This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
meaning that it can be used in all areas of the wheat industry (Sinnaeve. seeks to assess. To achieve this. reproducibility) on the one hand. for various cereals (Tulbek et al. and in particular its unique mixer. by allowing the user. This function makes the Mixolab unique. for example). the study was carried out with reference samples on the Farinograph using the intercomparison approach of Bipea (Bureau interprofessionnel d’études analytiques – InterProfessional Analytical Studies Office). the level of reliability of the method using the Mixolab (repeatability. 2006). to obtain information on water absorption capacity and kneading stability. 2006.Tecnica Molitoria International . 2007). for assessment of flours to be used in various products such as baguettes (Boizeau et al. 2007.. and then to re-cool it if desired. development time. In addition.. 2007.. 2007. It is entirely possible. Manthey et al. Lenartz et al. 2005) or additives such as hydrocolloids (Rosell et al. 2006). however. Cato and Gianibelli. This study. Bollain and Collar.. It can also be used to measure the effect of different ingredients (Collar et al. weakening and stability. the reference values communicated by Bipea represent true values which can be used for comparison purposes. 2004). For each of the parameters: hydration. This dough consistency measurement enables traditional measurement of the water absorption capacity of flours as well as their behaviour during kneading.. The principle of the Mixolab device 2 . 2000. 2006) or cakes (Koksel et al. . to obtain values comparable to those of the Farinograph. the Centre Wallon de Recherches Agronomiques de Gembloux. jointly conducted by the Arvalis-Institut du végétal. noodles (Cato. a direct comparison between the results provided by the two devices cannot be made.. as well as gelatinisation temperature. the Mixolab has been designed to enable analysis both of flours and integral grists. Tulbek and Hall. Due to the specific technical characteristics of the Mixolab. through a single test. 2007. The Mixolab clearly stands out due to the geometry of its mixer blades and the ability to vary the temperature when conducting a test. 2006.analysis Technologies to arrive at the current device (Dubat. Piguel et al. The device offers extensive measurement functions.Yearly issue 2008 involves measuring the torque exerted by the dough between two blades turning in opposite directions. This information will then be used in industry for a better understanding of the potential of flours (storage time for white sandwich bread depending on the speed of retrogradation. These applications make the Mixolab comparable to Brabender’s Farinograph. 2007).. and Chopin Technologies. amylase activity or starch retrogradation. 2007). through a collaborative scheme. and its accuracy on the other hand. using a simplified protocol and mathematical models. Bonet et al. The operator is thus able to heat the dough up to 90°C...
The device is illustrated in fig. . 1. heating and cooling speeds.Yearly issue 2008 . . .A PC interface including specific software: the operator can choose either to work on one of the fixed protocols.An automatic hydration water injection system: the water is measured out and automatically injected by the device in accordance with the test configuration set by the user.A dough consistency assessment system: a torque sensor measures the consistency of the dough between the blades at any moment. The temperature of the mixer can be measured at any moment.the hydration level at which the test Tecnica Molitoria International .The Mixolab. The mixer can be fully dismantled. The Chopin+ protocol The test is carried out in two separate stages. or on his own protocols. . . for example. Fig. cycle time and kneading speed. 2).A mixer temperature control system: heating resistors enable the temperature to be increased (up to 90°C).the protocol used. an international unit. 1 .the water content of the sample (determined in advance in accordance with Afnor standard V03-707). 2 . allowing enhanced assessment of the quality of a tested product. in Nm.3 Fig.The mixer. by modifying.the MiXolab The device The Mixolab is a device comprising: . tray temperatures. a) Determination of water absorption potential The operator prepares the test on the PC interface. enabling fast and easy cleaning (fig. cooling being carried out by the circulation of water (using a closed or open circuit). indicating: . and its temperature is monitored. as can the temperature of the dough (patented system). .
