration
Emulsion stability is commonly measured in
terms of the amount of oil separating from an
emulsion during centrifugation.’ It was noted by
MAY0N NAIS E STAB ILlTY AGAl NST VI B RAT10N
Bennett6 that the specific gravity of the two phases
influences the stability of the emulsion. These non-
visible changes in stability can be monitored by
specific gravity measurements of the emulsion
system.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
The test product used for this study was regular
mayonnaise. The ingredients in the test product
(obtained from a major manufacturer) were: soy-
bean oil, vinegar, water, egg yolks, salt, sugar,
lemon juice, paprika, dried onion, dried garlic,
calcium disodium EDTA, and natural flavour. The
oil content, specified by the manufacturer, was 70%
by weight.
Containers
The glass jar was a 32 02, wide-mouth jar with a
metal lid, a wall thick'ness of 0.1 15 f 0.01 in. and
weight when full of 2.75 lb. The plastic jar was
injection blow moulded PET with an LDPE lid, a
mid-section wall thickness of 0.022 f 0.003 in., a
shoulder wall thickness of 0.055 k 0.003 in. and
weight when full of 1.9 Ib. The jars were packed in a
16 x 12 x 7 in regular slotted container (RSC) of
175 lb test C flute board.
Equipment
The following equipment was used in the study:
electrohydraulic vibration table, model 840 MTS;
Fisher scientific pycnometer; Mettler balance,
model A E 160; and Sargent centrifuge, model Cm,
size 1 .
Storage conditions
Three different groups of test conditions were used:
series A, B and C . The set of plastic and glass
containers held for 21 days are defined as series A;
those for 26 days as series B; and those for 36 days
as series C. The maximum time the cases spend in a
typical distribution cycle is about 5 weeks. Hence,
the maximum testing time was limited to about 5
weeks.
83
Series A, B and C plastic and glass jars were
conditioned at 40 OF and 50% relative humidity
(RH) to represent typical refrigerated truck
conditions, 72°F and 50% RH to represent room
conditions and 100 "F and 40% RH to represent
accelerated conditions. Temperatures were
controlled within 2 "F and relative humidities
within Ifr 4%.
Vibration
For typical trucks, vibration data show that the
input acceleration values most commonly occur
near 0.5 8.' However, because of magnification
factors, the g levels typically experienced by
stacked, filled shipping units are higher. Random
vibration testing has shown the presence of tran-
sient truck g levels as high as 10.0 g.* The g levels
selected for this study were 'typical levels', 0.5 and
0.75 g, and a 'worst-case level' of 1.0g. These levels
represent continuous vibration forces experienced
by packages column stacked in truck shipments.
Plastic and glass container resonant frequencies
were determined by performing a frequency sweep
from 3 to 50 Hz. The resonant frequencies were
easily pinpointed by visually locating the frequency
of maximum movement of the case-pack on the
table. The point of maximum vertical container
movement was chosen as the resonant frequency.
The resonant frequency values obtained for the
cases at 0.75 and 1.Og were within the typical
frequency range found in commercial truck ship-
ments (ASTM D 4728-87).' During the tests the
cases were each vibrated at their resonant fre-
quency (at a constant input of 0.5,0.75 or 1.0 g) for
30 min. Series A and B had two vibration sessions
to model a typical distribution situation: plant to
distribution centre ride (first session) and distribu-
tion centre to store ride (second session). The C
series was given twice as many vibration sessions to
model a worst-case situation. All vibration tests
were done at 72 OF and 50% RH. A set of control
samples not subjected to any vibration and de-
scribed by O.OOg, were maintained at each of the
conditioning temperatures. Table 1 summarizes the
experimental design set-up.
Quantification of stability
The methods of quantification of emulsion stability
used for this study were percentage surface oiling
84 J. P. MACKSON AND S . P. SINGH

Table 1. Total number of containers tested a t each temperature, vibration level and condi-
tioning time
Temperature Vibration level Conditioning time (days)

21 26 36

Plastic Glass Plastic Glass Plastic Glass

40 0.00 4 4 4 4 4 4
0.50 12 - 12 - 12 -
0.75 12 12 12 12 12 12
1 .oo 12 12 12 12 12 12