the operator leaves the test to run its course. and cleans the bowl.Example of graph obtained for a Chopin + test on the Mixolab. The graph (fig. based on 14% water content). . the operator stops the test.the software then indicates the quantity of flour to be weighed out for the test. 3 . If it is visually observed that the C1 torque is within the limits of 1.Yearly issue 2008 . The operator starts the test. This operation is carried out by means of an integrated calculation system which takes account of the data from the first test (hydration level used and C1 torque reached) in order to calculate the potential hydration of the test sample. If the C1 torque is outside these limits (as most often happens). 4 .1 ± 0.the water content of the sample. 3) obtained when applying the Chopin+ protocol enables as- Fig.the protocol used.analysis is to be conducted (by default.the software then indicates the quantity of flour to be weighed out for the test.07 Nm.Tecnica Molitoria International . . the operator then indicates: . 55% is indicated. notes the C1 torque level reached. The operator starts the test and observes the behaviour of the dough. b) Determination of rheological characteristics Based on the test previously carried out. . .the hydration level at which the test is to be conducted.
5 . sessment of the rheological characteristics associated with the behaviour of the proteins and starch. The mixer is kept at a temperature of 30°C for 8 minutes. It provides an indication in respect of protein quality. .07 Nm) during hydration determination. Phase 5 Retrogradation The increase in consistency between C4 and C5 . This simplified protocol (called Chopin S) is equivalent to the following settings: ..Stability in min: time during which torque exceeds the C1-11% value .D1 in °C: dough temperature at C1 Phase 1 Initial kneading Phase 2 Weakening A drop in consistency can be observed when .C2: minimum consistency during phase 2 the dough temperature rises. The usual data concerning dough behaviour during the kneading process are measured. This fall. .T1 in min: time elapsed before C1 .1 Nm. described in tab.The green curve corresponds to the torque recorded by the sensor.The pink curve indicates the temperature of the dough in °C.WA as a %: water adsorption .D2: dough temperature at C2 extent varies depending on the samples involved describes the weakening of the proteins under the dual effect of the mechanical constraint and the heat. Phase 3 Gelatinisation The drop in consistency between C3 and C4 .The red curve indicates the temperature of the mixer.target torque: 1. The kneading procedure specific to the Mixolab ensures that the dough is prepared and weakening takes place during this phase. it was decided.kneading speed: 80 rpm.C5: maximum consistency during phase 5 indicates the way that the starch retrogrades .Description of the phases of the Mixolab and the associated parameters.C4: minimum consistency during phase 4 Phase 4 indicates the stability of the starch gel when . 1. in Nm. Studies currently taking place have shown that this retrogradation measurement can be correlated with the staling phenomenon when the bread is in a tin. in °C. It can be observed that this fall is greater when the amylase activity is high. at hydration levels close to real conditions in which flour is used. whose . not to use the heating section of the Mixolab and to extend the kneading time at 30°C. The simplified protocol In order to emulate the operating conditions of the Farinograph. This graph involves 5 separate phases.The horizontal purple line represents the target consistency.C1 in Nm: maximum consistency during phase 1 . . The starch granules break when a certain tem.Table 1 .1 ± 0. . .D3: dough temperature at C3 is measured on the dough.D4: dough temperature at C4 Cooking stability hot.C3: maximum consistency during phase 3 perature is reached. . for this study. The C3 level is dependent on the starch characteristics and amylase activity. This gelatinisation phase . and the dotted lines delimit the acceptable tolerance (1.Yearly issue 2008 .D5: dough temperature at C5 when dough temperature is reduced. Tecnica Molitoria International .
4 .weakening. It is observed that: . Fig.kneading time: 30 mins. . The statistical analysis was carried out using Minitab software (Minitab 15.Examples of graphs obtained for a Chopin S test on the Mixolab. weakening (Nm and UF equivalent) and stability (mins). To assess the performance of the cali- brations obtained by modelling. and converted here into UF on the basis of 1. a series of measurements was carried out on the Bipea Farinograph Circuit no. Following the tests. The transformation equations were implemented using a set of 125 calibration points and 20 validation points. . 4) are mathematically processed in order to acquire data close to that obtained on the Farinograph for the following settings: hydration (%).the difference between the hydration levels is always less than 1%. . 25 samples.hydration water temperature: 30°C. The test is carried out in two stages (a and b) in the same manner as previously described. remains within the acceptable tolerances for the circuit except for two points.Tecnica Molitoria International .dough weight: 75 g. . the curves (fig. .1. development time (mins).1 Nm = 500 UF.development time and stability remain within the acceptable tolerance for the circuit. coMparatiVe stUDY A comparative study of results obtained on the Brabender Farinograph and on 6 .mixer temperature: 30°C.0.Yearly issue 2008 the Chopin Mixolab using the simplified protocol is here reported. measured in Nm.analysis Fig. 5 shows the position of the four settings obtained from 30 samples resulting from 4 years of different harvests in relation to the reference value including the tolerance set on the Bipea.0). . .
7 .Yearly issue 2008 . 5 Difference between the calibration calculated based on the result obtained by each sample on the Mixolab and its Bipea reference value (in blue) and range of tolerances of the circuit (in red). Tecnica Molitoria International .Fig.
12 laboratories took part in the collaborative test.Yearly issue 2008 . its average (M) as well as its typical differences in repeatability (Sr) and reproducibility (SR) and its coefficients of variation for repeatability (CVr) and for reproducibility (CVR).5 mins and R = 2 mins.23 Nm (or from 15 to 105 in UF equivalent) for weakening. representing 6 countries (tab.analysis Reliability assessment Organisation of the inter-laboratory study The study was conducted in accordance with the provisions of ISO Standard 5725. 2). including 6 external (Bipea) reference materials.8% and R = 2. The typical differences in repeatability obtained in this study with 12 laboratories were compared to the typical differences in the control population of Bipea Farinograph circuit no.Tecnica Molitoria International . and a sample tested using the “blind duplicates” method were subjected to tests. 27 laboratories. . • development time: r = 0.02 Nm (equivalent to 11 UF).9% for hydration. 2 to 14. For each parameter.8 flour samples.04 Nm (equivalent to 20 UF) • stability: r = 1.List of participants in the ring test. 2 and 6: . 6) that the reliability values (typical differences in repeatability and reproducibility) are independent of the average. Tab. • weakening: r = 0. 0. These typical differences (tab. The following limits for repeatability (r) and for reproducibility (R) were calculated: • hydration level: r = 0. 3 shows. for each parameter and each sample.each laboratory was asked to repeat the simplified protocol twice after determining water content.1%. and R = 0. Results Typical differences in repeatability and reproducibility were determined using Table 2 . Comparison of the typical differences in repeatability of the study with those of the Bipea control population show greater variability for the hydration pa- 8 . 1. 4) illustrate inter-laboratory variation. since the coefficients for determination of the relations (R2) are adjusted by 1.5 to over 4 mins for development time.3 to 62. it has been established (fig. 25.6 mins and R = 0. . i.03 to 0.e. covering a value range from: 54.8 mins. parts 1. after elimination of aberrant averages (Dixon test) and variances (Cochran test).5 mins for stability. Laboratory Arvalis-Institut du végétal CRA Gembloux ChoPIN Technologies 1 ChoPIN Technologies 2 ChoPIN Technologies 3 NDSU AWB Granotec Argentine Rheotec IATA-CSIC horizon milling-Cargill Eurogerm Country France Belgium France France France USA Australia Argentina Belgium Spain USA France a one factor variance analysis.