72 0.00 4 4 4 4 4 4
0.50 12 - 12 - 12 -

0.75 12 12 12 12 12 12
1.oo 12 12 12 12 12 12

100 0.00 4 4 4 4 4 4
0.50 12 - 12 - 12 -
0.75 12 12 12 12 12
1.oo 12 12 12 12 12 12

Table 2. Average percentage surface oil of mayonnaise for

all plastic and glass test containers evaluated
Series Vibration Plastic Glass

level Temperature (OF)

(9) 40 72 100 40 72 1 00
~~~ ~~~ ~~~~

A 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.50 0 0 0 - - -
0.75 0 0 1.00 0 0 0
1.oo 0.68 0.50 3.97 0.66 3 32 5.32

B 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.50 0 0 0 - - -
0.75 0 0 0.76 0 0 0
1 .oo 0.95 1.33 5.04 1.19 3.19 3.62

C 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.50 0 0 0 - - -
0.75 0.50 0.75 0.70 0 1.07 0.98
1.oo 0.94 1.71 5.60 1.56 4.94 6.37
MAYONNAISE STABILITY AGAINST VIBRATION 85

and specific gravity measurements. All measure- (i) Photographic recording of open containers
ments were done at a mayonnaise temperature of showing top surface.
74 f 1 O F . The critical portion of the product, from (ii) Visual rating. Each jar was given either an
the consumer point of view, is the surface. Hence acceptable or unacceptable rating depending
the tested portion of mayonnaise was taken from on the amount of visible surface oil. For the
the top 1 cm (depth) of surface for both specific sample to be rejected it had to have oil overtly
gravity and percentage oiling measurements. evident.
The percentage of surface oil is a fundamental (iii) Centrifugation and specific gravity. Of the
and direct measure of demulsification involving the eight assigned containers, four were chosen at
removal of identical samples from the surface of the random to be centrifuged. The sample was
jar, which are weighed and then centrifuged. The oil transferred to a centrifuge tube and centri-
drawn out of the centrifuge tube is weighed in a fuged at 3000 r.p.m. for 30 min. A disposable
disposable pipette (see Table 2). glass pipette was tared on the balance. Any
Subtle changes in the emulsion result from a visible oil on the top of the centrifuge tube was
change in the molecular matrix. As mayonnaise drawn off into the diposable pipette and the
breaks down, the relationship between the oil, pipette weighed. The oil measurement was
water and air in the system changes. As the free expressed as a percentage. All eight containers
energy of the system is lowered (in an attempt to had one sample taken from the first centimetre
become more stable), bonding between these com- of surface depth for specific gravity determina-
ponents changes. These non-visible changes in sta- tion.
bility were monitored by specific gravity
measurements: the greater the emulsion break-
down, the greater is the specific gravity of the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
emulsion. Specific gravity was measured using a
pycnometer (see Table 3). Data
Eight jars per case were randomly selected for
testing. The jars were also visually evaluated for The average values for percentage surface oil and
consumer acceptance. The following procedure was specific gravity are given in Tables 2 and 3. For
used. complete data see ref. 10.

Table 3. Average specific gravity of mayonnaise for all plastic and glass test containers
evaluated
Series Vibration Plastic Glass

level . Temperature ( O F ) Temperature ("F)

(9) 40 72 100 40 72 100

A 0.00 0.8910 0.891 0 0.8940 0.8900 0.8900 0.8971

0.50 0.8913 0.8946 0.9050 - - -

0.75 0.8912 0.8887 0.9089 0.8932 0.8947 0.8989

1.oo 0.8968 0.8989 0.9089 0.8959 0.9055 0.91 27

B 0.00 0.8977 0.8961 0.9020 0.8970 0.8966 0.9012

0.50 0.8996 0.8968 0.91 78 - - -
0.75 0.9080 0.8989 0.91 88 0.8960 0.8945 0.9047
1 .oo 0.91 39 0.9010 0.91 78 0.9026 0.9073 0.9167

C 0.00 0.8976 0.9005 0.91 20 0.9010 0.8960 0.9028

0.50 0.901 9 0.8982 0.91 47 - - -

0.75 0.901 1 0.8976 0.91 62 0.8991 0.8954 0.9049

1 .oo 0.91 22 0.9136 0.921 1 0.9030 0.9106 0.921 3