2 0.35 11.7 1.5 0.9 .26 0.42 13.43 14.19 0.9 7.1 B 12 58.52 0. r and R are the limits of repeatability and reproducibility (r = 2.1 0.2 1.96 0.65 1.9 0.55 0.87 0.046 12.8 12 74 3.58 13.77 x SR).7 0.9 12 92 3.0 1.7 2.5 0.72 0.3 0.29 0.30 0.7 0.1 11 2.7 12 3.92 1.097 10. Tecnica Molitoria International .7 0.069 13.4 12 1.042 7.2 0.086 17.3 6.9 0.180 20.49 22.0 7.5 12 3.23 0.0 0.46 15.084 22.1 4.1 0.4 0.3 1. For all other parameters.7 0.4 0.25 8. rameter.5 1.5 6.5 1.7 11 3.7 0.2 2.13 11.7 1.51 16.5 6.2 11 11.7 12 2.6 2.0 0.9 D 10 56.362 19.1 8.5 0.3 F 11 53.2 0.8 2.0 12 2.33 23.1 0.0 0 0.77 x Sr and R = 2.6 12 66 2.27 0.4 11 1.5 12 1.0 0.9 H 12 51.31 14.49 16.1 0.256 13.1 10 16.24 14.076 19.1 0.6 1.76 4.6 2.27 0.7 0.5 8.67 15.3 0.28 0.07 Nm) for the centring of the curve.2 Nb is the number of laboratories or tests.79 1.5 17. Sr and SR are the typical differences in repeatability and reproducibility.4 0.083 23.2 0.0 0.0 12 100 4.67 4.0 0.02 0.Table 3 .6 12 1.35 0.9 1.4 0.8 0.3 17.37 12.38 0.8 0.2 G 12 51.3 0.2 12 1.51 0.76 1.17 9.Statistical analysis of the parameters of the samples.9 4.Yearly issue 2008 .2 1.6 0.89 1.5 0.7 0.9 1.6 9.144 26.5 0.9 0.19 11.25 5.4 0.2 1.31 22.6 10 19 4. CVr and CVR are the coefficients of variation (CVr = 100 x Sr/M and CVR = 100 x SR/M).7 0.40 0.6 1.5 2.1 1.4 12 3.7 0.8 0.19 8. This variability may be improved by the application of more restrictive tolerances (±0.7 0.040 11.33 0.8 0.7 0.8 10 4.05 Nm).0 0.2 0.76 0.043 11.8 1.0 0.1 1. Flour Hydration rate (%) Nb M (%) Sr (%) CVr (%) r (%) SR (%) CVR (%) R (%) Development time (min) Nb M (min) Sr (min) CVr (%) r (min) SR (min) CVR (%) R (min) Weakening (UF equivalent) Nb M (UF) Sr (UF) CVr (%) r (UF) SR (UF) CVR (%) R (UF) Stability (min) Nb M (min) Sr (min) CVr (%) r (min) SR (min) CVR (%) R (min) A 10 62.44 14.26 15.1 0.97 0.01 0.5 0.43 19.1 0.7 11 72 3.5 0.6 2.45 20.0 0.1 1.95 1.6 0.045 8.6 0.4 0.9 0.4 C 11 61.7 0. However.7 12 98 4.2 0.5 12 1.92 0.25 22.8 0.050 10.21 12. the typical differences in repeatability are lower and comparable to those observed on the Bipea for each of the circuits.5 0.00 0. this is explained by the accepted tolerances (±0.2 0.9 0.4 E 10 56.8 0.4 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.1 1.4 11 41 3.4 0.88 0. M is the average of the parameter.
Tecnica Molitoria International .Correlation between the average obtained by each sample on the Mixolab and its typical differences in repeatability and reproducibility.Yearly issue 2008 .analysis Fig. 10 . 6 .
Tecnica Molitoria International .analysis Fig. 12 .Yearly issue 2008 . 7 Differences between the average obtained by each sample on the Mixolab and its Bipea reference value (the samples are classed in ascending order according to their reference value).
13 .Fig. Tecnica Molitoria International . 8 Correlation between the average obtained by each sample on the Mixolab and its Bipea reference value.Yearly issue 2008 .