 J. P. MACKSON AND S. P. SlNGH

Ca Icu lat ions statistical evaluation. The 0.5 g level measurements

To derive the most accurate comparison between
the containers, the first two series (A and B) were
compared independently from the third ( C ) be-
cause of the different number of vibration sessions.
Because of its subjective nature, the results of visual
data are presented only as simple percentage com-
parisons. The 0.5 g level is not included in any
for plastic containers are presented primarily to
help in establishing trends.
Statistical analysis
The analysis of variance was made on a statistical
program called Statistical Package for the Social

Table 4. Comparison of series A, B and C containers for significant differences”

Series Temperature (“F) Vibration level (9) Significant difference Container extremeb

SG A 40 0.75 n
1 .oo n
72 0.75 Y Glass
1.oo n
100 0.75 Y Plastic
1.oo n
PO 40 0.75 n
1 .oo n
72 0.75 n
1.oo Y Glass
100 0.75 Y Glass
1.oo Y Glass

SG B 40 0.75 Y Plastic
1 .oo Y Plastic
72 0.75 n
1.oo Y Glass
100 0.75 Y Plastic
1.oo n
PO 40 0.75 n
1 .oo Y Glass
72 0.75 n
1 .oo Y Glass
100 0.75 n
1.oo V ?!astic

SG C 40 0.75 n
1 .oo Y Plastic
72 0.75 n
1 .oo n
100 0.75 Y Piasttc
1.oo n
PO 40 0.75 n
1.oo n
72 0.75 Y Glass
1 .oo Y Glass
100 0.75 n
1.oo n
--
“ S G = specific gravity comparison; PO = percentage oiling comparison
bThe container showing higher demulsification.
MAYONNAISE STABILITY AGAINST VIBRATION
Sciences (SPSS). From the calculations two impor-
tant values are derived: the F-value and the mean
square error (MSE). The MSE allows development
of a minimum significant difference (MSD) value.
The MSD allows a comparison between mean
values for plastic containers (for specific gravity
and percentage oiling) with mean values for glass
containers, thus evaluating if container types differ
significantly in the response to vibration. In addi-
tion, a Pearson correlation was performed for both
series A-B data and series C data to find out how
well the specific gravity measure relates to the
percentage oiling.
A four-way analysis of variance made on specific
gravity and percentage oiling determined if there
was significant interaction between the indepen-
dent variables (temperature, time of conditioning, g
level and container type) and the stability indica-
tors. The F-value and the significance of F-value
show a high level of interaction between the depen-
dent and independent variables. Hence, no general
conclusion about differences between plastic and
glass should be made from these observations. Any
comparison of plastic with glass should be specific
to a particular temperature, g level and time of
conditioning.
The difference between the plastic and glass
mean values (for specific gravity or percentage
I
I I
Plastic Glass
I
40
Temperature (degrees F)
Figure 1 . Percentage of containers passing visual test for series A
87
oiling at any time-temperature-vibration combin-
ation) was compared with the MSD value (calcu-
lated at a 95 % confidence level. The comparisons
between containers in the A and B series are
summarized in Table 4. Details of the full statistical
analysis are provided by Mackson.".
The Pearson correlation shows the degree of
linear relationship between the two measurements
of emulsion stability. A + 1 value indicates a per-
fect correlation whereas a - 1 value would de-
scribe a perfect inverse relationship. Comparison of
series A and B gives a Pearson correlation of
f0.67. For series C the Pearson correlation was
+0.70. Hence, there is a reasonable correlation
between surface oiling and specific gravity, both
describing emulsion stability.
Qualitative results
The visual rating showed very little difference be-
tween the two containers. Figures 1-3 compare the
trends in visual acceptability for the three series. In
most instances no difference was found, the only
consistent observation being that mayonnaise in
PET jars had a higher visual acceptance at the 1.0 g
vibration level than that in glass jars (see Figures 4
and 5).
--__ u
I
Plastic Glass I Plastic Glass
72 I 100
88 J. P. MACKSON AND S. P. SlNGH

: D1 0.00

I I I I I
Plastic Glass Plastic Glass Plastic Glass
40 72 100
Temperature (degrees F)
Figure 2. Percentage of containers passing visual test for series B

100
90
80
70
60
50

40
30
20

10
0
Plastic Glass lastic ’ Glass I Plastic Glass
I
40 72 100
Temperature (degrees F)
Figure 3. Percentage of containers passing visual test for series C

Only one general conclusion can be made: the
results suggest that at 1.0 g level, glass-contained
product response is consistently worse. Of the eight
comparisons where glass proved to be more ex-
treme, six were at 1.0 g. Specific comparisons at
normal transit g levels show that neither container
fails more consistently at a particular g-ievel-tem-
perature combination.
A hypothesis as to why glass containers exhibit a
consistently higher failure response at 1.0 g is that
MAY ON NAl SE STAB1LlTY AGAl NST VI B RATION 89

Figure 4. Fresh and demulsified mayonnaise. (Left, plastic; right, glass.)

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions may be drawn from

using specific gravity and surface oiling as indica-
tors of emulsion stability.
(i) Vibration forces encountered in typical ship-
ping environments can have a significant effect
on emulsion breakdown of mayonnaise. Tem-
perature and storage time accelerate this phen-
omenon.
(ii) There was no consistent significant difference
(at a 95% confidence level) in the amount of
surface oil or specific gravity of mayonnaise
between identically tested plastic and glass
containers.
(iii) Measurement of specific gravity is an accept-
Figure 5. At 1 .O g vibration the contents of both glass and able means to monitor emulsion stability.
plastic jars show oiling, but to a lesser extent in the plastic Measurements showed that there were no con-
jar. (Left, plastic; right, glass.) sistent differences in emulsion breakdown be-
tween glass and plastic at normal vibration
levels.
(iv) The percentage surface oiling was the most
the mayonnaise in the glass container is subjected conclusive way to judge emulsion breakdown.
to a ‘water hammer’ effect, whereby the g forces are (v) Visual rating is the best means of indicating
completely transferred to the product because of emulsion instability as this represents a direct
the rigidity of glass, unlike in plastic where the correlation between consumer acceptance or
container flexing absorbs some of the shock. rejection of the product.
90
REFER ENC ES
I. Becher, P. Encyclopedia of Emulsion Technology: Basic
Theory, Marcel Dekker, New York (1983).
2. Becher, P. Encyclopedia of Emulsion Technology: Applica-
Lions, Marcel Dekker, New York (1985).
3. Corran, J. Some observations on a typical food emulsion.
In: Emulsion Technology. Chemical Publishing, Brooklyn,
NY, pp. 176-192 (1946).
4. Becher, P. Emulsions: Theory and Practice, Krieger Publi-
cations Inc. (1977). Huntingdon.
5. Richmond. M., Harte, B., Gray, I. and Stine, C. Physical
damage of yogurt. The role of secondary packaging on
stability of yogurt, J . Food Prorect., 48:6. (1984).
J. P. MACKSON AND S . P.SlNGH
6. Bennett, H. Practical Emulsions, 3rd edn. Chemical Pub-
lishing, New Y ork (1968).
7. Wang, J. and Kinsella, J. Functional properties of novel
proteins, J. Food Sci., 41 (1966).
8. Marcondes, J., Singh, S.P. and Burgess, G.B. Dynamic
analysis of a less than truckload shipment Am. SOC.Mech.
Eng., Paper #88-WA/EEP-17 (1988).
9. A S T M 04728-87: Standard Test Method for Random
Kbration Testing of Shipping Containers, Annual Book
of ASTM Standards (1987).
10. Mackson, J. The Effect of Temperature and Vibration on
Emulsion Stability of Mayonnaise in Two Different Package
Types. M.S. thesis, Michigan State University (1989).