2005.Tecnica Molitoria International . (Eds). However.07 Nm) for the centring of the curve.. Poster session AACC. 2006. Tulbek M. Cato L. Volume II. 139. 153..05 Nm). Utilisation du Mixolab Chopin Technologies pour caractériser les blés 2006 et certains ingrédients dans la filière blé-farine-pain.. Comparison of the typical differences in repeatability of the study with those of the Bipea control population show greater variability for the hydration parameter... Cato L. Jollet S. this is explained by the accepted tolerances (± 0. Dardenne P 2006.C.. Kahraman K. vol. Collar C. Effets du Procédé Oxygreen sur la 14 . Sakiyan O... Fito P Toldra F .. Le Brun O. p. 2007. Mixolab assessment of AWB noodle wheat. olab to predict the suitability of flours in terms of cake quality.. Poster session AACC.. Rosell C. Blaszczak W.. For all other parameters.analysis conclUsions The tests on the Mixolab led to the same classification for the four parameters studied.. 153. Lenartz J. Finally.. Bollain C.. Dubat A. Dubois M. In: Proceedings Intrafood. 83. .C. Elsevier. 5-10... 2007.. 655-662.. Bonet A.. Manthey F. 2007 . 37-40.. Rosell C. Collar C. San Francisco. Industries des Céréales. 2. that the Chopin Technologies Mixolab (using the Chopin S protocol) and Brabender Farinograph methods were similar.. Dubat A. In press. Industries des Céréales.1... Therefore. for all parameters..G. Innovative assessment of the rheological behaviour of formulated bread doughs during mixing and heating. Sumnu G. 2004. bibliographY Boizeau S.. Le Multigraphe: un appareil pour la détermination de la qualité des céréales. . Industries des Céréales. Évaluation des blés durs américains à l’aide du Mixolab. weakening. Bollain C.. the Mixolab is a measuring device suitable for determination of the level of water absorption in flours and the rheological characteristics (development time. 13. the typical differences in repeatability are lower and comparable to those observed on the Bipea for each of the circuits. 2007 Utilization of Mix. Sorenson B. Piguel P Pernot A. Dubat A. the statistical analysis of accuracy showed. uation du Mixolab Chopin: comparaison avec d’autres méthodes d’appréciation de la qualité technologique des farines de blé tendre.Yearly issue 2008 . 17 ... Ozturk S. Int. Koksel H. innovation in traditional foods. 147 30. 2006. This variability may be improved by the application of lower tolerances (± 0. Innovative evaluation of the rheological behaviour of bread dough controlling mixing energy and temperature. 18-19. San Francisco.. Cereal Chem.M. Formation of homopolymers and heteropolymers between wheat flour and several protein sources by transglutaminase catalyzed crosslinking. 99-107.M. The reliability levels obtained are comparable to those of standard NF ISO 5530. Technol... Sinnaeve G. Industries des Céréales. 2007. stability) of dough during the kneading process.. Gianibelli M. .. Processing & assessment of Udon noodles. Food Sci. Coste C. Éval. London.
Poster session AACC. 21.15 . Journée d’étude “Waardebeoordeling van tarwe en bloem: new opportunities met de multigraph FFC” Gent.C... Sinnaeve G.. Evaluation of hard red spring wheat quality with Mixolab. .. Haros M.Yearly issue 2008 . Industries des céréales. Manthey F Simsek S. 2006. Évaluation du multigraphe FFC pour l’appréciation de la qualité des blés et des farines.rhéologie des pâtes: étude de farines de sarrasin par le Mixolab. 452-462.C. ment of hydrocolloid effects on the thermomechanical properties of wheat using the Mixolab..... Dubat A. 2007 Assess.M. Collar C.. Belgium. Tulbek M. 152. Food Hydrocolloid. Rosell C. Hareland G. 153. 2007 Évaluation à l’aide du . Mergoum M. 22-24. 2000. Hall III C. San Francisco. Tulbek M. Mixolab de l’influence des farines de lin sur le comportement rhéologique des pâtes. ... Industries des Céréales. 20-21. Tecnica Molitoria International ..
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.